[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ADMINISTRIVIA : Matrimonials
-
To: soc-religion-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Subject: Re: ADMINISTRIVIA : Matrimonials
-
From: dchakrav@netserv.unmc.edu (Dhruba Chakravarti)
-
Date: 5 Sep 1996 21:45:23 GMT
-
Newsgroups: soc.religion.hindu
-
Organization: University of Nebraska Medical Center
-
References: <ghenDwJuJy.1v3@netcom.com> <ghenDwqLwL.BLG@netcom.com> <504k0d$b0s@news.ececs.uc.edu> <5077j7$rdb@news.ececs.uc.edu> <ghenDx9t1K.By8@netcom.com>
Vivek Sadananda Pai (vivek@cs.rice.edu) wrote:
: Dear Dhrubaji,
: I've seen what Jaldhar wrote on the 27th, and it makes sense - many
: Hindus do consider Jati a valid criterion in matrimonial ads. Now, is
: this to be considered casteism, and if so, should ads which mention
: Jati be allowed on SRH, if ads are to be allowed at all?
Dear Vivekji:
Thank you for following up.
As I understand it, jAti simply refers to an ancestor, for example, the
person is a descendant of a person who achieved brahminness (knower of
brahma-GYAna), or kshatriyaness (filler of kshata - wound) etc. You must
be familiar with the various texts (we have discussed often in the past)
that establish this. There is nothing wrong in referring to oneself by
jAti, I would even admit that two families of the similar ancestral
glories have the freedom to choose each other, but I believe that we
should come to an agreement that jAti is not to be used for
discrimination, that is unfortunately a commonplace occurence. I do not
have an opinion on whether or not the ads should be allowed in SRH.
I feel that we will not be able to deal with casteism unless we
re-institute some of the older ways, at least in modified forms. The
biggest declaration of our 'castes' is by our last names; as you know, in
India, they are called titles, because that is what they were to begin
with, a title given by either the royalty or a convention of learned
people. It used to be that the titles were not inheritable, now they are,
perhaps because of British influence on our names. It is a problem that
has been recognized by many, and Babu Jagjivan Ramji even declared that he
would not like to be called by his last name anymore.
In earlier times, people used the names of their parents as their second
names, but today, last names have been accepted as inheritable. I imagine
that if authorities were to award the title achArya to all teachers,
shAstri to all scholars etc. and encourage them to use it as their last
names and not pass on to their children, we would make some progress. Such
a system is still in place in limited circles, among sanskrit scholars in
India and the renunciates.
With best regards,
Dhruba.
