The newly emerged figure in public life in India, Neha Bora, attacked ‘Brahmanvad’ in a recent speech. She also said that Brahmin priests commit rapes in temples.
For advertisement on our platform, do call at +91 6377460764 or email us at [email protected].
Since Neha has been suddenly catapulted into the national limelight, it seems this has gone to her head, and she thinks she can sermonize and pontificate to people on all topics under the sky, with her half baked knowledge.
In my opinion use of the word ‘Brahmanvad’ is unacceptable, highly offensive and even anti-national, as I explained in my response to that other self styled ‘intellectual’ Arundhati Roy
https://swarajyamag.com/
If Neha had attacked the caste system I would have supported her. But use of the word ‘brahmanvad’ is liable to convey the impression that all Brahmins are oppressors and evil.
The caste system, whatever its origin, subsequently developed into the feudal occupation division of society. In other words, though theoretically there were only 4 castes, in reality there were hundreds. since every occupation became a caste.
Thus, carpenter ( badhai ), potter ( kumbhar ), cobbler ( chamar ), ironsmith ( lohaar ), barber ( nai ) etc all became castes.
This was not unique to India. Even today many Englishmen have surnames like Baker, Butcher, Taylor, Gardener, Smith, Goldsmith, Mason, Potter, etc, which indicates that their ancestors belonged to these vocations.
Many people think that the caste system did a lot of damage to India. This is undoubtedly true of modern times. But it must also be said that in the feudal age the caste system did good to India because it corresponded to the feudal occupational division of labour in society , which resulted in great development of the productive forces (at that time).
Thus, while the caste system is a totally reactionary and evil institution today, which must be destroyed, at an earlier stage of our historical development it was progressive and good.
This may sound a contradiction, and so has to be explained.
As stated by the great British economist Adam Smith in his book ‘The Wealth of Nations’, division of labour results in great development of the productive forces in society.
In feudal society, while the primary occupation of most people was agriculture, there was also a handicraft industry, and the caste system contributed to the growth of this. As stated above, every handicraft vocation became a caste e.g. potter, smith, cobbler, weaver, barber, etc.
But there was also a need of some mental workers ( intellectuals ) in feudal society, and these were the Brahmins.
In feudal society there was no universal education ( as in industrial society ), firstly because there were no resources to provide them, and secondly there was no need to educate everyone, as agriculture and handicraft industry could be carried on by illiterates.
And yet there was need in feudal society for some mental workers too. This was for two reasons.
Firstly, in those days education, which was provided only to Brahmins, was mainly theological, and religion was needed by the ruling class to keep people pacified. People were told that they should accept their fate, since God had so ordained ( hoye wahi jo Ram rakh raakha ). The Brahmins were the custodians of theology, and so they performed this job of keeping people under mental subjugation, using religion for this purpose
But in addition to this, there was another role played by Brahmins, which must also be explained. While feudal society was relatively stable ( as contrasted to industrial society which is dynamic and fast changing ), there was still some progress in it, however slow. For this, intellectuals were required, and these were the Brahmins.
Thus, Brahmins served a dual role in feudal society, one negative, and the other positive.
The Brahmins, a small minority, were the only educated section of society in feudal times, and the rest of society, even the kings and aristocrats, were broadly illiterates ( with some exceptions ), and their language was Sanskrit. This may be compared with the situation in medieval Europe, where the only educated section of society ( with some exceptions ) were the priests, whose language was Latin.
Thus, Brahmins performed a dual role in society. The first was the negative role of keeping people under mental subjugation ( so that they may not revolt against the oppressive system ), the other being the positive role to help society in its progress.
As stated above, division of labour leads to great progress. In feudal society, the Brahmins were a small section of people who were left free to do mental work, the rest of society providing them for their material needs. Without this division of labour progress would have been impossible.
We may compare this with the situation in ancient Greece and Rome. These were societies based on slavery, and slavery in those days played a progressive role, because it left a section of society free to do mental work, their material needs being provided for by slaves. No doubt the condition of slaves was bad, but without slavery we would not have had Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Democritus, Pythogaras, Hippocrates, Homer, Aeschylus, Herotodus, Archemides, and the other great men of science and art in ancient times.
Similarly, while the caste system resulted in oppression of the dalits, etc it also had a positive aspect. Without an intellectual class
there would have been no progress.
Without an intellectual section of society ( the Brahmins ) there would have been no Aryabhat and Brahmagupta ( in mathematics ), Sushrut and Charak ( in medicine ), Kalidas ( in literature ), Panini and Patanjali ( in grammar ), Vijnaneshwar ( in law ), Kapila, Gautam and the other great Indian philosophers, and other men of science, art, law, etc. In fact it was because of Brahmins that we were leading the world in science at one time, as explained below :
https://indicanews.com/indians-were-once-leaders-in-science
So when we consider the caste system, and in particular the role of Brahmins, we must keep this duality in mind. The matter must be considered scientifically, not emotionally.
Attack on Brahmins and Brahmanvad serves to divide our people on caste lines, which is exactly what our nation’s enemies want. So Neha Bora, though unwittingly, serves our enemies by making such remarks, and thus her statement is anti-national, and must be condemned. She reminds me of the Tamil leader Periyar, who attacked Brahmins, and whom I called objectively a British agent, because he furthered the British policy of divide and rule
https://www.theweek.in/
Attachments area
