What do you think?
Rate this book
The Shudra: A Philosophical Narrative of Indian Superhumanism
Vedic literature has the same word for both man and God—purusha. The Vedic seers ritually sacrifice Purusha, the God, thereby also killing purusha, the spiritual–cultural man. This births the ‘caste-man’, who is not man at all. The caste-man is either higher or lower. A handful are superhuman: gods, priests, Brahmans. And the masses are subhuman: the Shudra.
In The Shudra, Jalalul Haq conducts a philosophical autopsy of ancient Indian texts, meticulously reading between the lines to uncover the early history of caste. He shows how inequality pervaded Buddhism, Jainism and other heterodox sects, even as they tried to counter the hegemony of Brahmanism. In this clash of gods and demons, Haq attempts to extract the human.
‘This provocative classic is a bearer of audacious hope. The Shudra is a moral paleontology for our times’
—Aishwary Kumar, Stanford University
‘Original and inspired, The Shudra is a brave book that should be widely read’
—Uma Chakravarti, historian
‘Haq speculates a philosophical trajectory that provokes us to think the annihilation of caste’
—Vaibhav Abnave, Prabuddha Collective
In The Shudra, Jalalul Haq conducts a philosophical autopsy of ancient Indian texts, meticulously reading between the lines to uncover the early history of caste. He shows how inequality pervaded Buddhism, Jainism and other heterodox sects, even as they tried to counter the hegemony of Brahmanism. In this clash of gods and demons, Haq attempts to extract the human.
‘This provocative classic is a bearer of audacious hope. The Shudra is a moral paleontology for our times’
—Aishwary Kumar, Stanford University
‘Original and inspired, The Shudra is a brave book that should be widely read’
—Uma Chakravarti, historian
‘Haq speculates a philosophical trajectory that provokes us to think the annihilation of caste’
—Vaibhav Abnave, Prabuddha Collective
284 pages, Paperback
Published February 28, 2022
4 people are currently reading
52 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
April 3, 2022
Great, but quite difficult read. Explores the socio-political factors that gave rise to much of Hindu and Buddhist philosophy, and the wider context which gave them birth. It also challenges the layman's orthodoxy that Buddhism was really a revolt against Brahmanism and shows us how it was still integrated into the upper-caste power-structures. It is shown how much of the philosophical ideas themselves are influenced by the ideological factors, including the necessity to restrain the Shudras. The book is also useful as a precis of the history of Indian philosophy's stance on caste, and its developments. The impression is of a dizzying diversity of creeds. The internal proletariat in its numerous sub-divisions keeps striving to break free, a half-hearted revolution occurs, before the shackles clamp down again. The revolution itself is often spearheaded by disgruntled sections of the upper-castes, who although they promise to make concessions to the proles, are too intimately linked with their nexus of privilege to give that up. It is never a truly grassroots revolution, but internal squabbling at the top. Such a cycle has happened multiple times.
The author charts the lack of a firm conception of 'Man', sandwiched between the ideal of the ascetic-saint who nevertheless indulged himself, and the dispossessed Shudras. There was thus a lack of genuine humanistic sentiment, as evidenced by the absence of the virtues of compassion and love in many of the central scriptures of the traditions. This was reinforced by the absence of a genuine conception of Self, whether it be the anatta of the Buddhists or the self-surrender of the Bhakti saints.
The homology between man and God was fully recognized in the Sanskrit word:'purusha'. However, to reinforce the power of the priests this God is ritually sacrificed, which destroys any possibility of humanism to arise. The different aspects of God are then broken up and disbursed: Indra is powerful, but amoral (if not immoral); Varuna is the upholder of 'Rta' (justice), but he is weaker than Indra. In the Upanishads, God is never active- 'God is thus sat-chit-ananda but he is not creatively active. He contemplates and enjoys but has no will to create or act in love or anger' This absence of a positive God conversely let to the doctrine of no-God or non-God (as in Buddhism, Jainism) as well as to idolatry and polytheism. This was supported by physiolatry and occultism.
After the death of Purusha, the caste-man is born. The Brahmin is superhuman because of his powers of tapas, while the Shudra is subhuman. The doctrine of karma justifies this by advocating that one deserves one's caste and the abuses inherent therein are merely part of the natural order of the cosmos. The ascetic-priest then is purified through his practice, and becomes above the normal run of ethics. Thus, he can be indulgent, sexually and otherwise, as well as play the games of power and privilege. The author notes that although there is an internal tension between the ascetic ideal (withdrawal, renunciation, pity) and the priests (power, indulgence), they both sustain each other, by opposing each other. The ascetic-priest was often the same person.
Chapter 1: The Death of Purusha:
The Aryans were primarily Kshatriya invaders (patronized by Indra) who depended on ritual. There was a strong, thriving indigenous tradition too (Known as Asura/Dasyu to us, Shiva, phallus-worship, muni-Shramanic). The Aryans slowly won over the indigenous priests, tilting the scales in their favour. Many of the Saptarishi for instance, were non-Aryan. The non-Aryan culture it seems had a tradition of religious promiscuity and pleasure-seeking, evidenced by the Apsaras and the Gandharvas. There was economic decline too. These three factors led to the eventual victory of the Aryans.
The Vedic Rishis were family men, while the Asura Munis were renunciants. The Rishis were the first to introduce the institution of sacrifice in India. Based on etymological background connecting Ahura-Varuna-Asura, the oldest Rishis were originally Iranian refugees. The early Rishis were monotheists, and there are evidences of an ancient family quarrel. There is also much polytheism and the Varuna-creed of justice sits uncomfortably with Indra's gods. Thus, from day one there were controversies and attempts at reconciliation of irreconciliable ideas.
Monotheism implied the equality of all worshippers and that was not to be. Hence Purusha/Brahman/Prajapati was ritually sacrificed to prevent that happening. Thus, priests became above the gods and divine favour became dependent on the priests, the mantras and their rituals. Sacrifices were seldom directed at the monotheistic god, he was just ignored. Indra instead, as the indulgent king, became the prototype. Varuna, as the god of morals could perhaps have prevented this, but he was much eclipsed. There was a Brahmin-Kshatriya alliance and the priests gained massively in dana and dakshina. Thus, the Vedic religion itself was a product of synthesis 'blending the nature-worship of the Aryans and native mysticism'. Siva-Rudra was similarly rehabilitated.
NEW DEVELOPMENTS: The doctrine of the atman-brahman was another way to make sure that the priests had all the power. Perhaps philosophically too, it was a cry for a unitary principle behind the dizzying diversity of creeds. A new culture of renunciation replaced Vedic sacrifice. Only Brahmins preserved the linear eschatology, while metempsychosis became the new ideology. GNOSIS was the new revolutionary idea, knowledge as the root of salvation. The new cosmology gave the renouncer tradition its justification, and was quietist in its amoral doctrine. A new conception of Dharma was established for the masses, while Dharma and social life became a bar to the aspirations of the ascetic-saints.
Chapter 2: Sangham Sharanam:
The eastern heterodoxy in Magadha, as evidenced by the Shramanic schools of Buddhism and Jainism were an assertion of Kshatriya supremacy against Brahmanical domination. Sacrifices were expensive, and were becoming increasingly unpopular in the East. Buddhism rejected the world, God, the soul, was a nihilistic and negative creed. Action itself was held to be wrong and leading to unhappiness. Karma was still preserved. After the death of God, here was the death of Man and he was shown to be a hollow nothingness and life itself was deprived of all meaning. The human as a category just did not exist. The Shramans shared much with the Brahmans however, renouncing, samsara, denying humanism. The Buddha himself never renounced Brahminical sentiment.
In general, Shramanism can be said to be Brahmanism without Brahma or brahman.
The ideal was that killing one's humanity led to spirituality. There was one strong disagreement with Brahmin doctrine, for the Brahmin renunciation was a future stage after Grihastha, while for the Buddha it could be any time. The cult of absolute rejection was agonizing. Of course, in reality, after undergoing the self abnegation, the Buddhists monks heavily indulged themselves. Buddhism was very much a priestly religion, and even laid the ground for the idolatry of future Indian religion. The death of god also led to teacher-worship. Thus, the Mahayana tradition for instance evolved into a theology similar to later Hinduism. Buddha himself, although strongly espousing moderation, remained life rejecting to the end.
Ch 3: Waiting for Kalki:
We must not consider the later development of Buddhism as a perversion of its original sentiment under the Buddha. There were notable seeds of what was to come in his own lifetime. He was considered a great magician, indulged in drinking and women. The new development that arose after the eclipse of the Buddhist era was heralded by the Bhagavad Gita.
The Gita can be thought of as an aborted revolution, much like the Shramanic traditions a few centuries earlier. It emphasized positive action and an involved life, the ascetic ideal was to be attained through KARMA MARGA, the path of action. The God of the Gita was a personal one, unflinchingly theistic. However, the casteism still continued, based on nishkama karma. One only has to do one's caste duty, sva-dharma, without questioning or worrying about consequences. Krishna invokes Arjun's caste-pride to justify his war.The Gita integrated both action and renunciation in this way. However, the idea of detached action, action without supposed 'interest' only led the way for the worst abuses by the upper-castes. It was taught, ironically enough, that actions lost purity if influenced by ethical concerns! The Gita also introduced Avataras for the first time. The god in flesh and blood however, again became synonymous with the brahman: 'Monotheism relapses into monism and mysticism.' However, it was revolutionary in opening the doors to spiritual equality for the first time, even if but a crack.
The Gitas like most Indian scriptures are therefore very internally inconsistent in its attempt to deal with both themes: ..instead of being the harbinger of a new egalitarian social life, it ushered in a revival of Brahmanical priesthood'
The indigenous deity of Siva-Rudra was Aryanized by marrying him to Parvati. The latent distrust of some Brahmins to this development is shown in the story of Daksha and Shiva's non-invitation. Thus, the Vedic cult (Brahma) surrendered to the Agamic cult (Shiva). It was the vehicle to replace Buddhism and Jainism and reintegrate Brahmanism. Shiva is the deity that is today worshipped most widely. His ascetic, wild, anti-cultural force was gradually tamed. The cult was also notably erotic, the union of Shiva and Sakti was held to create the world. Most dances held up to be Indian on the world stage actually derive from the tribal dances, or the temple culture of the medieval Indian devdasis with sexual motifs. The higher Aryanized Brahmins however, considered this to be beneath their dignity for a long time. Chanakya allying with Chandragupta Maurya and bringing down his previous master is reflective of the shifting loyalties in this period.
Vaishnavism was another new development. This was a Kshatriya move to restore their supremacy. He became by far the most relatable deity, taking avatar rupa. This also gave the Kshatriyas divine heritage to look back upon. He also did not have the occult Brahminical aura of Shiva. The Brahmins countered by trying to make him inferior to Shiva. Through Krishna in the Gita for instance, they made the avataras uphold the Brahminic ideas of karma and caste. Rama, Parashurama and Narasimha all had vicious anti-Kshatriya streaks. Buddha was even made an avatar of Vishnu, thus integrating this challenging creed! The Mimamsa school again advocated ritualism, while there was a huge proliferation of sects.
The next major development was Adi Shankara who integrated all the traditions, and laid the foundations of 'Hinduism' as we know it today. His pantheism allowed him to accomodate polytheism, the nastika schoools, and even some practices of the left extremist vamachara ones. All these co-existed in harmony in Shankara's system of illusionist pantheism. He even included place for a personal god, a saguna Ishwara, holding it to be due to our imperfect minds. His main critique was reserved for the vamacharas and the 5 Ms. The Gita's karma marga led to the world of gods and heaven, while gnosis led to the brahman and moksha. He was however, an extreme casteist, proclaiming that molten lead should be poured in the ears of a Shudra who heard a sloka; and his philosophy remained life-denying.
The Puranas were written to inculcate the masses with Brahminical ideology, one of the oldest propaganda exercises. Sankara restored a hierarchy of truths, and along with it, Brahminical supremacy.
Ramanuja and the Vishishta-Advaita came about as a reaction to this high-handedness. Through his logical acumen, he emphasized the importance of this world, was realist. Consciousness originated form the body, and the self was unique and separate from brahman. Brahman was itself an active creator-god distinct from ritualism and occultism. Here onwards, Vaishnavism split into many sects, became the dominant religion. The Bhakti marga and a new concept: absolute surrender to the deity (prapatti) became dominant. Ramanuja himself often met Shudras and Chandalas. However, independent of his personal inclinations, his creed still retained gradation although it was markedly more egalitarian. The Gita had maintained this, by making no effort to integrate the Dalits and those lower than the Shudra. The Bhakti cults was also a rebellion of lower Brahmins against the highest classes; as well as a way to reintegrate the Shudras away from Buddhism and Jainism. They would probably have been influenced in this by the growth of Islam in the region.
The Vishnuite religion again led into guru-worship, idolatry and a priestly class, as well as eroticism. The gurus were again held to be beyond ethics. Vishnuite theology again acquired a pantheistic content and remained illusionist. It too remained a hieratic ideology, and turned anti-Kshatriya and anti-Shudra. Although Shudra saints tried to reestablish themselves, they still capitulated to the Brahmins, once again.
ADDITIONAL NOTES:
(1) Reason as a source of knowledge almost does not exist in Indian philosophy! As opposed to Western philosophy, which revolves around this. Realisation of the brahman came about by stabilizing the mind, by ceasing all thought- attaining samadhi.
(2) In a dialectical process, the emptiness of pantheism gave rise to a corresponding polytheism.
(3) Ancient Indian politics was centred on the priests, not the kings, who were merely 'co-opted associates'
(4) The masses were service oriented, and themselves grew to imbibe this ideology. The author calls this the will to pity and self-pity. The lack of a strong sense of humanism or a self, necessarily led to a dearth of spiritual equality.
(5) The idea of love was not a part of the canon until much much later. In Buddhism, karuna was more of a metaphysical principle. It was probably helped along by Sufi influence. Even this love was more directed to animals, than humans, which continues to have chilling repercussions today.
(6) A double-morality prevailed, where violence was justifiable if committed by the laity under instruction from their higher-ups, an odd position. Saints follow different ethical rules than the masses, they are above ethics. Agency was with his caste or the brahman after he attained sthit-prajna.
(7) In the present, nationalism, often personified as a god is the newly imported religion from the West.
Worth reading.
“India’s cultural tradition, as essentialised in its spiritual centre, and having the ascetic-priests as its gate-keepers, has survived the vicissitudes of time without losing its identity and continuity. The Shudras in this conspiratorial saga were the resources, ‘the assets,’ to be used, abused, and then abandoned when they became of no use. They could even be eliminated if they turned “rogue”—for resisting and being rebellious.”
The author charts the lack of a firm conception of 'Man', sandwiched between the ideal of the ascetic-saint who nevertheless indulged himself, and the dispossessed Shudras. There was thus a lack of genuine humanistic sentiment, as evidenced by the absence of the virtues of compassion and love in many of the central scriptures of the traditions. This was reinforced by the absence of a genuine conception of Self, whether it be the anatta of the Buddhists or the self-surrender of the Bhakti saints.
The homology between man and God was fully recognized in the Sanskrit word:'purusha'. However, to reinforce the power of the priests this God is ritually sacrificed, which destroys any possibility of humanism to arise. The different aspects of God are then broken up and disbursed: Indra is powerful, but amoral (if not immoral); Varuna is the upholder of 'Rta' (justice), but he is weaker than Indra. In the Upanishads, God is never active- 'God is thus sat-chit-ananda but he is not creatively active. He contemplates and enjoys but has no will to create or act in love or anger' This absence of a positive God conversely let to the doctrine of no-God or non-God (as in Buddhism, Jainism) as well as to idolatry and polytheism. This was supported by physiolatry and occultism.
After the death of Purusha, the caste-man is born. The Brahmin is superhuman because of his powers of tapas, while the Shudra is subhuman. The doctrine of karma justifies this by advocating that one deserves one's caste and the abuses inherent therein are merely part of the natural order of the cosmos. The ascetic-priest then is purified through his practice, and becomes above the normal run of ethics. Thus, he can be indulgent, sexually and otherwise, as well as play the games of power and privilege. The author notes that although there is an internal tension between the ascetic ideal (withdrawal, renunciation, pity) and the priests (power, indulgence), they both sustain each other, by opposing each other. The ascetic-priest was often the same person.
Chapter 1: The Death of Purusha:
The Aryans were primarily Kshatriya invaders (patronized by Indra) who depended on ritual. There was a strong, thriving indigenous tradition too (Known as Asura/Dasyu to us, Shiva, phallus-worship, muni-Shramanic). The Aryans slowly won over the indigenous priests, tilting the scales in their favour. Many of the Saptarishi for instance, were non-Aryan. The non-Aryan culture it seems had a tradition of religious promiscuity and pleasure-seeking, evidenced by the Apsaras and the Gandharvas. There was economic decline too. These three factors led to the eventual victory of the Aryans.
The Vedic Rishis were family men, while the Asura Munis were renunciants. The Rishis were the first to introduce the institution of sacrifice in India. Based on etymological background connecting Ahura-Varuna-Asura, the oldest Rishis were originally Iranian refugees. The early Rishis were monotheists, and there are evidences of an ancient family quarrel. There is also much polytheism and the Varuna-creed of justice sits uncomfortably with Indra's gods. Thus, from day one there were controversies and attempts at reconciliation of irreconciliable ideas.
'much of the pluralistic theology, characteristic of the Vedas is due to this priestly trait to let all the gods and goddesses, of different sections of people, co-exist happily with each other, so long as they did not come in the way of their (Brahmins') acquiring material benefits'
Monotheism implied the equality of all worshippers and that was not to be. Hence Purusha/Brahman/Prajapati was ritually sacrificed to prevent that happening. Thus, priests became above the gods and divine favour became dependent on the priests, the mantras and their rituals. Sacrifices were seldom directed at the monotheistic god, he was just ignored. Indra instead, as the indulgent king, became the prototype. Varuna, as the god of morals could perhaps have prevented this, but he was much eclipsed. There was a Brahmin-Kshatriya alliance and the priests gained massively in dana and dakshina. Thus, the Vedic religion itself was a product of synthesis 'blending the nature-worship of the Aryans and native mysticism'. Siva-Rudra was similarly rehabilitated.
NEW DEVELOPMENTS: The doctrine of the atman-brahman was another way to make sure that the priests had all the power. Perhaps philosophically too, it was a cry for a unitary principle behind the dizzying diversity of creeds. A new culture of renunciation replaced Vedic sacrifice. Only Brahmins preserved the linear eschatology, while metempsychosis became the new ideology. GNOSIS was the new revolutionary idea, knowledge as the root of salvation. The new cosmology gave the renouncer tradition its justification, and was quietist in its amoral doctrine. A new conception of Dharma was established for the masses, while Dharma and social life became a bar to the aspirations of the ascetic-saints.
Chapter 2: Sangham Sharanam:
The eastern heterodoxy in Magadha, as evidenced by the Shramanic schools of Buddhism and Jainism were an assertion of Kshatriya supremacy against Brahmanical domination. Sacrifices were expensive, and were becoming increasingly unpopular in the East. Buddhism rejected the world, God, the soul, was a nihilistic and negative creed. Action itself was held to be wrong and leading to unhappiness. Karma was still preserved. After the death of God, here was the death of Man and he was shown to be a hollow nothingness and life itself was deprived of all meaning. The human as a category just did not exist. The Shramans shared much with the Brahmans however, renouncing, samsara, denying humanism. The Buddha himself never renounced Brahminical sentiment.
In general, Shramanism can be said to be Brahmanism without Brahma or brahman.
The ideal was that killing one's humanity led to spirituality. There was one strong disagreement with Brahmin doctrine, for the Brahmin renunciation was a future stage after Grihastha, while for the Buddha it could be any time. The cult of absolute rejection was agonizing. Of course, in reality, after undergoing the self abnegation, the Buddhists monks heavily indulged themselves. Buddhism was very much a priestly religion, and even laid the ground for the idolatry of future Indian religion. The death of god also led to teacher-worship. Thus, the Mahayana tradition for instance evolved into a theology similar to later Hinduism. Buddha himself, although strongly espousing moderation, remained life rejecting to the end.
Ch 3: Waiting for Kalki:
We must not consider the later development of Buddhism as a perversion of its original sentiment under the Buddha. There were notable seeds of what was to come in his own lifetime. He was considered a great magician, indulged in drinking and women. The new development that arose after the eclipse of the Buddhist era was heralded by the Bhagavad Gita.
The Gita can be thought of as an aborted revolution, much like the Shramanic traditions a few centuries earlier. It emphasized positive action and an involved life, the ascetic ideal was to be attained through KARMA MARGA, the path of action. The God of the Gita was a personal one, unflinchingly theistic. However, the casteism still continued, based on nishkama karma. One only has to do one's caste duty, sva-dharma, without questioning or worrying about consequences. Krishna invokes Arjun's caste-pride to justify his war.The Gita integrated both action and renunciation in this way. However, the idea of detached action, action without supposed 'interest' only led the way for the worst abuses by the upper-castes. It was taught, ironically enough, that actions lost purity if influenced by ethical concerns! The Gita also introduced Avataras for the first time. The god in flesh and blood however, again became synonymous with the brahman: 'Monotheism relapses into monism and mysticism.' However, it was revolutionary in opening the doors to spiritual equality for the first time, even if but a crack.
The Gitas like most Indian scriptures are therefore very internally inconsistent in its attempt to deal with both themes: ..instead of being the harbinger of a new egalitarian social life, it ushered in a revival of Brahmanical priesthood'
The indigenous deity of Siva-Rudra was Aryanized by marrying him to Parvati. The latent distrust of some Brahmins to this development is shown in the story of Daksha and Shiva's non-invitation. Thus, the Vedic cult (Brahma) surrendered to the Agamic cult (Shiva). It was the vehicle to replace Buddhism and Jainism and reintegrate Brahmanism. Shiva is the deity that is today worshipped most widely. His ascetic, wild, anti-cultural force was gradually tamed. The cult was also notably erotic, the union of Shiva and Sakti was held to create the world. Most dances held up to be Indian on the world stage actually derive from the tribal dances, or the temple culture of the medieval Indian devdasis with sexual motifs. The higher Aryanized Brahmins however, considered this to be beneath their dignity for a long time. Chanakya allying with Chandragupta Maurya and bringing down his previous master is reflective of the shifting loyalties in this period.
Vaishnavism was another new development. This was a Kshatriya move to restore their supremacy. He became by far the most relatable deity, taking avatar rupa. This also gave the Kshatriyas divine heritage to look back upon. He also did not have the occult Brahminical aura of Shiva. The Brahmins countered by trying to make him inferior to Shiva. Through Krishna in the Gita for instance, they made the avataras uphold the Brahminic ideas of karma and caste. Rama, Parashurama and Narasimha all had vicious anti-Kshatriya streaks. Buddha was even made an avatar of Vishnu, thus integrating this challenging creed! The Mimamsa school again advocated ritualism, while there was a huge proliferation of sects.
The next major development was Adi Shankara who integrated all the traditions, and laid the foundations of 'Hinduism' as we know it today. His pantheism allowed him to accomodate polytheism, the nastika schoools, and even some practices of the left extremist vamachara ones. All these co-existed in harmony in Shankara's system of illusionist pantheism. He even included place for a personal god, a saguna Ishwara, holding it to be due to our imperfect minds. His main critique was reserved for the vamacharas and the 5 Ms. The Gita's karma marga led to the world of gods and heaven, while gnosis led to the brahman and moksha. He was however, an extreme casteist, proclaiming that molten lead should be poured in the ears of a Shudra who heard a sloka; and his philosophy remained life-denying.
The Puranas were written to inculcate the masses with Brahminical ideology, one of the oldest propaganda exercises. Sankara restored a hierarchy of truths, and along with it, Brahminical supremacy.
Ramanuja and the Vishishta-Advaita came about as a reaction to this high-handedness. Through his logical acumen, he emphasized the importance of this world, was realist. Consciousness originated form the body, and the self was unique and separate from brahman. Brahman was itself an active creator-god distinct from ritualism and occultism. Here onwards, Vaishnavism split into many sects, became the dominant religion. The Bhakti marga and a new concept: absolute surrender to the deity (prapatti) became dominant. Ramanuja himself often met Shudras and Chandalas. However, independent of his personal inclinations, his creed still retained gradation although it was markedly more egalitarian. The Gita had maintained this, by making no effort to integrate the Dalits and those lower than the Shudra. The Bhakti cults was also a rebellion of lower Brahmins against the highest classes; as well as a way to reintegrate the Shudras away from Buddhism and Jainism. They would probably have been influenced in this by the growth of Islam in the region.
The Vishnuite religion again led into guru-worship, idolatry and a priestly class, as well as eroticism. The gurus were again held to be beyond ethics. Vishnuite theology again acquired a pantheistic content and remained illusionist. It too remained a hieratic ideology, and turned anti-Kshatriya and anti-Shudra. Although Shudra saints tried to reestablish themselves, they still capitulated to the Brahmins, once again.
ADDITIONAL NOTES:
(1) Reason as a source of knowledge almost does not exist in Indian philosophy! As opposed to Western philosophy, which revolves around this. Realisation of the brahman came about by stabilizing the mind, by ceasing all thought- attaining samadhi.
(2) In a dialectical process, the emptiness of pantheism gave rise to a corresponding polytheism.
(3) Ancient Indian politics was centred on the priests, not the kings, who were merely 'co-opted associates'
(4) The masses were service oriented, and themselves grew to imbibe this ideology. The author calls this the will to pity and self-pity. The lack of a strong sense of humanism or a self, necessarily led to a dearth of spiritual equality.
(5) The idea of love was not a part of the canon until much much later. In Buddhism, karuna was more of a metaphysical principle. It was probably helped along by Sufi influence. Even this love was more directed to animals, than humans, which continues to have chilling repercussions today.
(6) A double-morality prevailed, where violence was justifiable if committed by the laity under instruction from their higher-ups, an odd position. Saints follow different ethical rules than the masses, they are above ethics. Agency was with his caste or the brahman after he attained sthit-prajna.
(7) In the present, nationalism, often personified as a god is the newly imported religion from the West.
Worth reading.
November 25, 2024
This is a well researched and curated book. I admire the extent of reading and contemplation that has put into writing this. It decodes the Indian belief systems and religious doctrines at a very granular level and also provides excerpts from Vedas and Upanishads to back it up. A philosophical approach is also taken to explain the purpose of these systems.
I found the language a little hard to comprehend, a lot of jargon in some places. Because of this I was a little distracted and missed some important bits. I definitely need to reread this book for a comprehensive understanding. But it's totally worth reading multiple times.
I found the language a little hard to comprehend, a lot of jargon in some places. Because of this I was a little distracted and missed some important bits. I definitely need to reread this book for a comprehensive understanding. But it's totally worth reading multiple times.
January 20, 2024
A well-researched book unraveling the evolution of an inescapable trap wherein the majority of the country's population has fallen. The trap is being fortified in the current political environment. If you are having time to read, please read this book.
April 29, 2023
As a survey of the evolution of Hinduism, especially about conflict between the ascetic ideals and the profligate realities, it is an enlightened book. As an attempt to establish the non-humanity of the shudra, not so much. Mostly because most of the time was spent discussing the historical and political evolution of the religion with a focus on the conflict between the muni and the Rishi. Which to me, strongly resembles the Apollonian and Dionysian metaphor.
January 6, 2026
An absolute revelation.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews