Orissa temple bars Dalits' entry

seraph

GC - As for reservations and the question of temple entry: "Two wrongs do not make a right." Besides, reservations is neither the subject of this thread not the reason the Dalits of this village have been barred entry to the temple. The prohibition existed long before reservations existed.

Temple entry for non-hindus is related to the question of who can enter and who can not. Since you would probably be the first to scream if ALL Indians were accused of something, I am going to call you on this notion that ALL white people should be in some way held accountable for what SOME white people did a hundred years ago.

Having said that, I think that the history is more complicated and nuanced than you would like to present it. For example, after the British invasion of Orissa, the East India Company administered the Jagannath Temple in Puri at a financial loss for many years. W.W. Hunter in his History of Orissa describes the finances in great detail. It was only after an outcry by Church leaders in Calcutta about the funding of Hindu observance that this practice was stopped.

In fact, the ban on foreigners entering Jagannatha Mandira was instituted by the British in the wake of the brutal (Muslim) Afghan invasion, (Muslim) Kala Pahar and (Hindu) Maratha rule. (It is suprising to note that the Maratha rule is remembered in Orissa as particularly brutal). During these invasions the temples of Orissa were systematically looted and destroyed. I have read the official British army communiques from the 1803 invasion of Puri and I can tell you that Temples were "off limits" to the British soldiers and that it was NOT official British policy to attack religious sites (though this certainly happened on ocassion). It should also be noted that until 1813 (i.e. after the annexation of Orissa to Bengal), the East India company officially BANNED Christian missionaries in India.

Finally, it was the British (under Lord Canning) who set up the Archaeological Survey of India in 1861. Lord Curzon (for all his faults), systematically protected many monuments in India. The Konark Sun Temple - which was ransacked during the Kala Pahar (Muslim) invasion of the 16th century - is one of those monuments that was protected by Curzon.

(Note: For the sake of time I did not include sources, will be happy to do so if challenged.)

greenchutney

we are discussing a contemprorary issue in india. and there are many facets to it. and issues that are happening are related to dalits as well.
calling me on what?..thats one of the perceptions that caused some rules to be placed. and it was easy to enforced based on the skin color (atleast for whites) where am i saying all white people should be held accountable or whatever like this?......go back in time to when some of these temples made these rules..and they said strictly non-hindus....it was easy to enforce this atleast where whites (on appearance) are concerned about them being non-hindus. do i agree with the policy now?..no absolutely not. adapt to the times...thats what i have said in all my posts if you go back and look.
ofcourse its nuanced. and i have said before that its more complex...its my posts in this thread.
offical british policy eh?..you really expect me to believe that. just as the official american policy is treating prisoners with rose petal baths and what not. official policy..man c'mon...and you are reading british communiques....
sure there are examples of british cooperation and 'management' of temples. they might have not attacked the temples..but sure, there were instances of looting...of gold what not.
please do include sources. i am surprised you didnt you always have good ones from prior discussions. i hope some of your sources are non-british ones as well...and preferably non-communist pieces...or any of agenda filled ones. thanks~

seraph

My point was that EVEN IF white people had trashed all the temples in Orissa a hundred years ago, the white people coming to India today should not be penalized for the actions of their ancestors.

The irony is that in the case of Jagannath Temple, it was apparently the Brits who instituted the rule. They felt that it kept things more simple.

This is called presentism. You are projecting the present onto the past. In the case of Puri, I know of no primary documents that implicate the British invaders of the things you imply. Were they angels? Certainly not (as I alluded to in my post). In fact, if you or anyone else has data to contradict these communiques, I will be indebted to you for bringing this forward. As far as I know, it was Muslims and even Hindus who caused the most damage to the religious structures of Orissa.

Oilerman

Yes money talks but it is totally naive to say the caste system is exaggerated. I am a German Canadian Married to a Punjabi Dalit. My Father in-law is an activist in the Dalit community both in India and Canada, where by the way caste bias's still hold firm even in generations removed from India.

Last month I had the pleasure of attending the Golden Jubilee of the conversion of Dr. Ambedkar to Buddhism in Nagpur India, the place of the original event. I had the opportunity to speak one on one with two mayors, an MLA, a candidate hoping to be elected an MLA, authors from England, Thailand, across India and the United States, influential Buddhist monks, wealthy organizers and fund raisers, and a senior federal bureaucrat in India's federal government. All of these people are Dalits. I was the only obvious none Indian it seemed in all of Nagpur and everyone was anxious to speak with me. I have never experienced so many people with so much appreciation paid to me for coming so far to learn about their cause. Which I must exclaim is NOT exaggerated, from my own observation it is far worse then the world understands. I have learned from these people even amongst the influential and wealthy caste puts you in your place and only the truly motivated fight through the B.S.

Why else are states passing laws formally stating Buddhism is nothing but a branch of Hinduism? When in fact Buddhism was created before modern Hinduism? Buddhist teachings and scripture predate modern Hindu scripture by at least 150 years! The only bit of Hinduism that predates Buddhism is the Brahminist notion of caste!

I have seen this discrimination with my own eyes with regards to my wife both in Canada and Italy where we honeymooned, and I know how it oppresses her family in Punjab and in speaking to countless people while in Nagpur I assure you the oppressiveness of the caste system that exists in India today is a least as bad as the tyranny inflicted in South Africa, and the during the 17, 18 and 1900's in the United States towards African Americans.

Here's a question for you, have you ever heard o a Dalit Hindu Priest?

Nick-H

Thank you for that comment informed by first-hand experience. These things I know about mainly from reading the newspapers, rather than having a direct source, but even being that step closer to what happens in India on a day-to-day basis convinces me that you are right when you say that the situation is worse than the world understands. By and large I think that most of the world really does not understand day-to-day India!

There was a law being passed in Tamil Nadu allowing any person who had completed the necessary teachings to work as a temple priest: I'm not sure what happened to it with the change of government, but the last I read was the bleatings of temple authorities that it was impossible according to their tradition, and that overruled the law.

There are Temple chariot festivals where the courts have decreed that Dalits be allowed to share in the task of pulling the car: they do so with police protection and in fear of violence.

The newspapers that I see here regularly report acts of violence and even murder against those involved in intercaste relationships. In villages where high political posts are reserved for Dalits, when elected they often fear to take up those posts, even feeling the need to run from their homes.

__________________
.


Just one member of the IndiaMike Mod Team

Nick-H

GC... what you seem unable to grasp is my objection that this is defined only by skin colour. Have you never in your life experienced any difficulty due to your skin colour?

What is it? Because I am white I am a thief? Oh, gee thanks!

It is common for the world's religious places to allow entrance to any respectful person. If I want to visit Mecca, I am quite sure that so long as I was dressed correctly (including, I guess, a beard...), behaved and spoke correctly, that I would be admitted. Islam is a multiracial, fast growing religion, and I doubt that it has a problem with skin colour.

greenchutney

i just gave an plausible explanation of how it must have come about and how it was easy to differentiate or filter based on skin color. and that was historically or in those times. do i even agree to it now?..absolutely not.

yes.

and i am brown, so i was inferior to the white race. Oh, gee thanks!... (have actually heard this more than once)..

please read what i wrote. i said for non-muslims are not allowed to enter mecca. they will put you in detention even if you go under a robe. and if you need references or sources, i will be happy to provide it.

capt_mahajan

Sorry. Non Muslims cannot enter even the areas of Mecca or Medina. Road blocks and signs are put up en route.

"Non-Muslims are not permitted to enter Mecca. Road blocks are stationed along roads leading to the city. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mecca

greenchutney

from wikipedia...

In modern-day Saudi Arabia, the Masjid al-Haram and all of Mecca are open only to Muslims. Likewise, the Masjid al-Nabawi and the city of Medina that surrounds it are also off-limits to those who do not practice Islam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosque


you can check other sources. i think similar restrictions are on for the cities of najaf and karbala in iraq and some mosques in morroco..

greenchutney

modern hinduism?...care to explain?...buddhism was created before hindu scripture and that too 150 years?..please elaborate.
and you are telling your wife was discriminated because she was a dalit in italy...or in canada?
right?...again please provide some examples of what exactly what this discrimination....i can understand punjab...but italy during your honeymoon seems a bit interesting..
have you heard of dalit saiva saint?...go up look the story of nandan (alwar) and the temple of chidambaram and how he became a saiva saint in the saiva mythology.

shit happens. discrimination does happen and i am not denying it. yes castes have been distorted. yes the hindu soceity takes the blame. yes there are progressives wanting to change it. yes, there is people still practicing it. yes we have given and are giving shitload of reservations trying to correct it. yes, we have made one dalit to be the president of india (k r narayanan) recently..yes we have more than one former dalit as a chief minister....(and now rajashekhar redddy...current andhra CM...a dalit chrisitian)...yes we have made it illegal to discriminate...at least laws have passed even if there is sparse enforcement...yes, we have atheists, buddhists, christians, communists and muslims as our chief ministers, president, prime minister and leader of the majority party and bunch of chief ministerships spread across india at the moment. and yes we are chasing the brahmins out in droves in many places......

what else?...you tell me..what else you want to do under a democratic framework in a country of 1 billion with this much diversity?...you dont want me to be a dictator...and you want everything.....fine become buddhists...but this is silly now if you start saying buddha came before everybody else....and that too 150 years....how did you come up with that?

capt_mahajan

An aside, perhaps, but I find it interesting (not offensive, interesting ) that Indians are generally and outside the media, open to criticism and debate on the inequalities in their society. And so are many other nationalities. South Africans, Kenyans, Pakistanis... to name very few out of personal experience.

I honestly do not see this level of thrashing out (outside the media) in many countries in Europe, the UK or the US. Could it be that 'political correctness' has taken its toll?

If true, its a strength.

Just an observation. Maybe wrong.

Nick-H

OK, I'm wrong about Mecca ---and, seeing as how agree entirely on the basics, I shouldn't argue the details!

I'm still curious about Mecca, though... Given that Islam is a proselytizing religion, active worldwide, and muslims do come in all shapes, sizes and shades, to what extent would they pick on those who were black or white rather than brown or arab?

seraph

Nick, IMHO, your point is still valid - i.e. that Islam is a religion and not a race. With proper preparation you could conceivably "pass" and be allowed entry into these Islamic places. After all, Islam readily accepts converts and they also have to make Haj. Of course the penalty of being caught is public execution - so you would really have to want to go.

Besides GC, this is once again a "two wrongs make a right" type of argument. I am personally OK without darshan, but have felt for my Hare Krishna friends who have lived as devout Hindus in Puri for 15 years and can not even get in as far as Dalits were allowed to go 50 years ago (i.e. a couple of steps). Heck, even monkeys are given more access. That just seems wrong.

Oilerman

So again, why is it that only Brahmins can enter the priest hood in Hinduism? I think this nails down exactly how the lower castes are regarded in Hinduism to this day.

How do I know Buddha came before Hinduism, because I am educated and because I feel I have a vested interest in the subject, as my children will be Dalits. At the time of Buddha there where as many as 62 religious cults in India, one of the minor ones at the time, Brahmanism, evolved into Hinduism when in I think around the fourth century (have to check my facts) Brahman kings took control of India and forced Buddhism out, destroying temples and killing leaders and priests. To this point in history if you take the time to read up on archeology in greater India, between 75 and 80% of all religious artifacts recovered are indeed Buddhist. India was the original home to Buddhism. The first thing the Brahmins did was enforce tyranny in the form of the caste system, which your right was practiced by some cults before the Buddha. Only the two highest castes were allowed to own weapons (about 7% of the overall population) there-by eliminating the threat of revolt, and the lower castes (about 80% of the overall population) were denied education making them more easily brain washed by their new relgious leaders. This is the plague that infects India and Indians around the world to this day.

I’m surprised someone who seems so passionate on the subject does not know his own history. Maybe, I would suggest, you have your head in the sand especially concerning my next comment.

I have been dating/Married to my wife for 10 years. When I meet people of Indian/Pakistan background and the subject of my wife comes up the first question I can expect is “What is her name?” This is common among Indians to ask names, occupation, marital status and so on, but the name is a way placing people into a caste. You must certinly be aware last name in most cases is the best indicator of caste. (See Sikhism's attempt to eradicate caste through the changing of surnames to Singh) I’ve stopped telling people my wife’s last name because of this. In Italy for example we had a waiter in Rome who chatted with us briefly but upon learning my wife’s last name refused to serve us. That’s right buddy Canadians in Rome were refused service because of caste, again maybe consider pulling your head out of the sand. I’ve seen this attitude change in people many times upon learning her last name, usually its not so blatant, sometimes its just a look, or a grimace, or people just break off the conversation and leave or ignore us. Mind you its not an every day occurrence but over the course of ten years these situations do accumulate.

I’d give you the names of some books to read to help you understand your history a little better but I’m in transit right now between India and Canada and don’t have any handy. However I’m sure if you were really interested in the truth you’d seek them out yourself. Maybe later we can discuss the Brahmin practice of wife burning which no longer happens in India and around the world, right.

greenchutney

good lord. your post is full of inaccuracies, absolute crap and just plain brahmin baiting for no reason. tell me where you are getting your propanganda from seriously. thats what it seems like.

you know more about buddhism because you educated? and thats why it came before hinduism..and your children will be dalits?...just shows you little you know about the whole thing. first it was sanatana dharma. second buddha dharma was one of those. third, buddha dharma was widespread in india along with the other dharmas in the land. fourth, your children will not be dalits because it goes on the fathers caste usually if you want to chose that distorted interpretation of caste by birth. so they will be german canadian (goes on the father) unless you are a german-canadian-dalit yourself in this logic.

for starters, go read about the different castes. its kshatriya that do the arms thingy and are kings. brahmins are the priests, the educators and the advisors to kings. brahmins are not allowed to life arms or in that profession. there maybe exceptions but this was the norm. soceity was structured according to this according to the professions.

waiter in rome who stopped serving you because your wife was dalit?..and you concluded that its the caste system in action..and that he was a brahmin waiter and that all brahmins across the world are like this... nice logic..nice correlation skills... gimme a freakin break...

brahmin practice of wife burning eh?...please enlighten me. i would like to know. let me go see how many of my relatives are burning their wives now....and please do recommend some of your propaganda books.

if you just want to bait, i am not in the mood to be drawn into that. please show me a little more analysis and thought process. thanks.