03 Sep 2012
From: Brahmanism and Mental Blocks of Hindus by Dr. Prabhakar Kamath, a psychiatrist currently practicing in the USA, author of "Servants, Not Masters: A Guide for Consumer Activists in India" (1987), "Heretics, Rebels, Reformers and Revolutionaries" and an interesting background on the real Bhagavad Gita. This website and growing society produces a website, Nirmukta, promoting Freethought and Secular Humanism in India and South Asia.
The original BKs came from minor, merchant caste in the Sind; mainly Bhaibund and Amils. Actually, the word Jati is better used to denote the thousands of clans, tribes, communities and sub-communities in India. The vaishya caste (merchants) are one above Shudras.
For some reason, during their "enlightenment" rather than to reject the caste system they chose to project themselves at the new "top knot" or as Brahmins. Although Brahmins generally get bad press, and the caste system is failing to some degree especially amongst the young and urbanite, they tended also to be the learned and educated. They also ran the business of temples and making money from religion.
The BKs often present themselves as feminists in the West. I believe this is false. I don't believe they are, actually, particularly feminist nor interested in the upliftment of women. I believe their primary interest is in the upliftement of themselves by which I mean ... social climbing. Becoming seen as Brahmin or the top of society and usurping the traditional priest castes and it is funny to them doing what the Brahmins always did and snuggle up closely to the Kshatriyas ... by which we understand today not so much "warriors" but the ruling political elite as that was the role the Kshatriya played within society.
If the people fear authority, then become one.
Why? That's simple. It's better to be at the top of the dung heap than at the bottom ... and if most people will allow themselves to be treated like the bottom of the dung heap, then, "why not?", to their state of mind. Why not just take on the garb, the language, the attitude and ideas of the elite to become one ... and that is what they seem to be doing on the back of the lower middle classes and village Indians who financially support them.
Many Western BKs enjoy role playing as Indians and "Brahmins" but is being a Brahmin *really* that cool? Perhaps it is more cool than being a Hare Krishna and less effort than being a Hatha Yoga or renunciate.
And, on the mental foundation of the Indian people which people like the Brahma Kumaris can exploit ...
The original BKs came from minor, merchant caste in the Sind; mainly Bhaibund and Amils. Actually, the word Jati is better used to denote the thousands of clans, tribes, communities and sub-communities in India. The vaishya caste (merchants) are one above Shudras.
For some reason, during their "enlightenment" rather than to reject the caste system they chose to project themselves at the new "top knot" or as Brahmins. Although Brahmins generally get bad press, and the caste system is failing to some degree especially amongst the young and urbanite, they tended also to be the learned and educated. They also ran the business of temples and making money from religion.
The BKs often present themselves as feminists in the West. I believe this is false. I don't believe they are, actually, particularly feminist nor interested in the upliftment of women. I believe their primary interest is in the upliftement of themselves by which I mean ... social climbing. Becoming seen as Brahmin or the top of society and usurping the traditional priest castes and it is funny to them doing what the Brahmins always did and snuggle up closely to the Kshatriyas ... by which we understand today not so much "warriors" but the ruling political elite as that was the role the Kshatriya played within society.
If the people fear authority, then become one.
Why? That's simple. It's better to be at the top of the dung heap than at the bottom ... and if most people will allow themselves to be treated like the bottom of the dung heap, then, "why not?", to their state of mind. Why not just take on the garb, the language, the attitude and ideas of the elite to become one ... and that is what they seem to be doing on the back of the lower middle classes and village Indians who financially support them.
Many Western BKs enjoy role playing as Indians and "Brahmins" but is being a Brahmin *really* that cool? Perhaps it is more cool than being a Hare Krishna and less effort than being a Hatha Yoga or renunciate.
Dr. Prabhakar Kamath wrote:What is Taliban to Islam, Brahmanism is to Hinduism
While Brahmanic loyalists loudly decry fundamentalism of Islamic Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan, they are following the same narrow-minded, self-destructive and treasonous path themselves. What is Taliban to Islam, Brahmanism is to Hinduism. The blame for this should be placed squarely on the heads of Brahmanic religious leaders and their brainless followers. What is their justification for their despicable acts? “Muslims and Christians are not any better, Sar! Our government itself is protecting them against us, Sar!” “We have no choice but to take the law into our own hands, Sar!” And we often hear a lot more such Brahmanic bullsh**.
Brahmanic loyalists have every right to practice their decadent Dharma in their personal life within the framework of India’s Constitution. They have no right to impose by force their beliefs, traditions, culture and rituals on anyone including Hindus whose lifestyle is more modern than theirs.
The Brahmanic fanatics are too shortsighted and stupid to realize this.
If they continue to give vent to their resurfacing repressed hatred for other religions, sooner or later, their fanaticism would ignite the fire of communal conflicts, which could engulf the whole Indian nation in religious conflagration. What happened in Godhra, Gujarat in 2002 could happen all over India again and again. I have no hesitation in saying that these extremists, who pride themselves as Deshabhakthas (patriots), are in reality Deshadrohis (traitors) -enemies of the Indian Nation and Indian Constitution.
The Old Dharma Versus The New Dharma
Modern India is facing a greater threat to its integrity from Brahmanism than ever before. One major problem India faces today is that most Brahmanic loyalists’ allegiance is to Brahmanism rather than to India even though they claim to be great patriots. Their mindset is that of people living in 10th century.
They consider India as Hindu Desh, the land of Hindus, and Brahmanism as its Constitution. Separation of state and religion is beyond the comprehension of their narrow minds and dull intellects. They have no faith in the Constitution, India’s New Dharma. Take any problem in India today, and you will discover that it is as a result of conflict between the Old Dharma and New Dharma.
Ritualism Rather Than Results
The tendency of Hindus to indulge in ritualistic activities even in their civic life, which do not obtain results, is rooted in Brahmanism ... they indulge in numerous seemingly mindless activities, making lengthy speeches which no one listens to ... and so on, without stopping for a minute to think if the energy thus spent is worthwhile.
Brahmanism Brainwashed People that they were Helpless
Brahmanism was essentially an aristocratic system in which Brahmins and Kshatriyas were the rulers of the land and its main beneficiaries. In this system, Brahmins were the brains and Kshatriyas the brawn. They formed the bases of authority in the society. All classes of people had designated duties, which they were supposed to perform helplessly and faithfully. What determined the duties of a given class of people? It was the Gunas of Prakriti (inherent Qualities of nature) combined with the Law of Karma (“one’s class and life circumstances are determined by the Karmaphalam he earned in his previous life”) determined one’s duty in the society.
Over a hundred generations, Brahmins brainwashed people into believing that they were totally helpless in the face of the Gunas of Prakriti and Law of Karma, which were the foundation of Varna Dharma. Everyone must accept his class and destiny, which one is powerless to change.
And, on the mental foundation of the Indian people which people like the Brahma Kumaris can exploit ...
Dr. Prabhakar Kamath wrote:Do Nothing Citizens
Careful study of Indians would reveal that these people’s unwillingness to perform their civic duties is not the result of ignorance, lack of ability, lack of time or even lack of awareness, but rather the result of certain deep-rooted, unconscious mental blocks. The origins of these psychological barriers or simply mental blocks can, no doubt, be traced to our long feudal past combined with pervasive Brahmanic culture.
The chief mental blocks Indians developed were deep-rooted fear of authority, a pervasive feeling of helplessness, and dread of accusation of Ahamkara and of social ostracism.
Fear Of Authority Is Rooted In India’s Feudal Past
During the past 3500 years Indians were ruled by despotic Rajas and Maharajas, Chieftains, Islamic Sultans, Islamic emperors, British, and assorted overlords assisted by a cadre of bureaucrats, most of them Brahmins. During the rule by Hindu kings, Brahmins were the real power behind the throne. During the rule of foreign kings, Brahmins acted as the parallel government, which ruled Hindus by means of Brahmanic doctrines as enunciated in the Brahmanic Gita: The doctrine of the Gunas of Prakriti and the Law of Karma. Regardless who ruled the country and collected taxes, Brahmanism was practically the Constitution of India during this entire period. Even under the worst Islamic rule, such as Aurangzeb’s, Brahmanism prevailed. As we read in the previous article, Brahmins protected and safely conveyed civilization from generations to generation.
The rule of the kings was largely dictatorial, with no room whatsoever for dissent. The authority of the king was asserted by means of severe physical punishment meted out by the police and bureaucrats. Often dissenters, even on mere suspicion, were flayed alive, and their bodies stuffed with straw were paraded as an example for other potential upstarts. The rulers and the ruled were separated by a bureaucratic framework that dealt with people somewhat arbitrarily, as it does even today. In the name of the rulers the bureaucrats wielded vast powers. Their message to people was the same over the centuries: Hold your tongue in leash and don‘t do anything that might cost you a limb or your life. Parents discouraged their children from showing any initiative except perhaps in the non-controversial field of art and culture, and that too, only in the service of the aristocracy. “Don’t display any Adhikaprasangam (don’t be and upstart)“ has been a motto which we have inherited from our ancestors, who, of course, had nothing but our welfare in mind. Fear of authority, dinned into our heads for centuries, has been passed on from generation to generation, and it has now become a deep-rooted, unconscious, mental block.
Today, however, even under a vastly different political climate, our deep-rooted fear of authority has survived in us, hindering us from taking any initiative in tackling genuinely relevant civic problems. Our conscious mind knows full well that we are no longer under feudal rule, and that we are today citizens of a democratic country, masters in our own country. Our behavior, however, reflects that unconsciously we still think we are living in a feudal society ruled by the nexus of Kshatriyas and Brahmins. Naturally, our masterful inaction reflects this archaic belief system.
This fear of authority tallies perfectly with the haughty and arbitrary behavior of our politicians and bureaucrats, who are nothing but modern day incarnations of Kshatriyas and Brahmins. Sixty-three years after independence, Indian bureaucracy continues to function exactly like it did under the rule of the Guptas 1500 years ago, or Vijayanagara kings 600 years ago.
Fear Of Being Accused Of Ahamkara
The question might arise, “Why did not people defy these doctrines?”
Indeed a large section of Brahmanic society revolted against the authority of Brahmins, abandoned it, and joined heterodox Dharmas such as Buddhism and Jainism in the post-Vedic period.
... the accusation of suffering from the delusion of Ahamkara became the ultimate weapon of Brahmanism. Since Brahmanism could not inflict physical punishment like the kings, they resorted to psychological deterrents. To this day, every Brahmanic Guru uses this weapon against critics of Brahmanism. In the Brahmanic society anyone who ever said, "I did this" or "I think like this" "I reject this" risked being accused of Ahamkara.
The message of Brahmanism to the lay public was loud and clear: “Your Ahamkara does not behoove you. Do your socially designated duty helplessly and faithfully and be a good citizen. Performing one’s own Dharma, however imperfectly, is better than performing another’s perfectly. If you see any evil in this system, remember all systems are attended with inherent evil. That is no reason rebel against it or abandon it. Do not be an upstart.”