Rajput-Maratha relations of 18th century - Pointers towards future course of Republic of India

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

Rajput-Maratha relations are very interesting. By 16tth-17th century, Rajputs had been intricately networked with Mughals. The Islamic rebellion of 1580s was quelled by Akbar using rajputs. They were linked to Mughals and their other networks by means of marital alliances as well. Thus, for all practical purposes, 18th century Rajputs were extensions of Mughals (so some extent, there are notable exceptions, but that will be out of scope here). For Marathas who were new to this politics of north, there were too many undercurrents which they took time to understand. 

Bajirao-1 had kept amicable relations with Rajputana states by far and large. After his death, the empire became so heavily entangled in politics of North and South (Kaveri basin and south of Krishna-Tungabhadra river) that it was very hectic for nanasaheb to maintain his personal presence everywhere. Furthermore, unlike his father, he was not a soldier by character. He was an armchair politician of excellent calibre. 

The questions asked frequently by those interested in socio-politico-economic history of 18t century India are that -

1. What were the reasons for Marathas to get entangled in politics of Rajasthan? 

2. Could we attribute it to the lack of a national identity? Or was it payback time for all the harm that rajputs did in Maharashtra under the employ of the mughals?

As far as I understand, cash was major reason for this entanglement. The trade routes of Indian ocean were controlled by Europeans, by the time Mughals were defeated and marathas in Pune started framing India's policies. Shivaji began to raise navy after gap of about 650 years. Meanwhile, the ship-building tradition had almost vanished amongst "hindus". Along with it vanished the tradition of naval warfare. 

Mughals and Islamic kings were from central Asia and gave no importance to navy and neglected the traditional hold of India (and Indian powers) on Indian ocean for 5 centuries (From early 1100s to 1650s). In those 650 years, the necessity of Europe to reach out to India grew dire and in that process they developed better tools to reach India some way or the another. Most important of those tools were better ships loaded with better guns.

Marathas had to reinvent the wheel of Ship-building and naval warfare completely. While they were the ones who started meddling with european powers, Maratha navy was essentially a brown-water navy (which is still the case in modern republic of India, who is successor of maratha India). With this navy they did conquer bases like Andaman and other islands, they could not encourage Indic mercantile ventures to go out and trade with rest of the world under the aegis and protection of Maratha navy (something which even modern Indian state isn't doing much). 

There are various reasons for this, one of them being by that time Hinduism had acquired many negative self-flagellant attributes, one of them being "Sindhu-Bandi" (First of the seven legendary "prohibitions" on Hindus). Sindhu-Bandi prohibited Hindus from crossing Indus river and Indian ocean. The Vaishya-class of India was more of less following this norm.

The process which "generates surplus wealth" is trade. One who controls trade-routes, has access to surplus resources which he can use at his disposal. While agriculture and taxation also contribute towards "sustenance", they cannot create impetus for growth. 

The predecessors of Maratha-India that is Mughal-India and Sultanate-India had lost this control. Hence policy makers of Maratha India were perpetually cash-strapped, even when the taxation of the territories ruled by them was quite efficient. They were not much indulgent rulers, nor did they spend money on private or public construction projects, except religious revival (all temples destroyed by muslims were rebuilt in Maratha-India). 

Shivaji had abolished the mansabdari system and started paying fixed salary to all his soldiers and employees with a calibrated pay-scale. However, when Aurangzeb invaded deccan, he started luring the deccan satraps by offering them Mansabs and jaagirs (fiefdoms). To prevent this attrition of men, the third Maratha king (Rajaram) abolished the reform brought in by his father (Shivaji) and implemented by his elder brother (Sambhaji) in spite of adverse conditions and started offering Jaagirs to Maratha chiefs. 

He decentralized Maratha resistance (which is why they could outfight Mughals for 27 years and emerge victorious thereafter). This decentralization implied Maratha chiefs could win territories from Mughal occupied India and could extract the chauth (25% revenue) to sustain themselves. They would not receive any assistance from Maratha state, except authorization.

This school of thought sustained after Mughals died out and marathas retook India. War and expansion require revenues. With no access to trade and revenue generated therein, the options left in hand was agriculture, taxation or loot. The output of war-ravaged country in form of taxation and agriculture is very less (it takes time for farmers to come back and confidently till their lands).

Rajputs had allied themselves with Mughals since days of Akbar. many of the Rajput kings were intimately linked with Mughals (mother of Aurangzeb was a Rajput princess, if I remember correctly). Hence the wealth was intact in Rajputana. While Rajputs showed no tendency to regroup and expand outside Rajputana (akin to Marathas), they were sitting on pool of wealth, part of which had escaped Mughal retribution for at least 100 years prior to expansion of Marathas. Furthermore, Marwadi people had knack of trading and accumulating wealth (in fact, Peshwas encouraged Marwadis to migrate to Maharashtra and start their ventures there). This Marwad region too is in Rajputana.

Marathas which emerged out victorious, belonged to the school of Rajaram and not Shivaji and Sambhaji. Hindu society was not yet ready to venture out to trade. To do so, they had to depend on Europeans and Indians had lost the technology to build ships which could compete and outmatch europeans due to negligence of 600 years. These cash-strapped expanding Hindus needed money to fuel their expansion. Territory controlled by Rajputs had that money stored in their coffers. Marathas had no qualms in looting or asking for 25% chauth, in fact it was righteous thing to do as that would fund their expansion and temple-rebuilding ventures. 

Furthermore, Rajputs were divided, hence comparatively easier to cherry-pick. They belonged to "Hindu" side (and hence kafir side) of Mughal network, so attacking them won't provoke Indian "Ummah" to give a clarion call for Abdali-like Jihad again (which resulted in Panipat), hence attacking Rajput was more "politically convenient". There are many other factors (like Shinde-Holkar-Peshwa triangle which emerged after 1745, entanglement of Marathas in politics of Ganga-valley and few more). All these factors resulted in Maratha-Rajput relations. Similar other region was Bengal, something similar happened there from 1740 to 1751.

The Indian national identity was very much present, hence we cannot attribute the infighting of Indians and Hindus to lack of national identity. There are numerous letters from period of Shivaji to later Peshwas (until 1802) where "India for Indians" sentiment is spoken of and acted upon time and again. Panipat campaign is pinnacle of this sentiment. So we cannot attribute it to "lack of national identity" in Marathas. Marathas, after 1715, were "India", just like from Samudragupta onwards, Guptas were "India".

Nor can it be attributed to vengeance. Most Maratha-clans claim their Rajput ancestory (Shivaji came from Sisodiya clan). Marathas did not even avenge the Jaipur Massacre of 1748 by Madho Singh, when they were at their peak, forget the Mughal invasion of Raja Jaisingh century earlier in 1660s. 

Marathas had not yet consolidated Ganga-plains to profit from agricultural revenue. They could not profit from trade revenues for reasons mentioned above. Taxation can do only so much. They were in process of consolidating and eventually controlling two agriculturally most productive regions of India (Ganga Valley and Punjab). For doing so, they needed to keep armies. For that they needed cash. and hence whenever they needed cash, they turned towards Rajputana.

Did Marathas have choice of allying with Jats, Rajputs, Sikhs against Muslims? Was it really a "Hindu Vs Muslim" conflict? No, IMHO. It was more of "Dharma Vs. Islam" conflict.  This again does not imply that all actions of marathas were Dharmiks. But what they were aiming for, were fighting and dying for since the oath of 14-year old Shivaji in 1645, was idea of Dharmik India ruled by Indians (Hindavi Swarajya and Surajya). 

History is for learning. The mistakes of Marathas are known to everyone. Why did they commit them? What were the reasons which forced them to choose this style of governance? Few of those reasons are elucidated above. Modern republic of India will be facing exactly similar choices as Maratha India in near future. They have committed few mistakes akin to Marathas, without learning from them. But the "Panipat" of modern ROI is yet to happen, they moves have started. 

Modern Abdali (taliban) is mustering armies in Northwest and indigenous najibs and Shujas (radical islamist groups of Indian origin) and Holkars (Hindu leaders and parties like Digvijay Singh and Congress respectively) have begun showing their cards and playing their moves. If they want stable and peaceful India, ROI must embrace Maratha legacy and not shun and shy away from it. Whether ROI likes it or not, after Maratha-India, they are the "Successor iteration" of Hindu-India. They should draw their ideological inspiration and legacy of power from Marathas and not from British and Mughals.

The vision of "Dharma" or the "End game" was clear in Maratha minds.. Is it clear in the minds of their current successor? What is the reason of existence of Republic of India? Has ROI defined and answered this critical question yet?

सिंहासन खाली करो - Dynasty!! vacate the throne, people approaching

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

सदियों की ठंढी, बुझी राख सुगबुगा उठी,

मिट्टी सोने का ताज पहन इठलाती है;

दो राह, समय के रथ का घर्घर-नाद सुनो,

सिंहासन खाली करो कि जनता आती है।

  

जनता? हां,मिट्टी की अबोध मूरतें वही,

जाड़े-पाले की कसक सदा सहनेवाली,

जब अंग-अंग में लगे सांप हो चूस रहे

तब भी न कभी मुंह खोल दर्द कहनेवाली।

जनता? हां, लंबी-बडी जीभ की वही कसम,

"जनता,सचमुच ही, बडी वेदना सहती है।"

"सो ठीक, मगर, आखिर इस पर जनमत क्या है?"

'है प्रश्न गूढ़ जनता इस पर क्या कहती है?"

मानो, जनता ही फूल जिसे अहसास नहीं,

जब चाहो तभी उतार सजा लो दोनों में;

अथवा कोई दुधमुंही जिसे बहलाने के

जन्तर-मन्तर सीमित हों चार खिलौनों में।

लेकिन होता भूडोल, बवंडर उठते हैं,

जनता जब कोपाकुल हो भृकुटि चढाती है;

दो राह, समय के रथ का घर्घर-नाद सुनो,

सिंहासन खाली करो कि जनता आती है।

हुंकारों से महलों की नींव उखड़ जाती,

सांसों के बल से ताज हवा में उड़ता है,

जनता की रोके राह,समय में ताव कहां?

वह जिधर चाहती,काल उधर ही मुड़ता है।

अब्दों, शताब्दियों, सहस्त्राब्द का अंधकार

बीता; गवाक्ष अंबर के दहके जाते हैं;

यह और नहीं कोई,जनता के स्वप्न अजय

चीरते तिमिर का वक्ष उमड़ते जाते हैं।

सब से विराट जनतंत्र जगत का आ पहुंचा,

तैंतीस कोटि-हित सिंहासन तैयार करो

अभिषेक आज राजा का नहीं,प्रजा का है,

तैंतीस कोटि जनता के सिर पर मुकुट धरो।

आरती लिये तू किसे ढूंढता है मूरख,

मन्दिरों, राजप्रासादों में, तहखानों में?

देवता कहीं सड़कों पर गिट्टी तोड़ रहे,

देवता मिलेंगे खेतों में, खलिहानों में।

फावड़े और हल राजदण्ड बनने को हैं,

धूसरता सोने से श्रृंगार सजाती है;

दो राह,समय के रथ का घर्घर-नाद सुनो,

सिंहासन खाली करो कि जनता आती है।

Poet - Ramdhari Singh "Dinkar"

Kshama Dayaa Taap Tyaag - A moving poem by Ramdhaari Singh "Dinkar"

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

क्षमा, दया , ताप , त्याग , मनोबल सबका लिया सहारा 

पर नर व्याघ सुयोधन तुमसे कहो कहाँ कब हारा? 

क्षमाशील हो रिपु समक्ष तुम हुए विनीत जितना ही 

दुष्ट कौरवों ने तुमको कायर समझा उतना ही 

अत्याचार सहन करने का कुफल यही होता है 

पौरुष का आतंक मनुज कोमल होकर खोता है 

क्षमा शोभती उस भुजंग को जिसके पास गरल है 

उसका क्या जो दंतहीन विषरहित विनीत सरल है 

तीन दिवस तक पंथ मांगते रघुपति सिन्धु किनारे

बैठे पढते रहे छंद अनुनय के प्यारे प्यारे 

उत्तर में जब एक नाद भी उठा नहीं सागर से 

उठी अधीर धधक पौरुष की आग राम के शर से 

सिन्धु देह धर त्राहि-त्राहि करता आ गिरा शरण में 

चरण पूज दासता ग्रहण की बंधा मूढ़ बंधन में 

सच पूछो तो शर में ही बस्ती है दीप्ति विनय की 

संधिवचन संपूज्य उसीका जिसमे शक्ति विजय की 

सहनशीलता, क्षमा, दया को तभी पूजता जग है 

बल का दर्प चमकता उसके पीछे जब जगमग है 

-रामधारी सिंह "दिनकर" 

Mercy, resolve, tact, tolerance you've tried everything and some

But o my king of men when did Suyodhan succumb?

The more forgiving you were In your humane compassion

The more these rouge Kauravas pegged you as cowardly ashen

This is the consequence Of tolerating atrocities

The awe of machismo is lost When one's gentle n kindly

Forgiveness is becoming of The serpent that's got venom

None cares for the toothless, Poisonless, kind, gentle one

For three days Lord Raam kept Asking the ocean for a passage

Sitting there he petitioned Using the sweetest words to engage

When in response there was Not a whisper from the sea

A raging fire of endeavor Rose from Raam's body

The ocean took human-form 'N supplicated to Raam

Touched his feet, was subservient A slave he had become

Truth be told, it's in the quiver That lies the gleam of modesty

Only his peace-talk is reputable Who is capable of victory

Tolerance, forgiveness and clemency Are respected by the world

Only when the glow of strength From behind it is unfurled

Poet - Ramdhaari Singh "Dinkar"

The Engineered Language of Sanskrit

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

In continuation with the thoughts from this article.

Sanskrit is the language which is seen to be used by all post Paninian composers. Prior to codification of grammar by Panini, there were similar languages prevalent in subcontinent. The vedic language and the many forms of Prakrit languages were extent in the subcontinent and beyond. The new language which emerged after its coding by Panini, managed to incorporated and created following things..

1. alphabets which accommodated the linguistic patterns and requirements of many of the contemporary languages spoken (including Vedic "Vaak"). 

2. it created a means to use many of the customized Prakrit words in context one wished to use for describing an emotion OR a phenomenon OR an idea. Few syllables were omitted, few vowels were omitted which were not utilized by bulk of Indian populace. It is similar to way we twist and bend English language today to put in whatever words we wish to use. The Indian OR the Mumbaiyya English is an example of that "tendency" of human beings. I feel similar tendency existed then, although not as mundane as mumbaiyya. I know it is a clumsy metaphor but nonetheless..

Thus there was a language which was partially "engineered" and not completely evolved by random process of natural selection as is the case with Prakrit language (the very word Prakrit says that it is naturally evolved language). Since this language was engineered, it belonged to no one and everyone who understood it. It could be used with extreme flexibility and accommodation for describing very complex emotions and ideas which otherwise would have remained abstract and "asphuta (unspoken)". 

Sanskrit was not to be used by sabziwalas.. when chanakya's mother went to buy commodities in market of Patliputra, she must have conversed with the merchants in Ardha Maagadhi language. Even chanakya spoke with his disciples and public in similar local languages. But he had Sanskrit available to write his "arthashastra". This Sanskrit could be accessed  and understood perfectly by that class of society which was trained in grasping this knowledge. It was duty of this class of society to "download", translate and simplify whatever knowledge was "uploaded" on Sanskrit to his local language and disperse it amongst his audience and pupils. Thus, Sanskrit was a common platform where everyone "uploaded" the fruits of their deliberations. And this is what is the primary function of this language. Much similar to today's computer languages like COBOL and C++ etc...

The fact that a particular database is accessible to all who can use it, is easy to compose poetry in and hence easy to memorize, easy to write (extremely phonetic) and easy to speak marks the features of this common linguistic platform. 

The question "what was" or rather "who was" being linked is very important and pertinent one. What is the purpose and motive behind "linking" people OR certain set of people from different "Jaatis"?

As I said in previous paragraph, those who could understand this language flawlessly were linked. It takes 6 years to learn and understand Sanskrit grammar with all its complexities. Hence "Vyaakarana" is one of the most important domains of knowledge in Indian system. There was a large pool of individuals who had taken this intensive training in this language present all over India. This pool was networked by means of their schools, universities and laboratories. Whilst I do not much know whether the technology too was uploaded on Sanskrit platform, the presence of books like "Vaimanika Shastra" give us the hint that it was so. But we do not have much of the technological literature available in Sanskrit which was uploaded by the technologists (mostly from various trade guilds categorized as Vaishya and Shudra varna) then. But then we have also the record of millions of manuscripts burnt down when our temples and libraries were destroyed in medieval era. The contemporary people chose what to save and what not to save based on their ability, capacity and inclination. But that is different matter altogether.

Pool of individuals is made up of individuals and individuals are born in Kula/gotra/family belonging to particular group. This group is what we call as "Jaati". When a particular member of a particular "Jaati" get connected to this "Sanskrit platform", it is natural his immediate family will be connected too. it is also logical to expect that the member will teach the language to his progeny, if progeny is interested. Hence the progeny might "think" of connecting to the network by following the foot-steps of his/her father. Once this becomes widespread, there arises a new "Jaati" of those who has access to this database. 

They again might be proficient in local language, but they might start indulging in marital relations with those families which are similar to them in access to this platform and ideas therein. This is where the varna turns into a new "jaati". If this continues we have network of these newly formed "Jaatis". This defeats the original purpose but still keeps the system vibrant as long as the members of these "Jaatis" are at least proficient at what they are "reputed" of doing. Most of the "brahmin" jaatis were and are unable to speak OR understand Sanskrit in medieval and modern times. This is complete defeat of the very reason why this idea of varna, ashrama and purushartha were propped up. The moment this started happening, Sanskrit stopped "linking" and necessity to engineer and create a new "Sanskrit 2.0" arose. That necessity still has not been met yet.

We need a Panini 2.0 today. I have an idea of "Panini Project". But then it is too big, slightly abstract and will require refinement and inputs in terms of ideas, finance and efforts from many influential players. But time to create a new "Sanskrit 2.0" has come. A new "further refined" language (Pra-sanskarit) which will accommodate the needs of modern India which is trying to rise above the abrahmic shackles of previous millennia. A language which will be as flexible as Panini's sanskrit to accommodate new words, phrases and ideas of Greek, Latin, Germanic, English, Arabic, Persian and Indian origin, complex clauses, poetic and technical flexibility and huge "Bandwidth" to carry the ideas generated by modern day intellectuals. 

This is one of the most important steps towards tackling deracination. We need Maharshi Panini to reincarnate in spirit...

Parashuraam - A metaphor bridging Caste System and Varna System

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 India License.

In continuation with thoughts from this article

The story of Parashurama has many serious repercussions because to understand Parshurama, one has to understand caste system, varna system and their interrelation. 

India has been and will remain the land which is occupied by various "Jaatis" which share this land and are linked by a common thread of "Sanskriti". Here I present another view of looking towards India from socio-political PoV. 

1. Jaati or Castes are those networks of family which lived nearby and were indulging in "roti-Beti vyavaahaara" with each other. Roti-Beti means social security and marital relations to propagate and strengthen the network and its stake in geography or "Desha" of India. Each "Jaati" has their own customs traditions arising out of and modified according to demands and constraints of space and time. 

As described elaborately on this blog on countless occasions, Dharma is set of rules which accommodates the drives of each of the components of ecology to evolve and excel. In sociological context, it is set of rules to accommodate needs and aspirations of all the networks/clans/Jaati/castes (all are interchangeable) in desha of India. This dynamic equilibrium of jaati based networks rooted in land of India and connected to each other by thread of dharma is known as "Raashtra". 

2. Combinations of such Jaatis living together formed village and so on and so forth. Until the level of village, there is no need of linking these Jaatis together because everyone knowns everyone else.

3. As political, sociological, economic and sanskritik consolidation started, there became necessary to have certain groups which could look at the bigger picture. One of the main pre-requisite of such group is that this group itself should be root-less and possession less. Because since India is very rich geography, it needs to be protected over period of time from newer tribes coming from outside India to settle here. For defending the territory, military consolidation is essential and for that to happen, weaving all the indigenous "Jaatis" in one thread of "sanskriti" is essential since it is real pain in arse to control a huge and diverse geography, that is India without participation of most of Jaatis. This participation comes by giving them stake in "common neighborhood watch". 

4. This is where the need to have a Brahmana and Kshatriya arose. Brahmin varna was supposed to draw its cadre from all "Jaatis". Some members of "Jaati" should give up their possessions and become "Jaati-less" and start interacting with similar other "Jaati-less" individuals from other regions, Jaatis. Slowly, there arose necessity to have a link language and an artificial language of "Sanskrit" was designed. 

5. The "Kshatriya" too has to be "Jaati-less". A raaja although the "owner" of "rajya", was not supposed to have any property of his own. Raja was head of state and state owned the land and Raja owned the land by the virtue of being head of state. A Kshatriya cadre, just like brahmin cadre, was drawn from all Jaatis. Simply because every Jaati wants to have a "stake" in this order so that they are represented and their issues are addressed.

6. This is difference between Varna and Jaati. Varna is selected cadre drawn for purpose of administration, linkage and sanskritik conversation across the "desha" of India so that India remains not only a "desha (geography)" but also a "Rashtra (nation)" with common civilizational heritage. 

7. With time, these Varnas became new "Jaatis" since they started owning property and possessions individually. This owning of property suddenly converts one's vision from civilizational to parochial.

8. There is a reason why it happened so.. Purushaartha system asks every individual to pursue artha and kaama (wealth, power, desire) using just (dharmik) means. Whereas, the Varna specifically asks a person to give up pursuit of individual OR parochial artha and kaama for national or civilizational artha and kaama. 

9. This is the reason why in one of my previous posts, I said that Indic dharma requires a certain level of prosperity for functioning. In less prosperous geography and climate, the tree of dharma cannot take root. anyways..

10. While it is known that the members of Brahmin and Kshatriya "Varna" become property-possessing "Jaatis" over the period of time, there was a system which was churning out new individuals to form new line, to replace the "fallen" varnas and take their place and continue the "tantra" (system). During Abrahmic invasions, and more so during British invasions, this system where property-less networks were suddenly churned up to make national level decisions was  damaged. The last example which see is house of Peshwa. Of course there are many such examples, Peshwa is just one of them for demonstrating the point. 

Example - The caste of Peshwa was "Chitpavan brahmin community". It is interesting to know that this Jaati did not exist before 1720. It was during Marathi translation of Skanda Purana funded by Balaji Vishwanath (father of Bajirao-1) put in the story of 14 dead bodies resurrected by Parashurama and hence origins of Chita(Pyre) Paavan (purified/resurrected) brahmin class. In all previous literature, there is no special word for brahmins from Konkan. They are simply referred to as brahmins. Furthermore, there are many "theories" on origins of this caste (including Jewish, persian, greek, afghan, Berber origin and what not). But this is not the point. The point is, when this community suddenly rose to prominence, they catapulted the expansion of Indic dharma (Bajirao-1, Nanasaheb, Madhavrao-1). They churned the society of India and along with them rose many other lower castes (Shindes and Holkars which were from shepherds and agricultural labour caste) to "Varna" of "Kshatriya" bypassing the traditional 96-clan Maratha kshatriya class of Deccan.

After 3 generations, this community too let go all the steam and Post Madhavrao-1 (post 1772), the maratha movement simply kept existing due to initial momentum generated by these three kings. The reason of their fall (which started from Nanasaheb himself) is their sense of "property" and their attachment to it. Bajirao-1 had nothing to lose as he owned nothing worthwhile. The seats of Baroda, Kolhapur, Nagpur were from elite property owning class and were not much instrumental. Seats of Pune, Indore, Dhar and Gwalior became like Kolhapur,Baroda, Nagpur seats after 1790s. And all this when the Varna-system was totally collapsed in India for 600 years. Whatever manifested in form of this social engineering of India in 1600s and 1700s, was not ideal, yet had its roots in a faint memory of an "utopian Raam Rajya". 

11. Everyone gets attached to one's achievements. Once attachments arises, vision narrows and priorities change from expansion to preservation. While both qualities and visions are essential. Dharma withstood the onslaught of 1000 years due to the firmly rooted property owning class which sustained the possibility of dharmik ressurection in India by preserving the bond of Sanskriti. Dharma expanded when the property-less class was propped up to overcome the inertia of rooted class.

12. This is the dynamic of dharma. When "Brahmin" becomes a "Jaati", it loses all its potency. Same is with "Kshatriya". 

13. This is where the Parashurama comes in. Parashurama not only shows the struggle to achieve equilibrium sharing of responsibilities, duties and hence power associated with it between the "Brahmin" cadre and "Kshatriya" cadre which is drawn from "all jaatis" in geography of India. It also shows the tendency of inertia and ruthless preservative instinct of those networks which have found roots in property (represented by kaartavirya arjuna) and who go to any extent to preserve their power and keep "things going". 

14. The power of Parashurama is in his ability to rebuild a "brahmin" cadre by drawing individuals from "all Jaatis". To be precise, all those Jaatis who in given space and time are dharmik but are not owing much of property, and with bleak prospects. By rebuilding Brahmin cadre, I mean by convincing the property-less "Jaatis" to give up some of their members. And by convincing those members to give up the Jaati-based identity and priorities, give up their personal aarthik and Kaamik aspirations and channelize them towards civilizational and national arthik aspirations. This convincing is tough job. 

15. If point 14 is not taken into consideration, within no time, Parashurama becomes Hitler. 

Jaati-system (castes) is mainstay of India, while various Jaatis in India (networks/clans/castes/Lobbies) come and go, move up and down. Varna and Ashrama system along with Purushartha system links these Jaatis towards a common goal - that is establishment, preservation and protection of Dharma in prosperous geography of India. If the fail-safe measures to ensure the cleanliness of four-fold systems of Varna-Ashrama-Purushartha are not kept optimally operational with rigorous self-check at regular intervals, the new lines to replace the "fallen" members of Varna won't come up and system will start collapsing. As it did in past 1000 years. 

This is one of the main aspect of our "Dharmaarthik" deracination.


If you like this line of thoughts, please continue reading this article.