Amit Jadhav

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@GurvarinderGG @HongZhou1110308 @raviparmarIN According to Hindu theology, even Rishi Matanga couldn’t become a Brahmin in his present life despite performing tapas for years. He attained siddhi, but not a change of varna. Varna, once determined by birth as a result of past-life karma, can’t be changed in the present life.

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@GurvarinderGG @HongZhou1110308 @raviparmarIN Then please provide the verse from the Bhagavad Gita or a commentary by Shankaracharya, Madhvacharya, or Ramanujacharya that explicitly says a Shudra can become a Brahmin in the present life by performing pious karma. Until then, saying ‘it can be changed’ is just an assertion.

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@HongZhou1110308 @GurvarinderGG @raviparmarIN Under this interpretation, a Shudra cannot change their varna in the present life by cultivating different qualities or actions, because their birth itself reflects the guna and karma of past lives.

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

I support the view that the Aryan Migration Theory is not convincingly supported by the Rig Veda, archaeology, or genetics, and that modern versions largely repackage an older 19th-century hypothesis using the language of DNA and historical linguistics.

[Nick Collins @nickcollins1953]

The Aryan invasion/Migration Theory refuses to die.

The modified theory now holds that migrants from Central Asia arrived in India around 1,500 BC, bringing Sanskrit and Vedic religion wholesale, and that the Indus-Sarasvati civilisation they replaced was separate. There's a problem. The Rig Veda's hymns to the Sarasvati call it the mightiest river in the land, and the Sarasvati dried up around 2,000 BC. The people credited with writing those hymns would have arrived to find a dry riverbed.

Newer DNA studies are being used to prop the theory up regardless.

The primary paper, Narasimhan et al. in Science 2019, describes a small number of Central Asian males marrying into a much larger local Indian population. The popular books dress that trickle up as a civilisational rupture that rewrote India, imposed Sanskrit, and simultaneously repopulated Europe and Siberia, all from a windswept steppe with a fraction of India's demographic base.

The Rig Veda is also full of maritime references, of maritime travel, of gods with oceanic origins, and there are three-masted ships and hundred-oared vessels in its verses. Steppe pastoralists do not write poetry like that, and there is nothing in the text describing cold climates, the steppe, or a journey from anywhere else. If invaders had imposed their language you would expect older non-Indo-European river and mountain names beneath the Sanskrit layer, in the way Miami and Mississippi sit under English across the Americas. India shows no such pattern.

The newer Heggarty paper from 2023 shifts the entry route but not the frame. It uses assumptions which were on the authors' own admission "centred on the majority view." The output unsurprisingly confirms the majority view. India remains a destination in every model on the paper's menu. Out of India is not among them.

Neither describes an invasion, and neither describes a migration in the racial sense the Victorian invasion theorists meant.

A flawed nineteenth century racial theory dressed in twenty first century genetics or linguistics is still a flawed nineteenth century racial theory.

Link to full essay, with sources, in the comments below.

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@raviparmarIN Your gunas and karma from past lives determine your birth into a varna in this present life. A Shudra cannot become a Brahmin in the present life—you can only cultivate Brahmin-like qualities. That’s why the Gita tells you to follow your own duty (svadharma), not another’s duty.

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@GurvarinderGG @raviparmarIN Your gunas and karma from past lives determine your birth into a varna in this present life. A Shudra cannot become a Brahmin in the present life—you can only cultivate Brahmin-like qualities. That’s why the Gita tells you to follow your own duty (svadharma), not another’s duty.

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@ambedkariteIND Don’t let Manuvadi revisionism gaslight you. The traditional Shankaracharyas uphold a birth-based varna system, where jati (caste) is understood as the social expression of varna, not something separate from it.

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@ambedkariteIND Isvara → Past-life Karma →Samskaras (Mental impressions carried across lives) → Prakriti structured by the Gunas (sattva, rajas, tamas) → Svabhava (unchosen inborn nature) → Varna (social-ritual classification fixed at birth) → Duty (present life karma from that nature).

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@skalpanap @Gotra_Rakshit What makes you think he is showing off? Can’t you see his happiness..

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@deepakdialogues *Biased

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@saket71 Dr. Ambedkar defended reservation in public employment while explaining Article 16(4): “Reservations are given to those who have not had a proper look-in in the administration.” The First Amendment (1951), introduced by Dr. Ambedkar,inserted Article 15(4) educational reservation

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@UnreservedMERIT Reservation is a constitutional provision, not a fundamental right. The Constitution empowers the State to provide reservations for SCs, STs and OBCs under provisions such as Articles 15(4), 15(5), 15(6), 16(4), 16(4A) and 46. Calling it “unconstitutional” is simply incorrect.

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@1974nishu @Sagar_reporter If you want reservations to be evidence-based, you need data. A caste census provides the baseline to evaluate whether SCs, STs and OBCs are fairly represented in public institutions.

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@1974nishu @Sagar_reporter The question isn’t “What year is it?” The question is: Have untouchability and the social, educational and economic exclusion of SCs & STs ended? Constitutional measures should stay until those conditions no longer exist and representation reflects genuine equality of opportunity

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@NomadPhil0sophy @Sagar_reporter Admiration for Dr. Ambedkar long predates any government commemoration and comes from millions who see him as the principal architect of the Constitution and a leading advocate for the rights of historically oppressed castes.

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@NomadPhil0sophy @Sagar_reporter You call “Dalit” a vague identity, yet “Indian” is also a broad identity. Indians don’t all intermarry or share the same language, religion, or customs, yet they united against British colonialism. Political solidarity doesn’t require social uniformity.

[Amit Jadhav @AJ1810X]

@NomadPhil0sophy @Sagar_reporter By your logic, “Indian” is also a vague identity given to people living in India. Indians shouldn’t have opposed British colonialism because they didn’t intermarry, spoke different languages, followed different religions, and had hierarchies among themselves.