I think its implied by the purusha song. (I can accept that if the varna was a guideline - and the "castes" themselves were possibly meant as guidelines then the caste system could be seen as something similar to career guidance. But given the way the story is told, and the implications of the word varna (which refers to skin colour) and the association with the darkest people coming from purusha's feet - in a culture concerned with purity and cleanliness being next to godliness ... i think its pretty obvious the implication is the lower castes are dirtier and less deserving of power in the world. Especially in light of the idea that everyone is born Sudra originally, and only merit as a sudra gains you access to the higher castes of vaishyas, kshatriyas and brahmins.
In the Purusha Sukta hymn, there is no mention of varna, skin color or otherwise. But if skin color was a determining factor within the caste, how does one account for the lofty worship and praise of the dark-skinned Krishna, Rama, or the BLACK colored Kali?
There is no mention of caste in the Purusha regarding the four classifications of brahmanas, kshatriyas, vaishyas and the shudras. It is the Hindu's creationism mythos, "God" sacrificing himself, dividing himself into four parts and thus creating Man, illustrating that the whole is simply a sum of its parts.
Again, my contention is that it is not the pure, Esoteric doctrine at fault here, but the perverted, Exoteric interpretation of these scriptures.
Just as the Buddha had to rectify the damage done by the Upanishadic seers, then came Shankara and just as Shankara's followers did the same thing, which then justified the need for Ramanujacharya to come, just as the perversion of the Pharisees and the resultant emergence of Jesus, identically the corruption of the canonical teachings of the Buddha by the commentaries and had to be salvaged by Nagarjuna which was debased by the degradation of the Mahayanic Sutras and on and on and on....
No, whether they exist or not, what they are capable is dependant on you. (And others.) The harm you suffer will be because of other people, or if you are unlucky the world itself. if they exist and guide the actions of others to harm you, then its primarily others who are responsible for that harm. After all they listened to the space squid and surrendered their autonomy to allow the evil cephalopods to direct their actions.
So would this be a valid, logical argument against Anton van Leeuwenhoek's invisible creatures from another world that were the predominant cause of human nosocomial infections, morbidity and mortality?
What about the flatworm, the hairworm or especially the fungal parasite?
Exactly that.
The whole of the world is conscious to an extent, but self awareness, and the ability to create art that reflects on our place in the world, and mitigates the enourmous energies that drive ceation - thats where humans fit in.
We exist so nature can have a conversation with itself, and sing and dance in celebration of the wonder of being alive.
Everything else might do that too, but humans are especially adapted to do it more often and more intricately. And there's a magical aspect to that too. The actual art/rituals, and their complexity and creation allows the energy of the big bang (ie the energy that drives creation) to come into the world channelled and controlled through structures that live instead of ripping the whole SheBang to subatomic particles.
Okay.
So do humans exist specifically so gravity can celebrate its gravitational pull?
What about the sun....does it exist so it can bask in its own light?
)
