Liberty, fraternity and equality are cornerstones of Hinduism

"Freedom is a boon, which everyone has the right to receive." ~ Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj


Arya sarva samascaiva sadaiva priyadarsanah, meaning "Arya, who worked for the equality of all and was dear to everyone." ( The Ramayana's description of the Avatar Rama )


“I think in India the idea of universal brotherhood, the Sanskrit sentence vasudhaiva kutumbakam etc., has the same meaning.” ~ Bhagat Singh


These sayings of the famous Hindu king Chattrapati Shivaji, the celebrated Hindu epic Ramayana and popular freedom fighter Bhagat Singh on the Upanishadic phrase 'Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam' shows that liberty, fraternity and equality are the cornerstones of Hinduism, and highlights its compatibility with modern democracy and humanism.

Don't necessarily want to turn this into a debate and I am just a foreign observer, but I think the existence of discrimination because of caste would make the "equality" point questionable. That said, in other countries there may be discrimination as well. I also don't know anything about the biography and the life circumstances of the source you quoted.

Sirona said:

Don't necessarily want to turn this into a debate and I am just a foreign observer, but I think the existence of discrimination because of caste would make the "equality" point questionable. That said, in other countries there may be discrimination as well. I also don't know anything about the biography and the life circumstances of the source you quoted.

Click to expand...

So are you saying that Hinduism is incompatible with democracy and humanism !

Yeah, it is a problem and we are actively trying to minimize its deleterious effects. It has been with us for thousands of years. However, complete equality is for some future.

ajay0 said:

So are you saying that Hinduism is incompatible with democracy and humanism !

Click to expand...

AFAIK, India is a democracy.

As for humanism, the word can have various meanings, one of them referring to secular humanism. Understood that way, humanism would be at odds with Hinduism or any other religion. However, it must be noted that India has always valued religious tolerance in particular. But as for other issues like equality, I think improvements are necessary.

BTW, Liberté, égalité, fraternité is the motto of the French Republic and of Haiti. It was a consequence of the Age of Enlightement. The concept goes further back to the Christian idea of all people being the “children” of the “One Abrahamic God” .This is where the concept of human rights comes from. In Hinduism, at least to my understanding, everybody has the same obligation to fulfill their duty (dharma), but individual rights depend on their caste or “varna” (“color”).

A side note, when I visited the biggest Hindu temple of Mauritius, an Indian-looking man came close to me, excitingly shouting “hemal, hemal”. I found out that hemal can either mean “golden” or “idiot”, so I can't tell for sure what he meant, but given his excited tone, it might be possible that he was excited about my “Caucasian” skin color.

Sirona said:

But as for other issues like equality, I think improvements are necessary.

Click to expand...

What sort of improvements are you referring and suggesting !

ajay0 said:

What sort of improvements are you referring and suggesting !

Click to expand...

Well, according to my Hare Krishna friends, introducing the system of four castes and four phases of life laid down in the Bhagavad-Gita (varnashrama) worldwide will solve all problems of mankind at once and create a new utopia. One Hare Krishna author named Harikesa Swami published a book recommending this step (Varnasrama Manifesto for Social Sanity, 1981, Bhaktivedanta Book Trust), and this book succeeded in gaining the attention of German Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution for promoting "unconstitutional" ideas.

I can only guess how strongly ideas like varnashrama are ingrained in the traditional mindset of people born as Hindus, so I am sure these ideas won‘t magically disappear. But I think things like social programs and promoting education for the disfavored might be a good way for reducing discrimination.

I also read about Communists / Maoists in India gaining followers among the disfavoured. Communists believe that religion in general is the source of all evil and must be violently overthrown.

'Equality' itself is not that easy to define, as we're not all equal. As a simple example, a 12 year old kid who robs a store wouldn't be treated the same way as a 30 year old. I didn't treat all of my students equally, or our children, ad they were all individuals with differing needs.

I think the concept of 'fairness' although it's far more vague, is better than 'equal'.

Vinayaka said:

'Equality' itself is not that easy to define, as we're not all equal. As a simple example, a 12 year old kid who robs a store wouldn't be treated the same way as a 30 year old. I didn't treat all of my students equally, or our children, ad they were all individuals with differing needs.

I think the concept of 'fairness' although it's far more vague, is better than 'equal'.

Click to expand...

Minors are a specific exception. I don't think the concept of Liberty, Equality, Fraternity was meant to say that a helpless baby should be treated the same way a grown-up would be. Moreover, the "human rights" first literally were droits the l'homme , the rights of male citizens, excluding droits de femme or female citizens. If you had to decide, would you deny an untouchable, a low-caste or a woman certain rights or benefits because they're "like helpless children"? That's an argumentation which, for example, Prabhupada would use.

Bhagavad Gita As It Is, 16.7, purport
Now, in the Manu-samhita it is clearly stated that a woman should not be given freedom. That does not mean that women are to be kept as slaves, but they are like children. The demons have now neglected such injunctions, and they think that women should be given as much freedom as men.
It may be that Prabhupada's view reflects mainstream Hinduism, I can't tell. So, maybe you're right, and "fairness" is sufficient. In case I got you wrong, please elaborate.

In case this should turn into a debate, please move thread to the Same Faith Debate section.

Sirona said:

Minors are a specific exception. I don't think the concept of Liberty, Equality, Fraternity was meant to say that a helpless baby should be treated the same way a grown-up would be. Moreover, the "human rights" first literally were droits the l'homme , the rights of male citizens, excluding droits de femme or female citizens. If you had to decide, would you deny an untouchable, a low-caste or a woman certain rights or benefits because they're "like helpless children"? That's an argumentation which, for example, Prabhupada would use.

Bhagavad Gita As It Is, 16.7, purport
Now, in the Manu-samhita it is clearly stated that a woman should not be given freedom. That does not mean that women are to be kept as slaves, but they are like children. The demons have now neglected such injunctions, and they think that women should be given as much freedom as men.
It may be that Prabhupada's view reflects mainstream Hinduism, I can't tell. So, maybe you're right, and "fairness" is sufficient. In case I got you wrong, please elaborate.

In case this should turn into a debate, please move thread to the Same Faith Debate section.

Click to expand...

In no way do I think his views reflect mainstream Hinduism. I know way too many female doctors and lawyers for that. My 'age' example was just one. Another is 'intelligence'. How can we possibly treat everyone equally when humanity is so diverse?

But sure, I'm probably wrong.

Sirona said:

BTW, Liberté, égalité, fraternité is the motto of the French Republic and of Haiti. It was a consequence of the Age of Enlightement. The concept goes further back to the Christian idea of all people being the “children” of the “One Abrahamic God” .This is where the concept of human rights comes from.

Click to expand...

Interestingly, in India too, major social reforms came up with monotheistic sects like the Lingayats, Brahmo Samaj, Arya Samaj, Kabir Panthis and Prajapita Brahmakumaris.

The Lingayats was a Shaivite monotheistic sect started by Basaveshwara, who was the prime minister of a kingdom. Basaveshwara in his teachings emphasized the equality and fraternity of all human beings, regardless of caste and creed. The Dalits and lower caste members were the main adherents of this reformist sect.

The Brahmo Samaj also emphasized the equality and fraternity of all human beings, denounced casteism and was instrumental in the abolishment of the practice Sati, or the burning of hindu widows alive on the funeral pyre of their deceased husbands.

The Arya Samaj too emphasized equality, fraternity and liberty, and upheld women's emancipation and education, which was denied to them till then. Women were taught the Vedas and were trained to perform havans and chant them.

I was pleasantly surprised to see women chanting vedas with men when I went to an Arya samaj ceremony.

The Prajapita Brahmakumaris are the only spiritual organisation in the world led, administered and taught by women, and it is an unusual sight to see women teachers teaching people and newcomers on their religious philosophy and meditation in their centers. I was deeply touched to see them addressing people regardless of caste or religion or nationality as 'brother' or 'sister' , and I was also addressed as 'brother'. There is emphasis in the Brahmakumaris too on equality and fraternity of all as the children of one God, along with women's empowerment.

So in India too, obsolete differences in caste and creed were set aside by these reformist Hindu sects through their emphasis on equality and fraternity, and this has made the practical implementation of the constitution easier. This has also helped to bring down disorder and strife caused by casteism and other manmade barriers.

Sirona said:

AFAIK, India is a democracy.
As for humanism, the word can have various meanings, one of them referring to secular humanism. Understood that way, humanism would be at odds with Hinduism or any other religion.
BTW, Liberté, égalité, fraternité is the motto of the French Republic and of Haiti. In Hinduism, at least to my understanding, everybody has the same obligation to fulfill their duty (dharma), but individual rights depend on their caste or “varna” (“color”).

A side note, when I visited the biggest Hindu temple of Mauritius, an Indian-looking man came close to me, excitingly shouting “hemal, hemal”. I found out that hemal can either mean “golden” or “idiot”, .. it might be possible that he was excited about my “Caucasian” skin color.

Click to expand...

Yes, gold or golden is one of the meanings of 'Hema' (Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit). Do you have blond hair in addition of your skin-color? That is hardly ever found in India, though we have brunettes, my aunt was one. Talking of skin-color, I have seen three women with actual 'golden' skin-color. We call it 'kanchan-kaya'. Once in my city of Jodhpur and two in Delhi. Both women were of lower economic strata. It got me rooted to the ground. I would have fallen for anyone of them if I was not married.
Sirona, one thing that people need to understand is that India does not have the secularism as understood in other countries. We do not deny religion. It is clearly explained in our Constitution in 1952. We have 'Sarva dharma sama bhava' (Treat all religions equally).
Similarly there is different understanding of liberty as well as brotherhood. We have limits on liberty. We do not allow things which will poison relations between religions. India cannot afford that. That is punishable. As for brotherhood, society does not take it to mean that inter-religious or inter-caste marriage is OK, though that is permitted in law.
People do not have different rights or obligations in Hinduism in spite of varnas and castes. If that is there, it is an aberration of the religious law. Discrimination according to varna / castes is a crime and punishable in law with jail for 5 years. That is how seriously we take it. However, I hope you know that many sects in Hinduism do not discriminate on varna or caste.

Sirona said:

Bhagavad Gita As It Is, 16.7, purport:
Now, in the Manu-samhita it is clearly stated that a woman should not be given freedom. That does not mean that women are to be kept as slaves, but they are like children. The demons have now neglected such injunctions, and they think that women should be given as much freedom as men.
It may be that Prabhupada's view reflects mainstream Hinduism, I can't tell. So, maybe you're right, and "fairness" is sufficient. In case I got you wrong, please elaborate.

Click to expand...

Prabhupada's view is certainly not main-stream Hinduism. It is not even main-stream Vaishnavism. There are many other important Vaishnava sects.* Furthermore, though the differences by varna are there among Hare-Krishnas, there is no caste discrimination. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's philosophy will never tolerate that. Difference and discrimination are not the same things. Difference means that varnas are given different duties / responsibilities and every one has to fulfill his own dharma.

* Ramanuja Sri Vaishnavas, Vallabha's Shuddha-advaita, Madhva's Dvaita, Nimbarka's Dvaita-Advaita. Chaitanya's philosophy forms the fifth Vaishnava sect.
Apart from the five classical Vaishnava philosophies, there are many local ones.

@ajay0 , @Aupmanyav , thanks for sharing your perspective. I learned a lot.

Aupmanyav said:

Prabhupada's view is certainly not main-stream Hinduism. It is not even main-stream Vaishnavism. There are many other important Vaishnava sects.* Furthermore, though the differences by varna are there among Hare-Krishnas, there is no caste discrimination. Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's philosophy will never tolerate that. Difference and discrimination are not the same things. Difference means that varnas are given different duties / responsibilities and every one has to fulfill his own dharma.

Click to expand...

I looked up the Caitanya-Caritamrta's statements on varnasrama-dharma. Madhya-Lila, chapter 8, verse 57:

Text 57:
Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu ordered Rāmānanda Rāya, “Recite a verse from the revealed scriptures concerning the ultimate goal of life.”

Text 58:
“ ‘The Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Viṣṇu, is worshiped by the proper execution of prescribed duties in the system of varṇa and āśrama. There is no other way to satisfy the Supreme Personality of Godhead. One must be situated in the institution of the four varṇas and āśramas.’ ”

Text 59:
The Lord replied, “This is external. You had better tell Me of some other means.”

Text 60:
Rāmānanda Rāya continued, “ ‘My dear son of Kuntī, whatever you do, whatever you eat, whatever you offer in sacrifice, whatever you give in charity, and whatever austerities you perform, all the results of such activities should be offered to Me, Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.’ ”

Text 61:
“This is also external,” Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu said. “Please proceed and speak further on this matter.” Rāmānanda Rāya replied, “To give up one’s occupational duties in the varṇāśrama system is the essence of perfection.”

Text 62:
Rāmānanda Rāya continued, “ ‘Occupational duties are described in the religious scriptures. If one analyzes them, he can fully understand their qualities and faults and then give them up completely to render service unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Such a person is considered a first-class man.’

Text 63:
“As stated in scripture [Bg. 18.66], ‘After giving up all kinds of religious and occupational duties, if you come to Me, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and take shelter, I will give you protection from all of life’s sinful reactions. Do not worry.’ ”

[The text goes on about the highest form of bhakti].


@Aupmanyav , for clarification, you're an atheist, but you don't believe in secularism?

Hypothetically speaking, if a plumber decided to become a policeman or state-servant [assumed he has the necessary skills and education] would that be okay to you? If a butcher had a God-experience and decided to become a guru, would this be okay to you?

Sirona said:

The text goes on about the highest form of bhakti.
@Aupmanyav , for clarification, you're an atheist, but you don't believe in secularism?
Hypothetically speaking, if a plumber decided to become a policeman or state-servant [assumed he has the necessary skills and education] would that be okay to you? If a butcher had a God-experience and decided to become a guru, would this be okay to you?

Click to expand...

1. The problem, Sirona, is that Chaitanya had renounced the world and devoted himself only to bhakti. Now every lay person, house-holder will not do so. So, do not think that what was good for Chaitanya will be good for all other people.
2. Yeah, I do not believe in secularism absolutely - that is if it impacts on my own religion. I am an atheist but still a Hindu, and do not disregard the reality of the world. That is a truth at its own level - Vyavaharika (pragmatic truth).
3. There are thousands of plumbers in our police and army. In political positions, administration and police in India, it is constitutionally mandated that 27.5% will be from what we term as 'Other Backward Castes' and 23.5% will be from (16.5% of 'scheduled/listed lower castes and 7% of 'scheduled/listed tribes' reserving 50% or more of all positions for these sections of the society). The same applis to admission in educational institutions. (percentage corrected)
4. Sirona, perhaps you have heard the story of the 'pious butcher' (DharmaVyadha) in SrimadBhagawat Purana - his discourse is known as 'VyadhaGita'. It basically says that no one can be a 100% non-violent. In our life, we knowlingly or unknowingly are cause of death to other creatures. He specifically mentions that those who are vegetarians also are violent, because the plants after all are living. This was something said some 2000 years ago. Vyadha Gita - Wikipedia
The story goes (as you will read in the wiki link) that a brahmin after all his education had not understood 'dharma' and he was sent to a pious butcher to learn 'dharma'. There are a whole lot of people from untouchable castes whom Hindus consider as saints and give utmost respect. After all, Sage VedaVyasa, the compiler of four Vedas and writer of Srimad Bhagawat Purana, Brahma Sutras also was an untouchable. Saint Kabir was not even a Hindu. A butcher as a 'guru' is no problem in Hinduism.

Sirona said:

Don't necessarily want to turn this into a debate and I am just a foreign observer, but I think the existence of discrimination because of caste would make the "equality" point questionable.

Click to expand...

Casteism as a social institution is a man-made one and has no basis in the Shrutis or spiritual teachings of Hinduism, and its present version actually contradict and violate the Shrutis.

This is why the Arya Samaj and Brahmo Samaj, which are based only on the teachings of the Vedas, rejected casteism entirely. It is interesting to note that they also stand for gender equality and empowerment of women.

The Vedas emphasize the equality and fraternity of all human beings. The Manu smriti that brought about casteism was of manmade origin and had nothing to do with Vedic religion. This was perhaps necessary at a certain time period but became obsolete with time. Buddha and Mahavira too criticized casteism and emphasized equality and fraternity of all beings.


Casteism and laws debarring women from study of the Vedas, sati are man-made laws stemming from the Smritis. Caste system, like the feudal system in Britain and Japan, was necessary at one point of time in history, but it is obviously obsolete now.

The smritis, or man-made laws and customs regulating society, can and ought to be modified with changing times and circumstances for material progress in line with new methods and innovations. Negligence in this regard is the cause for deterioration in material standards.

But this was all ignored and Hindus obstinately continued with the caste system rigidly, even though it was obsolete. Consequently the Hindus were weakened by disunity, and lost their sovereignty to foreign invaders for the last 1000 years. Invaders like the Mughals and British themselves were united by the ideals of equality and fraternity and this was the reason why a few of them was able to conquer and rule easily very large numbers of Hindus who were much superior to them numerically.

Paramahamsa Yogananda, author of the 'Autobiography of a Yogi, stated on the caste system...


"These were (originally) symbolic designations of the stages of spiritual refinement. They were not intended as social categories. And they were not intended to be hereditary. Things changed as the yugas [cycles of time] descended toward mental darkness. People in the higher castes wanted to make sure their children were accepted as members of their own caste. Thus, ego-identification caused them to freeze the ancient classifications into what is called the ‘caste system.’ Such was not the original intention. In obvious fact, however, the offspring of a brahmin may be a sudra by nature. And a peasant, sometimes, is a real saint.”


Thus the caste system was a man-made feudal system which was useful once upon a time, but became obsolete later on, and is still hung on to by some conservative Hindus due to force of tradition and conditioning, to their own detriment.

kiwimac said:

Unless, of course, you are a Dalit.

Click to expand...

Under progressive Hindu kings like Chattrapati Shivaji mentioned in the op, the Dalits were treated with respect and dignity.

Shivaji recruited the Mahars belonging to the Dalit caste as soldiers in his army and lower caste Hindus in his navy, a progressive step considering the casteism of those times. Shivaji is remembered for creating a progressive and powerful Hindu state in India during a time of considerable conflict and strife.The Mahars were particularly employed as fort guards in Shivaji’s times, and their responsibility was to guard the slopes and accesses to Maratha mountain fortresses. Many of them rose to the position of fort captains as well.


However after Shivaji's demise, the Peshwa rulers who ruled subjected them to inhuman casteist degradation again and stopped recruiting them in the military, quite unbecoming considering the Mahar's grand services to the state under the noble Shivaji.

As mentioned by historian Shraddha Kumbhojkar in her work, “the Peshwas were infamous for their high caste orthodoxy and their persecution of the untouchables.” The Mahars were forbidden to move about in public spaces and punished atrociously for disrespecting caste regulations. Under their governance, the social and occupational mobility enjoyed by the Mahars was completely destroyed.

Under the tyrannical Peshwa's too , the Maratha state collapsed after the third war of Panipat where they were routed by the Afghans and lost its former prestige.


Battle of Koregaon: Why the Dalits hate Peshwas and celebrate this British ‘victory’

The Mahars however again distinguished themselves as soldiers, when hired as mercenaries by the British in their colonial army, and they played a vital role in bringing down the Peshwa rule in western India, in the famous Battle of Koregaon.

Aupmanyav said:

Yes, gold or golden is one of the meanings of 'Hema' (Sanskrit Dictionary for Spoken Sanskrit). Do you have blond hair in addition of your skin-color? That is hardly ever found in India, though we have brunettes, my aunt was one. Talking of skin-color, I have seen three women with actual 'golden' skin-color.

Click to expand...

Men too. Actor Hrithik Roshan

A niece.