bob_brigante wrote: > I think the most interesting thing about the term is that it > implies something good: A rakshasa is someone who protects > (raksha: protection). > So, Bob, you're saying that it was a good thing when the invading Aryan speakers imposed the caste syestem on the native South Indian Dravidians and called them "rakshasa", "devils" and "demons". And that was a good thing and protected them. From what?
But when George Allen calls someone a "macaca" that's a bad thing, and when Mel Gibson and Michael Richards use racial terms it's a bad thing, but when someone calls the President of the U.S. a "demon" and a "devil", that's a good thing. > Rakshasas are supposed to protect society, but because of arrogance > in their power, they become wrongdoers like Ravana, and instead > society needs protection from them. > So, you're saying that the King of Sri Lanka was Ravana, a Dravidian, and was a "rakshasa", a "devil" and a "demon", and it was a good thing for the Aryan Rama to kill the King of Lanka and the Lankans, the dark-skinned native inhabitants.
