Dear Goanetters: I just read Cornel's "sermanv."
Just a question: Did I in my post defend the origination/perpetuation of caste? or did I imply for the need of a different approach to deal with the caste problem given the historical evidence that caste has nothing to do with Hinduism as a religion? The brilliance of Cornel's post is that he managed to lump me together with Gilbert. That is a hoot! He is responding to something that I did not write or imply. When I wrote the last piece on caste, I did not even think of Cornel. He is too far from my mind. It was a general reference to caste "crusaders" out there - not confined only to Goanet. Thankfully, there are many who are crusading against caste in a thoughtful, measured way, without any fanfare and without directing attention to themselves, and with much success. In fact, I was prompted to comment on a particular point raised by a post from Tomazinho Cardozo; the title for my post came out from one of the lines in his writing. I do not operate from the premise of " hanv teka borench ditam." Poor Cornel! On the caste issue, while I wholeheartedly applaud his Herculean efforts to "stamp it out," he is too emotional on this issue and cannot think in a scholarly manner, a scholar that he is. Just by emptying dictionary on a piece of paper/screen it does not construct into a thoughtful and useful argument In fact, Jose Colaco, a few days ago in his post, understood the point of my post when he raised the question: a religion HIGHJACKED by caste or some other nefarious socio-economic-political structures, is the same thing as a religion being BASED on caste? I have no plans or interest to quarrel with Cornel. Indeed, I have nothing to quarrel about with him. Basilio Monteiro
