That is a good question. “On what basis do people disagree?”
There are 3 basis.
1. Explicit historical references
2. Different explanations to any verses that deny space for ICM
3. Different philosophical basis to the whole thing
+
There are 3 basis.
1. Explicit historical references
2. Different explanations to any verses that deny space for ICM
3. Different philosophical basis to the whole thing
+
https://twitter.com/harshmadhusudan/status/1437349227823132680
1. Itihasa is full of ICM references including the Smritis.
- One can constantly see new “Jati-s” emerging at different points in time in history. A few Kulas begin to endorse ICM with “specific” jAti-s only. Over a period of time they become different jAti-s.
+
- One can constantly see new “Jati-s” emerging at different points in time in history. A few Kulas begin to endorse ICM with “specific” jAti-s only. Over a period of time they become different jAti-s.
+
- itihAsa puranam itself has such references. Eg., the Soota Jati. It is a constant marriage between brAhmana women & kShatriya men that resulted in the Soota-jAti. Some have gone onto become Kings, most Ministers/ Advisors and some Bards.
Soota-s were the the greatest Bards
+
Soota-s were the the greatest Bards
+
- The very Smritis, the ones that discourage ICM, also list different kinds of ICMs, give them an honourable name and also list all kinds of property inheritance rules in such marriages. This means those marriages occurred. They were discourage. But they were accommodated.
+
+
2. While the Smritis do discourage ICM, many have given different explanations. Again Itihasa Puranas is full of such Guna-Karma explanations. The texts are absolutely not consistent in these matters.
+
+
We can pick a quote here and there to serve our theories. But just the Mahabharata has a different view at one point and another view at another.
Simply put, our ancestors encourage sva-jAti vivAha, discouraged antarjAteeya vivAha but when it occurred accommodated
+
Simply put, our ancestors encourage sva-jAti vivAha, discouraged antarjAteeya vivAha but when it occurred accommodated
+
They got accommodated within one of the two Jati-s. When the practice crossed a certain number a new jAti for organically formed.
The only difference is people simply went about this quietly. Realising an order was more important than making a point about ICM.
+
The only difference is people simply went about this quietly. Realising an order was more important than making a point about ICM.
+
3. However, the most important thing in this is to understand that the Smriti texts or any individual was no absolute authority on this matter. Firstly, from time to time a learned saint altered the course of things.
+
+
Secondly, the kula-jAti-varna are secondary entities that are derived from a more fundamental Purushartha and Srishti-Sthiti-Laya. The Social Order derived from this resulting in Kula-Jati-Varna is subject to Change based on Kala-Desha-Vartamana.
+
+
The Tradition offers a very consistent framework from within which we respectfully disagree with the respected Acharya.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
