Yudhiṣṭhira found it very difficult to ascertain a person's jāti because a lot of people were being born from parents of different varṇas/jātis.

He found such evidence in Veda itself; 'ye yajāmahe..'.

In the Maitrāyaṇī Saṃhitā of Yajurveda, we find something. [1/7] "na vai tadvidma yadi brāhmaṇā vā smo'brāhmaṇā vā yadi tasya vā ṛṣeḥ 3smo'nyasya vā..."

"We don't know if we are Brāhmaṇas or non-Brāhmaṇas, we belong to that Ṛṣi, or another one?..."

Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa takes an interesting stance regarding this. [2/7]

Have you seen these verses?

Some say that verse number 70 prohibits spoken Sanskrit for Śūdras (noccaret saṃskṛtāṃ giram).

Let me show you the context of these verses.

[1/8] These verses appear in a chapter of Skanda Purāṇa, in which the procedure of tīrtha-yātrā to Somanātha has been mentioned.

Have a look at the beginning of the chapter, where Devī poses the question of tīrtha-yātrā to Somanātha.

[2/8]

When imagination goes too far

Based on Vācaspati's argument, Udayana cites a belief that because the anumāna of Nyāyaśāstra has to be unopposed to Vedas, and the knowledge of such non-opposition requires knowledge of Vedas, Śūdras are not eligible for studying Nyāyaśāstra. +


Although this is the pūrvapakṣa, but he accepts it at the end.

The flaw in this argument is twofold.

Firstly, to know that the some idea or behaviour is unopposed to Vedas can be known even through Itihāsas, Purāṇas, and verbal testimony of Śiṣṭas.
+

Desire happiness? Stay disciplined

Manu says, “सन्तोषं परमास्थाय सुखार्थी संयतो भवेत्” (the one desirous of happiness should be disciplined while having contentment).

Why?

+ He says, “सन्तोषमूलं हि सुखं दुःखमूलं विपर्ययः” (contentment is the cause of happiness, non-contentment is the cause of suffering).

+

Yādavācārya (16th century), disciple of Rāmakṛṣṇa Cakravartī, refutes his opponent who says that teaching Nyāya philosophy to Śūdras would lead to sin. The issue is that sage Gautama is said to have created this for the benefit of 'all', which would include Śūdras also.

(1/5) Yādavācārya specifies 'teaching' as an act directed to a specific person. If another person listens to it, it doesn't count as teaching. When the opponent points out that if 'all' includes Śūdras, it would be inevitably directed towards them also. Yādavācārya responds

(2/5)

From the perspective of Dharmaśāstra, jāti is based on collective memory. Medhātithi notes this on Manusmṛti 10.5.

Generally the definitions of Brāhmaṇa etc. as presented in Dharmaśāstra-texts, assume the prior knowledge of who a Brāhmaṇa etc. is.

(1/5)

https://twitter.com/sharmasatyan/status/1867760882811646215

The definitions are like; 'A Brāhmaṇa is the one born of duly wedded Brāhmaṇa & Brāhmaṇī'. Now someone may ask; on what basis is his father a Brāhmaṇa (similar about his mother)?

Such questioning and lack of a definitive proof will lead to an infinite regress.

(2/5)

Varṇa is a complex idea

A Pāraśava man (son of a Brāhmaṇa father & Śūdra mother) marries a Pāraśava woman, begets a Pāraśava son, who similarly marries a Pāraśava woman. If this process continues for 6 generations, the 7th generation will be born a Brāhmaṇa.

+
Also, Ganganatha Jha's notes in the second screenshot show how the traditional commentators of this Manusmṛti-verse differ significantly in their interpretations.

My tweet contains Nandana's interpretation. He also cites Baudhāyanadharmasūtra which states something similar.

+

Upanayana for Vrātyas

Kavi Gaṅgārāma has stated that Vrātyas are eligible for Upanayana, which is only for the purpose of learning śauca and ācāra.

He says that such an Upanayana is simply of the form of going near the Ācārya. He mentions a similar opinion of

[1/3] MM Gāgābhaṭṭa, who in his nibandha text (?) agrees with such an Upanayana of Vrātyas and the like.

Ref.: A portion titled 'mlecchībhūtānāṃ śuddhivyavasthā' from his nibandha on Dharmaśāstra, commissioned by the former King of J & K Raṇavīrasiṃha. [2/3]

When a Kirāta 'Vīradatta' was renamed 'Dvijavarman'

In Brahmāṇḍa Purāṇa, there's the story of a Kirāta Vīradatta, who used to sell wood. He once got a part of the wealth that a thief had stolen & kept in the forest. With the suggestion of his wife + he used the money to get wells, temples, and so forth constructed. Vīradatta dedicated all those to Brāhmaṇas, who were lead by Devarāta. Pleased by his deeds, the Brāhmaṇas named him 'Dvijavarman' and his wife 'Śīlavatī'. +

From Śrī Bhāratī Tīrtha Mahāsvāmī (Śaṅkarācārya Śāradā Pīṭha)

Regarding the eligibility in Brahmavidyā of those who aren't eligible for Vedic sacrifices [Thread] + "Vyāsa and Bhagavatpāda have taken exception to this extreme position and categorically stated that despite their disqualification to engage in sacrifices, they too can definitely practise +

The story of Raikva and Jānaśruti seem as a counter-argument to the popular interpretation of Brahmasūtra ‘संस्कारपरामर्शात्’ (1.3.36).

Jānaśruti was given knowledge without a saṃskāra-like ceremony. He in fact got knowledge in lieu of giving riches to Raikva. + As per Śrī Bhāratī Tīrtha Mahāsvāmī, Śaṅkarācārya of the Śāradā Pīṭha, Raikva didn’t receive knowledge by undergoing Brahmacarya and formally learning from a Guru. It is inferred that he used methods for knowledge which are widely accessible. +

The Mahābhārata verse 'श्रावयेच्चतुरो वर्णान्…' itself seems clear on the subject of letting all 4 varṇas hear Vedas if Brāhmaṇas are made to sit in the front row.

Śrī Karapātrī Svāmī has refuted such an interpretation by citing some verses from Mahābhārata. +

He finds it to be in contradiction with the verse 'मन्त्रः शूद्रे न विद्यते'. The complete verse is
'उक्तस्त्रयाणां वर्णानां यज्ञस्तस्य च भारत।
स्वाहाकारवषट्कारौ मन्त्रः शूद्रे न विद्यते॥'.
This verse is connected only with mantras which have 'svāhā' & 'vaṣaṭ'.+

Veda and truth

In this verse from the Ṛgveda (7.104), it is said that for the wise, true and false statements appear to compete with each other. Out of the two, the statement which is true and straight, is saved by Soma, while the one which is false is destroyed.+ What I understand from this is that Veda is never in opposition with the truth at any given period of time. If something has been stated by the Veda, which seems in opposition with any fact accepted today, it may be the fault of our understanding that the Veda appears so.+

Ādi Śaṅkarācārya has acknowledged the laukika method through which Śūdras could access Vedas and the knowledge preserved in them. Vācaspatimiśra & Ānandagiri tell that the laukika method includes reading books and so forth. + As per Vācaspatimiśra, the only problem is that if Śūdras gain the knowledge of Vedas by reading the written form of Vedas (and so forth), they won’t attain the fruits promised for those who study Vedas via upanayana ceremony and so forth. +

During the time when Manusmṛti was composed, there also were:
∙ People who were marrying freely with different varṇas and jātis
∙ People born of such marriages who weren't known publicly in that manner
∙ Śūdra kingdoms and kings
∙ Non-Kṣatriya kings
∙ Śūdra teachers
(1/3) ∙ Brāhmaṇas who were students of Śūdra teachers
∙ Brāhmaṇas who weren't trained in Vedas
∙ Brāhmaṇas who were servants
∙ Women who were performing Yajñas by themselves
∙ Women who were members of non-Vedic sects
(2/3)

Was asked about a statement of Aitareya Brāhmaṇa according to which 'Śūdra can be beaten at will'. Although I am no expert on Brāhmaṇa texts, but I do care about the context in which things are said. The statement occurs in the 35th chapter. (1/7) There, a Kṣatriya is being intensely discouraged from consuming 3 edible things during the ritual. This being the main topic, to discourage him it is said that if he consumes them, a non-Kṣatriya like offspring will be born in his family. (2/7)

In Bṛhaspatismṛti, the king is told to protect the dharmas of those born of pratilomas, those residing in forts, and the dharmas of specific deśa & jāti. Even though, elsewhere they may be punishable, but for them they shouldn't be so, or else they would develop aversion (1/4) for the king, which'll lead to destruction of his power and treasury. Following are some examples of dharmas given:
1. Dākṣiṇātya dvijas marry the sibling of their mothers, etc.
2. In the Madhyadeśa, hired workers & artisans eat cow meat.
3. Those in the east eat fish (2/4)

The 'varṇa by birth' system sounds linear and easily comprehensible only if one does not consider thousands of years of mixed varṇa marriages, the offspring as a result of them, and the change of varṇa by following the āpaddharma even in the absence of āpat. (1/9) The mentions of the offspring who were not publicly known as being born of such a marriage, is found in Manusmṛti 10.40 (pracchannā vā prakāśā vā veditavyāḥ svakarmabhiḥ). Similar is mentioned in 10.57 (varṇāpetam avijñātam). (2/9)

Rote learning VS ancient Indian tradition of education

1.) In Śāṅkhāyaṇa Āraṇyaka 14.2, it's said that the one who, having studied the Veda, doesn't know the meaning of it, is like a pillar, and bears the burden, while the one who knows the meaning, alone prospers. (1/10) 2.) In this very Āraṇyaka, there has been mentioned discussions, disagreements and different PoVs regarding various phenomena.

3.) Much of Upaniṣad literature is presented as answers given in response to questions.
(2/10)

The lack of honest effort for basic research leads to the mistake that;
‘the prohibition of ‘upanayana’ ceremony means prohibition of education.’

Those who commit this mistake, could read about a ceremony called Vidyārambha, which is open to all varṇas. 1/5 A detailed description of this ceremony is mentioned in Saṃskāradīpikā, where a typical line which is attributed to Mārkaṇḍeya is explained. The line says that in the ceremony, one is to honour one’s ‘vidyā’ and also one’s ‘vidyāsūtrakāras’. 2/5

Ātmavidyā given to Sayed Khan by Guru Gobind Singh

Mesmerised by the Guru, Sayed Khan had stopped fighting. When Guru asked what he wished to get from him, Khan asked for Ātmavidyā. Hara Singh Sadhu of Nirmal Sampraday of Sikhs records it in his श्रीगुरुसिद्धान्तपारिजात. 1/5 Guru grants his wish & says:
इदं विश्वं यतो जातं ब्रह्म विद्धि तदेव हि।
अयं जीवो यदल्पज्ञं दृश्यते सैद चेतनम्॥२५
From where this world was born, know that as Brahman (pure Self/consciousness). O Sayed Khan! this Jīva, which knows little, is conscious. (25) 2/5