The concept of gotva was brought in by the 'originator of the thread' Prof. Davis himself, not by me. He used the English translation of it, 'cow-ness'. 

The point I was making was that for naiyaayikas , 'cow-ness' is similar to 'pot-ness'. We can extend this and use words  like pencilness and carness too.

 If  braamhaNatva (brahminness)  is taken only as similar to cowness, it leads to the ideas such as 'the varnas have been viewed as similar to biological species'. But in fact, brahminness is viewed as similar to carness and pencilness.

If one resorts to sources of knowledge other than empirical observation or direct perception to substantiate the '-ness' of a certain group of entities, it shows that one has an understanding that commonality of that group of entities is not an empirically verifiable or directly perceivable one.

If one lists empirically verifiable or directly perceivable features to identify the common identity of a group of entities, then one need not and does not usually resort to any other source of knowledge as the Vedas for that purpose.

Prof. Aklujkar pointed out the difference between jaati of grammarians which is the commonality in the meanings of words denoting entities or the meaning of the word denoting the group of entities and jaati of the naiyaayikas which is the commonality in the entities. 
 

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 12:48 AM, rajam <rajam@earthlink.net> wrote:
Thanks to Professor Paturi for touching on the concept of “gotva.” 

May I ask a naive question: What is the basic semantics of the word “gotva?” I’m familiar with “gotra.”

Thanks and regards,
rajam


On Jun 16, 2016, at 11:51 AM, Nagaraj Paturi <nagarajpaturi@gmail.com> wrote:

Correction:
I typed:
3. Those mentioned by Jayanta are not saying BraahmaNatva etc. are not like gotva etc. They are saying exactly the opposite. They are saying 'because braahmanatva etc. are not like gotva etc. the validity of what all Brahmins have in common can be verified / known only through a different source of knowledge than the one that can establish what all cows have in common. 

I wanted to say:

3. Those mentioned by Jayanta are not saying BraahmaNatva etc. are like gotva etc. They are saying exactly the opposite. They are saying 'because braahmanatva etc. are not like gotva etc. the validity of what all Brahmins have in common can be verified / known only through a different source of knowledge than the one that can establish what all cows have in common.     

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Nagaraj Paturi <nagarajpaturi@gmail.com> wrote:
1. While the discussion of Jayanta is mentioned to be on Varnas, the title of the post /thread has 'caste' in it. Since it is now well established that these two are two different categories /concepts, we might need to be careful about this distinction.

2. For Nyaya, gotva is as much a jaati as  ghaTatva is jaati. ghaTatvajaati is as much empirically observable and directly perceivable as
gotvajaati.   

3. Those mentioned by Jayanta are not saying BraahmaNatva etc. are not like gotva etc. They are saying exactly the opposite. They are saying 'because braahmanatva etc. are not like gotva etc. the validity of what all Brahmins have in common can be verified / known only through a different source of knowledge than the one that can establish what all cows have in common.   

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 10:10 PM, Johannes Bronkhorst <johannes.bronkhorst@unil.ch> wrote:

Vincent Eltschinger’s « Caste » et philosophie bouddhique (Vienna 2000) seems relevant in this connection. An English version of this book is also available:

Caste and Buddhist Philosophy: Continuity of Some Buddhist Arguments Against the Realist Interpretation of Social Denominations (Motilal Banarsidass 2012)

Johannes

On 16 juin 2016, at 18:37, rajam <rajam@earthlink.net> wrote:

Many thanks to the originator of this thread!

Right now, I just want to register the fact that I’m very much interested in this topic.

Last year (May 2015), I had a publication (in Tamil) about references to, or a lack there of, “jāti” and “caste” (as we understand it today) in Old Tamil literature/grammar, also known as Sangam literature/grammar.

I don’t know how many of you are aware of the fact that the English word “caste” has its origin in the Portuguese word “casta,” which was first recorded in Arte da Lingua Malabar written by Fr. Henrique Henriques in the mid-16th century. 

If one wants to dig deep into the understanding of the terms such as “jāti” and “caste” … one has to have a minimal understanding of the origins of the Western contact with India, which happened in the early 16-th century through Portuguese arrival in South India.

Thanks and regards,
V.S.Rajam
On Jun 16, 2016, at 8:53 AM, Dominik Wujastyk <wujastyk@gmail.com> wrote:

​Dear Don,

This interests me a lot, and I'd be grateful to read what you might write about it in future.  It's on my back-burner, but I've long wondered whether Sanskritic narratives about jati and varna can be thought about in ways similar to eighteenth and nineteenth century European narratives about races and species.  Were people of different varnas formally considered to be of different "species?"   It's a bit shocking to think in these terms, but I've been wondering about it.  If you ever put flesh on these bones, one way or another, or can point me to existing discussions on this, I'd be really interested.

Best,
Dominik

--
Professor Dominik Wujastyk*
Singhmar Chair in Classical Indian Society and Polity
 University of Alberta, Canada

On 16 June 2016 at 08:53, Donald R Davis <drdj@austin.utexas.edu> wrote:
Dear Colleagues,

I would be grateful for additional references to an argument mentioned in Jayanta Bhatta’s Āgamaḍambara 4.143-4 (in Dezso’s edition in the Clay series).  The question is whether the jāti of Brahmins, etc. is like the jāti of cow-ness, etc. in being empirically observable or directly perceivable.  Jayanta refers to those who say that verbal/textual testimony alone (śabdamātreṇa) establishes the four-varṇa system.  This prefigures an argument made in Vijñāneśvara’s Mitākṣarā (on Yaj 1.90) where the same distinction is drawn to refute an objection.

I assumed Jayanta would have made a similar argument in his Nyāyamañjarī, but I have not been able to locate it (probably because I barely know the Nyāya literature).  If anyone could point me toward other instances of this issue, whether in original sources or contemporary research, I’d appreciate it.

Best,

Don Davis
Dept of Asian Studies
University of Texas at Austin

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)


_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)



--
Nagaraj Paturi
 
Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.
 
Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies
 
FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,
 
(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )
 
 
 



--
Nagaraj Paturi
 
Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.
 
Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies
 
FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,
 
(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )
 
 
 




--
Nagaraj Paturi
 
Hyderabad, Telangana, INDIA.
 
Former Senior Professor of Cultural Studies
 
FLAME School of Communication and FLAME School of  Liberal Education,
 
(Pune, Maharashtra, INDIA )