From the perspective of Dharmaśāstra, jāti is based on collective memory. Medhātithi notes this on Manusmṛti 10.5.
Infinite regress
Generally the definitions of Brāhmaṇa etc. as presented in Dharmaśāstra-texts, assume the prior knowledge of who a Brāhmaṇa etc. is.
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.
Collective memroy
At this point Medhātithi brings in the idea that collective unbroken memory of a people as being of ‘X-jāti’ is the definitive proof of them being of ‘X-jāti’.
From Medhātithi’s commentary on Manusmṛti 10.5.
Biological basis
That jāti cannot be identified by merely looking at someone, rules out the possibility of it being (purely) biological.
विश्वास-टिप्पनी
your arguments only imply that jAti is not purely biological.
Fact is that jAti/ varNa is mostly biological.
Legal wedding
Also, an offspring of a Brāhmaṇa and Brāhmaṇī who aren’t duly wedded, isn’t tagged as a Brāhmaṇa by the Dharmaśāstra-texts (for example Manusmṛti 10.5). This also rules out a definitive biological basis of jāti. This is exactly why the Dharmaśāstra has to step in.
Nirāmbopaniṣat
In this sense, what Nirāmbopaniṣat (10) says is congruent with the Dharmaśāstra-sense of jāti & varṇa, as per which jāti cannot be reduced to either the body, or the mind/intellect, & not even to the Self (Ātman). The basis is a little abstract, i.e., collective memory.
(5/5) • • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh