I would like to know your interpretation of Manusmriti 9.335

@SparkSunshine That verse says the shudra will attain a higher caste, but it doesn't specify when, but other smritis say that it will be his next life, meaning he'll be reborn as a higher caste.

@UdayKrishna I just explained why that sentence is anti-Vedic. Men are not created equal according to the Vedas.

@UdayKrishna Of course even Hinduism says everyone has the right to happiness and life, but I'm talking specifically about the "all men are created equal" part.

@UdayKrishna Practicing heretical (non-Vedic) religions is not allowed in a Vedic kingdom. The shastras instruct kings to deport heretics.

Can you please give reference for those Smriti verses?

@SparkSunshine Āpastamba (2, 11.10-11).—‘In successive births, men of the lower castes are born in the next higher one, if they have fulfilled their duties. In successive births, men of the higher castes are born in the next lower one, if they have neglected their duties.’

Downvoted for misrepresenting Hinduism. There are so many obvious defects with your answer. Firstly you are comparing Hinduism with US constitution. What's the logic here? Secondly Manu Smriti is not Veda. Please be honest here. Nothing like this is mentioned in Veda. You quoted MS only because it serves your agenda and discarded thousands of other verses in Veda that says Atman lives in all.

@ram I am a Hindu and I don't believe in Manu Smriti. Manu Smriti is nothing less then a manual to divide a nation based on caste, colour, creed, sex and what not which would eventually led to its downfall. Is that what you want? For a nation to prosper, merit should be given important. That's common sense. No scripture required. It has nothing to do with Hinduism whose point of discussion is Atman. Nothing less nothing more.

@Lokesh It appears that you have been convinced by western philosophy. Anyways, the Manusmriti is condoned by the Vedas themselves and cited by all ancient Vedic scholars as the foremost of the dharma shastras.

@Ikshvaku Here's what Narad Muni says in Bhagavat Purana (7.11.35): "If one shows the symptoms of being a brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya or śūdra, as described above, even if he has appeared [born] in a different class, he should be accepted according to those symptoms of classification." Was Narad Muni also influenced by Western philosophy?

Dhram Shastras vary from yuga to yuga...Paaraasara smriti is applicable in Kaliyuga; Manu smriti is for Satyayuga..on top of that Manu smriti's many verses are miss interpreted..so u should not promote such ideologies, they r not beneficial for the world, India, Hinduism and even for this site..Now India has it's own law and if that contradicts with Manu smriti then which one Indians should follow??

@Lokesh Basing the entire varnashrama dharma on that single verse is a logical fallacy called cherry picking: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking | What you have to actually do is interpret all the verses. If only that verse was interpreted like that, then it would conflict with hundreds of other smriti verses. Anyways, that Bhagavata verse is on the same footing as this Manusmriti verse: "The man of impure origin, who is devoid of caste, unknown, a non-Aryan, even though having the appearance of an Aryan,—one shall discover by his acts. - 10.57"

@Ikshvaku Dharma shastra do conflict with each other, it is a well known fact. Its nothing new. After all dharma shastras are merely suggestions.

@Lokesh You have to use the rules of hermeneutics laid down in the Purva Mimamsa sutras to interpret all the various rules in the dharma shastras that appear to conflict with each other. Until you've done that, then you don't know how to interpret.

@Lokesh And Dharma shastras are not merely "suggestions", they are laws on Dharma, which are actions that are sinful or not sinful; they are directly from the Vedas; they are an anga or upabrahmana of the Vedas.