I want to reply to Mr Pannvalan’s comments because it seems he is overstating his case and actually declaring Komanam a primitive and unsuitable item for wear.
I am quoting Mr Pannvalan’s post below and my replies are given in blue colour below the points and questions he raised in the post.
[Quote The reasons for wearing kaupinam in olden days must have been due to –
1. There were no sewing machines (not to talk of modern weaving wills), which came into
being only after the industrialisation that saw things of mass production, for the first time
in the world history.
2. Cloth that requires minimum cutting and stitching with human hands was used to cover
human body, prior to industrialisation.
3. Thus there was no second choice at all, in those days.
My answer to the above 3 points is that it is not a question of sewing machines (did people not have thread and needles and have people not used for a very long time kurtas, pyjamas, blouse etc made by hand stitching?).
So it is wrong to say that there was no choice. If people wanted they could have gone for hand stitched under garments. But they did not because Komanam is not only simple and easy to put in to use (instant availability with no stitching required) but it is most comfortable and the most scientific inner wear (I will explain why at the end).
i wish to ask our friends who wear ‘kaupinam’ or defend wearing it the following questions.
In the name of keeping our traditions and safeguarding our identity -
Ø Do they want us to go back to the ‘kaupinam age’ too?
I don’t know what is meant by the Kaupinam age (is it the opposite of "jockey" age!). May be it is suggested that it is a primitive age and culture and that Komanam is connected with such an age. I am not sure how right Mr Pannvalan is in attributing such judgements to Komanam and it s wearers.
Ø Why stopped with ‘kaupinam’ alone? One could have added ‘Veshti-Panchakaccham,’
‘Angavasthram’, ‘Kudumi’ etc.
I don’t know what to say to this because the argument is being un necessarily extended to Kudumi etc. This shows a tendency to bracket such things together and is nothing but a mind set. There is actually no need to get carried away like this when discussing the simple komanam
Yes Komanam is often associated with kudumi and pancha kachcham but I know many with kudumi and panchakachcham who wear only jockey etc. Similarly I know many Komanam wearers who do not have kudumi etc and who dress in veshti or pants
My point is that these things are individual choice and need not go together. People are free to have any combination of komanam kudumi jockey or pancha kachcham or even suit and tie as they prefer. Why group komanam with only kudumi etc?
Ø Will they shun wearing modern dresses like pants/suit, coat, tie etc?
I want to assure Mr Pannvalan that Komanam wearers need not be considered Neanderthal men. They also use tooth brush, watch TV, read English or other newspapers and also wear pants. What is the point of the question any way? Does Mr Pannvalan expect or insist that Komanam wearers should shun pants etc. I wear both pants and veshti with my Komanam and many others do that. Just preferring Komanam does not mean one has to have kudumi etc.
Why is fundoshi so popular in Japan and has made a great comeback with both men and women. It is a Samurai or even medieval item The Japanese are a modern people bu they don’t ridicule the findoshi. And the Japanese wear it with their suits also!
I should also remind you that modern Thongs, Bikinis and Gstrings are nothing but Komanam. I am sure you will find nothing wrong in them or with people in Gstring bikinis being seen in public. If so why object to a practical and decent inner garment like the komanam?
Ø Will they be prepared to live in old, small and tiled houses in this 21st century?
Come on sir, you know very well that many people live in such old houses and they can be either jockey or komanam wearers. It is a matter of economics . Do you really mean to say that only jockey wearers should live in modern houses.
Ø Will they avoid modern electronic gadgets and stick only to communication through
personal messengers (which always results in filters and distortion)?
Are you suggesting that just because I prefer Komanam I should not use an electric shaver etc? I am really at a loss to understand your points.
You don’t have to connect the habit with only khadi and charka. We are not claiming any miraculous powers for this humble and effective under garment
.
Ø Will they avoid travel by motor vehicles or even air?
Ø Will they avoid going abroad, as it is forbidden for any true brahmin to cross the seas?
(I do not really know the rationale or logic behind this and have not heard any texts or
scriptures supporting such ban)
Ø Similarly for food, will they avoid eating all food that is considered alien to our culture
and traditions?
Does this mean that those wearing a suit or even pants or jeans should not eat idli or chapathi and should only eat “alien” food?! Why should a man with Komanam be expected to be fitting a certain pattern that you assume.
I have personally seen many brahmins of today not only working in organisations owned by people who acquired wealth through foul means and following all unethical or even criminal practices, but also they being compelled to do some unethical acts themselves. In such a scenario, wearing kaupinam alone does not offer any solace or mental comfort. What do you say?
Both people with Komanam or with jockey, whether Brahmin or not, work for such individuals. Did any one suggest in this site that either wearing komanam in such situations offers solace or that Komanam makes a saint out of one? And do people using jockey derive “mental solace” in such situations? And do people using jockey not work for such individuals?
My conviction is don’t go by outward symbols or items related to covering human body alone, so as to call oneself a brahmin. If someone is still bent upon continuing such outdated practices, it will be nothing but mad, ridiculous and preposterous and will result in isolating oneself socially and communally. That’s all one can say.
Nothing can be more “preposterous” than the above comment and it does not deserve a reply. Who is to say what is outdated or mad and ridiculous? And who is saying that a good Brahmin is only one who wears Komanam? We do not claim Komanam makes a better or worse person or Brahmin (or any other community) out of any body.
It is my sincere wish such impractical and unworkable ideas not be promoted in this forum of the educated and intellectuals, at least henceforth. ]Unquote
Why do you consider Komanam impractical and unworkable. Until 100 years back 99 % of Indian men had only Komanam and found it very practical. It is still very practical and workable. It is not only a very comfortable and agreeable inner wear but it is also scientific in its design.
1.It is suspended by the waist string. This secures the Komanam firmly and it is further secured or reinforced by the cloth’s tension and weight of the body.
2.You can adjust the fit yourself. It need not be loose or tight but can be fitted exactly as you want.
3.The suspension from the string which is separate gives support that is better than the underwear which is one piece only (usually with elastic which can get loose after some time).
4.The penis is centred correctly and will not deviate left or roght (which is the universal case with under wear).
5.The testicles are so well supported ina gentle but firm grip and will not shake (try running with Komanam under your shorts and you will understand this). So no hydrocele. 6.Better self control than jockey (has to be tried to realize this.
7.And better performance because of better control (again only experience will prove this)
Moreover great comfort (to such an extent that it becomes part of you and you can not be without it). Mr Vishwanath says passing urine is difficult because no slits like jockey. True but ask any Komanam wearer and he does not find it a problem (we like to untie, wash and retie but you can not wash even with a jockey with slits!). By the same token wearing a suit is also less comfortable than wearing shorts or lungi etc but that does not mean people don’t use suits.
Finally it is individual choice if one uses Jockey or komanam or nothing underneath. We don’t insist that all should wear Komanam. Not at all. It is each person’s choice. But we strongly recommend those interested to try it and can assure that you will soon prefer it and will not go back to jockey (it also ahs nothing to do with religion or tradition but is a question of self fitting, comfort and health benefits).
Above all I request our friends not to be so aggressive in calling it outdated or impractical etc. There is really no need. It is after all a piece of old cloth and a matter of choice.
