A Few Glimpses from South Indian History

[Vivek_V]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Sow. Happyhindu

Tamil polity has already placed the onus of casteism on brahmins! And this forum indicates support for the same. My previous discussions with yourself would reveal the same too; even though now you say that the onus shouldn't be on brahmins alone (which I agree to).

Vedas are not all about rituals. Adi Shankaracharya himself spoke against rituals when he met Madana Misra, the ritualist. I don't understand how Narayana Guru or Chattampi Swammi could have spoke of Advaita or Upanishads and spoke of rejecting the Vedas. Both are considered derived from the Vedas.

"Anyways, i wud like to see south-indians giving up their fake claims of being kshatriyas and vaishyas to begin with."

Which goes to say that varnas never existed in south Indian history? And where do you get that from? Vaishnavites understand varna in the same method as ISCKON, both of which follow the explaination given in the BG.

I mentioned Narayana Guru for a separate reason though. Many here have quoted how evil traditions of brahmins existed in so and so place, and even in Advaita. My question is why did Narayana Guru not see these "evil" things, but understood it as a completely different and good thing?

"Vivek, it is true that the word brahmanism has come to mean casteism (casteism and brahmanism are two interchangable words meaning the same thing). It is probably so because the dharmashastras were created by brahmins"

For that matter brahmins wrote and emphasized so many things - including about faith, education, not drinking etc. How DK didn't care to call these "brahminism"?

What you are not accepting here is that its because of anti-brahmin ideology that casteism called "brahminism". The term "brahminism" to be called casteism was created in modern times and DK propagated it gladly.

This is what I mean when I say brahmin legacy has been reduced to only casteism in the eyes of tamilians. And this happened because of DK and its solely negative potrayal of brahmins. However, brahmins through history and even into the modern era played more roles.

This community gets into a discussion when Abdul Kalam was called a brahmins (as I recall someone doing so), it doesn't care to notice that Abdul Kalam was infact inspired by brahmins. That part of history is invisible to them.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[saidevo]

namaste svAmi.

I am not an avid movie watcher; but what is conveyed sometimes by certain movies not getting the attention they deserve have a great value.

You have given a good example as to the amount of regard given to Tamizh brahmins by people of other castes, even today. This regard is different from the obsequious respect people now show towards politicians, policemen and social celebrities. We should also note that the regard given to brahmins is not for their worldly educational degrees, high profile jobs or other social accomplishments; it is for the religion, culture and tradition they are supposed to maintain even in these days. Brahmins have been and always been regarded as the religious and spiritual guardian of the society and land, and are perceived as eminently suited to that task.

Now the question everyone of us should ask ourselves is, do we as Tamizh brahmins, deserve such regard, for the kind of religious and cultural perception people have towards us? The extent to which we as a community can meet these expectations of the people will be the deciding factor for the regard we can command, IMO, in the days to come. The more brahmins seek to shed their religious, sectorial and cultural identity, the faster will they lose the regard in the society.

 

[sangom]

Was Narayana Guru offering ritualistic homam sacrifices? From my cursory reading it appears that Chattampi Swami initiated Narayana Guru into Yoga, not Vedas. Moreover Narayana Guru's teacher, Chattampi Swami wrote a critique titled Vedadhikara Nirupanam rejecting the authority of the Vedas.

Smt. HH,

Chattampi (monitor in a class - a name earned by him in the village school) Swamikal
was the son of a Namboothiri, Vasudeva Sharma and a nair (?) lady Nangamma. Even so he could not get beyond the village school level because of caste. he worked as a brick worker and then as a document writer. Later he is supposed to have obtained the darsan of the Devi and ventured into his criticism of the orthodox view of vedas and scriptures (mainly casteism).

Shri Narayana Guru, born as an Ezhava, was placed in an even more disadvantageous position as far as education was concerned. In the Travancore scenery "aaSaan" usually refers to a village school master and mostly from Ezhava caste who had jealously transmitted what little someone had learnt in the distant past (surreptitiously) from Nambutiri fathers (not for society, but real), I think. Ayurvedic medicine also was one such area for them.

I give below some extracts to show the state of education of the lower castes in Travancore state in the 19th. century.


Narayana Guru was born in the year 1854 AD at Chempazhanthy, in the suburb of the city of Trivandrum, the present capital of Kerala State, India. In those days Trivandrum was the capital of a princely state called Travancore. ... In the days of Narayana Guru the most vital information everyone wanted to know of another person was his caste. This may look ridiculous to the present generation, but no one thought so in those days. Everybody wanted to know caste and everyone revealed his caste also as a matter of course. (Sree Narayana Kendra, Delhi - Birth and Childhood of Guru)

Early Education and Becoming a Guru

Nanu's first teacher was his own father, Madan Asan. He had formal schooling in the village school of Chempazhanthy Pillai. Apart from Malayalam and Tamil he learned by heart, as was the practice in those days, Sidharupa, Balaprabodhana and Amrakosa. He was blessed with a penetrating understanding and a sharp memory from very early childhood. Although there were a few schools in Travancore and Cochin in those days, Nanu's circumstances were such that he had to satisfy himself with what he received from his father, his uncle Krishnan Vaidyar and the village schoolmaster.
(Sree Narayana Kendra, Delhi - Early Education and Becoming a Guru)

The census commissioner of Travancore
(the major constituent of present-day Kerala) stated in his report for
1941 that the high level of literacy achieved by the princely state was
the result of successive rulers' personal interest in the educational
uplift of the people (Census of India 1941, Vol XXV, Part I, p 155). In
support of this assertion, the report referred to the rescript (edict)
issued by Rani Gouri Parvati Bayi in 1817 directing that the state
(Travancore) "shall defray the entire cost of the education of its people
in order that there may be no backwardness in the spread of enlightenment
among them, that by diffusion of education they might become better
subjects and public servants, and that the reputation of the state may be
advanced thereby". Discerning scholars have, however, pointed out that the
credit for this proclamation should go to Colonel John Munro, the British
Resident (1810-19), who was also the 'dewan' of Travancore for a short
period and not to the rani who was then only in her early teens and
grossly ignorant of statecraft [Nair 1978: 40].

Since the princely rulers of Travancore were in many respects far more
enlightened than their counterparts in the rest of India they took keen
interest in the education of their subjects. But functioning as they did
in a highly caste-ridden society, the rulers, in spite of their best
intentions, most often proved in effectual in ensuring educational
opportunities for members of all castes and communities. Throughout the
19th century the Travancore government did practically nothing to promote
education among backward and depressed communities - which together
accounted for nearly half the state's population - or among women. This
writer contends that the early efforts at the education of the backward
classes and women came not from the state, but from the missionaries. In
his administration report for 1862-63, the dewan, Sir T Madhava Rao,
confessed that very little was done for female education [Pillai 1940:
692]. It was the grant-in-aid education code of 1895 which for the first
time provided funds for the establishment of schools for backward classes
in Travancore [Travancore Census 1931: 433]. In spite of the concerted
efforts of the missionaries, literacy among the vulnerable groups remained
extremely low throughout the 19th century.

For breaking the strong casteist barriers to education (and several other
aspects of social life), the state had to await the emergence at the dawn
of the present century of several powerful social reform movements - such
as the Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana Yogam (SNDP Yogam), founded in 1903
under the leadership of Sree Narayana Guru (1855-1928) and the Travancore
Sadhu Jana Paripalana Sangham, founded in 1907 under the leadership of
Ayyankali (1863-1941).1 The SNDP Yogam led many agitations for ending
discrimination against the ezhava community. These agitations were later
reinforced by the alliance forged among ezhavas, Muslims and Christians
for fair representation in public service and for the total removal of all
kinds of discrimination based on caste and community.
It was this alliance which eventually led to the formation of the
Travancore State Congress, which spearheaded the freedom struggle in
Travancore. In the wake of independence and the establishment of
democratic rule based on adult franchise, the backward and depressed
castes/communities acquired sufficient political clout to wrest their due
share of rights and privileges from the government.
Since the high rate of literacy in Kerala has been largely due to the
relatively rapid progress made by the former princely states of Travancore
and Cochin, the discussion in this paper will be based on developments in
these two regions, especially Travancore.
Broadly three periods are distinguished for the purpose of the discussion:
(1) The 19th century, during the major part of which foreign missionary
initiative was prominent and close co-operation existed between the state
and the missionaries in their educational efforts. In the late 19th
century the educational efforts of the foreign missionaries were in
several cases supplemented and in a few instances replaced by the
indigenous churches. (2) The first half of the 20th century, during which
several powerful social movements played a decisive role in the promotion
of education. (3) the 43-year period since the formation of Kerala state,
when the elected representatives of the people and the governments in
power became more responsive to the economic and social aspirations of
different sections of the population, especially the educationally
backward regions in northern Kerala. Since developments during this period
are more recent and better known, this paper will make only a brief
reference to this phase.
(kerala literacy)

 

[sangom]

namaste svAmi.

You have given a good example as to the amount of regard given to Tamizh brahmins by people of other castes, even today. This regard is different from the obsequious respect people now show towards politicians, policemen and social celebrities. We should also note that the regard given to brahmins is not for their worldly educational degrees, high profile jobs or other social accomplishments; it is for the religion, culture and tradition they are supposed to maintain even in these days. Brahmins have been and always been regarded as the religious and spiritual guardian of the society and land, and are perceived as eminently suited to that task.

Now the question everyone of us should ask ourselves is, do we as Tamizh brahmins, deserve such regard, for the kind of religious and cultural perception people have towards us? The extent to which we as a community can meet these expectations of the people will be the deciding factor for the regard we can command, IMO, in the days to come. The more brahmins seek to shed their religious, sectorial and cultural identity, the faster will they lose the regard in the society.

Shri Saidevo, Shri Swami,

Permit me to give my views.

Just one cinema "vedam putitu" (1987) casting sathiyyaraj should not be made the basis for sweeping conclusions about regard to Brahmans and so on. If this view is correct, then "agrahaarattil kazhutai" (1977) will require Tamizh Brahmins to rethink their ideas. I give below the plot of that cinema for ready reference (source: wikipedia, of course)

"A donkey strays into a village dominated by the upper cast Brahmins. Prof. Narayana Swamy decides to keep it at his house. He appoints a mute girl to look after the donkey. The entire village turns against the donkey and its caretaker. When the girl's stillborn baby is deposited outside a temple, the donkey is blamed and is killed.

After the death of the donkey some miracles start happening in the village. People start believing that it is the donkey that brought about all the miracles and starts worshipping the dead body of the donkey. The villagers give a ritual funeral to the donkey by burning it. In a symbolic end, fire spreads and engulfs the entire village. Only the professor and the girl survive.

Even though this film won a National award, Doordarshan was forced to cancel a scheduled a TV screening and the Tamil press ignored the film as the Brahmin lobby tried to have the film banned.

(For the story, Courtesy to and sourced from Cinema Of Malayalam)"

Is there any evidence to conclude that the attitude of Nbs towards Brahmans have undergone change during the period 1977 and 1987?

And, if my memory serves me right, Vedam Putitu depicts a Brahman orphan, driven away by all the Brahmans in the agrahaaram because they despise that family for some reason (I don't remember now.) who is given shelter by the Gounder and brought up as a Brahmin. It again shows Brahmans as clannish and Gounder as large-hearted. Those who are sure about the theme may correct me, if I am wrong.

The above excerpt also shows how the Brahmin lobby reacted.

I am sure that if, by some magic, the Tamizh brahman community takes the sentiments/views of the two of you, and abides by it, there will surely be a reawakening of the DK spirit and in the next round, things may not be as smooth as the first round.

Please don't delude yourself that the high-caste NBs are really having regard for us Tabras because of "the religion, culture and tradition they (we) are supposed to maintain even in these days". They now have some regard for us because we have changed, and it is the change that has mellowed the attitudes and if the Brahmans are to go back to our old ways, this goodwill will evaporate.

 

[saidevo]

namaste smt. HappyHindu.

Also, when we speak of varna in south india, possibly we may need to take the following into consideration:

1) Varnashrama of the dharmashastras applied within the boundries of Aryavarta; and not to regions that fell outside those boundaries. [Please share your thots on this statement].

2) It would be very hard to fit the southern Indian society into 4 varna categories considering the fact that the southie society was mainly just B and NB. All the so-called warrior clans were merely those who made claims of being ‘kshatriyas’ or ‘vaishyas’. I feel trouble in colonial period mainly came bcoz the NBs themselves wanted to claim and divide (their own selves as well as) each other into 3 varnas – kshatriya, vaishya and shudra.

It is wrong to say that the 4 varNas did not fit into the South Indian (DrAviDa) society.

TolkAppiyam, the earliest extant Tamizh text relating to the Sangham period, has classified the Tamizh society that existed then into four varNas and three classes, thus:

தொல்காப்பியம், ப்றத்திணை இயல், வாகைத்திணை, சூத்திரம் ௭௪:

அறுவகப்பட்ட பார்ப்பனப் பக்கமும்
ஐவகை மரபின் அரசர் பக்கமும்
இருமூன்று மரபின் ஏனோர் பக்கமும்
மறுவில் செய்தி மூவகைக் காலமும்
னெறியில் ஆற்றிய அறிவன் தேயமும்
நாலிரு வழக்கில் தாபதப் பக்கமும்
பாலறி மரபில் பொருநர் கண்ணும்

அனைநிலை வகையோடு ஆங்கெழு வகையால்
தொகைநிலை பெற்றது எண்மனார் புலவர்

tolkAppiyam, pRatthiNai iyal, vAgaitthiNai, sUtthiram 74:

aRuvakappaTTa pArppanap pakkamum
aivakai marabin arasar pakkamum
irumUnRu marabin EnOr pakkamum
maRuvil seydi mUvakaik kAlamum
neRiyil ARRiya aRivan tEyamum
~nAliru vazhakkil tApathap pakkamum
pAlaRi marabil poru~nar kaNNum

anai~nilai vakaiyODu A~ggezhu vakaiyAl
togai~nilai peRRadu eNmanAr pulavar

Meaning:

The seven classifications, that is four varNas and three classes, given by the wise that has stabilized the society are:

• pArppanar--brAmaNas, with their six tasks of dharma as: vedas chanting, getting them chanted, performing veda yajnas, getting them performed, charity and seeking alms.

• arasar--kShatriyas, with their five tasks of dharma as: learning vedas, performing yajnas, charity, distributing arms, and sustaining the citizens.

• EnOr refers to the vaNigar--vaishya, with their six tasks of dharma: learning vedas, performing yajnas, charity, agriculture, business, and maintaining cattle farms.

• EnOr in addition refers to the vELAlar--shUdra, with their six tasks of dharma: agriculture, occupations other than agriculture, entertaining guests, rearing bulls and buffaloes, religious worship, vEdam ozhinda kalvi--education other than learning the vedas.

In addition to these four varNas, TolkAppiyam speaks of three classes of people who do not strictly fit into these varNas. They are:

• aRivOn--astrologer, also called kaNiyan, whose flawless job involves looking at the constellations in the sky and predicting the affairs of people and country, day and night, looking at the past, present and future.

• tApathar--ascetics, with their eight customs: taking bath in sacred waters, wearing skin, wearing locks of hair, performing fire sacrifices, not staying in a place (for long), seeking food in the forest, divine worship, and atithi--guest, worship.

• porunar--warriors/soldiers, who battle with their shoulders and swords, with the tradition of dharma behind them.

 

[Nara]

.....Just one cinema "vedam putitu" (1987) casting sathiyyaraj should not be made the basis for sweeping conclusions about regard to Brahmans and so on.

Dear Sangom sir,

Even from this "one" cinema, I think a mistaken conclusion is being presented. The way Sathyaraj's character treats the boy cannot be taken to mean he has high regard for Brahmins, all it shows is he respects the right of the boy to follow his family practice, and his honor bound duty to make this possible for the orphaned boy, abandoned by his own Brahmin community. As you state, it shows decency of the NB character, nothing about Brahmins.

Also, we must not disregard that in the end the boy gets so disgusted by the way his own Brahmin clan was behaving that he removes and throws away his poonal.

Please don't delude yourself that the high-caste NBs are really having regard for us Tabras because of "the religion, culture and tradition they (we) are supposed to maintain even in these days". They now have some regard for us because we have changed, and it is the change that has mellowed the attitudes and if the Brahmans are to go back to our old ways, this goodwill will evaporate.

Is it not interesting to see some claiming Brahmins are respected all around Tamil Nadu, and at the same a claim that Brahmins are treated badly is also made?

I do think Tamil people are in general civil and accommodating, they respect the right of all groups, including Brahmins, to follow their traditional practices. However, if Brahmins take this tolerance as respect and regard for them, they are quite mistaken. Not many will countenance any expression of superiority by the Brahmins in public.

Cheers!

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Sravana Ji,

The Varna system at one time started with very idealistic tendencies. Even when it degenerated, it had such a hold on our folks because of village oriented life for a very long time and seemed to somewhat work, keeping our religion intact from the repeated aggression of foreigners.

Just because you and I say that this world should have meritocracy based on the way caste system worked (I think that's what you are saying), it can work that way.

Representative democracy is the only way to rule a diverse population (race, ethnicity, language, religion etc). Otherwise unnecessary blood will spill.

Because Capital and its investment are paramount in modern society (to feed all the mouths), with its industrialization and change, meritocracy (cream rises to the top) at work and egalitarianism at the social level are the only tools that will produce optimal result. After all, resources in this world are limited.

Hope this clarifies.

Regards,
KRS

Dear Shri KRS Ji,

I do not think the requirements of equality with reference to occupations is satisfied even now, since just as in the past, we need workers at all levels and the one whose talent or qualities fit the job is the right person for the job.

Regarding selecting the right person for the job, it is just not enough if objective assessments are made but whether the assessments used are themselves the right ones.

The varna system got that right and required that only those with higher moral standards would come under higher castes. These have been replaced today by lesser materialistic standards and have let people of lesser character occupy positions at the top. Thus we have corruption established at the top and inevitably at all levels now.

Equality among occupations will not happen as importance of jobs will vary. We have only changed the yardsticks of selection which I think is for the worse.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri SwamiTaBra,

Okay, let me hear what models you have that will fit the society like India (for example) to thrive and prosper? So, what have you got against 'Egalitarianism'?

Regards,
KRS

Egalitarianism is the Holy Grail, a chimera. You are talking as if the democracy and industrialisation as obtained now is ensuring or assuring summum bonum, not achieved or achievable by alternate models!

Long live this democracy and this gigantic industrial model....

Rgds.,

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Vivek Ji,

I have always held that most of our forefathers did not discriminate against others and even if they did, that should not visit their descendants

My own opinion is that what started as an ideal system degenerated in to a birth based system first (probably because of convenience?), and later when the industrialization accelerated completely fell apart.

Regards,
KRS

Thanks SwamiTaBra,

The speak here is like our past was devoid of all morality when every society thorugh history has had its times of rigidity and inequality, while at the same time times of rising against such inequality. It is interesting how some here find it so easy to believe that our forefathers had absolutely no sense of morality in treating others, or that their culture was nothing other than casteism.

Meritocracy has been thrown in the gutters with the new play of caste cards from politicos which seems so appealing to people here who go on to post lengthily about caste system history and ficticious accounts of "aryans and dravidians" to justify the DK policy, without coming to see that brahmins in good part played a role in taking India to the modern era due to their imperative to educate themselves.

Education today is like a profit bussiness, with quality education going up to many lakhs of ruppees which only a few well-to-do can afford.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Sravana Ji,

Since you are discussing the term I used, I am posting this.

In democracy, popularity and electability factors are part of the merit (People desrve their leaders). Democracy works at the level of maturity of a society. Many, many great political leaders around the globe are not intellectual giants.

Industrialization and thereby industries which have to produce wealth, do have absolute necessity for meritocracy. A diverse democratic society at the social level needs egalitarianism to function as a cohesive society.

I don't understand your issues with this?

Are you saying that because these do not seem to work in India, the ideas themselves/ are invalid?

Regards,
KRS

The fact is democracy has little to do with meritocracy and in establishing egalitarianism in society. So also with industrialization. In democracy, merit is compromised at the highest levels where representatives get elected on the basis of popularity and in industrialization, the compromise is on egalitarianism and so an industrialized country practicing democracy in reality compromises both.

 

[KRS]

Egalitarianism applies to each nation within herself. It does not apply as a principle to one world, as we do not have a one world government. No one can exploit anyone else, if the exploited do not allow it.

Regards,
KRS

Brilliant analysis.

Let me add: industrialised countries exploit the less fortunate ones. See how the sub-saharan African countries are being exploited or mineral riches and yet the peoples of those countries die like fire-flies. China is the latest in the list of countries to join the exploiters' list. So where is the egalitarianism for the African?

All the crocodile tears for lack of democracy in Africa.

Rgds.,

 

[sangom]

Also, we must not disregard that in the end the boy gets so disgusted by the way his own Brahmin clan was behaving that he removes and throws away his poonal.

Dear Shri Nara,

I had forgotten this. Thanks for pointing it out.

Is it not interesting to see some claiming Brahmins are respected all around Tamil Nadu, and at the same a claim that Brahmins are treated badly is also made?

I do think Tamil people are in general civil and accommodating, they respect the right of all groups, including Brahmins, to follow their traditional practices. However, if Brahmins take this tolerance as respect and regard for them, they are quite mistaken. Not many will countenance any expression of superiority by the Brahmins in public.

Cheers!

Somewhere in this forum I remember having read the usage பிராம்மணக் குறும்பு; I suppose it means "Brahman mischief". If so, what we see is an eagerness on the part of some Tabras to come out of the present chastised stage to the old mischief stage.

The sad part of the whole issue is that the caste equations have changed so much during the last 50 years or so, and the younger generation cannot believe that Brahmans could have been responsible for instituting caste practices, untouchability and consequently caste-based atrocities committed by the society at large. I observe that even Shri KRS seems to hold the view that, by and large, Tabras did not commit any atrocities. May be that Brahmans in TN were not capable of such physical acts by themselves, but I am sure they were past masters in scheming where it mattered their self-interest; and in an era where the Brahmans enjoyed, perforce might be, social superiority it would not have been difficult for them to hatch some plan or the other to "discipline" errant groups with the help of other compliant groups.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Sangom Ji,

I do not hold the view that ALL of our forefathers were innocent of doing any harm to others - all one needs to do is to read the Manu Smrithi or even Ramayana to understand that it was not so.

But on the same token, I think that it is not also true to take a broad brush and say that by and large our whole community did harm to others.

Yes, I understand that if you apply today's enlightened views of mores, we can say that we might have done harm to others as a community in a sub conscious way.

I just can not fathom my own forefathers doing harm to others.

I think that, this is why we need to be careful when we apply the principles of dialectic materialism to the past communities, sir.

Hope this explains.

Regards,
KRS

 

[sravna]

Dear Sri Sravana Ji,

The Varna system at one time started with very idealistic tendencies. Even when it degenerated, it had such a hold on our folks because of village oriented life for a very long time and seemed to somewhat work, keeping our religion intact from the repeated aggression of foreigners.

Just because you and I say that this world should have meritocracy based on the way caste system worked (I think that's what you are saying), it can work that way.

Representative democracy is the only way to rule a diverse population (race, ethnicity, language, religion etc). Otherwise unnecessary blood will spill.

Because Capital and its investment are paramount in modern society (to feed all the mouths), with its industrialization and change, meritocracy (cream rises to the top) at work and egalitarianism at the social level are the only tools that will produce optimal result. After all, resources in this world are limited.

Hope this clarifies.

Regards,
KRS

Dear Shri KRS Ji,

I do not understand what you mean by egalitarianism at the social level? Does it mean equality with respect to income/wealth? I think you do not mean it that way as that does not happen in an industrialized society where wealth tends to be unevenly distributed. So, would you kindly clarify how else equality can be achieved at the social level?

Why should there be bloodspill when the government is not a democracy and why wouldn't that happen in a democracy? Would you kindly clarify on this too?

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Sravana Ji,

Egalitarianism at the social level means that everyone eats at the same table (In the west, at least) and do not have class distinctions when they interact socially. So when a plumber meets a CEO of a company in a social situation, they treat each other at the same social level as human beings, - no class distinction. This is an ideal, not reality. In my opinion, this is practiced somewhat in USA, more than any other country I have visited (even China does not practice this).

In a diverse society if one does not give voice to all, the eventual result will be bloodshed. Like what happened in Sri Lanka, or Ireland. Unless there is fair treatment of every community to express themselves and accommodate their voice in the governance, to their perceived satisfaction, over time these communities will view themselves as oppressed and the result will be bloodshed. This is what I meant.

Hope this clarifies.

Regards,
KRS

 

[sravna]

Dear Sri Sravana Ji,

Since you are discussing the term I used, I am posting this.

In democracy, popularity and electability factors are part of the merit (People desrve their leaders). Democracy works at the level of maturity of a society. Many, many great political leaders around the globe are not intellectual giants.

Industrialization and thereby industries which have to produce wealth, do have absolute necessity for meritocracy. A diverse democratic society at the social level needs egalitarianism to function as a cohesive society.

I don't understand your issues with this?

Are you saying that because these do not seem to work in India, the ideas themselves/ are invalid?

Regards,
KRS

Dear Shri KRS Ji,

I do not have issues with that but the problem is as I mentioned in my reply to your earlier post, these are not compatible ideas. Meritocracy is necessary for any society that wants to advance. It is not an exclusive requirement of industrialization. Just as our modern society advances through meritocracy by enhancing the material aspects, the ancient india for example thrived, beacuse of men of wisdom, in its spiritual aspects

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Sravana Ji,

Yes, I agree. I have stated numerous time in this very Forum that our ancients when they devised the true Varna system with mobility between Varnas, were truly practicing meritocracy to the needs of those times. But, alas, we have surely lost that ideal along the way.

Regards,
KRS

Dear Shri KRS Ji,

I do not have issues with that but the problem is as I mentioned in my reply to your earlier post, these are not compatible ideas. Meritocracy is necessary for any society that wants to advance. It is not an exclusive requirement of industrialization. Just as our modern society advances through meritocracy by enhancing the material aspects, the ancient india for example thrived, beacuse of men of wisdom, in its spiritual aspects

 

[Vivek_V]

Sri Sangom - You again skip the question I asked

"They now have some regard for us because we have changed, and it is the change that has mellowed the attitudes and if the Brahmans are to go back to our old ways, this goodwill will evaporate. "

"Old ways" is a generalization of so many things brahmins did in the past. This is exactly why I droped the question as to why casteism is considered "brahminism", but non-drinking or inclination to educate (having very high priority) is not considered "brahminism".

Sangom let me ask you, by pointing to propaganda movies what are you justifying?

I clearly already mentioned how a ruling polity can build a negative sentiment against any upper class in society by enumerating its negative part. Brahmins were regarded respectable in some part for their, disrespected in other parts for the way they treated people. The same would go for say upper caste NBs.

But your posts still doesn't care to drop an answer for the question I asked about DK and its selected narration of history of TBs. Instead, you seem to keep giving excuses.

Lastly, all mentions of where Narayana Guru learnt from apart. I went to mention him because after all he did learn scriptures and philosophies like Advaita and found no evil "brahminical" thing in them.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[sravna]

Dear Sri Sravana Ji,

Egalitarianism at the social level means that everyone eats at the same table (In the west, at least) and do not have class distinctions when they interact socially. So when a plumber meets a CEO of a company in a social situation, they treat each other at the same social level as human beings, - no class distinction. This is an ideal, not reality. In my opinion, this is practiced somewhat in USA, more than any other country I have visited (even China does not practice this).

In a diverse society if one does not give voice to all, the eventual result will be bloodshed. Like what happened in Sri Lanka, or Ireland. Unless there is fair treatment of every community to express themselves and accommodate their voice in the governance, to their perceived satisfaction, over time these communities will view themselves as oppressed and the result will be bloodshed. This is what I meant.

Hope this clarifies.

Regards,
KRS

Dear Shri KRS Ji,

Caste practices atleast by brahmins is mostly a thing of the past just as slavery is a thing of the past in the western countries. Eating at the same table happens in India too, if that is what you mean by egalitarianism.

Democracy gives the option of changing the government and that is its strength. But it doen't certainly guarantee egalitarianism. It doen't even guarantee good governance as corrupt politicins resort to all sorts of gimmicks to retain their popularity.

 

[Vivek_V]

Sri KRS - What I understood from Swami TaBra's post on egalitarianism

"Okay, let me hear what models you have that will fit the society like India (for example) to thrive and prosper? So, what have you got against 'Egalitarianism'?"

Swami TaBra's post went to say that the bias similar to the varna system exists even today, and that our early society was not built as a people-ill-treating system - it just evolved that way like every single society does. Of course, you posted IYO also it wasn't in place to discriminate, but became like that later, which I also agree to.

When you say we don't have a government between nations in the world (at post # 111), you are right. The fact is that organizations like the UN try to fullfil that role (not too successfully).

IMO, the model for India would be to keep no reservations based on being NB or TB, or any caste. Perhaps only in schools with relation to financial basis. Work should be purely on merit-basis replacing even peoples' names in exams or so with numbers which are randomized in the evaluation process.

I don't see the DK as a crusader of casteism, I see it as one which wanted to just remove brahmins out because of the position they held. It didn't go to investigate why they held important offices, nor spread a message of the importance of education or so. This is why the lowest castes in rural areas have not benefitted.

I am aware of the good and evil brahmins as a society have done. And casteism is not a puppet show run by brahmins. DK calls casteism I don't think its right to make people answerable to that, anymore than it is right to make white Americans answerable to the Atlantic slave trade or the anti-miscegenation laws.

What DK does (which I feel shouldn't be justified) is present a wrapped up history only highlighting the evil of brahmins.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Vivek Ji,

Thank you for your response.

The pertinent section of your post to my own thinking is, yes, I do not agree with any educational quota system. Professor Nara Ji and I had a lengthy discussion about this in the past here, if you want to go back and read the archives.

I have consistently stated here that the present generation should not be paying for any perceived sins of their forefathers. It is just a morally wrong position for a government to take.

The issue is at the elementary/high school level, and by all means I would think that all of us would support all the resources of the government in those levels to be spent on disadvantaged groups, so that by the time the college arrives, it is a level field for everyone.

But, instead the Indian government has taken a road of quota system, which has not been in the history of any nation to be proved as successful, simply because India is the first one to implement this system.

Regards,
KRS

 

[sangom]

Sri Sangom - You again skip the question I asked

"They now have some regard for us because we have changed, and it is the change that has mellowed the attitudes and if the Brahmans are to go back to our old ways, this goodwill will evaporate. "

"Old ways" is a generalization of so many things brahmins did in the past. This is exactly why I droped the question as to why casteism is considered "brahminism", but non-drinking or inclination to educate (having very high priority) is not considered "brahminism".

Sangom let me ask you, by pointing to propaganda movies what are you justifying?

I clearly already mentioned how a ruling polity can build a negative sentiment against any upper class in society by enumerating its negative part. Brahmins were regarded respectable in some part for their, disrespected in other parts for the way they treated people. The same would go for say upper caste NBs.

But your posts still doesn't care to drop an answer for the question I asked about DK and its selected narration of history of TBs. Instead, you seem to keep giving excuses.

Lastly, all mentions of where Narayana Guru learnt from apart. I went to mention him because after all he did learn scriptures and philosophies like Advaita and found no evil "brahminical" thing in them.

Regards,
Vivek.

Shri Vivek,

Our points of view on the issues you have raised/ are raising are very much contrarian and I don't think it will be of any use to discuss these between us. That is why I have stopped responding to your posts addressed to me.

I write this to clarify two points in the above post.

1. It was Swami who brought the cinema topic first and I have only responded to him. You seem to take anything that suits you to attack and citicize me, without even reading the posts carefully.

2. Sree narayana Guru did not learn advaita or Vedanta or our scriptures; the Brahmans here in Travancore as well as Madras Presidency were not at all favourably inclined to him. But the Guru had close friendship with the Saiva Adheenams of today's Tamil Nadu from whom he learned much about saiva siddhanta and perhaps, vedanta also from them. The guru's concept of advaita is not Sankara's. It seems to reflect his own spiritual realisations or reflections. What I wanted to convey was that Brahmans never imparted any learning to him.

That he did not find any evil in Brahmans is more due to his very mild nature, and not because the Brahmans were good or there was no "Brahmanism". If you see his most quoted observation, "oru jaati, oru matam, oru deivam, manushyanu" (one caste, one religion and one God for humanity) we will be able to understand the underlying emotions against the caste system.

When the guru ultimately built a Siva temple in Aruvippuram, the Brahmans in a gang went there and said a non-brahman cannot consecrate an idol and make it into a deity. The followers of Guru were large in number and had thronged there to see the consecration. Even so the brahmins thought that they were supreme and their writ would run. guru simply replied that what he was consecrating was an "Eezhava Siva" and not a "Brahmana siva". Still altercation ensued when the Guru's followers got enraged and were to attack the Brahmans. Seeing that they had committed a faux pas, the Brahmans went away. perhaps you are aware of all these.

I have referred to the incident of a young boy crying and complaining to his mother "it all started when he (another boy) hit me back." I am of the considered view that blaming DK/EVR/DMK etc., for their anti-Brahman stance is very very similar to this. the Tabras had it coming, as (I think shri Kunjuppu observed in one of his posts.) but they were so puffed up with their superiority and invinciblity that what they felt is a simple high-tide, became a gigantic tsunami, that is it. They did not have the awareness to gauge the rising resentment against them, and never tried to mend their ways even when the resentment surfaced initially in less violent forms. But these are inconvenient facts today for the TBs to face. However, I feel truth is truth and has to be faced.

I will not be responding to any further posts from you in this thread pl.

 

[happyhindu]

namaste smt. HappyHindu.



It is wrong to say that the 4 varNas did not fit into the South Indian (DrAviDa) society.

TolkAppiyam, the earliest extant Tamizh text relating to the Sangham period, has classified the Tamizh society that existed then into four varNas and three classes, thus:

தொல்காப்பியம், ப்றத்திணை இயல், வாகைத்திணை, சூத்திரம் ௭௪:

அறுவகப்பட்ட பார்ப்பனப் பக்கமும்
ஐவகை மரபின் அரசர் பக்கமும்
இருமூன்று மரபின் ஏனோர் பக்கமும்
மறுவில் செய்தி மூவகைக் காலமும்
னெறியில் ஆற்றிய அறிவன் தேயமும்
நாலிரு வழக்கில் தாபதப் பக்கமும்
பாலறி மரபில் பொருநர் கண்ணும்

அனைநிலை வகையோடு ஆங்கெழு வகையால்
தொகைநிலை பெற்றது எண்மனார் புலவர்

tolkAppiyam, pRatthiNai iyal, vAgaitthiNai, sUtthiram 74:

aRuvakappaTTa pArppanap pakkamum
aivakai marabin arasar pakkamum
irumUnRu marabin EnOr pakkamum
maRuvil seydi mUvakaik kAlamum
neRiyil ARRiya aRivan tEyamum
~nAliru vazhakkil tApathap pakkamum
pAlaRi marabil poru~nar kaNNum

anai~nilai vakaiyODu A~ggezhu vakaiyAl
togai~nilai peRRadu eNmanAr pulavar

Meaning:

The seven classifications, that is four varNas and three classes, given by the wise that has stabilized the society are:

• pArppanar--brAmaNas, with their six tasks of dharma as: vedas chanting, getting them chanted, performing veda yajnas, getting them performed, charity and seeking alms.

• arasar--kShatriyas, with their five tasks of dharma as: learning vedas, performing yajnas, charity, distributing arms, and sustaining the citizens.

• EnOr refers to the vaNigar--vaishya, with their six tasks of dharma: learning vedas, performing yajnas, charity, agriculture, business, and maintaining cattle farms.

• EnOr in addition refers to the vELAlar--shUdra, with their six tasks of dharma: agriculture, occupations other than agriculture, entertaining guests, rearing bulls and buffaloes, religious worship, vEdam ozhinda kalvi--education other than learning the vedas.

In addition to these four varNas, TolkAppiyam speaks of three classes of people who do not strictly fit into these varNas. They are:

• aRivOn--astrologer, also called kaNiyan, whose flawless job involves looking at the constellations in the sky and predicting the affairs of people and country, day and night, looking at the past, present and future.

• tApathar--ascetics, with their eight customs: taking bath in sacred waters, wearing skin, wearing locks of hair, performing fire sacrifices, not staying in a place (for long), seeking food in the forest, divine worship, and atithi--guest, worship.

• porunar--warriors/soldiers, who battle with their shoulders and swords, with the tradition of dharma behind them.

Dear Sir,

Thankyou for the post.

Perviously there was a discussion between yourself and Nara sir about the term anthanar and parpannar; which appears to be 'somewhat unrelated' to the vedic brahmanas. I use the term 'somewhat unrelated' because i feel that the parpannar described by tholkappiyam were more likely to have been temple priests who probably were associated with the abhicharas and ritualism of the atharva-veda; but these were not considered 'vedic' at some point of time since 'vedism' recognized only 3 vedas initially (Rig, Sama and Yajur). Am inclined to believe that the atharvas were probably defeated and 'overtaken' by the yajurvedis (esp considereing the rise of yajurvedis as researched by Staal). The Atharva remains a bag of surprises esp wrt to its origins, and esp considering the fact that parts of it are considered older than Rigveda. However, all this apart, i wud like some clarification from yourself as well as others on this:

1) Does the Tholkappiyam text use the term "varna"?

2) Did Tholkappiyam designate social divisions "fixed by birth", meaning does it disallow mobility across the varnas?

3) Were slaves and untouchables mentioned in Tholkappiyam? [I have never found untouchability a sin when practiced within homes and outside homes for a valid reason. But telling a man that he is untouchable because of his birth does not go well with me..i cannot imagine labelling a new born child an untouchable by birth].

4) Was the use of force against any social grouping permitted / mentioned in Tholkappiyam?

Unfortunately i do not know much about Tamil literature. Nor do i have an english translation of the Tholkappiyam to go thru.

Regards.

 

[kunjuppu]

......... which has not been in the history of any nation to be proved as successful, simply because India is the first one to implement this system.

/QUOTE]

not true KRS, to the best of my knowledge.

the erstwhile USSR was the first country to promote education, job opportunities by class (caste). while the old aristocracy was done away with, and the intelligentsia (brahmin equivalent) either losing their head or heading to the fields, the erstwhile peasants & factory workers' children were selected for favourtised treatment towards education, sports and the army.

such so, by the time, stalin had ascended the throne, the ussr had a second string of management and officers, who parents were the serfs or rightless factory workers. soviet science for the first time in the world, proved, that given the right environment even a beggar's son can get nobel prize.

mao tse tung followed the same model, though in mid sixties with the cultural revolution, he turned everything topsy turvy.

tambrams in the 60s onwards used to predict of dire effects on the 'quality' of enginers and doctors because of the quota system. tamil nadu, and now other states, have proved, by and large, the system works and what more, many of these go back to the villages and towns to practice, instead of congregating in the cities or moving abroad.

one more thing KRS. you have been consistent that, to quote you, 'I have consistently stated here that the present generation should not be paying for any perceived sins of their forefathers'.

sir, racial memory is a fact. we all remember good things and bad things. does not our blood boil, if we hear of our grand father wronged and cheated. would not the other castes feel the same? we might find it 'morally wrong' for government to discriminate. but the government is performing a giant social revolution, peacefully and through the letter of the law. as tambrams, the normal ones won't like it, because we are at the receiving end. let us thank our God, that the transformation has been quick. in about 40 years, the social tamil world has turned upside down. only us tambrams have not reconciled to this change. with a change in attitude, our position in tamil society would be better.

 

[Vivek_V]

Sri Sangom - I asked one question.

"That he did not find any evil in Brahmans is more due to his very mild nature, and not because the Brahmans were good or there was no "Brahmanism"."

No its because he was not blind or biased to judge brahmins (or their history/legacy) by what he merely saw in his time (unlike EVR).

I have not come across anything from Narayana Guru's ideas that his Advaita was in any way different to Adi Shankaracharya's. In either case, Vedanta is itself held to be prior to the Shankara's time (from the Upanishads) and the people who passed the Upanishads into the present age are again the brahmins.

Brahmins and their past/culture have much more than unotuchability, practices of the mutts, or "abracadabra". This is why Narayana Guru didn't judge the whole community in universal striding statements.

"Our points of view on the issues you have raised/ are raising are very much contrarian and I don't think it will be of any use to discuss these between us. That is why I have stopped responding to your posts addressed to me."

Sangom, I am sorry if you feel that way. I just asked you a simple question: By what sense of morality do you justify DK's rhetoric on brahmins or its policy of 69 percent reservation? You didn't answer it.

Casteism is indeed wrong, but its NOT a one way equation of brahmins against the rest, it has more facets than merely denial of entry into temples too. Someone who doesn't know this is obviously someone who has no idea about casteism in India.

Its also a wrong idea that people somehow read "brahminical dharmashastras" to take inspiration to do the the evil of casteism too. Brahmins wrote innumerous texts. The point is cretins like those in the mutts who practice casteism do evil out of their own disposition and use whatever scripture they can find to justify it.

We could as well say such acts are not justified using many other tales, or scriptures.

Coming to politics, DK's anti-brahmin rhetoric and policy was mainly because of the fact that brahmins held office posts in majority, despite being a minority. DK couldn't go to accept that brahmins held those posts because they kept with times, and had the imperative to educate themselves.

It went to attack a community instead of spreading the importance of education, which
would have actually benefitted TN.

Till today, there is only one image of brahmins in the minds of tamilians Edtd - KRS and that is TBs the oppressor, the social evil, and the "foreign aryan". Why was non-drinking or inclination to education, which were also typical of many brahmins was not called "brahminism" by the DK?

I asked you one simple question: Do you find this selective narration of brahmin history/culture/legacy justified? I do not.

Further, when you go to speak about accounts of brahmin villages and non-brahmin villages, speak at lengths about the aryan-dravidian propaganda without (clearly) having read its genesis. All of it just leaves me wondering if you are mentioning all this to boister support for justifying anti-brahminism.

Regards,
Vivek.