Brahmin Ancestors and their Contribution to Community - after, all the positives!

[sangom]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Shri niyengaar has started a thread with the title

< RULE - Only Positives > Brahmans' Positive contributions to the Tamil Society.

He has been gracious enough to stick on to this Forum (I am fed up of people here trying to portray Brahmans very negatively.

Truth be told, these people are making me think if i should even continue here or just leave this place alone for them to continue their slagging of my Community!

Every Good thing i ve heard of my Ancestors and their Contribution to my Community as well as to the Tamil Community ( yeah, the two are different for me - thanks to you people ), is the only one which still keeps me going on here.)

For some genuine comments in that thread, Shri iyengaar showed the true brahmin culture level by his following comments:-

p.s. : This is STRICTLY Only for the Positives. All you foul-mouthers and Anti-Brahmanists - KEEP OFF THIS THREAD - You people anyways have this whole forum for u. One Thread on Positives is not going to keep you shut there either.

In the light of such highly sophisticated reactions from a champion of brahmin-ness, I felt it is better not to raise the BP of Shri niyengaar &Co., by writing anything further in that thread and have started this new thread.

My intention is to analyse, impartially, whether the eulogisation of some persons in the niyengaar thread are really valid, how far those statements are factual and whether, in an unbiased analysis, the contribution made by those personalities really was towards the iyengaar (brahmin) community, the Tamil community or humanity in general, etc.

Before I take up the above, may I state that according to hearsay, some rich brahmins had built Chatrams in the olden days, but the NBFC contribution towards building Chatrams was far, far more and so, today only research scholars will be able to authentically say which were the Brahmin-built Chatrams. But there were and probably some of them still exist, many Braahmana Chatrams, meaning choultries which are exclusively for brahmins and one should not mistake this for brahmin-donated Chatram.

Apart from this I have not heard of any direct contribution to social welfare done by the Brahmins. One reason might have been that the brahmins were, in the main, supposed (believed) to be the persons fittest for receiving Daanam or gifts and they lived off such gifts from the rich patrons of society of all castes; our Puraanas will give the full account of Daanam to brahmin/s and the merit/s thereoff. Even a Sudra could have a yaaga performed by the brahmin priests but he could not be a yajamaana and enter the yaaga pandal.

Of the various names of notable Brahmins who made significant contribution/s to the society, given in this post here, the first is that of Sir C.V. Raman (CVR).

It is commonly known that CVR did not discover the Raman effect, that it was Dr. KSK (whose name has been shown as Gopalakrishnan in the said post) and CVR usurped the credit for the discovery as also the Nobel prize. When I joined the Honours course in Physics, the Principal of the college was Shri C.S, Venkateswaran who worked for nearly 12 years under CVR. He found out that CVR was like a huge banyan tree - will not allow sunlight to shine on anyone under him - and so gave up his research career and took up the teaching profession. The assessment of CVR by CSV was passed to us students, through our professors and lecturers with all of whom csv had very cordial relationship.

Coming now to Raman effect proper, I agree it went to substantiate the theoretical prediction about such scattering by one Adolf Smekal in 1923; the Raman effect is, therefore, also known as Raman-Smekal effect. The use of Raman effect and Raman spectroscopy is very useful in several areas but I am unable to say whether their use is of any direct or significant welfare of any society - iyengaar, brahmin, Tamil or whatever. People who are more knowledgeable may correct me.

 

[subbudu1]

CVR was known to be a hot-headed man. There is no doubt. Long back when he lived in Calcutta , he was accused of being partial towards South Indians or probably south indian Brahmins specifically. Most members in his team seemed to be so. His retort was that he choose the best. I wouldnt go far and accuse him of being casteist. He did not believe in superstitions and refused to chant the name of God even as he let out his last breath. It seems his wife was known to be good natured and appreciated by one and all. I would call him a visionary in some respects , some failings but I wouldnt think him to be casteist. His contribution to society was in the field of science. I wouldnt expect him to concentrate on anything else.

Let us look at T. Muthuswamy Iyer who was considered a great contributor to society by TBS. He was a chief justice of Madras High Court.It seems that in his childhood he took the help of some Naicker to complete his schooling with the death of his father. I would have assumed that he would become broadminded as a consequence. But this is what he had to say on temple entry.
" Religious institutions founded, endowed and maintained for the benefit of those sections of the Hindu Community who conform to certain recognized usages as those of the castes for whose benefit the temples are by immemorial usage dedicated as places of worship[SUP][21][/SUP][SUP][22][/SUP]"
[TABLE="class: cquote"]
[TR]
[TD]“[/TD]
[TD]Hindu temples were neither founded nor are kept up for the benefit of Mahomedans, outcastes and others who are outside the scope of it[SUP][21][/SUP][/TD]
[TD="width: 20"]”[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

- Source Wikipedia

 

[saidevo]

namaste.

Here is a GOI official denial to what Sangom has stated about CV Raman usurping the Nobel prize and denying the credits due to his team members.
Kariamanikkam Srinivasa Krishnan

I usually take accounts about our ancestors at face value and only check when I have a different personal view or there is some popular controversy. I feel shrI Sangom could have checked and easily found what I have found now.

 

[sangom]

namaste.

Here is a GOI official denial to what Sangom has stated about CV Raman usurping the Nobel prize and denying the credits due to his team members.
Kariamanikkam Srinivasa Krishnan

I usually take accounts about our ancestors at face value and only check when I have a different personal view or there is some popular controversy. I feel shrI Sangom could have checked and easily found what I have found now.

Shri Saidevo,

Just as in every facet of human activity there are many unknown and not very noble facets in the field of scientific research also. I wrote the previous post from whatever I had heard of CVR during my college days. But in the GOI web page cited by you, there is a tell-tale admission of the actual happening in the following words, imo:—

"It was also pointed out by Krishnan that while recommending Krishnan for a professorship at the Andhra University Raman wrote to the Vice Chancellor . “If the Nobel Award for physics made in 1930 had been for the work done in the year 1928 alone instead of the entire work on the scattering of light done at Calcutta from 1921 onwards, Krishnan could justly have come in for the share of the prize.”"

 

[saidevo]

namaste shrI Sangom.

I fail to understand as to how the text you have quoted in blue in post #4 undermines CV Raman. In case you have an impression that Krishnan did more original work on the discovery than Raman, please peruse the following links, which IMHO make it clear as to what Raman did and did not do to Krishnan:

Krishnan's diary pages:
Sir CV Raman: The man and his effect by Biplab Pal

Raman's Nobel Lecture:
Venkata Raman - Nobel Lecture

Since your words carry much weight here, I had to go to these lengths to point it out to you. I don't mean to criticize you for your opinions.

 

[sangom]

namaste shrI Sangom.

I fail to understand as to how the text you have quoted in blue in post #4 undermines CV Raman. In case you have an impression that Krishnan did more original work on the discovery than Raman, please peruse the following links, which IMHO make it clear as to what Raman did and did not do to Krishnan:

Krishnan's diary pages:
Sir CV Raman: The man and his effect by Biplab Pal

Raman's Nobel Lecture:
Venkata Raman - Nobel Lecture

Since your words carry much weight here, I had to go to these lengths to point it out to you. I don't mean to criticize you for your opinions.

Shri Saidevo,

Namaste!

From the first link itself it will be seen that the Raman scattering was observed but not understood even by Raman himself for quite some years. Krishnan worked for and under Raman for years and he also could not recognize the scattering. So, in terms of level of ignorance Raman and Krishnan were same. Hence, as a Brahmin who will be selfless and altruistic (that is the crux of niyengaar's thread, is it not?) Raman should have included Krishnan as co-discoverer.

Simply because of the fact that of the two equally ignorant people it was Raman who first got the doubt whether the green light could be smekel effect, Raman abrogated to himself all the credit and profits. Is it then appropriate to consider Raman - who seems to have been utterly selfish and did not want to do a service even to his co-worker - as a Tabra who did yeomen service to community as a whole? That is probably why the Nobel prize considered the work done only during 1928 and not from 1921 onwards; had the latter been done, possibly Krishnan would be found to have done an equally deserving role.

I have my own doubts now about the reasons for the Nobel jury all voting for Raman in 1930. Since Raman booked his ticket to Europe one year in advance, it looks to me that there must have been some assurance given to him by some very powerful sources. Who could it be? Not God because Raman comes out as an atheist

 

[saidevo]

namaste shrI Sangom.

So, the second link means nothing to you, as the first link gives you ideas to run away with! While politics is not uncommon in any international award, it is how the winner expresses it is important, IMO. CV Raman in his Nobel lecture has clearly stated how he worked as a team with Krishnan and others and how the discovery was team-work.

It is not uncommon for scientists not to understand the implications of their research in the beginning, but to term it as ignorance, Raman abrogating to himself all credit, etc.,etc.--well all those are your personal opinions, and I am sure most readers who peruse the links I have given will have different opinions.

 

[saidevo]

namaste.

Here is something to know about CV Raman's personal life:

From a speech given by Dr.Abdul Kalam
SpeechOfDrAPJAbdulKalamAtBPGC pdf free ebook download from discovery.bits-pilani.ac.in
The traits of Nobel minds

Let me start with an incident about Sir CV Raman, a Nobel Laureate in Physics for discovering Raman Effect. Raman gives the view that the color of the sky is blue due to its molecular diffraction, which determines the observed luminosity and in great measures also its color. This led to the birth of the Raman Effect. Raman wa in the first batch of Bharat Ratna Award winners. The award ceremony was to take place in the last week of January, soon after the Republic Day celebrations of 1954. The then President Dr.Rajendra Prasad wrote to Raman inviting him to be the personal guest in the Rashtrapati Bhavan, when Raman came to Delhi for the award ceremony. Sir CV Raman wrote a polite letter, regretting his inability to go. Raman had a noble reason for his inability to attend the investiture ceremony. He explained to the President that he was guiding a Ph.D. student and that thesis was positively due by the last day of January. The student was valiantly trying to wrap it all up and Raman felt, he had to be by the side of the research student, see that the thesis was finished, sign the thesis as the guide and then have it submitted. Here was a scientist who gave up the pomp of a glittering ceremony associated with the highest honour, because he felt that his duty required him to be by the side of the student. It is this unique trait of giving value to science that builds science.

*****

Here is what Wikipedia quotes about Sir CV's patriotism:

Raman was a staunch patriot and he had great faith in India's potential for progress. He excelled under the most adverse circumstances. When he received the Nobel, he quoted:

"When the Nobel award was announced I saw it as a personal triumph, an achievement for me and my collaborators -- a recognition for a very remarkable discovery, for reaching the goal I had pursued for 7 years. But when I sat in that crowded hall and I saw the sea of western faces surrounding me, and I, the only Indian, in my turban and closed coat, it dawned on me that I was really representing my people and my country. I felt truly humble when I received the Prize from King Gustav; it was a moment of great emotion but I could restrain myself. Then I turned round and saw the British Union Jack under which I had been sitting and it was then that I realised that my poor country, India, did not even have a flag of her own - and it was this that triggered off my complete breakdown."

*****

For more impartial insight, check this link from IIT Madras:
http://www.physics.iitm.ac.in/~labs/amp/CVRaman-Life-and-Works.pdf

 

[Nara]

.... Here was a scientist who gave up the pomp of a glittering ceremony associated with the highest honour, because he felt that his duty required him to be by the side of the student. It is this unique trait of giving value to science that builds science.

Saidevo, I am gratified that you have take the cudgels for a scientist and an atheist to boot. I hope you have not thrown your antipathy (perhaps qualified antipathy) for science and atheism (absolute antipathy for this one) only because CVR was born into a Brahmin family, that would be too parochial.

Cheers!

 

[subbudu1]

Saidevo, I am gratified that you have take the cudgels for a scientist and an atheist to boot. I hope you have not thrown your antipathy (perhaps qualified antipathy) for science and atheism (absolute antipathy for this one) only because CVR was born into a Brahmin family, that would be too parochial.

Cheers!

Nara I think I would like to offer some correction here. He was certainly non ritualistic not very much into religion. May be a tinge of an atheist. But somewhere he did have some soft corner or may be he was controlled in some aspects by the society and his wife. In some article it was described that during his 60 th birthday celebrations he was seen with a panchakacham and forehead smeared with sacred ashes. But by and large he was not ritualistic.
He advised his wife not to conduct an ellaborate shraddham on his behalf after his death and refused to listen to his wife , who asked him to recite the name of god during his last moments.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

...only because CVR was born into a Brahmin family, that would be too parochial.

Here is a member who questions CVR's honesty presumably only because CVR was born into a brahmin family. Well, that was one of the stated goals of this thread. Nara does not seem to have any objections. Yet, he criticizes a person who writes against such impartial analyses as being parochial.

I know Nara will consider this nit-picking and taking jabs at him and his group, but I feel a sense of fairness is missing in his group's criticisms.

 

[Nara]

.... Yet, he criticizes a person who writes against such impartial analyses as being parochial..

And you object to the use of the word daft.

Saidevo has an established reputation in this web site for criticizing science and its limitation and has been a staunch theist and a bulwark against atheists. Now, all of a suden, he touts CVR, a scientist and an atheist, as one of his own and is putting up a spirited defense of CVR.

My response was one of appreciation and a hope that it was not only because CVR was a brahmin by birth. You see this as unfair criticism. You seem to have taken a liking to criticize me whatever I say.

BTW, you took so much objection to the use of terms like "orthodox", do you have anything to say to sarang here, or your objections are reserved just for a lucky few of us.

Cheers!

 

[saidevo]

namaste Nara.

In reply to your post #9 addressed to me, and your opinion about me in post #12, I have this to say:

I prefer that anyone in general and a brahmin specifically should not be sought to be maligned for anything negative when his positives are much more. As for the antipathy you perceive in me, I think I am capable of empathy too.

Sangom has decried any trait of altruism in CVR. Don't you believe that a scientist by the very nature of his profession is more altruistic than selfish?

Here is a an interesting article about CVR's denial of God:
Experimenting with Dr. C V Raman, for path to final destiny. | SpeakingTree

 

[Nara]

....I prefer that anyone in general and a brahmin specifically should not be sought to be maligned

Brother saidevo, I agree with the first part, "anyone in general", but feel "a brahmin specifically" superfluous.

Don't you believe that a scientist by the very nature of his profession is more altruistic than selfish?

No, my respect is on the scientific process, not any specific scientist, some of them can be as silly and superstitious as anyone else.

Cheers!