• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Define a Brahmin please!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
"Well, you can read up on the Kapalikas and Kalamukhas who were meat eaters as well as 'brahmin' priests to several communities (esp to trading guilds like nagarathars, gavares, etc). Then there were SSV (chattada srivaishnavas) who served as 'brahmin' priests to several communities -- they were recorded in colonial documents to have been meat-eaters. Now it wud all come down to who are the brahmins today (this is a question which might be in your best interest to explore privately)." - happyhindu wrote

Hello Happyhindu:

In some history books it is claimed that early Vedic people of India, after elaborate prayers, sacrificed horse(s) to their Gods, and at the end of the rituals ate horse meat regularly.

Can this be true?

If it is, then when do you believe these Vedic people started eating the so-called vegetarian diet (I mean here Brahmins of TN; granted TN Brahmins regularly consume plenty of milk, as good source of sugar, protein and fat from animal source, the cow)?

I know you like religious history a lot.

Thanks.

Y
 
"Well, you can read up on the Kapalikas and Kalamukhas who were meat eaters as well as 'brahmin' priests to several communities (esp to trading guilds like nagarathars, gavares, etc). Then there were SSV (chattada srivaishnavas) who served as 'brahmin' priests to several communities -- they were recorded in colonial documents to have been meat-eaters. Now it wud all come down to who are the brahmins today (this is a question which might be in your best interest to explore privately)." - happyhindu wrote

Hello Happyhindu:

In some history books it is claimed that early Vedic people of India, after elaborate prayers, sacrificed horse(s) to their Gods, and at the end of the rituals ate horse meat regularly.

Can this be true?
Yes its true. You can get some info on the development of sacrifices here: SAMHITAS, THE BRAHMANAS, THE ARANYAKAS, AND THE UPANISHADS

It wud seem that the Kurus were outsiders who entered India thru present-day Pakistan. They encountered existing aryans in the indian land. To gain a foothold, it appears the kurus started off with the "creation" of rituals, that is, they started creating the brahamanas (brahmana sacrifical texts).

The sacrifical texts are all about the procedures of conducting a ritual. However, the hymns (or verses) involved in the rituals were borrowed from pre-existing vedic hymns of rig, yajur and sama.

Meaning to say the brahmana-texts only borrowed the verses from pre-existing vedic texts (for usage in homams). The creators of the brahamans (texts) were not the composers of the verses themselves. This is one reason why no one knows who were the original composers of the vedic hymns. Many-many vedic hymns got lost in time also.

The ashvamedha (horse-sacrifice) is mentioned in detail in the Shatapatha Brahamana text. It was part of the ritualism culture of the kurus, panchalas and their associates.

I find nothing spiritual in the ashvamedha sacrifice. It only announces to the world a king's largess and ambitions of conquering land.

You may find the writings of Firts Staal interesting in this regard, esp wrt the rise of the yajurveda group (imo, the brahmana texts of yajurveda are closely linked with military pursuits, which is why ashvamedha is associated with shatapatha brahmana of shukla yajurveda).

Regards.

If it is, then when do you believe these Vedic people started eating the so-called vegetarian diet (I mean here Brahmins of TN; granted TN Brahmins regularly consume plenty of milk, as good source of sugar, protein and fat from animal source, the cow)?

I know you like religious history a lot.

Thanks.

Y
Vedic (to me) refers only to a period of time. A period of time when certain hymns, verses were composed. The vedic people (that is the people of the vedic period) cud not have been vegetarian. For the simple reason that man was still somewhat primitive then.

The smrithis allow consumption of meat, fish. The pallavas supported soma yagnas. The somayajin held a high position in the pallava kingdom. So i suppose soma pana (liquor consumption) also existed.

I have no idea when exactly the concept came into origin that tamil brahmins were always vegetarian and abstained from liquor.

Regards.
 
Last edited:
Hello all

There is a way to identify a brahmin. The identity is not based on caste system but by some concept which might be new to all of you. There is a difference between brahmins and non brahmins and this can be identified by certain ways. Like there are differences between jews and non jews (not based on color of skin) there is a difference. All over india brahmins (irrespective of iyer and iyengar) have one strong identity elements (i would say 60%). If needed i can give you the code of identification. This similarity exist only in jewish community (60%) in the world and brahmins and jews are similar in this fashion. If you need the answer i can provide you. I did a study on my close knit communtiy and my brahmin friends (from north india, south) all over india and found this similarity. ofcourse there are some papers published using jewish people but not based on bhramin people i did a comparison and found the striking similarity.


Thanks
Shiva_murugan
 
Hello all

There is a way to identify a brahmin. The identity is not based on caste system but by some concept which might be new to all of you. There is a difference between brahmins and non brahmins and this can be identified by certain ways. Like there are differences between jews and non jews (not based on color of skin) there is a difference. All over india brahmins (irrespective of iyer and iyengar) have one strong identity elements (i would say 60%). If needed i can give you the code of identification. This similarity exist only in jewish community (60%) in the world and brahmins and jews are similar in this fashion. If you need the answer i can provide you. I did a study on my close knit communtiy and my brahmin friends (from north india, south) all over india and found this similarity. ofcourse there are some papers published using jewish people but not based on bhramin people i did a comparison and found the striking similarity.


Thanks
Shiva_murugan

Dear Shiv Sir,

Kindly share with us please.
 
Dear Shiv Sir,

Kindly share with us please.
I second that. Please share with us.

Shiva-Murugan, am also curious abt this: ofcourse there are some papers published using jewish people but not based on bhramin people i did a comparison and found the striking similarity.

Please can you share with us these papers also, and what point you used from these papers to compare with brahmin people.
 
Hello all

Idneitifcation of community is difeerent from who a brahmin please, anybody can become a brahmin, but idenitifying the commonlaities among a race is what this papaer it highlights the difference between jews and non jews of same color, when i studied brahmins accross (ofocurse my sample size is small) i found there is one similarity. and it seems to correlate based on what the paper says. Okay how do i attach a pDf file. Also reading this paper is complex as you need to know lot of different subjetcs such as statistics, ect.. so if you are competeent in this filed and willing to question certain validity then you should be okay. also pleaase note people who do not have these similariites does not imply they are brahmins or non brahmins there can be somethingh else. but this is a researh paper.
Thanks
Shiv_murugan
 
There used to be an attachment Icon to attach PDF files when you click "Go Advanced" but i dont see the Icon today.Can anyone help out here?
 
Definition of a brahmin

Ref: Meghavarshini's post

In my opinion, Brahmin is a person who never worries/thinks about tomorrow i.e. he who does not save for tomorrow due to his absolute/unflinching faith in God that God would take care of him. He is supposed to do his duty only. He should be welll versed in vedas, performance of rites and rituals and shastras regarding how one should lead his life. In case, the person is not inclined to educate himself in vedas due lack of intelligence, he should then do service to God in the temple. In case, the person born in a brahmin family joins army, he would be called kshatriya and not a brahmin. Similarly, if any person chooses business, a vaishya and if he chooses service for money/bread winning, he is a shudra. Ultimately, the brahmin is based on the profession such as purhohityam, intrepreter of vedas, shastras, upanishads i.e. scholars or teachers of vedas, etc. or renders advice to the ruler fearlessly taking into account what is good for the country. rajaji48
 
Definition of a brahmin

Definition of a brahmin
Ref: Meghavarshini's post

In my opinion,Brahmin is a person who never worries/thinks about tomorrow i.e. he who does not save for tomorrow due to his absolute/unflinching faith in God that God would take care of him. He is supposed to do his duty only. He should be welll versed in vedas, performance of rites and rituals and shastras regarding how one should lead his life. In case, the person is not inclined to educate himself in vedas due lack of intelligence, he should then do service to God in the temple. In case, the person born in a brahmin family joins army, he would be called kshatriya and not a brahmin. Similarly, if any person chooses business, a vaishya and if he chooses service for money/bread winning, he is a shudra. Ultimately, the brahmin is based on the profession such as purhohityam, intrepreter of vedas, shastras, upanishads i.e. scholars or teachers of vedas, etc. or renders advice to the ruler fearlessly taking into account what is good for the country. Last but not the least, he should help the needy and always think of other's welfare and advises people who come to him for advice impartially and fearlessly. He should be a living example for others to follow. rajaji48
 
Ref:Post No.2 by Renu

QUOTE=renukakarthikayan;83843]Can we also have definition of a modern day Kshatriya,Vaishya and Sudra too.
It will be fair to every Varna.
Like what are duties of a modern day Kshatriya,Vaishya and Sudra and rules and regulations that make one qualify for the 2nd,3rd and 4th Varna.
Why does everyone want to be a Brahmin? What about other caste?[/QUOTE
Except the slight downward moderation in the code of conduct for brahmins, there is not much of difference between a Kshatriya and a vaishya. They are only eligible to give Dana and not eligible to take dana. Only brahmins are allowed both giving and taking dana. Like brahmins they do their duty of protecting the country and earning money through business. They are supposed to soebd a portion of their wealth for charitable purposes and performing rituals, sacrifices through brahmins, etc. Shudra has only to do his duty and duty and protect his family. The outcaste i.e. chandala is only expected to do menial jobs to eke their living. The menial jobs like scavanging, washing clothes, working in graveyards,etc. They are also supposed to do their duty and there is no compromise in regard to the performance of profession with utomost sincerity is a code of conduct for all the castes. rajaji48
]
 
There used to be an attachment Icon to attach PDF files when you click "Go Advanced" but i dont see the Icon today.Can anyone help out here?
I don't think you or me shd bother Renu. Obviously Shiva-Murugan has no idea what he is talking about. Just one of those people who will twist a paper on jews with his own claims that he has studied brahmins of his own sample size, and make tall-tall claims, with blah, blah. He's even talking about a race. Pure humbug IMO. Just look at this write-up. Shd anyone take this seriously:
Hello all

Idneitifcation of community is difeerent from who a brahmin please, anybody can become a brahmin, but idenitifying the commonlaities among a race is what this papaer it highlights the difference between jews and non jews of same color, when i studied brahmins accross (ofocurse my sample size is small) i found there is one similarity. and it seems to correlate based on what the paper says. Okay how do i attach a pDf file. Also reading this paper is complex as you need to know lot of different subjetcs such as statistics, ect.. so if you are competeent in this filed and willing to question certain validity then you should be okay. also pleaase note people who do not have these similariites does not imply they are brahmins or non brahmins there can be somethingh else. but this is a researh paper.
Thanks
Shiv_murugan
 
Last edited:
Definition of a brahmin
Ref: Meghavarshini's post

In my opinion,Brahmin is a person who never worries/thinks about tomorrow i.e. he who does not save for tomorrow due to his absolute/unflinching faith in God that God would take care of him. He is supposed to do his duty only. He should be welll versed in vedas, performance of rites and rituals and shastras regarding how one should lead his life. In case, the person is not inclined to educate himself in vedas due lack of intelligence, he should then do service to God in the temple. In case, the person born in a brahmin family joins army, he would be called kshatriya and not a brahmin. Similarly, if any person chooses business, a vaishya and if he chooses service for money/bread winning, he is a shudra. Ultimately, the brahmin is based on the profession such as purhohityam, intrepreter of vedas, shastras, upanishads i.e. scholars or teachers of vedas, etc. or renders advice to the ruler fearlessly taking into account what is good for the country. Last but not the least, he should help the needy and always think of other's welfare and advises people who come to him for advice impartially and fearlessly. He should be a living example for others to follow. rajaji48
Are you aware of even one person who qualifies to be a brahmin as per your definition (amongst your family memebers, friends, etc) ? How about those in secular jobs? Do they qualify to be brahmins according to you ?
 
I don't think you or me shd bother Renu. Obviously Shiva-Murugan has no idea what he is talking about. Just one of those people who will twist a paper on jews with his own claims that he has studied brahmins of his own sample size, and make tall-tall claims, with blah, blah. He's even talking about a race. Pure humbug IMO. Just look at this write-up. Shd anyone take this seriously:


Dear HH,
May be we should give him a chance to share with us.Who knows may be he has some valid points.
Meanwhile can anyone tell me what happened to the Attachment Icon?
 
.... So, please do not sneer at this attempt, it was meant to be unoriginal.
Megh, this statement is sort of puzzling to me, are you saying this not your own views, but that of others that you have synthesized and just presenting it here, and therefore this disclaimer that these are not your own original ideas? Also, it is not clear whether you are in agreement with these views because you say you are only asking questions, but I suspect you are, and I am going to proceed on that assumption.

So, Sri Nara, Brahmin is a position, not a mere title or surname. I personally feel that there are some responsibilities associated with being 'Brahmin'. My question was, how do WE define one, not how the Shastrs defined them.
If you go through the archives of this web site you will find that this topic has been discussed threadbare. It is fascinating to see every newcomer who is not afraid to post opinions starts a thread on this topic and the next round of hot debate ensues. We all get to present the same arguments once again. Yet, the so called reformers get accused of saying the same things again. These people should note that this topic will never die as long as this supremacist feeling of being a Brahmin exists. This feeling is at the root of this urge to define who a Brahmin is. Who cares, except Brahminists nobody does.

BTW, Megh, if we take the Sashtras and try to understand the true upshot of it, then, an impartial arbiter will conclude that a Brahmin is one who makes his living on the labor of others.

THIS POST IS NOT AN ARGUMENT AGAINST THE SYSTEM- THE QUESTION IS, CAN TI BE INCLUSIVE AND THUS, BECOME HARMLESS?
Megh, I request you not to use upper-case as that is indicative of shouting in anger. If you want to emphasize something, please consider bold or italic font with a different color.

Cheers!
 
Yes its true. You can get some info on the development of sacrifices here: SAMHITAS, THE BRAHMANAS, THE ARANYAKAS, AND THE UPANISHADS

It wud seem that the Kurus were outsiders who entered India thru present-day Pakistan. They encountered existing aryans in the indian land. To gain a foothold, it appears the kurus started off with the "creation" of rituals, that is, they started creating the brahamanas (brahmana sacrifical texts).

The sacrifical texts are all about the procedures of conducting a ritual. However, the hymns (or verses) involved in the rituals were borrowed from pre-existing vedic hymns of rig, yajur and sama.

Meaning to say the brahmana-texts only borrowed the verses from pre-existing vedic texts (for usage in homams). The creators of the brahamans (texts) were not the composers of the verses themselves. This is one reason why no one knows who were the original composers of the vedic hymns. Many-many vedic hymns got lost in time also.

The ashvamedha (horse-sacrifice) is mentioned in detail in the Shatapatha Brahamana text. It was part of the ritualism culture of the kurus, panchalas and their associates.

I find nothing spiritual in the ashvamedha sacrifice. It only announces to the world a king's largess and ambitions of conquering land.

You may find the writings of Firts Staal interesting in this regard, esp wrt the rise of the yajurveda group (imo, the brahmana texts of yajurveda are closely linked with military pursuits, which is why ashvamedha is associated with shatapatha brahmana of shukla yajurveda).

Regards.


Vedic (to me) refers only to a period of time. A period of time when certain hymns, verses were composed. The vedic people (that is the people of the vedic period) cud not have been vegetarian. For the simple reason that man was still somewhat primitive then.

The smrithis allow consumption of meat, fish. The pallavas supported soma yagnas. The somayajin held a high position in the pallava kingdom. So i suppose soma pana (liquor consumption) also existed.

I have no idea when exactly the concept came into origin that tamil brahmins were always vegetarian and abstained from liquor.

Regards.

Hello Happyhindu:

Thanks for the nice reply.

My hypothesis is

1. Tamil Brahmins of the Last Tamil Sangham Period ate meat, as many TB poets in Puranaanuru describe the preparation and consumption of "delicious meat and rice coocked in tamarind juice" by them.

2. Jainism & Buddhism were prevalent in TN till 800 CE. The followers of these religions were adhering to Ahimsa and probably following strict vegetarian diet even without cow's milk in their diet.

3. The present day TBs are the followers Adi Shankara (900 CE) or Ramanuja (1100 CE). These people copied the practices of vegetarianism of the Jains and Buddhists with a twist that they included cow's milk in their diet.

Other explanations are quite possible.

Cheers.

Regards.

Y

p.s. Vedic period is the time between 1500 BCE - 500 BCE, people say. Probably, the Indo-Aryans came from Turkmanistan and other regions of the steppe lands of Central Asia just before or just after the Fall of the Indus Valley Civilization about 5000 year ago.
 
Last edited:
Namaste Sri Nara Sir,

If you go through the archives of this web site you will find that this topic has been discussed threadbare. It is fascinating to see every newcomer who is not afraid to post opinions starts a thread on this topic and the next round of hot debate ensues. We all get to present the same arguments once again.

Yes. It is true with some topics on most of the Lists. A solution, may be, is to prepare a FAQ and append the previous messages (both pro and con) as answers to them. This may avoid the repetition.

Yet, the so called reformers get accused of saying the same things again. These people should note that this topic will never die as long as this supremacist feeling of being a Brahmin exists. This feeling is at the root of this urge to define who a Brahmin is. Who cares, except Brahminists nobody does.

Actually, I have a slightly different take on this. The newcomers in fact long to hear the exemptions or violations (be it for sandhya vandanam, tarpaNam, Shraddham etc.) In case they were desirous of orthodox answers, they would have probably asked their vadhyars, purohits, maTadhipati, dharmadhikari etc. By the way, who is/are (a) brahminists?
[/QUOTE]

BTW, Megh, if we take the Sashtras and try to understand the true upshot of it, then, an impartial arbiter will conclude that a Brahmin is one who makes his living on the labor of others.

The whole edifice of capitalism is built on the principle of living on the labour of others. Why single out only brahmins?

Regards,

narayan
 
Dear Shri narayan, Greetings!

...Yes. It is true with some topics on most of the Lists. A solution, may be, is to prepare a FAQ
I don't see this as a problem needing a solution. My point is only that as long as there are people who think there is something special about what a "Brahmin" is, these discussions will never go away. What I object to is the ease with which some members attach the blame for these topics to people like me who oppose Brahminism -- we only respond to these nonsensical claims after they are made, never the originator of the topic itself.


By the way, who is/are (a) brahminists?
As you know, casteism is prevalent, and there are many non-Brahmins who firmly believe in the same nonsense, that there is something special about being a "Brahmin". This kind of thinking is rooted and promoted by Brahmincal Hindusim based on Vedas and Darma Shasthras, aka Brahminism. I would like to refer to the followers of this Brahminism, Bs and NBs alike, as Brahminists.


The whole edifice of capitalism is built on the principle of living on the labour of others. Why single out only brahmins?
I am not the right person to defend capitalism. But, your statement about capitalism is true only for feudal capitalism, and I condemn such a system with equal vigor. However, free-enterprise capitalism with sufficient checks placed on them to protect larger society from unscrupulous business practices, through a liberal democratic system, is not one in which the entrepreneur will make his/her living on the labor of others. They may get a larger share of the wealth generated than they deserve, but that is another topic.

Cheers!
 
The whole edifice of capitalism is built on the principle of living on the labour of others. Why single out only brahmins?--Narayan asked.

Dear Narayan:

In my understanding, capitalism is where the capital gets MORE importance over the labor in an enterprise.

History records the confrontations between the labor and management (either owner of the capital or owners' representative as the manager) at length.

In this modern world, I stoutly oppose your assertion that "capitalism is built on the principle of living on labor of others."

Because, the present day capitalism involves capital, unique know-how provided by the cadre of scientists, engineers, accountants and other "white collar professionals" (collectively called as Technology), the old cadre of "blue collar" workers and the management.

Capital requires some reasonable return on the money (10 y US Treasury rate plus a risk premium of say 3%-5%).

In a well run enterprise, all the stackholders are happy: capitalists - the share holders get about 5%-8% long term return on capital, after inflation; professionals and management get salaries & benefits and the labor gets wages & benefits.

Bonuses are paid yearly depending on the " excess profitability" of the enterprise, which follows all the laws mandated by the elected Govt in liberal democracy.

Where do you see these days "the principle of living on labor of others", please?

Cheers.

ps. I see some aberrations in the Financial Sector behavior before and after the Financial Tsunami that destroyed Lehman Bros, Bear Stearns etc in 2008.
 
Last edited:
Hello Happyhindu:

Thanks for the nice reply.

My hypothesis is

1. Tamil Brahmins of the Last Tamil Sangham Period ate meat, as many TB poets in Puranaanuru describe the preparation and consumption of "delicious meat and rice coocked in tamarind juice" by them.
Shri Yamaka,

According to George Hart, the 'vedic brahmins' came into tamilakam from 100 AD to 700 AD. Since Purananuru is dated between 200 BC - 100 CE (wiki source) it was written earlier (to the time period when vedic-brahmins arrived in tamilakam).

The Parpanas, Anthanars, etc described in sangam literature like Tholkappiyam, Purananuru, etc are not the vedic-brahmins who arrived in later times. Last year we had a discussion in this forum on this topic.

The meat eating Parpanas in Sangam literature, obviously does not refer to the (later-day) vedic-brahmins. The Parpanas, Anthanars of the Sangam period apparently involved in activities like weaving (Thiruvalluvar), making bangles (Nakeeran pulavar), etc. Something you do not think can be associated with Parpanars... Quite likely these were considered sacred activities during that time.

Apart from activities prescribed for parpanars in tholkappiyam, their job was the sing praises of their king (to motivate him during war -- you may like George Hart's writings). These 'kings' i think were merely commoners elevated as leaders of various tribal units. From my pov kingship was not exactly heredity in practice (though theoretically it is supposed to be).

Come to think of it, the sanga kala parpana activity is actually similar to our everyday pujas. Chant namavalis to praise Gods, offer incense, karpooram, flowers, etc with shlokas (and if any then ask for fulfillment of wishes) -- this is a non-vedic practice.

The south has been dotted with such Parpana priests, even until recent times. Which is why i mentioned kapalika, kalamukha priests and ssv priests (who existed even during the last century). For a strange reason, these kept disappearing and so-called "vedic-brahmins" took over their positions. But then, to me, the term "vedic-brahmins" is rather misleading (but that's a diff topic).

2. Jainism & Buddhism were prevalent in TN till 800 CE. The followers of these religions were adhering to Ahimsa and probably following strict vegetarian diet even without cow's milk in their diet.
Yes, quite likely vegetarianism is a jain, buddhist practice.

3. The present day TBs are the followers Adi Shankara (900 CE) or Ramanuja (1100 CE). These people copied the practices of vegetarianism of the Jains and Buddhists with a twist that they included cow's milk in their diet.
With due respect to all readers, i have a small pov on this. I have no proof, and my POVs are hypothetical. For now, they are mere assertions.

In my humble opinion the vast majority of present-day tamil brahmins are in fact the ancient Parpanar priests, Anthanar philosophers, etc.

Those who were invited by kings to perform homams from 100 to 700 AD were IMO only a small section (whose culture is best represented today by the namboodiris of kerala, apart from a few rare pockets of vedic purohits amongst tamil brahmins. Meaning to say their culture was not mainly Smartha, instead it was the Shrauta and Grihasutra type).

The vast majority of present-day tamil brahmins imo were the traditional Parpanas who did not follow smrithis until about vijayanagar empire happened. And even then, following smrithis did not become as common as during the colonial period. This one can say by noting practices that were followed.

Example - marriages within the family or within surrounding villages were preferred. From what i hear, tamil brahmins even until 100 years back were marrying cross-cousins and mom's brother (that is, they followed practices that were not permitted by smrithis).

To me, these are the very Parpanas and Anthanars, with 2000+ years history of holding a revered position in the minds and hearts of people. Unfortunately, they spoiled it themselves during the colonial period with their own hands and claims.

It appears that during the colonial period, they liked to be "aryan" and somehow grew to detest the word "dravidian" (though its just a linguistic category). They wanted to be "vedic" though the south is full of non-vedic deities. They adopted smrithis, wanted to belong to smrithis (a history that does not belong to them), and became proponents of smrithis. When infact they are actually traditional priests and philosophers.

Other explanations are quite possible.

Cheers.

Regards.

Y

p.s. Vedic period is the time between 1500 BCE - 500 BCE, people say. Probably, the Indo-Aryans came from Turkmanistan and other regions of the steppe lands of Central Asia just before or just after the Fall of the Indus Valley Civilization about 5000 year ago.
I like the topic of indo-aryans. Please give me 3 weeks time. I shall start a thread on it. I also have a thread on Narasimha avatara to complete.

Regards.
 
Last edited:
Shri Yamaka,

According to George Hart, the 'vedic brahmins' came into tamilakam from 100 AD to 700 AD. Since Purananuru is dated between 200 BC - 100 CE (wiki source) it was written earlier (to the time period when vedic-brahmins arrived in tamilakam).

The Parpanas, Anthanars, etc described in sangam literature like Tholkappiyam, Purananuru, etc are not the vedic-brahmins who arrived in later times. Last year we had a discussion in this forum on this topic.

The meat eating Parpanas in Sangam literature, obviously does not refer to the (later-day) vedic-brahmins. The Parpanas, Anthanars of the Sangam period apparently involved in activities like weaving (Thiruvalluvar), making bangles (Nakeeran pulavar), etc. Something you do not think can be associated with Parpanars... Quite likely these were considered sacred activities during that time.

Apart from activities prescribed for parpanars in tholkappiyam, their job was the sing praises of their king (to motivate him during war -- you may like George Hart's writings). These 'kings' i think were merely commoners elevated as leaders of various tribal units. From my pov kingship was not exactly heredity in practice (though theoretically it is supposed to be).

Come to think of it, the sanga kala parpana activity is actually similar to our everyday pujas. Chant namavalis to praise Gods, offer incense, karpooram, flowers, etc with shlokas (and if any then ask for fulfillment of wishes) -- this is a non-vedic practice.

The south has been dotted with such Parpana priests, even until recent times. Which is why i mentioned kapalika, kalamukha priests and ssv priests (who existed even during the last century). For a strange reason, these kept disappearing and so-called "vedic-brahmins" took over their positions. But then, to me, the term "vedic-brahmins" is rather misleading (but that's a diff topic).


Yes, quite likely vegetarianism is a jain, buddhist practice.


With due respect to all readers, i have a small pov on this. I have no proof, and my POVs are hypothetical. For now, they are mere assertions.

In my humble opinion the vast majority of present-day tamil brahmins are in fact the ancient Parpanar priests, Anthanar philosophers, etc.

Those who were invited by kings to perform homams from 100 to 700 AD were IMO only a small section (whose culture is best represented today by the namboodiris of kerala, apart from a few rare pockets of vedic purohits amongst tamil brahmins. Meaning to say their culture was not mainly Smartha, instead it was the Shrauta and Grihasutra type).

The vast majority of present-day tamil brahmins imo were the traditional Parpanas who did not follow smrithis until about vijayanagar empire happened. And even then, following smrithis did not become as common as during the colonial period. This one can say by noting practices that were followed.

Example - marriages within the family or within surrounding villages were preferred. From what i hear, tamil brahmins even until 100 years back were marrying cross-cousins and mom's brother (that is, they followed practices that were not permitted by smrithis).

To me, these are the very Parpanas and Anthanars, with 2000+ years history of holding a revered position in the minds and hearts of people. Unfortunately, they spoiled it themselves during the colonial period with their own hands and claims.

It appears that during the colonial period, they liked to be "aryan" and somehow grew to detest the word "dravidian" (though its just a linguistic category). They wanted to be "vedic" though the south is full of non-vedic deities. They adopted smrithis, wanted to belong to smrithis (a history that does not belong to them), and became proponents of smrithis. When infact they are actually traditional priests and philosophers.


I like the topic of indo-aryans. Please give me 3 weeks time. I shall start a thread on it. I also have a thread on Narasimha avatara to complete.

Regards.

Hello Happyhindu:

Very interesting perspective on TBs of Tamil Sangam Period and the present days..

One serious doubt for me:

1. Is there any indication in Sangam Literature that TBs were "fair-skinned /Light-skinned" while others were "dark-skinned"?

My feeling is in the current population of TBs about 70% are "fair/light -skinned" and the rest are like any other Tamils.

Why is this skin color in this discussion?

As a biochemist/molecular biologist cloning human genes (and probably humans, in the future), I believe the melanin content on human skin and their genes/alleles are very good biological indicators of tracking the migration of humans.

If you need to know more, please read my posts #3 and #6 on Aryan Invasion Confusion thread started by Biswas on 25th May, 2011 in the General Discussion here.

2. If the TBs of Sangam Period were "fair/light skinned" for melanin pigment, then I am very confident that Vedic people of the North had already migrated to the Tamil country.

The most recent research on mitochondrial DNA haplotype Z concurs with my hypothesis; George Hart many not be familiar with this result.

Cheers.

Regards

Y
 
Hello Happyhindu:

Very interesting perspective on TBs of Tamil Sangam Period and the present days..

One serious doubt for me:

1. Is there any indication in Sangam Literature that TBs were "fair-skinned /Light-skinned" while others were "dark-skinned"?

My feeling is in the current population of TBs about 70% are "fair/light -skinned" and the rest are like any other Tamils.

Why is this skin color in this discussion?

As a biochemist/molecular biologist cloning human genes (and probably humans, in the future), I believe the melanin content on human skin and their genes/alleles are very good biological indicators of tracking the migration of humans.

If you need to know more, please read my posts #3 and #6 on Aryan Invasion Confusion thread started by Biswas on 25th May, 2011 in the General Discussion here.

2. If the TBs of Sangam Period were "fair/light skinned" for melanin pigment, then I am very confident that Vedic people of the North had already migrated to the Tamil country.

The most recent research on mitochondrial DNA haplotype Z concurs with my hypothesis; George Hart many not be familiar with this result.

Cheers.

Regards

Y

Shri Yamaka,

Am not aware of Sangam period Parpana Varu being dark-skinned or light-skinned.

Am thinking these things depend on the level of exposure to sun. The progeny of farmers toiling away in the fields under sweltering heat will be dark-skinned, as compared to those who lead a sheltered life.

Also, NBs of other states such as Karnataka and Andhra are not as dark-skinned as their Tamil counterparts. Moreover as you might notice the Tamilians of Jaffna (or Srilanka in general) are not as dark-skinned as Tamilians of Tamilnadu. So i think it has something to do with the climatic conditions brought upon by the southeastern ocean / winds which makes the Tamilians of Tamilnadu particularly dark-skinned.

I do agree with you that people from North migrated to South. It is very possible that brahmins from northern-india arrived in southern india after muslim invasions (and mughal rule) happened in those regions. I remember reading something abt construction of numerous agraharams by the tanjore nayak dynasty. I was wondering what was the necessity to construct so many brahmin villages in the Trichy-Tanjore regions. Quite possibly they were constructed to accomodate many brahmins, who at that time, arrived from north-india to south.

However, in north india too, the sway is generally of Shiva, a non-vedic deity (ex: Ujjain, Somnath, etc). Again the question wud come up -- are priests of non-vedic deites brahmins? Or are they also like the Parpana varu and Anthanars of Tholkappiyam?

Come to think of it, there is no northindian equivalent of Venkataramana Swamy Varu of Thirumala. The maximum number of temples to Narasimha Swamy Varu is in Andhra. Am thinking these deities are native local ones, and their priests must have been local to begin with.

There is no reason why native brahmins (parpana varu) could not have reinvented themselves as vedic-brahmins (by adopting certain practices and creating puranic stories to assimilate native Gods into the Vedic list). Especially if kings patronised the local dieties, and wud have liked vedic assimilation for their Gods.

Also sir, i do not think all north-indians are fair-skinned. The vast majority are just various shades of brown.

For all these reasons stated above, am not sure how melanin content can act as a migration indicator in present-time.

Regards.

PS: Please cud you share with me some info or citations of papers on the research regarding mtDNA haplotype Z . Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Dear Sri"Nara",

As you have reminded in your post, this subject crops up off and on under various threads. But, For me, the answer is the same. As per the present social grouping in the prevailing patrilineal society, Brahmin is the one who is born to the Brahmin father by caste.
There may be so many other factors determining the definition of Brahmins during past centuries, but they have no relevance today.

Regards,
Brahmanyan,
Bangalore.
 
Last edited:
Dear Sri"Nara",

As you have reminded in your post, this subject crops up off and on under various threads. But, For me, the answer is the same. As per the present social grouping in the prevailing patrilineal society, Brahmin is the one who is born to the Brahmin father by caste.
There may be so many other factors determining the definition of Brahmins during past centuries, but they have no relevance today.

Regards,
Brahmasnyan,
Bangalore.
Greetings Shri Brahmanyan,

Sorry for butting in. However, i thot there is a 'generation-gap' with respect to our outlook. And i thot i must mention it on behalf of all the youngsters i know (including tambrams).

For most youngsters, caste is increasingly growing to be a non-entity. At the same time, we have caste-based reservations, and youngsters have to deal with it.

Hence, (to me) it is misleading to say that the topic has no relevance today. As long as caste-based reservations exist, this topic will remain of relevance.

If a people's movement can threaten to change the fate of politicians with the Lokpal bill drive, surely, with increasing awareness, youngsters in future can be expected to act upon caste and casteism.

One thing people already realise is how unaware our wise sages were regarding democracy. Those who drafted smrithis wud have never imagined in their wildest dreams that a day wud arrive when the whole of india turns out to be a democracy.

Regards.
 
Shri Yamaka,

Am not aware of Sangam period Parpana Varu being dark-skinned or light-skinned.

Am thinking these things depend on the level of exposure to sun. The progeny of farmers toiling away in the fields under sweltering heat will be dark-skinned, as compared to those who lead a sheltered life.

Also, NBs of other states such as Karnataka and Andhra are not as dark-skinned as their Tamil counterparts. Moreover as you might notice the Tamilians of Jaffna (or Srilanka in general) are not as dark-skinned as Tamilians of Tamilnadu. So i think it has something to do with the climatic conditions brought upon by the southeastern ocean / winds which makes the Tamilians of Tamilnadu particularly dark-skinned.

I do agree with you that people from North migrated to South. It is very possible that brahmins from northern-india arrived in southern india after muslim invasions (and mughal rule) happened in those regions. I remember reading something abt construction of numerous agraharams by the tanjore nayak dynasty. I was wondering what was the necessity to construct so many brahmin villages in the Trichy-Tanjore regions. Quite possibly they were constructed to accomodate many brahmins, who at that time, arrived from north-india to south.

However, in north india too, the sway is generally of Shiva, a non-vedic deity (ex: Ujjain, Somnath, etc). Again the question wud come up -- are priests of non-vedic deites brahmins? Or are they also like the Parpana varu and Anthanars of Tholkappiyam?

Come to think of it, there is no northindian equivalent of Venkataramana Swamy of Thirumala. The maximum number of temples to Narasimha Swamy Varu is in Andhra. Am thinking these deities are native local ones, and their priests must have been local to begin with.

There is no reason why native brahmins (parpana varu) could not have reinvented themselves as vedic-brahmins (by adopting certain practices and creating puranic stories to assimilate native Gods into the Vedic list).

Also sir, i do not think all north-indians are fair-skinned. The vast majority are just various shades of brown.

For all these reasons stated above, am not sure how melanin content can act as a migration indicator in present-time.

Regards.

PS: Please cud you share with me some info or citations of papers on the research regarding mtDNA haplotype Z . Thanks.


Hello Happyhindu:

1. Yes, you will have minor oscillations in the melanin content during summer vs winter time; or depending on how long you stay in direct sun uncovered and how long at a time etc... but the levels "settles down" to a near constant level of pigment.

2. As I discussed in the other thread cited above, immigrants from the North (you may call the Aryan invasion if you like those words) met the Aboriginal peoples of India, who I believe were dark-skinned (similar to most people at the very Southern tip of India). They fought initially; but after some time they started inter-marry between the two groups and started migrating towards the South.

Also, the expression of the wild type gene or the mutant allele skip generation(s). That's a complex genetics issues of multiple gene expression.

When you inter-marry over at least for a period of 3000 years, the mutant allele (the low pigment genes of the Central Asia) and the wild-type gene products (of the Original peoples) interact to give different hues of pigment color, which is what you see in most of the middle part of India, with some exception.

In other words, the Kashmiris are nearly same as the peoples of Central Asian population and the Kanyakumaris are nearly the Original peoples of India (who appear very similar to Kenyans and the Aboriginals of Australia) as far as the skin pigments are concerned.

3. I guess not all immigrants (the peoples of Central Asia) became the Vedam writing or reading people.. some of them perhaps started liking and practices of the Original people (the Dravidians) and they followed them.

4. Please go to the Thread I mentioned before and see a material posted by Renuka for mtDNA haplotypes.

Cheers.
 
Last edited:
Dear Happy Hindu dear,

Yamaka wrote:
Please go to the Thread I mentioned before and see a material posted by Renuka for mtDNA haplotypes.


Yes,go check that out! that article comes with a nice visual treat.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top