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.
ost No.2 by Renu
