I have been reading some of the posts especially a few of Happy Hindu. I would like to share some experience with you about brahmins of different parts of India, because I have indeed not only travelled across India, I have lived in all four co-ordinates north-east-west-south. This experience of brahmins will help us explain how they play a role in India. Do they really stand up for the cause of good governance and honesty and so on?
1, Iyengars of TamilNadu- By and large there are lot of extremes in the community.Some extremely good and honest, the likes of Raja Gopalachari. When we quote that name we look at some one dignified, calm, person, a well organized person, clean and neat, a true patriot, a religious person, yet broadminded, and not a fundamentalist. He stood for honesty and we must salute the likes of him. We have some kind of hindutva breeds as well the likes of Govindacharya. Then there are more cloistered and orthodox Iyengars. Some of them stand for honesty and some have been outight dishonest with their colleagues as well as with the management. bribing taking, I know specific examples. In other words scanning across, it is not predictable who is honest and who is dishonest until we move with them.So will they stand up for honesty if they are in power. No, as you will end up getting honest and dishonest leaders from both.
2. Iyers - Iyers by their own texts are supposed to be upholding the smritis. There is no ambiguity here. The most orthodox Iyer will even defend untouchability if he very much believes in smrithis. However the good part is today for last two generations, no Iyer fully believes anything. Not his Guru, not his smrithi, not his customs not his rituals and so on. The likes who fully believe it, may be holding a paramacharya photo, travelling with a kudumi and jholna pai, and like a person who does not know how to survive, is at receiving end everywhere. He may be attached to the Kanchi Muttam, and living in modest circumstances while the rest of coterie around him may be making money in the name of vaidikam and shastram. Do the Iyers stand for honesty. They like to believe so. But when it comes to trying situations there are seldom few who can come out like Gandalf the white. The average Iyer is your simple man, reasonably honest, but he is not your most orthodox Iyer. The most orthodox either do not know how to survive or be practical , or the other orthodox play games both against others and their own traditions and survive.So again it is difficult to predict who will be honest and who will not unless you move with them.
Telugu and Kannada brahmins- On a whole their social interaction is very good but there is no guarantee for their honesty either. Naramasimha Rao is a case. I do not think he was casteist but he was not honest even though a good administrator. So there is no guarantee that their rule will be honest.
Malayali Brahmins- People like Sangom have a deeper insight. But I think on the whole their Malayali identity is far more important to them than uniting with other brahmins. The most respected namboodiris will be considered the worst brahmins here, because they were revolutionary against tradition. Take the case of EMS. Are there corrupt and two-timing malayali brahmins. The people of Kerala and the namboodiris themselves will point out the two timers among them. The whole episode of smartha vicharam and the lunatic casteism and discrimination of kerala, recorded since colonial times is a positive indication of what happens when these folks are in power or controlling the power.
Orissa Brahmins - By and large they are much simpler than the brahmins of other states. That is largely because by and large people of Orissa are simple. However there are a lot of politics that come into play. Brahmins are clear about their identity inspite of only mild differences in their food habits with the rest of the state. I am surprised if just by wearing thread, somebody can feel so better. The pandas of Puri are a good example of rampant corruption in the brahminical ranks. In a recent cyclone in Orissa, there was a report in BBC, that brahmins were unwilling to lend a helping hand in cleaning up the mess and corpses destroyed during the unbearable cyclone. Would they make perfect adminstrators? The Shankaracharya of Puri made some statement that Dalits can have their own temples and manage that for which there would be training. He was in favor of sati, and women not chanting the Vedas. I would assume that the Puri acharya is not native to Orissa, but the most conservative of Orissa brahmins could very well echo these sentiments.
I am continuing this in a new post so it becomes easier.