Let us reclaim our rights

[Raji Ram]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

..i said once to my daughter...who is doing medicine ....if i like ...i will

drink coffee in her home...if im not able to feel her marriage decision...i like to drink coffee from STARBUCKS than her home...

Oh, Come on TBS Sir,

After living in the U S of A for so many years, you can not say like this!

 

[Raji Ram]

When I saw that episode on Vijay TV many times when participants spoke many words were Bleeped every now and then.

I was just wondering if these words were censored by the Indian Vijay TV Channel?........

It is done in India, Renu! Even in movies we often hear beeps!

 

[suraju06]

Dear Renuka,

When I saw that episode on [COLOR=#DA7911 !important]Vijay TV[/COLOR] many times when participants spoke many words were Bleeped every now and then.
I was just wondering if these words were censored by [COLOR=#DA7911 !important]the Indian[/COLOR] Vijay TV Channel?......

It is there in India too. Those bleeps represent the fear of Vijay TV to name castes which are casteist in nature, which go to any extent to maintain the 'purity' of blood lines including honor killings. Renuka, it is a universally known fact that all political parties in India rely on castes for their survival. They draw their foot soldiers-these are the cadres who collect funds from small businessmen in their locality, get posters printed, paste them on the walls all over the city, write with a piece of charcoal revolutionary slogans on white walls, gather crowds for the political meetings addressed by their leaders, indulge in violence against other political rivals, hand over fat amounts of election funds to the party in public meetings etc.,-from these castes. Without these foot soldiers the leaders and their parties will be no where. So when a powerful caste indulges in atrocities it is always down played because that side of the bread is buttered for the politician. Vijay TV, like the political parties relies for its ad income and viewership ratings on these castes which it can not alienate. "Satyam Apriyam na brooyath" is the golden advice that is followed here.

Cheers.

 

[tbs]

Oh, Come on TBS Sir,

After living in the U S of A for so many years, you can not say like this!

hi RR madam,
i said these words to my daughter/wife also...they know my nature very well....i feel comfort in DAYS INN and STARBUCKS coffeee

than a unwanted compromise.....just info...my MIL is in delhi....i never visited her home last 15 years...i stayed in five star hotel....

but never had a cup of water from my MIL's home....i visit delhi every year...i stay myself alone....அறுவறுத்த சாப்பாடை விட

....விறு விருத்த பட்டினியே மேல்.........

 

[tbs]

The bearded participant was not able to express clearly what he had in mind. He said something about calling the scheduled castes as scheduled castes stressing the scheduling aspect of it. But he was not going into the caste discrimination even there. That the BCs have not been included in the same schedule. May be they thought they could avoid the 'polution' that may be caused by being listed with the dalits. He could have talked about this which would have exposed the true colors of the so called dravidian ideologues. That was not to be. Then he spoke about the untouchability which came later than the castes into the Hindu society which is a known fact for those who have studied history of castes in the Hindu religion. He was not clear as to what he was stressing by pointing this out. He did not come forth freely. May be the effect of editing.

I know an Aiyengar girl who is a Lecturer in a college who chose to marry a dalit boy who was also a lecturer in another college. The family tried to reason out and failed. The girl was just forgotten by the other members of the family. She is living separately and of course happily with her husband and children. As far as the parents are concerned she just does not exist. That is all. Similarly I know of an Iyer girl who worked in the postal department and she married a dalit boy working along with her. The story is the same in her case too. Her father tried to discourage but failed. He has just written her off.

It must have been quite painful but they stoically put up with that reality. Both families do not speak about their particular daughter with any one. If the conversation moves in that direction they just cut it short saying she is not their daughter or some such thing and move over to other topics.

Cheers.

hi sir,
this is true....but one thing...ONLY A UPPER GAL MARRIED TO A DALIT....THE WHOLE FAMILY/COMMUNITY AGAINST THEM.....

but an upper caste man married to a dalit gal....the story is completely different....like some episode...the father of the gal....ready

to do HONOR KILLINGS.....

 

[Raji Ram]

Dear TBS Sir,

I wish you all the best to get a good son in law of your LIKING when the correct time comes!

 

[sangom]

hi sir,
this is true....but one thing...ONLY A UPPER GAL MARRIED TO A DALIT....THE WHOLE FAMILY/COMMUNITY AGAINST THEM.....

but an upper caste man married to a dalit gal....the story is completely different....like some episode...the father of the gal....ready

to do HONOR KILLINGS.....

Shri tbs,

What I understood from that Neeyaa Naanaa episode as also other sources is that marriage with a dalit boy or girl is not generally taken lightly. Dalits or untouchables have become such lowly and undesirable specimens in the minds of non-dalits. This antagonism is not only among hindus but also among christians, muslims and perhaps among others not known to us also. If a non-dalit girl marries a dalit male then the honour killing comes into play because the ND girl has paved the way for continuance of the dalit gene into the coming generations. It is for the same reason that dalits are even now being forbidden from growing dogs (not bitches) as their pet animals.

If a ND male marries a dalit girl, the reactions may be not so acute but the couple may simply be ostracized.

I would like to know if my above understanding is correct.

Anyway, we have to then go into the concept of untouchability and how it happened to infect vedic hinduism. May be the kshatriyas and vaisyas were the villains, as usual, and they compelled the meek and sAtvic brAhmanas to write the many scriptures supporting untouchability and including so many castes and sub-castes into the untouchable categories. We cannot catch hold of the original kshatriyas and vaisyas who perpetrated this heinous crime, but we brAhmins can now wield the axe and kill the vaisyas and kshatriyas, as the OP says!

 

[suraju06]

Post #107:

Anyway, we have to then go into the concept of untouchability and how it happened to infect vedic hinduism. May be the kshatriyas and vaisyas were the villains, as usual, and they compelled the meek and sAtvic brAhmanas to write the many scriptures supporting untouchability and including so many castes and sub-castes into the untouchable categories. We cannot catch hold of the original kshatriyas and vaisyas who perpetrated this heinous crime, but we brAhmins can now wield the axe and kill the vaisyas and kshatriyas, as the OP says!

The other option-the option preferred by BBs, doubting Thomases and self loathers-is for the brahmins to accept that they are a devilish tribe, though extremely small in size (2% of the total population) and that they always controlled every lever of power and manipulated the kshatriyas and vysyas who were just innocent as angels and so the whole tribe should first accept that they are solely responsible for the castes and untouchability and hence commit harakiri as atonement. After this happens Hindu religion will be an Amaithippoonga and everyone will be happy ever after.

Cheers.

 

[tbs]

Shri tbs,

What I understood from that Neeyaa Naanaa episode as also other sources is that marriage with a dalit boy or girl is not generally taken lightly. Dalits or untouchables have become such lowly and undesirable specimens in the minds of non-dalits. This antagonism is not only among hindus but also among christians, muslims and perhaps among others not known to us also. If a non-dalit girl marries a dalit male then the honour killing comes into play because the ND girl has paved the way for continuance of the dalit gene into the coming generations. It is for the same reason that dalits are even now being forbidden from growing dogs (not bitches) as their pet animals.

If a ND male marries a dalit girl, the reactions may be not so acute but the couple may simply be ostracized.

I would like to know if my above understanding is correct.

Anyway, we have to then go into the concept of untouchability and how it happened to infect vedic hinduism. May be the kshatriyas and vaisyas were the villains, as usual, and they compelled the meek and sAtvic brAhmanas to write the many scriptures supporting untouchability and including so many castes and sub-castes into the untouchable categories. We cannot catch hold of the original kshatriyas and vaisyas who perpetrated this heinous crime, but we brAhmins can now wield the axe and kill the vaisyas and kshatriyas, as the OP says!

hi sir,
one more thing....im always curious...when a iyengar gal marry to a iyer boy.....the whole iyengar community against the gal/their

family.....but a iyer gal marry to iyengar boy...the whole iyer community compromised....they are not against iyengar community...

but in the case of iyengar community....even they are ready to vandalise the whole iyer village.....this peculiar nature of

kashatriya guna....how they got it?....i may be wrong...pls my brothern iyengars....pardon me if any wrong in my words...

just my observation in tirupati....

 

[tbs]

Dear TBS Sir,

I wish you all the best to get a good son in law of your LIKING when the correct time comes!

hi RR madam....
thanks for your blessings....just info ...my MIL name RAJI also...i know how my RAJI mami behaves with me....i have three

RAJI MAMIs very close relations..including my mother is RAJI too....

 

[XLR8R]

You know, I learn a lot reading threads like these - the caste conflicts you talk about are completely alien to my family. On the whole my family is still Brahmin (though not necessarily Iyer/Iyenger as we married into non-Tamil groups). Some girls did marry NBs and there hasn't been a lot of problem other than initial hostility before marriage (most disappeared very quickly after marriage on both sides). Marriage with dalits was a bigger problem than with middle castes though.

TBs aren't going extinct - you just need to open the horizons and let them marry other groups too. The sex ratio is still skewed in favour of boys, and by virtue of that alone numbers are going to increase

We need not claim any special rights - if we share some kind of cultural affiliation then based on personal mindset it is OK to try to preserve that. Discrimination on the other hand is unacceptable.

 

[palindrome]

Neeya Naana 31-03-2013 – VijayTv | Tamilkey.com

Thanks to K sir for the link. Saw the Neeya-Naana episode again and again. Must appreciate Gopinath the host very much, for the enlightening topics and public awareness he creates thru his shows.

In the show, Prakash Raj and one another participant wondered from where did it all begin, but no one addressed that. A bearded guy rightly said untouchability started around AD times. However, no one spoke about the beginnings of highs and lows.

Wish the bearded guy (who is perhaps a journalist or a social scientist) had mentioned about tribalism; ie., about tribal days when tribal warfare included kidnapping women and cattle from inimical tribes. The stronger tribes grew in numbers as they had more women to procreate with*.

The stronger tribes also grew in territorial strength (owned more land). The tribal period was marked by clans (kulams). There was no jati no varna during that time. Within a clan, the clansmen took to diverse occupations in a settlement; which was based on ability, proclivity. There was no untouchability within a clan or a tribe.

Tribalism existed alongside faiths which arose in its time. The Agamic religions, Buddhism and Jainism, supported jati (caste), i.e., the system of occupations based on ability. Birth based rigidity did not exist. Anyone could become an agamic priest. Any strongman could become a ruler of a territory; or could overthrow an existent ruler and take his place. Anyone cud become a trader. Codes of conduct existed (as can be seen in Tholkappiyam). But the low could become high and vice versa (IMO this was because clan structures were still existent during that time).

Then came the period of Brahmanism. In Brahmanism, Varna was the social unit of organization. The varna model pushed its way into pre-existing jati societies. In Brahmanism, the sense of highs and lows, and untouchability all of which were based on birth-based rigidity came to exist. Manusmriti was written in the Sunga Empire by a warring set, who claimed to be ‘brahmins’; around 200 AD**.

Before 200AD, the dharmashastras permitted some leeway, as is evinced by some permissibility in earlier dharmshastras. However, the period of later dharmashastras marked by Manusmriti and subsequent dharmashastras was torturous to the enslaved (with molten lead, cutting off tongue, etc punishments).

Manusmriti did not recognize a fifth class (ie., no difference between a shudra and a panchama; all were slaves with the rest categorized as dasyus or ‘outcastes’). Those ostracized and/or enslaved included people who did not support the religion of the dharmashastras; ie., from Buddhism, Jainism, certain Agamic religions and tribal religions. Previously, some of us had discussed George Hart’s works in this forum, wherein we discussed how priests of other religions were made untouchables.

Brahmanism (ie, birth-based discrimination and oppression), it can be argued, was derived from tribalism. It codified certain conducts in tribalism (such as kidnapping women and owning women), for self-survival*. The sense of highs and lows became deeply entrenched. Notably, the brahmana could have any number of wives and concubines (females were also gifted in lieu of a fee for the performance of a vedic fire sacrifice). But the shudra could have only one wife. Females were treated like material items or property (belonging to males), and had no right to education, occupation, and making choices.

Amongst certain tribes, codes existed, where a female had no right / choice to ‘marry outside’ or produce progeny for an inimical tribe. The dharmashastras also prohibit inter-marriages. If varna shankara (marriages between high and low varna people) took place, such people were made outcaste. This is what we see even today in rural societies. What we think is ‘jaati veri’ has actually more to do with tribalism and/or brahmanism than with jaati itself. Since jaati (occupation) was never common / homogeneous amongst all of the dalit groups.


*Rakshasa Vivaha (kidnapping and ‘marrying’ after slaying a lady’s kinsmen) was recognized and permitted in the dharmashastras. In fact, the mangalyam was a symbol to indicate so and so female is ‘married’ (i.e., owned) by so and so tribe. It was similar to the system of tying something around a cattle’s neck to indicate ownership. I think Sangom sir also had written about the thali (mangalyam) in this forum earlier. Once thus ‘married’, the woman belonged to the 'husband's' tribe. On becoming a widow the lady had to marry the husband’s younger brother. The Devar (groom’s younger brother is made to sit accompanying the groom thru most part of the vivah, because he is the second husband in waiting. The term Devar apparently is derived from Dvitiya Varah, meaning Second Husband). Such levirate marriages were common in most old societies across the world. In short, men were owners of women; and their strength was known by the number of women and cattle they owned.

**Also note Kshatropeta dvijatyah, AKA brahmakshtriya or kshatropeta brahmanas (kshatriya brahmanas) were brahmins of kshatriya descent. That is, they were actually a warring creed who claimed to be Brahmins. They included several groups such as the Bharadvajas, Bhrigus, Gargas, Samkritis, Mudgalas, Kanvas, Urukshayas, Kapis, Priyamedhas, Vishnu-vriddhas, Haritas, Shaunakas, etc. Since military might could make people claim brahminhood, obviously, it was a role model for others to follow. What we see as ‘caste fights’ (even today) are actually fights to maintain position in the varna hierarchy-- this is a distinctive feature in dharmashastra ‘hinduism’. Such varna hierarchy does not exist in Buddhism, Jainism, and other religions of tribal and agamic origin.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

I was telling my husband that when other caste run freely and kill for honour I fail to understand why the Brahmin alone is always blamed for caste discrimination??
Weird isn't it..whole of India is caste infected..so why blame one community alone?

Dear Doc,

It is rather quite simple to reason this out. The majority of people who tend to shift the blame on brahmins are the middle castes themselves. This is an easy way for them to absolve themselves from any blame and continue the oppression they perpetrate on SCs.

My opinion is that the brahmins should keep out of any skirmishes between these middle castes and SCs. After all, they all gang together and form a single entity (non-brahmins) when it comes to criticizing and discriminating brahmins.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

பிறப்பின் அடிப்படையிலான சாதி முறை உருவாகக் காரணம் இந்து மதம் தான் என்று உறுதியாக சொல்ல முடியாது.

Those interested, please refer to article in the link below. It is quite a long article written by one Mr. Pravaahan. If time permits, I will summarize the main points later.
Africavil Saathi Murai

 

[palindrome]

World over social organization of people existed. So did slavery. The term caste has been used by social scientists in differing contexts, such as categorization of people based on either color, or culture, or occupation. Since most of the old world had organized societies, it is very easy to draw parallels.

In the Indian context, jaati indicates an occupational categorization of people. In association with Varna, a jaati set of people can be ritually polluting or ritually pure. Additionally, they are based on lineage or descent. In the African context, though hierarchical and signified by certain codes, occupational castes were not considered people of a different culture, nor did they encompass ideas of ritual pollution. Categorized based on color also did not exist. Nor did they have shastras describing or demeaning people by associating certain character / attributable qualities, with certain occupational jaatis.

Social categorization of people across Africa varies from place to place; although some elements may be regional (such as certain taboos followed by certain occupational castes in west africa). Across Africa, social organization can be very primitive or very complex.

 

[renuka]

Dear Doc,

It is rather quite simple to reason this out. The majority of people who tend to shift the blame on brahmins are the middle castes themselves. This is an easy way for them to absolve themselves from any blame and continue the oppression they perpetrate on SCs.

My opinion is that the brahmins should keep out of any skirmishes between these middle castes and SCs. After all, they all gang together and form a single entity (non-brahmins) when it comes to criticizing and discriminating brahmins.

Dear Sir,

I get your point...everything is basically human nature..when humans want to fight they will fight with someone they view as different.
Then when they have no one to fight with they will invent differences among themselves and start fighting with each other.

The sea is seldom calm.

I do not support anyone in this caste battle cos every human has the right to live without being discriminated whether Brahmin or Dalit or anyone else in between.

 

[zebra16]

பிறப்பின் அடிப்படையிலான சாதி முறை உருவாகக் காரணம் இந்து மதம் தான் என்று உறுதியாக சொல்ல முடியாது.

Those interested, please refer to article in the link below. It is quite a long article written by one Mr. Pravaahan. If time permits, I will summarize the main points later.
Africavil Saathi Murai

I think your earlier posts showed far more maturity. Do you really think the intended readers are not aware of it?

It is the fervent wish of a select few to SET THE AGENDA of this forum to the single point of BRAHMIN BASHING. The people who spend hours and hours in populating this forum with posts that contain the supposed atrocities of brahmins right from dinosaur's era are more CASTISTS themselves than the forum brahmins they would like to bash about. The proof is in the forum posts itself.

 

[zebra16]

Wish the bearded guy (who is perhaps a journalist or a social scientist) had mentioned about tribalism; ie., about tribal days when tribal warfare included kidnapping women and cattle from inimical tribes. The stronger tribes grew in numbers as they had more women to procreate with*.

Let us not imitate the veda regurgitating brahmin, (whom we scorn here rather routinely) shall we? Instead of meekly reproducing the voluminous article written by others, shall we get to the brass tacks of applying grey matter to what we have read.

Each successive tribal male member who kidnapped and enslaved women from his inimical tribe, had a MOTHER who herself was kidnapped and abducted. She surely knew the trials and tribulations of an abducted woman and would have expressed her feelings and travails and would have made a lasting impact on the young impressionable mind of the tiny toddler much before he went on to become an abductor and kidnapper. The things learnt from the mother are seldom forgotten throughout the life by anyone, for example mother tongue.

It would be too naive to believe such a phenomenon existing throughout the world for such a longer time duration as the propounder of such absurd theories would like us to believe.

 

[renuka]

Each successive tribal male member who kidnapped and enslaved women from his inimical tribe, had a MOTHER who herself was kidnapped and abducted. She surely knew the trials and tribulations of an abducted woman and would have expressed her feelings and travails and would have made a lasting impact on the young impressionable mind of the tiny toddler much before he went on to become an abductor and kidnapper. The things learnt from the mother are seldom forgotten throughout the life by anyone, for example mother tongue.

Dear Sir,

If this mindset was true...no Indian woman will suffer in the hands of her Mother In Law.

Most women who go thorugh a bitter experience eventually do the same to others.

Women whose father suffered to pay dowry still ask dowry from the Daughters in Law.

Even same in the case of kids who have suffered sexual abuse or physical abuse..they eventually grow up to become abusers themselves.

Thoughts,words and deeds are contagious..we reap what we sow.

 

[palindrome]

Let us not imitate the veda regurgitating brahmin, (whom we scorn here rather routinely) shall we? Instead of meekly reproducing the voluminous article written by others, shall we get to the brass tacks of applying grey matter to what we have read.

Each successive tribal male member who kidnapped and enslaved women from his inimical tribe, had a MOTHER who herself was kidnapped and abducted. She surely knew the trials and tribulations of an abducted woman and would have expressed her feelings and travails and would have made a lasting impact on the young impressionable mind of the tiny toddler much before he went on to become an abductor and kidnapper. The things learnt from the mother are seldom forgotten throughout the life by anyone, for example mother tongue.

It would be too naive to believe such a phenomenon existing throughout the world for such a longer time duration as the propounder of such absurd theories would like us to believe.

The above post was written by me based on content researched into by social scientists ie., people with grey matter.

A sampler for the tradition of kidnapping brides -- Bride kidnapping - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also look up Paisacha Vivaha in Manusmriti -- where a lady is raped before marriage. This form of vivaha though censured by Manu was still acceptable enough to be listed as one of the 8 types of marriage. Those were tribal days, where women were treated no better than chattel. No religion or religious laws, were made by women anywhere in the world.

 

[zebra16]

*Rakshasa Vivaha (kidnapping and ‘marrying’ after slaying a lady’s kinsmen) was recognized and permitted in the dharmashastras. In fact, the mangalyam was a symbol to indicate so and so female is ‘married’ (i.e., owned) by so and so tribe. It was similar to the system of tying something around a cattle’s neck to indicate ownership. I think Sangom sir also had written about the thali (mangalyam) in this forum earlier. Once thus ‘married’, the woman belonged to the 'husband's' tribe.

It is rather easy to pick and choose select writings from a person to further the bias one has formed oneself.

So, over a period of time the cattle begins to like the "tag" attached to it so much that it starts to pray for the longevity and well being of the "tagger", in this case the 'mAngalyam" and the husband respectively and also starts to perform "karva-chauth" and "vara lakshmi vratham" etc.

I also find in this particular instance you have not gone on to find the universality of the act. For example in western countries, they exchange "engagement rings and wedding bands". So are both (the husband and wife) tagging each other like cattle? Of course you wont find anyone in the western world subscribing to this notion and you will come up some other explanation.

Sri Sangom in his various posts here has said that (i) early vedic brahmins were cattle raiders as also women abductors; (ii) the very word vivAham means and signifies abduction, the authority of such interpretation being ATR (he didnt highlight on the word "pAnigrahaNam" sanskrit synonym of vivAham and we might have a new and revised interpretation as "seizing of the hand forcibly" etc.) (iii) Sri Sangom has also given the mantras of vedic mantras especially those that are chanted during tarpanam and shraddham.

I have read enough of history to know that dominating tribes and kings did indeed abduct and enslave women and other tribe members and had a large entourage of concubines in their harem. But I am yet to come across an article about a tribe which considered the progenies of such "raids" to be their "legitimate heirs" and bequeathed their earthly possessions to them (rather than to the legitimate issues born out of marriage to someone belonging to their own tribe) and required the offsprings of such union to perform funeral rites and after death ceremonies. And of course the progenies do perform the tarpaNams and shraddhams etc. all throughout their life and the tradition is being followed for at least 3000 years on a very conservative basis. Once again the “tagged” (symbolically) wishes the “tagger” happiness in the other world too to express the faith and gratitude for having been enslaved and forced to submit. A very nice theory indeed.

If in your extended study and research you have come across such other tribes, please do share with me the source of such information.

 

[palindrome]

It is rather easy to pick and choose select writings from a person to further the bias one has formed oneself.

So, over a period of time the cattle begins to like the "tag" attached to it so much that it starts to pray for the longevity and well being of the "tagger", in this case the 'mAngalyam" and the husband respectively and also starts to perform "karva-chauth" and "vara lakshmi vratham" etc.

I also find in this particular instance you have not gone on to find the universality of the act. For example in western countries, they exchange "engagement rings and wedding bands". So are both (the husband and wife) tagging each other like cattle? Of course you wont find anyone in the western world subscribing to this notion and you will come up some other explanation.

Sri Sangom in his various posts here has said that (i) early vedic brahmins were cattle raiders as also women abductors; (ii) the very word vivAham means and signifies abduction, the authority of such interpretation being ATR (he didnt highlight on the word "pAnigrahaNam" sanskrit synonym of vivAham and we might have a new and revised interpretation as "seizing of the hand forcibly" etc.) (iii) Sri Sangom has also given the mantras of vedic mantras especially those that are chanted during tarpanam and shraddham.

I have read enough of history to know that dominating tribes and kings did indeed abduct and enslave women and other tribe members and had a large entourage of concubines in their harem. But I am yet to come across an article about a tribe which considered the progenies of such "raids" to be their "legitimate heirs" and bequeathed their earthly possessions to them (rather than to the legitimate issues born out of marriage to someone belonging to their own tribe) and required the offsprings of such union to perform funeral rites and after death ceremonies. And of course the progenies do perform the tarpaNams and shraddhams etc. all throughout their life and the tradition is being followed for at least 3000 years on a very conservative basis. Once again the “tagged” (symbolically) wishes the “tagger” happiness in the other world too to express the faith and gratitude for having been enslaved and forced to submit. A very nice theory indeed.

If in your extended study and research you have come across such other tribes, please do share with me the source of such information.

I do not understand what you are protesting about. You seem to assume stuff. It may be better if those who protest take their bias into account first (if not a bias why else wud it be difficult to accept bride kidnapping existed in dharmashastras).

Kidnapping brides still exists in gond and bhil tribes. Some info wrt 8 forms of weddings in dharmashastras --
1) SanathanaDharma and
2) Hindu Saṁskras: Socio-religious Study of the Hindu Sacraments - Pandey Rajbali - Google Books

The dharmashastra religion codified / legitimized a tribal practice. Manusmriti considers all 8 forms of marriage legal. If Manu considered the wedding legitimate there is no reason to think a kidnapped bride's children would be illegitimate.

Till date in Russia, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, China, kidnapping a bride is 'tradition'. In these places, the kidnapped bride after wedding belonged to the husband and his respectable family; and her children are considered legitimate. In fact in certain central asian tribes, apparently kidnapping was the only way to procure a bride. A youtube link: Bride Kidnapping in Kyrgyzstan - YouTube

I do not think Karva chauth, Vara Lakshmi Vratham, Tharpanam, Shradam, etc existed in a tribal period. Each caste has a particular shape of mangalyam. Tribal symbolism perhaps akin to totemism. The name of the groom is not there on the mangalyam. The devar was the second husband in waiting. Perhaps this indicates the lady belonged to the husband's family / tribe and was not the groom's property alone.

In a Christian wedding, the wedding bands have name of the bride / groom engraved on them (at least they are traditionally supposed to). It meant they are attaching themselves to each other (so to say supposedly).

Am not saying anything in favor or against the wedding band or the mangalyam. If the human mind creates or seeks rituals, so be it. Am not saying anything against cattle either. So kindly do not assume things.

Apart from this, (info provided based on goodwill) am not keen on further interaction. You may please research on your own.

Thanks.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

I think your earlier posts showed far more maturity. Do you really think the intended readers are not aware of it?

It is the fervent wish of a select few to SET THE AGENDA of this forum to the single point of BRAHMIN BASHING. The people who spend hours and hours in populating this forum with posts that contain the supposed atrocities of brahmins right from dinosaur's era are more CASTISTS themselves than the forum brahmins they would like to bash about. The proof is in the forum posts itself.

I agree that the agenda is rather clear.

I just write here so that such prejudiced writings do not go uncountered. Many gullible readers may be swayed by such untruths just because they are presented eloquently.

For example, the word jaati is repeatedly used to denote occupation whereas it is likely to have descended from jananam or janiththal which denotes birth. There was flexibility in varna but jaati is always birth based. Birth based social stratification was firmly entrenched in tamil society before vedic adherers came here. The article to which I referred gives a clue as to where the original inhabitants of tamilakam came from and they must have brought jaati with themselves. Also, claims that there were only two varnas in tamilagam were totally baseless. Right from sangam period literature, from tholkappiyam to purananuuru, to later day nikandus references to four varnas can be found. IMO, the dharmasasthras only codified already existing laws.

 

[palindrome]

The term Jaati literally means birth ofcourse. The birth could be anywhere. In any clan, In any tribe. Jaati by itself seems pretty much harmless. In association with varna ie., social stratification based on class; jaati always meant an occupation group. Which is why all dharmashastras describe and divide society based on allocated occupation.

Untruths happen when certain people seek to conceal their doing. Whether it be colonial period or a time period little earlier to that. Prejudice is all over the dharmashastras. All over society. Instead of seeking to cure and remove infection; there are people who wish prejudice is fed milk, grows or remains; because it is all about their own self-claimed birth position within the hijacked term 'hinduism'. This applies to jaundiced people of any dwelling, urban or rural; or any current classification, B or NB.

Birth stratification was never entrenched in societies where social organization was based on clan kinship. It was non existent in Sangam period in Tamil regions. This was already discussed in this forum earlier. Some links are http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/general-discussions/5937-few-glimpses-south-indian-history-13.html and http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/general-discussions/7646-politics-thirukkural-5.html

In Varna System codified by Dharmashastras, class is rigid and based on birth. Even a child has to be named reflecting his class.,ie, the name must indicate whether he is a brahmana or a shudra. Manusmriti Chapter 2 says:

31. Let (the first part of) a Brahmana's name (denote something) auspicious, a Kshatriya's be connected with power, and a Vaisya's with wealth, but a Sudra's (express something) contemptible.
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Verdana] 32. (The second part of) a Brahmana's (name) shall be (a word) implying happiness, of a Kshatriya's (a word) implying protection, of a Vaisya's (a term) expressive of thriving, and of a Sudra's (an expression) denoting service.
[/FONT]

Dharmashastras codified selective tribal practices, ie., practices which helped self-survival of those who followed it. They must have been written in various places in northern parts of India. There is no evidence to show dharmashastras were written or followed in Sangam period in South India. The penetration of varna terms happened from the Shatavahana period in Andhra and was non-existent in Andhra also before that. This was already discussed in the threads: http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/genera...aarakshan-reservation-debate-resuming-13.html and http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/general-discussions/7318-wikipedia-article-about-kerala-iyers-14.html

Am providing all this info and links to old threads specifically for certain new readers of this forum. It is not meant for those who wish to devise agendas or involve in obfuscation and obscurantism. All said and done, readers are advised to do their own research.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

In tamilakam, there were social groups that followed patrilineal hierarchy and there were other groups that followed matrilineal hierarchy. Social laws and conducts expected out of males and females are different in each society.

ஆண் ஆதிக்கச் சமூகம் என்றால் ஒருத்திக்கு ஒருத்தன் என்பது. But the man has no such restrictions. பெண் தலைமைச் சமூகத்தில் பெண்களுக்கு இப்படியான கட்டுப்பாடு இல்லை. நாயர்களின் திருமண முறையான தரவாடு பற்றி இத்தளத்தில் ஏற்கனவே பேசப்பட்டிருக்கிறது.

Reference here:
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/general-discussions/7318-wikipedia-article-about-kerala-iyers-4.html

Even after the patrilineal societies gained ascendancy, there were groups which continued to remain matirlineal. The progenies born to the women of such societies were the ones who were called shudras. This was true in even western countries. Women who practiced polyandry were decried by the male-dominant society. The dharmashastras or the hindu/brahmin religion did not create such a category.