கால பைரவன்;108216 said:
....So he is not questioning Parimelazagar's urai alone. To him, the tamil brahmins have always been involved in such interpolations with vested interests.....
He does not realize how silly his judgemental posts appear when he himself routinely churns out illogical and ad-hominem attacks!
KB, if I am guilty of offering logically fallacious arguments that would be pretty bad for me, but that would not make some of the logical fallacies presented by others any less fallacious. So, simply accusing me in return of logical fallacy is like the joke about Indian crabs not letting any other crab from escaping from an open crate.
In any case, I reject your charge that I am also offering fallacious arguments. First, I don't engage in ad hominems <period>, so, that can be batted out right away. If you show me I did, I will immediately offer unconditional apology and withdraw those comments.
Now, to your other charge:
He writes about domination and control of brahminical forces and all such things! Yet, if others write about the vested interests of dravidianist scholars, he takes up cudgels against them! That qualifies as general diatribe but what he did does not!
This is called exchange of ideas, you can say Draividan scholars were motivated by vested interest, and I can say no, not at all. I can say Brahminical forces dominated and controlled, and you can say not at all. While each of us may keep saying what we want, we will be believed only to the extent we provide convincing evidence. As long as we do this without making personally insulting comments, I see no problem.
He says the literary achievements of brahmin scholars should be considered as achievements of individuals! The brahmins as a community should not take credit for them. But, the brahmins as a community should take the fall for the alleged interpolations of Parimelazagar. Such conflicting stands are abundant in his posts. Yet he talks about irrelevancy and logical fallacies in the posts of other members.
KB, this is a false charge and I reject it. My criticism is about Varna/caste system which is a crucial part of Brahminism. I hold all those who defend this ideology, whether it is Sankarachariyar or Senthilraja, accountable.
Next, Brahmins having held establishment power in the past is an undeniable fact. Village after village we have Agraharams with Brahmins involved only in intellectual pursuits, living off of the sweat of others. They enjoyed royal patronage, provided by royalty who were NB in many case, and they were co-opted as part of the Brahminism's upper caste. Strict oppressive caste system was imposed by these practitioners of Brahminism, both B and the co-opted NB castes. These facts have been presented in this forum many times.
So, what I said about Brahmins exerting total domination over literary recognition is true. But your deduction that what I was saying amounted to holding the entire Brahmin jAti, and only Brahmin jAti, responsible is not correct, I am not saying that at all. I only want those who defend this ideology, B or NB, to take responsibility.
There have been snide remarks in the past that we must go to other forums and hold NBs responsible for the atrocities they commit against Dalits. I am aware of only couple of sites, this one and Karuthu. My views will align with the majority in Karuthu, no fun. Here I am in the minority and a lightening rod of sorts. However, I would welcome a chance to post in any other caste-based discussion group of any NB caste. If such a caste-oriented discussion group exists, please provide the link.
Further, when an individual makes literary contributions then it is because of the individual's genius and effort, jAti has no role to play. So jAti cannot claim any credit. However, when an individual inserts jAti ideology and dominance based on strict adherence to Brahminism, then blaming Brahminism and those who defend it is fair game. So, I don't see any double standard. You may not agree with me, that is alright, all I am trying to do is make my position clear.
BTW, the regular caste clashes we see in many villages, perpetrated by middle castes upon Dalits are vestiges of this Brahyminical system that once enjoyed establishment support.
He does not realize how silly his judgemental posts appear when he himself routinely churns out illogical and ad-hominem attacks!
I plead guilty to being silly, that is something I try to do often. But I try my best to be non-judgmental of individuals and also try my best to avoid logical fallacies. But, in spite of what I think of myself, I know I am not perfect. If I commit a logical fallacy I expect others to point it out to me. In this instance, KB, you are wrong, there is no fallacy from my side. As for ad hominem, I can say with reasonable confidence I am not guilty. As I said earlier, if you show me these instances I will make proper amends.
Once again, it is the caste/varna system, Brahminism and those who defend these, whether B or NB, that I am asking to take the "fall" (your word KB), not everyone of any given jAti.
In any case, coming to Thirukkural, I do not think it is necessary to depend on Parimelazagar's urai to prove its position with regards to caste system.
I will write about this later as a separate reply.
Cheers!