The Great Hindu Tradition

[Raghy]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Sri. Sangom said -

.......I therefore feel that there is no point in whining about Kazhakm's victory; we as tabras should try to castigate our brahmin leaders, or, even better than that, castigate ourselves for our political naivete as a social group.

Greetings, Sir. It seems, I have not expressed my views properly. I was not whining; DK had not succeeded. DK party was not the subject of my conversation at all. My subject was, brahmin community in Tamil Nadu too changed, changed as rapidly as it did in Kerala. It is quite possible, brahmins were under peer pressure from other brahmins to maintain acharam and madi etc. In the absence of/reduction of such peer pressure, the acharams and unfounded habits were thrown away.

Quite rapidly brahmins who moved to the cities started mingling with other castes. They just learned to live freely. I request you to consider your own life as an example, please. Gathering from different messages, I understand you lived in Ahmadabad and other places in North India. When you went back to your native place on holidays, where you required to follow some of the orthodox habits due to comminty peer pressure?

The change of Tamil brahmin's life style and social integration took place more in North India and in overseas than in Tamil Nadu itself. DK is a regional political party, restricted to Tamil Nadu only. So, any rational thinking person would hesitate to grant the credit for the change of life styles to DK party. So, DK party is not my main topic at all. But, DK party keeps the propoganda against the Tamil brahmins in Tamil Nadu.

Well, I wanted to say, Tamil brahmins just like Kerala brahmins, indeed adopted to social changes; they did not lag behind. That's all.

Cheers!

 

[saarangam]

The thread 'The Great Indian Tradition' was started by Sri Sarma Sasthrigal to inform the members about a book released recently and authored by him. Now after 100 postings in this thread the focus is on brahminism, casteism, anti brahmin movement by DK, DMK and so on.There are very lengthy postings and heated exchanges, but none of them seems to have any relevance to the thread.IMO this digression,which can be seen in many of the threads, is primarily due the non specific nature of naming the threads.If this particular thread had been titled 'A Book on the Great Indian Tradition' our members would have
restricted their replies to the contents of the book or matters related to the book.It is my humble suggestion that members of the forum are more specific in naming their threads to avoid such gross digression.
Regards

 

[kunjuppu]

dear vivek,

today in egypt, an old government is stepping down and new one taking place. not sure what turn the new government will take.

in 1979 islamic republic was established in iran. in 1917 the ussr was established in the old russian empire. in 1949 people's republic of china was established. with each of these new rules, those societies took a radical change from their hitherto states.

in iran the supporters of the shah will call this a retro move. so did chiang kai shek in china or the western powers over the death of the czar. however there were no tears shedded by the masses.

on march 7 1967 tamil nadu too took a radical change in its destiny with the establishment of the dravidian revolution. starting that day, with a deliberate intention, by the rule of the law, without bloodshed and peacefully too, the transfer of social influence and established but never verbalized privileges were transferred from the tambrams to the other groups.

as tambrams, we lost. all we are doing now is a too late post mortem, i think. many of us have reconciled to the change of rule which over the past 44 years has produced two generations of intelligentsia from the NB groups of tamil nadu.

it may be of interest to note, that whatever differences these NB groups, including dalits have within themselves, agains the tambram they are united. hence our repeat addressing of cruelty against the dalits by the other NB groups, falls on deaf ears, i think.

as far as i know, till 1960, in no other state has the brahmin group held so much sway over the life and culture of a society as the tambrams did during the first half of the twentieth century. the term madrasi, de facto meant tambram.

it was but natural that the other 98% or so of the populace resent this domination. add to it was the exclusivity, arrogance and whatever aspects which have been mentioned here.

today, we face a tambram society far spread out. the migrations in the past 40 years, particularly to the west, has bred two generations of tambram children, most of whom, feel lukewarm at best, about their tambram heritage. outside of india, we are desis, who blend more with the whites or north indians with an identity of bharatvasi than a tamilian.

the DK was a social movement which succeeded. to invoke the supposed friendship of periyar to rajaji or MK with his brahmin chelas, does not discount the fact that the tambram power is no more and unlikely ever to rise again.

those tambrams outside of tamil nadu were not at all affected by the dravidian revolution. it gave them a good topic to discuss over a cup of coffee or beer, and that was just it. but then again, nobody could have done anything against such a massive mandate for change.

the only occassion such has happened in independent india was in 1959 when the communists won power in kerala. by cheating and gross misuse of authority, the nehru government got rid of ems and his cohorts. but it was unlikely such could happen again, even though, many tambrams, like my own father prayed for it.

i think, today in tamil nadu, as long as we are willing to consider ourselves as just one of the numerous groups, we can live in peace. we have a reputation, which spills over in the way we are portrayed in movies or stories. this is but a reflection of how others see us.

we cannot compare ourselves to the jews. the jews were a different religion, diametrically opposed to christianity. not so us. we as brahmins considered ourselves to be the upholders of the hindu religion, with each one of the groups below us in a structured hierarchy, and damning the dalits to the netherworlds untouched. we had it coming. it is just a wonder that it took so long. it is even a greater wonder that it was so bloodless. i guess, the more thoughtful among us will be grateful for that.

today, even periyar's thoughts are increasingly becoming passe. he wanted NB to get their due share of power and prosperity, women to be educated, smaller families, and above all a social respectability outside of organized religion. all that is reality today. not much is left for periyar's goals.

whether we as tambrams like it or not, we too have been impacted by periyar. today, in this forum, even the most ardent traditionalists does not defend the incongruences and inequalities embedded in our scriptures. we would not openly deny entry to any one in our temples. sama pandhi is de facto rule in all our weddings. we mingle, we mix and some of us even intermarry with other castes. credit for all this goes to periyar.

it is best to accept history, and move on towards a better society tomorrow for our children. let us teach them to look forwards, and not teach them to rue a lost shangri-la that never was.

thank you.

 

[kunjuppu]

The thread 'The Great Indian Tradition' was started by Sri Sarma Sasthrigal to inform the members about a book released recently and authored by him. Now after 100 postings in this thread the focus is on brahminism, casteism, anti brahmin movement by DK, DMK and so on.There are very lengthy postings and heated exchanges, but none of them seems to have any relevance to the thread.IMO this digression,which can be seen in many of the threads, is primarily due the non specific nature of naming the threads.If this particular thread had been titled 'A Book on the Great Indian Tradition' our members would have
restricted their replies to the contents of the book or matters related to the book.It is my humble suggestion that members of the forum are more specific in naming their threads to avoid such gross digression.
Regards

dear saarangam,

your point well taken. i am remiss as i am one of the digressors.

however to be kind to us (& perhaps be fair to the spirit of the forum), threads have a way of meandering into areas never intended by the originator. but the nature of topics are such, that there is an interrelation to the discussion and the title of the thread, albeit not to the book.

what is happening today is the tradition for tomorrow, is it not. some traditions happened a millenium ago, and some only 40 years ago. however in the mind of the living, can one not perceive the values of the two traditions, and many inbetween?

whether we like or not, when history is written periyar and his social reformation movement will get more than a passing glance. something we cannot say about any social initiatives by our own tambrams. we will talk of bharathiar who was absolutist. not of rajaji or vaidyanatha iyer, who inspite of claiming reformist labels, did not go far enough along the path where they started.

for my portion of the digression, i tender my apologies, somewhat cheerfully though, i have to confess

 

[saarangam]

Dear Kunjuppuji
I am not finding fault with members who digress from the topic.Let me make my point more clear.When a thread is named 'The Great Indian Tradition' members are naturally under the impression that the thread is intended to discuss our tradition. All the postings in this thread are relevant in this sense and no one can accuse the members of any digression. But when the thread is intended to discuss the book on Indian Tradition it should have been named 'A Book on The Great Indian Tradition'to elicit the views of members about the book.I was only referring to the title of the thread. I find that many of our members are very specific about naming the threads , but there are some exceptions as in this case.
regards

 

[happyhindu]

Happyhindu - You are playing the blame game which is why you don't accept brahmin efforts to fight casteism giving excuses.

" What benefit did they (the self-appointed kshatriyas) get by keeping populations socially subjugated? What benefit did they get out of suppressing the "low castes"? Except for a sense of social power closely inter-twined with the position as "Kshatriyas" who overpowered and subjugated others ? "

What benefit is Mayawati getting from misusing tax money? What changes happened to casteist violence Tamil dalits faced when brahmins were expelled? DK used a social problem to gain political mileage, instead of accepting that, we see justifications here for it.

My question was related to the shastras. The moot point is yes, the shastras upheld discrimination. Hence your reply should have been from the same shastra pov -- to address why social power and subjugating populations is so intertwined with kshatriya-hood. Do not digress by jumping to shameless cheats like Mayawati, Raja, DK and so on.

"So deeply was this sense of "kshatriya-hood" entwined in the hindu ethos that even if a shudra became a king (like Shivaji) he too wanted to be recognised as a "Kshatriya" by brahmins."

Yes, and who accepted him was his teacher Kondadev, who was a brahmin. Today, like the DK government, the Maharashtra government in its caste-politics is pulling down his statue to erase the positive legacy of brahmins. What DK would like of course is to paste untouchabillity, caste ill-treatment etc as our only legacy so that it justifies your vilification of brahmins. Sadly, this vilification has gone deep into the thinking of some like Sangom, who have accepted a bleak future for his children, grandchildren in their identity of being brahmins.

The local brahmins refused to perform the pattabhishekham (coronation ceremony) for Shivaji. Finally Shivaji had to bring Gagabhatta from Kashi who constructed a geneology linking Shivaji to Rajputs to elevate him to kshatriya status and performed the coronation ceremony. Please note that Shivaji had to be elevated to a kshatriya status thru fabricated geneology; and only then he was coronated as a king. Ofcourse in this medley, Shivaji's coronation ceremony was delayed.

The local brahmins continued to deny the Bhonsales vedic rites and argued that as shudras they were entitled to perform only puranic rites. As a result, the Marathas had to take the support of Chitpavans who successfully meddled with the Sahyadri Khand of Skanda Purana to self-promote themselves. And not only that, they successfully took over and ran the Maratha empire as Peshwas. You can read a list of ill-treatments the dalits had to face under the peshwas from Ambedkar's works.

One cannot claim that brahmins were innocent victims who got vilified by politicians in a secular india.

Politicians merely found that caste-discrimination topic resonates with the masses and made their career out of it in different places across the country. If caste-discrimination did not exist, none of these politicans could have made a career out of it (irrespective of whether it is congress party member or DK member).

The oldest puranas, and upanishads are pre-buddhist, even if they were written over a span of time and even after the buddhist era. Infact, buddhist monks are themselves called brahmana. Read up, the world is bigger than the internet, not everything I say is in e-format for me to point links.

On what basis do you say the oldest puranas and upanishads are pre-buddhist? More importantly, which upanishad says that caste is based on character and not on the family of birth?

"If caste was not birth-based, why are brahmanical mutts claiming that caste is by birth (or that a brahmin is by birth)? Another question - if varna is by temperment, do you think you are a brahmin? "

Because society got rigid and they didn't want others to be identified amongst them. "Who I think is a brahmin?" is a personal opinion. The idea of what a brahmin is, is given by Yudhistira in the Mahabharata, and even in buddhist texts and even the BG chapters that discuss the idea of gunas. In the early times, it seems men who pursued knowledge, meditation, or a discipline of life (which seems to generally included vegetarianism) seem to be regarded as brahmanas.

Going by the historic view, there was no time in history when caste was based on temperment. This is what the orthodoxy reflects. To the orthodoxy, even if a man's character is bad, he still is a brahmin because he was born into a brahmin family. Going back, even in vedic times, Indra still belonged to arya varna if he violated women. He did not become a dasyu based on his bad behavior / character.

There are similar ideas of Kshatriya, Vaishyas and even Shudras too. The ideas of Sudras goes from one who is (mentally or physically) crippled and incapable or any of the other varnas to ones who willfully choose to bear ther service of other castes.

It is rather stupid to designate a mentally crippled or a physically crippled person as a shudra. It is a dumb fallacy to think that shudras willfully chose to be slaves. No one will willfully allow his wealth could be snatched and/or allow himself to be terrorized into remaining a slave.

What do you mean "sprouts of colonial India"? They are nevertheless people who fought casteism and whom DK, and as it would see, yourself, fail to acknowledge as brahmins who fought casteism. These people spread the idea of the BG because they were inspired by it. The idea that people had taken for granted in society when caste system established itself as birth-based is that a person of low strate is like that because it was in his blood, or as British spread the idea - in his "race". From the Upanishads, and BG there was inspiration that all humans are of the same spirit - and actually this is the same thing that motivated someone like Chankya in a much earlier time too.

None of this will be called by Nara or DK as "brahminism".

Yes, and obviously the mutts will say that - remember that brahmins existed long before mutts and even contributed to the rise of buddhism in India. For you to judge brahmins on the basis of the mutts is only for you to justify hatred for brahmins. Tell me just why does the other organizations like Arya Samaj, Brahmo Samaj or people among brahmins who fought caste discrimination not come to be spoken of as followers of "brahminism"?

Nowhere have i mentioned that i am judging brahmins based on mutts. But anyways, am sure that is not going to stop you from assuming. Hence i leave you to your personal characterisation spree. Anyways, now coming to the topic:

Are you sure 'brahmins' existed long before mutts? On what basis do you say that? None of these organisations -- arya samaj, brahmo samaj, etc existed in pre-colonial india. It was only due to stupid theories like aryan-dravidian divide and AIT, that hindus began to feel social pressure in colonial India. All these reactionary organisations (arya samaj, brahmo samaj, dalit mutts, etc) cannot remove caste-discrimination as long as the concept of birth-based varnashrama continues to be held and propagated by the brahmanical orthodoxy.

Because DK has indoctrinated TN society with "kill a brahmin instead of the snake" ideology. But Tamils in general don't hold such a vengance as EVR would like everyone to have towards brahmins. I don't see at point to exile a community for a problem that is through society is okay, no wonder tamil dalits haven't found peace. When brahmins were exiled, my great grandparents among them, rest all upper caste NB communties washed their hands of the issue saying they were merely following brahmins, and that without brahmins they would have been very very caring of lower sections of society. You yourself seemed to insinuate this in the previous response that somhow all other castes are trying to climb up the caste ladder which they do by ill-treating low castes.

Am not talking of DK. We can jointly do DK-bashing later. I am talking of the shastras and how it affected the society. So stick to that topic for now instead of digressing.

"What makes you think brahmins didn't ever own much wealth? Historically, there were kshatropeta brahmanas (brahmins of kshatriyas descent..

On a whole brahmin way of life was not targetted on owning wealth, nor did they do bussiness. And there is nothing wrong IMO, with many NBs owning wealth, they did it through their bussinesses and deserved it. It was their job. What I am pointing is that casteism was practiced even by them as they owned huge estates and houses, the facets of casteism as practiced by all of society are different. And this is something EVR intentionally overlooked, to wash his hands of the issue. His ideology was completely based on attacking a community, when he couldn't reasonably do that on his community. Blaming it on brahmins, he took his ticket to political power, and today people like yourself and Nara clearly seem to support this act, when it wasn't even an actual struggle against casteism. Proof of which is given by looking at the rampant violence against Tamil dalits in rural areas.

You replies are all non-sequiters based on DK, EVR, Politicans, etc. Just a way to digress and evade replying about the shastras i suppose.

Coming back to the topic -- please explain why you think a brahmin's life was not targetted at earning wealth?

The BG mentions of the three gunas and on that basis it is explained. This was the earliest and most relevant idea of varna, because varna itself doesn't speak of any lineage of an invdividual but (varna or colour) of the soul.

Your explanation is only partial. What do you think about the full explanation given by Chandrashekhara Swami's that BG supports caste by birth? Is not a family environment important?

We don't know if it spread right away. As in all civilizations if any philosophy influences a king, he tries to establish it. Reading of certain Hindu dynasties like the Guptas it seems even doubtful if Manu smriti was a law code practiced all across India. Today mutts will use anything at their disposal to justify their acts, we too should use anything in the reaches or orthodoxy (which appeals to them) and reason to destroy their ill-treatment. But none of this comes close to solving with the rhetroic of DK. I feel many people (TBs or NBs) look at EVR as a hero, but there is nothing inspiring in his message.

Again a non-sequitur. No one can claim that the Guptas were a hindu dynasty. Chandragupta Maurya first supported brahmanism but ended up converting to a jain towards the end of his career (as a king). Some historians suggest he was frustrated that he could not reform brahmanism so he became a jain. The greatest of all maurya emperors, Ashoka became a buddhist (so apparently he was not inspired by orthodox brahmanism either).

Anyways, please explain why you claimed that during the time of mauryas, caste was based on character in hindusim?

"Dunno why you see any of this discussions as a blame game. You are not the only person intereted in a solution."

Read the past postings of yourself, and tell me when you go about to speak like casteism was a puppet show run by the brahmins. The point is brahmins wrote so many things, some of them are their own abstruse philosophy, many others texts to form the ideological basis of the upper class ethos (of which they as ministers etc were part of).

You go to the extent of saying casteism is practiced because brahmins wrote of it somewhere - these people who follow it could have as well read BG of Upanishads, which were kept by brahmins and read more often than even the Manu smriti. Goes to say you are playing the blame game by putting this on brahmins when you clearly know that they ill-treat dalits based on their personal biases and arrogance.

Well casteism from the shastra pov is still upheld only by the orthodox brahmins. It is a fact, not some blame game. It is true brahmins in secular life do not follow caste discrimination. It is also true some large-hearted brahmins fought against casteism in the past. But it made no large-scale difference socially since the orthodoxy continues to propagate birth-based caste-system. Some populations will be considered "Low castes" and inferior as long as the shastras designate them so. By stating this, i feel am stating what is merely a fact. And the only solution i could think of is to remove birth-based caste. If you think there are other solutions, please go ahead and state them.

"Please let me know why you think varna was a social system (which time period was this?) and became heredity only later (when?). "

What is a system that speaks of occupations? Obviously a social setup. There will be a stratas in society, upper castes today ill-treat them for their sadistic pleasure and their arrogance, not by reading anything "divinely" prescribed.

Please tell in which historic time period was varna based on temperment and not on the family of birth? And in which time period in history did varna become heredity?

By where it is do you expect me to provide you a link? Not everything is in the internet. There are huge canons of Hindu literature all of them explaining the varnas on basis of the gunas (Sattva, Rajas, Tamas).

Non-sequitur again. Arrian's account mentions 7 groups that were cast together into a "caste" based on their occupation. They were social groups. Arrian's Indica does not mention the presence of a hindu chaturvarna sytem in which birth-based caste of the hindu dharmashastra kind were followed.

Obviously there was no chaturvarna in place during the time of Arrian around 150 AD. This merely strengthenes the stand of historians who date manusmrithi to the brahmin Sunga empire (sunga empire came after the mauryan empire). So how can you claim that the varna system (that is, hindu chaturvarna system) was based on temperment in the mauryan times?

"But from the historical pov, in which time period in ancient India was such a chaturvarna system followed (based on inclinitions / temperment)? "

The era when my Jain family became brahmins. When Chandragupta was taken to be a king. Hindu history as you would agree is vast, and not all texts have been uploaded to the net.

So you are claiming that your family became brahmins when chandragupta was a king? What shd i say for such a fantastical (and untrue) claim -- wow!! Do you have any historical records to prove this?

Chandragupta himself became a jain and began supporting jainism. So why would your family become brahmins at this time - a time when patronage for brahmanism began dwindling ?

More importantly, how can anyone become a "brahmin" after having been a jain? If you are sure they were jain, then it might merely mean that your family sanskritized themselves into brahmins at some point in time after they converted from jainism into hindusim.

Yes, but he still didn't care to uplift the dalits, did he? Tamil nadu in rural places sees violent forms of casteism against dalits, similar to UP (where a second consecutive day a dalit girl was raped).

In any other country an act like that of EVR will be considered ethnic cleansing. EVR never got the support of low-castes, he only used propaganda to up his political mileage. Dalits actually gained inspiration from Ambedkar, and even from men like Vivekananda or Tagore. These were fights against casteism, not EVRs rhetoric.

Sorry EVR did get the support of low-castes. And it is the low-castes who still vote DK into power. Anyways , we shall come to EVR, DK and everything that the caste-system helped create in colonial and post-colonial india later. For now, lets resolve whether or not caste-discrimination was sanctioned by the shastras; and the relationship between these shastras with historic times during which the discriminations were followed / put into effect.

"Just because a region has a fast flowing river, does not mean that the boundries of a region can change as per the course of a river. "

Yes it does, because aryavarta was called so because it was a region of fertile land.

So explain how the boundries changed because the course of a river changed (which river was this) ?

No tribe has been classified as anarya, and this is clear that it is about character - straight from the Mahabharata's use of it, and those people who wrote and spread it had full knowledge of the ved samhitas. So stop trying to bring your dead argument alive. You can maybe point in a sanskrit dictionary where your fantastic meaning of "arya tribe" is mentioned.

Dictionaries give meanings of words, not explanation on tribes / population groups. Anarya were population groups who did not follow the culture of vedic fire sacrifices and had their own worship beliefs. These lived outside the boundries of aryavarta. Already mentioned works of Sayana and Yaska. There are also commentaries by Skandasvamin, Venkatamadhava and a host of other traditional commentators from the orthodox schools who have designated population groups as arya or anarya.

Well ofcourse to 'brahmanism' anything that supports vedic fire sacrifices is noble and hence the meaning of 'arya' is designated as 'noble / cultured'. But anything that belongs to / supports an other culture is 'anarya' (non-arya). There is no hindu shastra that calls an other (non-vedic) culture as "arya' or 'noble'.

During the Buddha's discourses, the idea of who a brahmana is, is spoken of. As you say, do your own reading and find out. In anycase, the BG has clear references in chapters about the gunas being the basis of varnas - which ever time they pertained to, they couldn't have been just words - they pertained to a time. And these references are exactly the inspiration for brahmins like those of the Arya Samaj to allow all into their fold.

I did not ask about Buddha's discourses or Arya Samaj. You claimed that an "original varna system" based on temperment was followed during the maurya times. So provide proof for your claims -- go on and explain on what basis did you claim that a hindu varna system based on temperment (and not family of birth) was followed in the Maurya times?

You stick to the topic. Topic is not whom to blame for casteism - which is what you, Nara and DK have been doing. You go till the extent to say that dalits being hit and ill-treated today has to do with them perpetrators of violence climbing up the caste ladder, which you believe was built and assigned by brahmins. Tell me how long the line was when the caste tickets were being handed out.

Sure i am sticking to the topic. Instead of digressing and ranting off about DK, Mayavati, politians, etc, you please stick to the point of shastras and caste-discrimination; wrt historic times during which the dharmashastras were produced and discriminations were put into effect; and why caste discrimination still exists in rural india . Am looking forward to your reply on this post.

Regards.

 

[suraju06]

Well suraju06, how about the following:

I have come to the conclusion that these are people who are irredeemably sold on the idea of brahmin supremacy. There is no use arguing with these people. They will disengage suddenly from the conversation with you to pop up in another thread some other day with the same arguments with different phrases and clauses.
​

I changed just one measly word, no prize for figuring out which one.

It is easy to make triumphant declarative statements, anyone can do that. But to stick to facts and logic, well that is difficult.

Suraju06, you have accused me of going into sphinx like silence. Now I ask you to show me when and under what thread I retreated without giving you an answer. If you do, I am ready to engage you just as long as you refrain from making personal comments.

BTW, there is one issue that is still pending between the two of us on which you promised an answer, but never gave one.


Click here for context.

Cheers!

Mr. Nara,

Your reply has the answer as well for your question. I repeat it here:
"It is easy to make triumphant declarative statements, anyone can do that. But to stick to facts and logic, well that is difficult."
Rhetoric has no place here. When you ask whether the SV or Sankara matoms are following the high ideal of the greatness of the பாகவதர்கள்/தொண்டர்கள் y0u have been steadfastly refusing to answer my question as to why you never seem to question the discriminatory practices followed by the other innumerable matoms in Tamilnadu. Thus why is it that only a saiva Pillai can become the head of the thiruppananthaal, dharmapuram, madurai, thiruvavaduthurai adheenams? Why a dalit cannot become the head? That too these matoms , except the Madurai one, are all situated in the socalled liberated territory of Thanjavur District? And why is it that Mudaliyars have a special place in the Melmaruvathur Sakthi peetam of Bangaru Adikal? If you read my postings carefully you will notice that I only question the tendency to put all the blame for the casteist practices on Brahmins of Tamilnadu. You have been doing only that.If your answer is that this is the forum for TBS then my answer is that it is not. It is a forum visited by many NBs too. I had asked in a very simplistic way a question to you. ஒரு மந்திரக்கோலை ஆட்டி தமிழ்நாட்டிலுள்ள பிராமணர்களை எல்லாம் கழுதைகளாக்கிவிட்டால் அல்லது அவர்கள் எல்லாரையும் எப்படியோ ஒருவிதம் ஒழித்துக்கட்டி விட்டால் மறு நாளே தமிழ் நாட்டில் சாதிகளும் சாதிக்கொடுமைகளும் மறைந்து விடுமா? what is your reply to this question? Dont tell me that it is again rhetoric.It is not. As for your quote from an earlier conversation and asking for a reply which you think is pending, I would say I have already conclusively given you the reply to your rhetoric under the thread Enge Vaishnavam. Please read it once again.
This is not a personal attack. The fact is that you are irredeemably sold on the idea that:
1. Brahmins are solely responsible for the caste system.
2. They are solely responsible for its continuance today.
3. Brahmins are capable of scheming for the continuance of the inequalities in the system.
4. Only brahmins need reform.
5. There is no casteism because it is only brahminism which is wrongly called casteism.
6. So if brahmins go there will be no castes and TN will be a heaven on earth.
7. Periyaar is a great social revolutionary who brought about a social revolution.(this takes the cake)
8. Brahmins are responsible for all the atrocities perpetrated on them by the DK and DMK hooligans. If they change such atrocities will stop.

I have my own views about all these positions you hold. I know you would nit pick and deny that they are not your views and that I have invented them. Friend, this is the image of you for many of us who visit this forum as reflected from your postings. I tried to have a dialogue with you on all these earlier but you were slippery. Not that you do not engage in a conversation. But it leads us no where in the end and you have immense amount of energy to start it all over again. It was revealing to me only when I read your words in one of your postings here that you come here only to pass time. Well. Happy time passing!

 

[suraju06]

Happy Hindu

//All these reactionary organisations (arya samaj, brahmo samaj, dalit mutts, etc) cannot remove caste-discrimination as long as the concept of birth-based varnashrama continues to be held and propagated by the brahmanical orthodoxy.//

Held and propogated by brahminical orthodoxy? I repeat from my answer to Nara just above. Can you tell why Thiruvavaduthurai and Thiruppananthaal and other saivite matoms have only saivapillais as mutt head? Is it because the brahminical orthodoxy propogated that idea too? If you do not know, please let me add, Saivism followed by these matoms do not accept the supremacy of the four Vedas.

And I repeat another question:
If one day by waving a magic wand you convert all brahmins in Tamilnadu into donkies or just make them vanish into the thin air by some supernatural power, can you be sure that there would be no castes and caste discrimination in Tamilnadu? There will be no one to propogate and all temples will have free entry of dalits? Thevars and Mudaliyars will routinely marry dalits and allow everyone to call them also dalits?

 

[happyhindu]

Held and propogated by brahminical orthodoxy? I repeat from my answer to Nara just above. Can you tell why Thiruvavaduthurai and Thiruppananthaal and other saivite matoms have only saivapillais as mutt head? Is it because the brahminical orthodoxy propogated that idea too? If you do not know, please let me add, Saivism followed by these matoms do not accept the supremacy of the four Vedas.

Shri Raju,

My post to Vivek was specifically on caste-discrimination based on the dharmashastras (wrt the historical time during which the dharmashastras were written / created and propagated). By caste-discrimination i mean ill-treatment meted out to shudras in the name of caste. I have no reason to speak of the saiva adhinams in this scenario as the saiva agamas do not have injunctions against shudras. On the contrary, none of the 28 saiva agamas discriminate. According to the agamas, everyone (including shudras and women) are competant to receive diksha to follow the path to moksha (and the agamas is said to be the direct revelation of shiva himself).

And I repeat another question:
If one day by waving a magic wand you convert all brahmins in Tamilnadu into donkies or just make them vanish into the thin air by some supernatural power, can you be sure that there would be no castes and caste discrimination in Tamilnadu? There will be no one to propogate and all temples will have free entry of dalits? Thevars and Mudaliyars will routinely marry dalits and allow everyone to call them also dalits?

If brahmins were to take steps to eliminate caste discrimination, yes i think it will send a powerful message to the masses and make a difference esp in the rual areas. A thevar will not dare ill-treat a paraiyar if a paraiyar has the option to change his occupation to that of a brahmin.

Am not against caste. Am against the concept of "birth-based" caste and that occupations cannot be changed.

Shri Raju, if you might notice my conversation here is mostly limited to Vivek's posts. I request you not to intervene in the conversation between myself and Vivek. It is only a request, and if you really wish, you can direct posts to me. However, i may not reply to your posts from now on as I prefer to limit my conversation to only one poster, that is Vivek, in this thread.

Regards.

 

[suraju06]

//If brahmins were to take steps to eliminate caste discrimination, yes i think it will send a powerful message to the masses and make a difference esp in the rual areas.//

In majority of the villages in Tamilnadu where casteism is practised there are no brahmins. The village folk do not know what the so-called brahminism is or for that matter what this creature called brahmin looks like. As far as the village folk are concerned casteism is organic and not imposed from outside by some one. Moreover the most vilified brahmins do not command any respect or awe among these village folk to command compliance if a message is sent out by them. Like the many other good words said by brahmins these messages will also be lost as other-worldly nonsense.

I understand your desire to focus on Sri Vivek's views. I believe once a view is thrown into the forum it becomes an object for comments by members of the forum without any recourse to its author. Views will be expressed irrespective of whether the author takes it or not. Only in this spirit I have made my comments. You need not respond if you choose not to. Cheers.

 

[suraju06]

//According to the agamas, everyone (including shudras and women) are competant to receive diksha to follow the path to moksha//

According to these agamas you have to be free of the polluting 'malams' which pulls you down. But then who has discarded these malams and who has not is subject to interpretations. Vedas and Agamas are pure and flawless in intent and content. Only the interpreters are jaundiced. May be such jaundiced interpreters have determined who should head the matoms.

 

[happyhindu]

In majority of the villages in Tamilnadu where casteism is practised there are no brahmins. The village folk do not know what the so-called brahminism is or for that matter what this creature called brahmin looks like. As far as the village folk are concerned casteism is organic and not imposed from outside by some one. Moreover the most vilified brahmins do not command any respect or awe among these village folk to command compliance if a message is sent out by them. Like the many other good words said by brahmins these messages will also be lost as other-worldly nonsense.

Each one is entitled to his / her opinion. Am not sure if any villager will agree with you.

There were many kshatropeta dvijatayahs military units. No one knows where most of them disappeared. It is not necessary that the old kshatropetas must be represented by present-day brahmins alone. The so-called 'upper' castes could very well represent them -- afterall the so-called 'kshatriyas' and 'brahmins' share common vamsavalis / supposed-descent. It does not matter who (B or NB) practices caste-discrimination against the dalits. The shastra-sanctioned concepts of caste discrimination and ill-treatment of low-castes (just because they belong to a 'low" caste), have to be gotten rid of. Such concepts have no place in a secular progressive india where the majority population is hindu.

We need not imagine what will be lost to worldly nonsense. Consistent positive efforts over time can make a difference.

According to these agamas you have to be free of the polluting 'malams' which pulls you down. But then who has discarded these malams and who has not is subject to interpretations. Vedas and Agamas are pure and flawless in intent and content. Only the interpreters are jaundiced. May be such jaundiced interpreters have determined who should head the matoms.

Any woman who has periods also is said to have malams. Here the malams relate to body cleanliness that are not related to caste. Unlike the dharmashastras where the concept of untouchability is based on caste (more specifically, birth-based caste which a person cannot change even if s/he wants to). The agamas do not discriminate based on caste and gender.

Regards.

 

[sangom]

Mr. Nara,
...
ஒரு மந்திரக்கோலை ஆட்டி தமிழ்நாட்டிலுள்ள பிராமணர்களை எல்லாம் கழுதைகளாக்கிவிட்டால் அல்லது அவர்கள் எல்லாரையும் எப்படியோ ஒருவிதம் ஒழித்துக்கட்டி விட்டால் மறு நாளே தமிழ் நாட்டில் சாதிகளும் சாதிக்கொடுமைகளும் மறைந்து விடுமா?...

Shri Suraju,

When we had the epidemic of "plague" long ago in this world, it used to first start with the noticing of one or two dead rats in unusual places and circumstances. Due to their great fear, people used to promptly bury those dead rats, still the onset of the pestilence and consequent deaths in large numbers could not be stopped. I suppose even if someone with a magic wand like the one you imagine, were there and made all the rats vanish from the world, the pestilence which had already started (among the humans) would go along its natural course and invariably take its toll and then only disappear. If the magic worked and eliminated all the rodents including rats, perhaps, plague could have been wiped off, never to return. But that is not possible in this real world and so, we still have some occasional cases reported from different parts of the world, but plague as an epidemic or pandemic has disappeared.

In a similar way, the infection of casteism, spread originally from the scriptures like dharma sastras, puranas, etc., and the incentive for its spread right through all these centuries, will definitely take its toll, before it dies out; but just as you postulate the imaginary scenario of vanishing brahmins, if the wand is capable of eliminating every one of the brahmins (including tamil brahmins), including the brahmin mutts, on the face of this earth, casteism will also taper and finally disappear, though, during that period, victims will be there. This is what I feel.

 

[happyhindu]

I repeat from my answer to Nara just above. Can you tell why Thiruvavaduthurai and Thiruppananthaal and other saivite matoms have only saivapillais as mutt head?

Thus why is it that only a saiva Pillai can become the head of the thiruppananthaal, dharmapuram, madurai, thiruvavaduthurai adheenams? Why a dalit cannot become the head?

Shri Raju,

Saiva adhinams have started taking in NBs for training as priests. Thiruvavaduthurai adheenam started taking in NB boys in 2003. There is another adhinam that admits NBs in Pilliyarpettai. Who knows along the years in future one such boy may become the head of a saiva mutt.

The Saiva pillai / Saiva vellalar are supposedly a "caste". They also claim to descend from velirs (which is rather unsubstantiated) and make varna claims of being kshatriyas although they were recognized as shudras in caste census and could not change it despite going to courts. Despite their claims, they are infact a social group of people spanning various occupation sets (plus, low castes sucessfully joined in the ranks of vellalars in the colonial period). You may refer to the thread Brits are to Blame for more info on this. It would only be right for them to give up caste-discrimination if they truly consider themselves children of Shiva who see all as equal and God in all.

Regards.

 

[suraju06]

Shri Suraju,

When we had the epidemic of "plague" long ago in this world, it used to first start with the noticing of one or two dead rats in unusual places and circumstances. Due to their great fear, people used to promptly bury those dead rats, still the onset of the pestilence and consequent deaths in large numbers could not be stopped. I suppose even if someone with a magic wand like the one you imagine, were there and made all the rats vanish from the world, the pestilence which had already started (among the humans) would go along its natural course and invariably take its toll and then only disappear. If the magic worked and eliminated all the rodents including rats, perhaps, plague could have been wiped off, never to return. But that is not possible in this real world and so, we still have some occasional cases reported from different parts of the world, but plague as an epidemic or pandemic has disappeared.

In a similar way, the infection of casteism, spread originally from the scriptures like dharma sastras, puranas, etc., and the incentive for its spread right through all these centuries, will definitely take its toll, before it dies out; but just as you postulate the imaginary scenario of vanishing brahmins, if the wand is capable of eliminating every one of the brahmins (including tamil brahmins), including the brahmin mutts, on the face of this earth, casteism will also taper and finally disappear, though, during that period, victims will be there. This is what I feel.

Dear Sri Sangom Sir,

Your example is itself flawed. It is the germs which cause the plague. Rats are only carriers. Even if all the rats were killed or made to disappear, the germs would find other convenient carriers and take their toll. What you are suggesting in a remote way is that we should kill the carriers whereas I am questioning the wisdom of it particularly when we find there are innumerable other species which are acting as carriers. Are we not barking up the wrong tree when we say kill the rats while the germs are gestating and mutating in other carriers to take new avatars in more vicious forms. All I am saying is that we spend too much of our time in barking up the wrong tree. The fact is that We are not ready to even identify the germ. We are happy with finding one of the carriers and want to go on a killing spree.Because it is fashionable we have given it a name "Brahminism" and we are happy with our achievement.Next in the agenda is to go on a killing spree. My question: is it the wise thing to do? Let us identify the germ find out where it is thriving and then understand the clime in which it thrives and then try to eradicate it. Of course trigger happy revolutionaries and hatred mongers would identify anything as a carrier and kill it or hang it to fulfill their ulterior motives like capturing power, ruling a country or to satisfy their megalomania. If you remember Hitler, Periyar etc here, you got it. I hope you would not accuse me of nit picking. I wrote this because the flaw was quite obvious and was jarring. Cheers.

 

[kunjuppu]

... Of course trigger happy revolutionaries and hatred mongers would identify anything as a carrier and kill it or hang it to fulfill their ulterior motives like capturing power, ruling a country or to satisfy their megalomania. If you remember Hitler, Periyar etc here, you got it. I hope you would not accuse me of nit picking. I wrote this because the flaw was quite obvious and was jarring. Cheers.

suraju,

as a pov, to view periyar as a hate monger, trigger happy revolutionary, megalomaniac, having ulterior motives like capturing power etc i can accept.

but one thing about periyar. he was completly satisfied with social revolution. all along, consistently and without fail, DK has never stood in elections. it was periyar's intention to stay out of power politics and influence from the 'outside'.

infact, periyar was a supporter of kamaraj during the 1967 election, and has at times, supported the NB factions within the Congress.

hitler, ofcourse sought power and enforced changes through his position as the chancellor of germany.

one other thing: i think almost everyone will agree with your description re hitler, i am not so sure, if even all the tambrams would agree with equating periyar to hitler. and definitely not a majority of the tamil NBs either. as i said, it is all a pov.

furthermore i am wont to think, that periyar succeeded due to his unrelenting hardness on what he considered brahminism. it spilled over to hurt the brahmins, because only tambrams practised what periyar preached against. as losers, we are ofcourse tend to villainize our vanquisher, and to that extent, your evaluation may have validity.

the social revolution that has become reality today in tamil nadu is something that is topsy turvy of the society of our ancestors. that is a reality, and beyond the realms of points of view. i think so.

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Kunjuppu,

Revolutions happen against something oppressive. In that sense you may say that periyar was spearheading a social revolution against brahmin oppression. But you should give brahmins also some credit for helping this cause as many of the brahmin themselves started to give up the notion of brahmin supremacy on the basis of appeal to their reason alone. In this forum also you see that not a single member supporting caste by birth. If at all there is any resistance it is only for the tendency to taint the motives of our ancestors in creating a classification.

Coming to another aspect of a revolution it is fully successful only if it places in the place of an oppressive system a humane one. But that is not what happened. Instead of caste we now have wealth aggrandizement. I think this is a much bigger monster as it is not amenable to reason. Would one call what happened in TN, a social revolution? There definitely was a revolt but little has changed for the common man except the oppressors

 

[sangom]

Dear Sri Sangom Sir,

Your example is itself flawed. It is the germs which cause the plague. Rats are only carriers. Even if all the rats were killed or made to disappear, the germs would find other convenient carriers and take their toll. What you are suggesting in a remote way is that we should kill the carriers whereas I am questioning the wisdom of it particularly when we find there are innumerable other species which are acting as carriers. Are we not barking up the wrong tree when we say kill the rats while the germs are gestating and mutating in other carriers to take new avatars in more vicious forms. All I am saying is that we spend too much of our time in barking up the wrong tree. The fact is that We are not ready to even identify the germ. We are happy with finding one of the carriers and want to go on a killing spree.Because it is fashionable we have given it a name "Brahminism" and we are happy with our achievement.Next in the agenda is to go on a killing spree. My question: is it the wise thing to do? Let us identify the germ find out where it is thriving and then understand the clime in which it thrives and then try to eradicate it. ...

Shri Suraju,

Just as the plague bacterium originates in rodents (man has not been able to prevent it so far), casteism originated in the scriptures authored by brahmins and was nurtured by them. Once the disease spread over the entire populace, even affected persons, their breath, clothes, water everything becomes cause for contacting the disease in the case of plague; similarly in a large human society affected by casteism every one is a potential carrier, unknowingly; the very air is infectious. In such a case the germ has been identified but killing the germ is not possible either in the case of plague or casteism; only the primary carriers can be prevented. While rats used to be actually killed, I did not say that for brahmins. I took your own postulate of a magic wand which now you twist as killing. Kindly exhibit at least that much of straightforwardness and don't twist and put words into your opponent's mouth just to see that your pov gets some support.

My comparison therefore is not at all flawed. If we can kill the germ of casteism which is brahminism without making brahmins vanish with a magic wand by which you meant killing brahmins, as you now seem to suggest, very well, and that is what I am advocating. That will mean, for brahmins, to knowingly disown casteism totally.

 

[kunjuppu]

sravana,

below is a quote from a blog of an elderly brahmin lady. i have to believe it is true. i was surprised, but i figure this is the type of casteism that periyar was trying to abolish. the timeframe for this would be early 1940s, still within living memory of quite a few here, and the place is trivandrum

On the other side a huge rectangle housing about fifteen classrooms, around two inner courtyards. So there was a constant flow of fresh air, and we never felt the heat. Fans were unheard of in those days.
There were two different dining rooms, one for the Brahmin students, and one for the others, where we had our lunch in. In those days, Brahmins were treated with special respect, for the Brahmins followed strictly the rules laid down by the sastras. There was also a watershed, strictly run by a Brahmin water man, where we used to rush for a glass of water in between class periods

Memories and Musings: May 2006

 

[Nara]

suraju06,

In all the months I have lurked around in this web site I have always tried my best to be as forthright in expressing my views as possible. I always endeavored to answer all legitimate questions, the only ones I scrupulously try to avoid, not always successfully, are gratuitous and repeated personal comments and attacks. Yet, you commented that I go into a "sphinx like silence" or "divert to some other topic" when confronted. This is absurd on the face of it, if anything, many here would like me to just shut up and go away.

Be that as it may, my question to you was:

How come the present day Brahmin SVs can't follow even the narrowly interpreted words of Azhvars?
​

Your answer:

why you never seem to question the discriminatory practices followed by the other innumerable matoms in Tamilnadu

Well, is this not a diversion that you accused me of? I suppose you enjoy the right to divert the topic and still accuse me of doing exactly the same thing. I will let even this pass. Let us try to stick to the topic and refrain from logical fallacies.

Now, from your "why you never seem to question the discriminatory practices followed by the other innumerable matoms in Tamilnadu" two points follow.

1. You have no valid answer for my question, i.e. there is no defense for SVs talking a big talk about Acharya Bhakti etc., but won't follow even some simple teachings they gave almost 1000 years ago.
2. Since all these other maThams do it, it is alright for SV maThams to do it too, a kind of race to the bottom, seek the least common denominator approach.

Both points reveal a height of hypocrisy hard for many to scale.

Ok, now to your question -- for the record, any maTham or institution that follows Varna or other birth-based exclusivity, whether B or NB, I condemn it with all the vigor I can muster. suraju06 says there are these adheenams that engage in such practice, if so, I condemn it.

Given the limits of my knowledge, experience and access, I think the best fight, figuratively speaking, where I can make a difference is with Brahmins. This decision as to where and on what issues I want to make a stand is mine and mine alone, and the fact that it is here and is about Brahminism does not mean I condone a Devar hacking a Dalit, a Vanniyar Christian ill treating Dalit Christian, Arab dictator torturing his own countryman, a rich Kuwati beating a maid-servant from India, or any number of atrocities that go on.

I had asked in a very simplistic way a question to you. ஒரு மந்திரக்கோலை ஆட்டி தமிழ்நாட்டிலுள்ள பிராமணர்களை எல்லாம் கழுதைகளாக்கிவிட்டால் அல்லது அவர்கள் எல்லாரையும் எப்படியோ ஒருவிதம் ஒழித்துக்கட்டி விட்டால் மறு நாளே தமிழ் நாட்டில் சாதிகளும் சாதிக்கொடுமைகளும் மறைந்து விடுமா? what is your reply to this question?

Sangom sir has answered this question beautifully, I couldn't have managed half as good an answer. Further, this is another one of your straw man fallacy, a diversion. Even if all Brahmins are made into donkeys, caste atrocities will not vanish, so, what follows is caste not that Brahmins have no responsibility, only that this poisonous tree called caste system has taken deep roots and even if the planter is no more, the tree won't die. Further, this does not mean in anyway that Brahmins must therefore not try to aspire to be better, does it?

As for your quote from an earlier conversation and asking for a reply which you think is pending, I would say I have already conclusively given you the reply to your rhetoric under the thread Enge Vaishnavam. Please read it once again.

Conclusively? Really?? The only question I have raised again here, the one at the top of this post, is one you never answered and still can't bring yourself to answer. I am not asking you to go and lecture to your SV acharyas, not at all. Just as a matter of principle, why can't you try and give a straight forward and honest answer to this question, namely, how come SVs can't follow even the narrowly interpreted commentary of Thondadippodi Azhvar's words? Just your opinion, that is all, no further action is needed.

The fact is that you are irredeemably sold on the idea that:
1. Brahmins are solely responsible for the caste system.
2. They are solely responsible for its continuance today.
4. Only brahmins need reform.
6. So if brahmins go there will be no castes and TN will be a heaven on earth.

I have no problem if these are your views about me, but you claim these to be facts. So, I ask you to cite my words where I said any of the above in the sense of the highlighted phrases, like "only", "solely", etc. I know you can't and I am about to see "sphinx like silence" and diversion from you.

3. Brahmins are capable of scheming for the continuance of the inequalities in the system.

Whatever you mean by this, I know I never said anything remotely like this. My point is the Varna/Jati system is hopelessly flawed can never be reformed. I also think Brahmins, by virtue of their position in the social structure, must lead the way in dismantling it.

5. There is no casteism because it is only brahminism which is wrongly called casteism.

Another vague accusation. I think the present day casteism is an inevitable consequence of Brahminism, which has Varna system at its core supported by the notion of karma and rebirth. This is my position, irredeemable perhaps.

7. Periyaar is a great social revolutionary who brought about a social revolution.(this takes the cake)

Yes, Marie Antoinette couldn't understand what all the peasants were agitated about and suggested they eat cake. Brahminists can never understand what a true revolutionary EVR was.

8. Brahmins are responsible for all the atrocities perpetrated on them by the DK and DMK hooligans. If they change such atrocities will stop.

It is utter nonsense for suraju06 to claim that I am irredeemably sold on this above point #8, and to claim that this is fact not his opinion says a lot about what suraju06 considers as facts. Atrocities of hooligans of any kind must never be excused. What I question is the exaggerated claims about how widespread this was.

suraju06, I have tried my best to answer all your question as best as I can. Now, would you please answer my question, stated at the top.

Thanks ...

 

[suraju06]

suraju,
but one thing about periyar. he was completly satisfied with social revolution. all along, consistently and without fail, DK has never stood in elections. it was periyar's intention to stay out of power politics and influence from the 'outside'.

DK never stood in elections because Periyar knew that he will not win a single constituency. Any way it was not something of a sacrifice that Periyar did not fight elections. He was not capable of any sacrifice. He was born a rich man lived his youth in licencious ways, was a miser to the core in his old age and great leaders are not made of such stuff.

infact, periyar was a supporter of kamaraj during the 1967 election, and has at times, supported the NB factions within the Congress.

Periyar supported Kamaraj because he was not a brahmin and just that. He did not require any other reason.

hitler, ofcourse sought power and enforced changes through his position as the chancellor of germany.

Hitler in the name of nationalism sold the hatred opiate to the Germans and rode to power on that euphoria. Periyar sold the opiate of hatred and was content with his poonool cutting and kudumi cutting antics. Not much of a difference.

one other thing: i think almost everyone will agree with your description re hitler, i am not so sure, if even all the tambrams would agree with equating periyar to hitler. and definitely not a majority of the tamil NBs either. as i said, it is all a pov.

Every sentence put down in this forum by every member is a POV.

furthermore i am wont to think, that periyar succeeded due to his unrelenting hardness on what he considered brahminism. it spilled over to hurt the brahmins, because only tambrams practised what periyar preached against. as losers, we are ofcourse tend to villainize our vanquisher, and to that extent, your evaluation may have validity.

It appears you have forgotten many things. Periyar said "if you see a brahmin and a snake, kill the brahmin first". Casteism was not practised by brahmins alone in Tamilnadu. Mudaliyars, Pillais, Nadars, Chettiyars,Gounders, Vanniyars, Thevar, Konars ...every one was practising the casteism in more obnoxious ways. Brahmins were singled out because they were a micro minority and were prone to attack. They were defenceless and yet were living a contented life. All the controling levers of economy, politics and social living were in the hands of these powerful middle castes. It is they who ruled the roost. But Periyar cleverly saw an advantage in consolidating them all by holding micro minority brahmins as villains of the piece. He knew that his foot soldiers have to come from these powerful communities only and so he never accused them of casteism. He conveniently invented the theory of brahmin conspiracy and sold the hatred opium by packing it in it. The opiate sold well and it was lapped up even by many brahmins and we have the effect of it here even in this forum.

the social revolution that has become reality today in tamil nadu is something that is topsy turvy of the society of our ancestors. that is a reality, and beyond the realms of points of view. i think so.

Social revolutions are not made of such stupidity and partisanship.They are an altogether different category. Before the social revolution brought by the Bolsheviks in Russia or the Commies in China or the Civil Right Movement of MLK the so called SR of Periyar cannot hold a candle. At best,Periyar can be said to have created a Mafia which is enduring till date. Otherwise you wont have to witness such monstrocities like the Uthappuram wall or the massacre at Kilvenmony or the rape of Vachathi. And kindly read Periyar's views about the Kil Venmony events if you can access the Viduthalai of that era. You will understand what kind of stuff that man was made of. Cheers. [/QUOTE]

 

[N.R.Ranganathan]

Friends,

It is not correct to say that the brahmins are always at fault and have
perpetuated the caste divide. Brahmins form an insignificant portion of the
total population and are not capable of influencing any opinion. Even if the
brahmins exit from the scene, do you think that the caste system will
vanish ? Please follow the fight amongst BC, OBC and MBC. Members
belonging to other caste divisions like nadars, chettiars, pillai etc fight
amongst themselves. As far as possible, brahmins stay away from this
unrest. Nowadays, OBC would like to become MBC and some people would
like to be classified as SC or ST depending upon the benefits offered by
the Government. The politicains are actively encouraging this caste
divison. For instance PMK boasts of vanniyars' support and the leader says
no one can form a Govt. in TN without his support. Mr.MK defends Mr.Raja
bringing into reckoning his caste - he is a dalit and hence he can do no
wrong and people like to throw out the dalit leader.

 

[happyhindu]

Shri Ranganathan,

There is a big difference between brahmins in the secular world and orthodox brahmins. The former is like anyone else, living their own lives and possibly wondering what this caste hullaboo is about.

Each time anyone mentions that brahmins must give up caste discrimination it automatically refers to the orthodoxy.

If you go to urban areas you are not going to find a vanniyar, chettiar, thevar, or anyone fighting. These caste differences exist in rural areas. All that these people need is education and/or awareness. Politicians take advantage of the rural mentality for votes. Once caste differences are removed these politicians also will go jobless.

Caste fights tend to be carry overs from the fights that used to occur between tribes previously for power control. Please also note that sense of social power and subjugation has always been closely intertwined with the sense of "kshatriya-hood".

Warrior clans often claim to be kshatriyas; although they have no connection with vedic kshatriyas. They are either the kind that do not follow rites required for dvijas, or are people who adopted dvija practices in time (practically all of india's armed groups fall into this category including the rajputs, thevars, kallars, marathas, etc).

Each time a warrior clan is victorious they claim kshatriya-hood. And they beleive it is their duty to keep the low suppressed at all costs as the shastras ordain them to do so. Irrespective of whether it was the marathas or the vijayanagar period, the rulers always had to keep the brahmins appeased.

Shri Saidevo posted this in an other thread from the DharmavyAdha:

"rAjA prashAsti dharmENa svakarma niratAh prajAh
vikarmANascha yE kEchitta anyunakti svakarmasu"

--The king dutifully protects the people engaged in their sva-karma (prescribed per birth in a varNa-discussed in the commentary at the end); It is also the king's duty to punish anyone abandoning sva-karma and navigate them towards their sva-karma.

There is a fundamental problem in the shastras -- because they uphold differences between the victor and the vanquished in the guise of "divine" shastras. Such portions of the shastras have no place in a modern secular india nor do those who uphold them at an institutional level as mutts.

I repeat this again -- if a pariyar has the option to become a brahmin priest, a thevar would never castigate him on caste grounds. Why should there be caste rigidity? What purpose does it serve in today's india?

I myself do not like to belong to a religion that tells me that a shudra should be treated in certain ways, or that even the presence / sight of an untouchable will ruin things.

There are 2 options today:
1) Let religion become irrelevant (as it is already becoming due to modernization).
2) Let religion adapt with changing times so that it can resonate with the ones who practice it.

I hope to beleive in the 2nd option.

Regards.

 

[suraju06]

Shri Suraju,

Just as the plague bacterium originates in rodents (man has not been able to prevent it so far), casteism originated in the scriptures authored by brahmins and was nurtured by them.

A living arrangement/societal system could not have originated from any scripture. It is not logical. It should have originated from the society itself imposed by powerful sections of the society with a certain goal.Only after this happening it could have found a place in the scriptures. We are all looking at the scriptures from such a long distance in time that we can never say who wrote them or which part of it is original and which part interpolation. We dont have even the old palm leaves to carbon-date them as the scriptures precedes even that primitive technology in time. Casteism, even if it was nurtured by brahmins really does not matter. Such a micro minority can never have a decisive say in such a sensitive matter. At worst it has to be looked at as only a peculiar ideosyncracy of a small community. So it is reasonable to infer from the available circumstances that the casteism was a system developed by the society itself and was followed for a long time as long as it worked well. When conflicts arose they could have possibly been resolved by muscle power and economic power. In the last two centuries with the information explosion the happenings in every small community became known to the whole world and it had its own effect on the people. Thus we are where we are now.

Once the disease spread over the entire populace, even affected persons, their breath, clothes, water everything becomes cause for contacting the disease in the case of plague; similarly in a large human society affected by casteism every one is a potential carrier, unknowingly; the very air is infectious. In such a case the germ has been identified but killing the germ is not possible either in the case of plague or casteism; only the primary carriers can be prevented.

Now you are tying yourself in knots. There is no need to play with words and create a secondary level carrier and primary level carrier dichotomy. The logic is simple.In medical terminology there is a term called metastasis. It means cancer cells have spread to other vital sites from the site where they were first noticed. Primary carrier or secondary carrier the problem can be solved only if all carriers are isolated and dealt with. I am telling that the disease has progressed to metastasis stage and so let us look at holistically and identify all the sites and deal with all of them simultaneously. But what you are telling is let us tackle primary carriers of the germ: the secondary we need not talk about.

While rats used to be actually killed, I did not say that for brahmins. I took your own postulate of a magic wand which now you twist as killing. Kindly exhibit at least that much of straightforwardness and don't twist and put words into your opponent's mouth just to see that your pov gets some support.

How sad! I am not twisting anything. You quoted my words and then the quote trailed off with a liberal number of dots. It was a reasonable deduction on my part that you have also included the ozhiththukkattuthal part of it also. Well. If you did not mean it that way then my arguments will stand corrected to that extent.

not at all flawed. If we can kill the germ of casteism which is brahminism without making brahmins vanish with a magic wand by which you meant killing brahmins, as you now seem to suggest, very well, and that is what I am advocating. That will mean, for brahmins, to knowingly disown casteism totally.

Again the attempt is to equate casteism with a non existent imaginary 'brahminism'. Okay, for arguments' sake, let brahmins 'die' by giving up casteism. What are you going to do with the lakhs of Pillais, Mudaliyaars, Gounders, Thevars et al? They will 'die' automatically? They are such noble souls that they will 'die' as soon as brahmins 'die'. Only brahmins are not such noble souls and they needed 'slaying' by vilification! Some logic ! this. Cheers.

 

[sangom]

Friends,

It is not correct to say that the brahmins are always at fault and have
perpetuated the caste divide. Brahmins form an insignificant portion of the
total population and are not capable of influencing any opinion. Even if the
brahmins exit from the scene, do you think that the caste system will
vanish ? Please follow the fight amongst BC, OBC and MBC. Members
belonging to other caste divisions like nadars, chettiars, pillai etc fight
amongst themselves. As far as possible, brahmins stay away from this
unrest. Nowadays, OBC would like to become MBC and some people would
like to be classified as SC or ST depending upon the benefits offered by
the Government. The politicains are actively encouraging this caste
divison. For instance PMK boasts of vanniyars' support and the leader says
no one can form a Govt. in TN without his support. Mr.MK defends Mr.Raja
bringing into reckoning his caste - he is a dalit and hence he can do no
wrong and people like to throw out the dalit leader.

Shri Ranganathan,

I think that your above views arise either because your knowledge of the ancient judicial system of India is not much, or, you fully subscribe to the new-era thinking of disowning completely the crucial role performed by brāhmaṇas in the matter of advising the kings, rulers, etc., which continued right up to the british rule. Even as late as in the 19th century, the british courts had śāstris attached to various courts to give advice regarding various aspects of hindu law covering a variety of issues which depended primarily upon the caste system in all its rigidity and separate dispensations on a caste-wise basis. If only the (brāhmaṇa) śāstris of those days had decided not to enforce the caste-based laws of the various dharmasastras, or, if they had the egalitarian outlook, as some members here now try to establish (though not with any measure of success), contained in the few-and-far-between examples of one isolated manīṣāpaṃcakam or bhagavdgitā, it would probably have changed the very destiny of this nation for the better. But none of them did so and none of them found it expedient to even initiate a reform.

I give below a few extracts from the mānava dharma śāstra which throws some light on the exalted position accorded by it to brāhmaṇas. The various other dharmasūtras/dharmaśāstras also are on similar lines as regards the pre-eminence accorded to brahmins. It is impossible for me to convince myself, in the face of such evidence, that such an extra-ordinarily privileged status could have been afforded by either a text written by brahmin weaklings on the dictates of the ruling kṣatriyas (as some members seem to view these dharmaśāstras), or that it could have been a sort of common code voluntarily adopted by a people at some point of their evolution as a society (a recently expressed pov).


It was the rule that the king was the supreme authority in his kindom and he ruled his state with the help of his rājaguru (purohita) and commander (senāni).


CHAPTER X

1. Let the three twice-born castes (varna), discharging their (prescribed) duties, study (the Veda); but among them the Brahmana (alone) shall teach it, not the other two; that is an established rule.

2. The Brahmana must know the means of subsistence (prescribed) by law for all, instruct the others, and himself live according to (the law)

3. On account of his pre-eminence, on account of the superiority of his origin, on account of his observance of (particular) restrictive rules, and on account of his particular sanctification the Brahmana is the lord of (all) castes (varna).

Chapter VII

37. Let the king, after rising early in the morning, worship Brahmanas who are well versed in the threefold sacred science and learned (in polity), and follow their advice.

38. Let him daily worship aged Brahmanas who know the Veda and are pure; for he who always worships aged men, is honoured even by Rakshasas.

39. Let him, though he may already be modest, constantly learn modesty from them; for a king who is modest never perishes.

54. Let him appoint seven or eight ministers whose ancestors have been royal servants, who are versed in the sciences, heroes skilled in the use of weapons and descended from (noble) families and who have been tried.

55. Even an undertaking easy (in itself) is (sometimes) hard to be accomplished by a single man; how much (harder is it for a king), especially (if he has) no assistant, (to govern) a kingdom which yields great revenues.

56. Let him daily consider with them the ordinary (business, referring to) peace and war, (the four subjects called) sthana, the revenue, the (manner of) protecting (himself and his kingdom), and the sanctification of his gains (by pious gifts).

57. Having (first) ascertained the opinion of each (minister) separately and (then the views) of all together, let him do what is (most) beneficial for him in his affairs.

58. But with the most distinguished among them all, a learned Brahmana, let the king deliberate on the most important affairs which relate to the six measures of royal policy.

79. A king shall offer various (Srauta) sacrifices at which liberal fees (are distributed), and in order to acquire merit, he shall give to Brahmanas enjoyments and wealth.

82. Let him honour those Brahmanas who have returned from their teacher's house (after studying the Veda); for that (money which is given) to Brahmanas is declared to be an imperishable treasure for kings.

83. Neither thieves nor foes can take it, nor can it be lost; hence an imperishable store must be deposited by kings with Brahmanas.

84. The offering made through the mouth of a Brahmana, which is neither spilt, nor falls (on the ground), nor ever perishes, is far more excellent than Agnihotras.

145. Having risen in the last watch of the night, having performed (the rite of) personal purification, having, with a collected mind, offered oblations in the fire, and having worshipped Brahmanas, he shall enter the hall of audience which must possess the marks (considered) auspicious (for a dwelling).

201. When he has gained victory, let him duly worship the gods and honour righteous Brahmanas, let him grant exemptions, and let him cause promises of safety to be proclaimed.

Reformist poet-saints like Kabir Das, Raidas, etc., had met with stiff opposition in medieval times from orthodox brahmins mainly. It was their wont to complain to the king against such persons for breach of the social codes of conduct. Obviously, therefore, brahmins were not mere meek scribes who jotted down whatever was dictated to them; they were capable of action to oppose anyone who they felt violated the sacred and eternal law code. I do not think the situation was any different in the south, as may be seen from the killing of jains at the behest of brahmin saint appar to the then king of Madurai.

The Child Marriage Restraint Act, popularly known as Sarda Act, of 1929 was moved by Rai Bahadur Haribilas Sarda, a marwari - and not a brahmin, incidentally - remained in paper because, reportedly, the british government recieved threats and decided not to implement it when the natives themselves were against it. Could not our great grandfathers' and/or our grandfathers' generation implement it with enthusiasm? Mostly they did not, is the truth. This piece of legislation itself was not because of some internal awakening among the hindus or among brahmins but due to the pressure put on the government by the League of Nations, and the publication of Catherine Mayo's Mother India in 1927.

Subsequent to Independence also, when the Hindu Code Bill came up before the Parliament the orthodoxy (read, 'mostly brahmins') offered stiff opposition to it. In fact the senior kāñci ācārya (candraśekharendra sarasvati)was so exercised by the prospect of the ancient hindu laws being thrown overboard, that he held a late night secret meeting in a small village near Tiruvavaduturai, to "save" hindu (sanātana) religion and Manu Dharma Sastra, though his followers did not show much enthusiasm in that meeting. You can read for a fuller account in the book "indu matam enge pokiratu?" இந்து மதம் எங்கே போகிறது? by Agnihotram Ramanuja Thathachariar.

All these show, as clearly as possible, that even 2 or 3 generations ago the brahmins were not in favour of any reforms on the various aspects of the hindu customs as laid down in the dharmaśāstras. It is therefore my considered view that we as brahmin community, belonging to the brahmin caste by birth, cannot disown the role played by brahmins throughout history, for originating, nurturing and trying to perpetuate and resist progressive measures to the caste system, caste inequities and hence indirectly to the caste intolerance and atrocities that happened in the past or are happening now, even if we of the last one or two generations no longer are parties to any of the atrocities; but, in the area of discrimination, I will not agree that all of the brahmin community have grown out of such prejudices completely, some remain yet to change their pov. Perhaps if these discriminations and atrocities subside and die out eventually, we can then feel a sense of relief. For that to happen, it will be necessary for us to change ouselves at the individual's level first, then as family units and then as a community, in that order, from the trappings of the feeling of brahmin superiority and separateness (exclusivity).

The attempt to justify our stand as a community (not as individuals), of our innocence and non-culpability because other NBs indulge in caste discrimination and atrocities, while we are no longer parties to these, is - to me - like a self-proclaimed, reformed thief (in this case, the brahmin community as a whole) trying to justify himself for a past theft, because there are others still stealing. Though we as individuals may be completely blameless, as a community we cannot claim that we have no blame attached or that we have no role to play in rooting out this evil practice.