What castes are the converts?

[KRS]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Friends,

It is becoming more and more clear that a large number of folks from other religions are coming in to our religion. There are very educated (in our religion) folks such as Sri Elst, Sri Frawley, Sri Morales (all western) who got initiations to Hinduism (Sri Morales even recently was apponted the Acharya at the Nebraska Hindu Temple, located in Omaha).

And then we hear about a recent story where a young couple in TN, one muslim and one christian, eloped and got married according to Hindu rituals. Please refer:http://newspostindia.com/report-45759

Of course, in this other Forum, when I mentioned that this is one of the reasons we need to keep our tradition of being tolerant, I was attacked. By a person, who said that 'they are welcoming and rejoicing that the converts have come Home (meaning Hinduism)' and made other remarks that are quite silly (of course, I am warning our Forumites to not to venture out in the midday sun in India, lest your mind gets scrambled like this. Especially not when the Englishmen are out. He also thinks that I am a moon).

Anyways, it just occurred to me that these folks who are railing against other religions and posting the stories of welcoming other folks in to 'our fold', also believe in the caste by birth theory.

So, my honest question to our friends here: What castes these folks belong to? Some, because they have academic Ph.D's attached to them, would be Brahmins? Some, like the hapless couple mentioned in the elopement story (I say hapless, because unfortunately they are going to come acroos a whole lot of hardship in their lives), will become Sudhras? Or may be Vaishyas?

Sri Morales defines a Hindu not by birth, family, country, but belief in the Vedas as the authority (he includes both the Strutis and Smritis as well as the Puranas and Itihasas as 'Vedas').

So, what gives?

How does one determine?

Pranams,
KRS

 

[appaiah]

Dear Sri KRS

More often than not, the deciding factors are the colour of the skin and the colour of the currency. This may seem too offending, though the facts are bitter.

Sri happyhindu's following words make one laugh.

How many wannabe kshatriyas can hold a sword properly (ridiculous to think abt this in present times :madgrin: - uncool gun riders any1? )

Thanks for the "lateral" thinking.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

The only people who have been doing conversion on a large scale are the ISKCON people. There the converts are all considered Brahmins. The organization which issues large number of conversion certificates and also conducts inter caste and inter religious marriages is Arya Samaj. They do not believe in the caste system.

Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami and his Saiva Siddhanta Church has done a number of conversions. They also do not believe in the caste system.

I do not know about the people who have academic Ph.D's attached to them. They come out with their own interpretations and agendas. Not that others do not have agendas. But these individuals are in it for Fame and power.

There is no historical evidence of conversion of Buddhista/Jainas to Hinduism. There have been stray cases. The most famous case is that of Saint Thirunavukkarasar.

There are many who believe that conversion is not possible at all. This view prevailed for a long period of time.

The most popular method of winning over adherents is not to insist of any conversion at all. I know a number of westerners who practice Hinduism. ( the practice of some of them would equal that of any orthodox Brahmin). But they have not undergone any conversion.

 

[malgova.mango]

Dear Happyhindu or HH sir,

The Mahabharata - considered as 5th Veda - So if any one doesn't know what the 4 vedas talk about, one can readily read this 5th Veda to gain Knowledge and understand the fundamental values of our culture, it is available in most of the Indian languages and also in English.

In that epic, there is a story about a king called Chandrahasan - This vividly describes the jati system in the days of yore in the Dravida Desam. He was born a Kshatriya , but bought up in a Iyengar brahmin family, through his devotion to Sri Hari he overcomes all odds and tribulations he faces. Truly a moving story. During the kurukshetra war, another Pandian King oversees the catering industry for the war people.

The import is no body creates are invents Jati, Our native culture recognized the facts of life and used it to develop human potentialites rather than playing the game of democratic politics. If you observe in countries where the neo religions couldn't establish one can discern the jati system prevalent in that places. Japan is one such country. We can also discern in some african,arabian and european countries the system of monarchies, puritans, etc.... this are left-over of the natural practices of native culture. Even Parsis are part of our vedic culture. They are unfortunately driven out and found refuge in India due to neo religions conversional activities. Neo religions gave a hell of a time for the native Jewish culture the suffering there people went through is History. Somehow people couldn't able to correlate the history. Unfortunately the modern historians want to project their own views rather unearthing the existing facts.

In India the politics of democracy played its part in bringing devastation to our native culture. The fine points are forgotten .....

I heard a small population of native cultures of Europe survived the on-slaught of this neo religion and they are seeking now, our help for protection of what's left as they can identify their native culture with ours.

Just sharing a few thoughts...

Regards
Malgova.mango

 

[appaiah]

Dear Sri Malgoa Mango,

You had stated:

In that epic, there is a story about a king called Chandrahasan - This vividly describes the jati system in the days of yore in the Dravida Desam. He was born a Kshatriya , but bought up in a Iyengar brahmin family, through his devotion to Sri Hari he overcomes all odds and tribulations he faces. Truly a moving story. During the kurukshetra war, another Pandian King oversees the catering industry for the war people.

I have the following doubts:

1. Was there Iyengar and Iyer during the Mahabharata days itself? Brahma, Kshatriya, Vysya, Sudra Possible. Iyer- Iyengar?

2. Was there Pandian King as well those days?

Regards

Appaiah

 

[Saab]

Dear Appaiahji,

Here are the answers to your questions:

1. Before Ramanuja Acharya there was only Smartha sampradhaayam. Ramanuja himself was a Vadama Brahmin.

http://www.salagram.net/parishad6.htm

In other words, there were no Iyengars before his time as he was the initiator of that sect with Vishnu as the Supreme Deity. Contrary to the popular belief the Smarthas do not hold Siva (alone) as the Supreme Deity though many in the community might hold such a view. There are still many naamakkara Iyers in the Thirunelveli area.

2. Yes, there was Pandya kingdom during Mahabharatha time and the Pandya king sided with the Pandavas. So says Mahabharatha. In fact Pandya desam was there even during Ramayana time that is about 175000 years ago!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandya_Kingdom

By the way, in a book called 'Architecture and Art of Southern India' by Geroge Mitchell that I have in my possession says that a set of recently discovered murals inside the tower of the principal gopura of the Tirupudaimarudur temple the entire Ramayana has been painted! Also painted was the legend of Sambandar converting the Pandya king!

I hope to visit this temple one day.

Regards,
Saab

 

[appaiah]

Dear Sri Saab ji

Thanks for the good links.

The wikipedia article on Pandya Kingdom makes an interesting readig. I had already expressed my views on the reliability of wiki articles as they can be edited by anyone. However, there are many references given therein, therefore if an opportunity comes, one can get to those references and study in depth and arrive at an informed surmisal.

As to Iyer and Iyengar, my view was also that the division would have come about after the propounding of visishtadvaita (Sri Ramanujar was the primary proponent). The dvaita (Sri Madhwacharyar) followers are madhwas, the advaita (Sri Adi Sankara) followers are smarthas/iyers and the visishtadvaita (Sri Ramanujar) followers are iyengars. During the 16th century, in order to counter the Visishtadvata, Sri Appayya Dikshitar gave a sub-theory of Shiva-advaita. The Gurukkals and the Dikshitars donot exactly follow advaita and therefore refer to themselves as the Shaivites or Adisaivars. I had made the query so that Sri Malgoa Mango would get to his source and let us know as to whether the mention of iyengar was there or vaishnavite was there in the original version.

Regards

Appaiah

 

[malgova.mango]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Dear Sri Appaiah & Sri HH![/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Yes , young Chandrahasan took refuge in an Iyengar family, that's how I heard in the discourse by “Variyar Swamigal” I've not read the source book, so if it is wrong, please correct me.[/FONT]

Yes - Pandyan king exists as I stated, Even the Alli rajyam refered in Mahabharata- refers to the maternal lineage of practice found in Kerala .


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]For me an Iyengar is a one who sees “Vishnu” only as Parathvam, many puranam confirms that this line of thinking exists since time immemorial and I'm not puzzled about that. [/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Sri HH!, CD or cassette on this discourse is availabe in TN . If you are somewhere, please try with Saravana Bhavan outlet, they may get one for you. [/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Also consider...[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]People get their name from the land they belong... So you are a dravidan, regardless of your jathi if you born in dravida nadu. So I'm a brahmin, a chozian, a dravidan.... no problem. If I'move to US also I'm a dravidan living in US. If a group of Dravidan moves to some other country the country name doesn;t change to Dravidan country..[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The civilisation exist in Dravida desam a atleast from the period of Ramayana ......... [/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Thiruvalluvar, Auvaiyar, Kambar and many other saint poets are not a product of instant culture, It is many 1000's of years life-time of tapas by the tamil people to have them.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]To me Aryan is not someterm opposite to dravidan-- this is how the modern historian view that's different. Aryan in sanskrit means – elders- not in term of age but for the discipline and the magnanomity of their heart. So many Dravidians are Aryans.... for you to chew about.[/FONT]


[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Regards[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]malgova.mango[/FONT]

Dear Sri Malgoa Mango,

You had stated:



I have the following doubts:

1. Was there Iyengar and Iyer during the Mahabharata days itself? Brahma, Kshatriya, Vysya, Sudra Possible. Iyer- Iyengar?

2. Was there Pandian King as well those days?

Regards

Appaiah

 

[Brahmanyan]

What Castes are the Converts?

Dear Sri KRS.,

At the outset I wish to admit that I do not understand the purport of this question. As your learned self very well know that our Dharma do not believe in Conversions. And to my knowledge there is no samskara in our Scriptures for converting some one to our Dharma. In fact when an European approached HH Sri Chandrasekhara Bharathi Swamigal of Sringeri to get converted to "Hinduism", the Maha Sannidanam dissuaded him from the same and asked him to continue to be a good Christian and not to waste his gifts on airy speculations as to relative value of various religions and apply his God given gifts on the stable background of his God-chosen faith, Christianity. According to Maha Sannidhanam the word "Hinduism is the name which has now been given to our system, but its real name has always been Sanatana Dharma or the eternal law. It does not date from a particular point of time or begin from a particular founder. Being eternal it is also universal. It knows no territorial jurisdiction. All beings born and to be born belong to it".(Ref. "Dialogues with The Guru").


Coming to the question of Caste of the "converts", it is my personal view that he or she can attach themselves to any Caste of their choice and call themselves by the caste name accordingly ! HH Acharya Sri AC Bhaktivedandtha Swami Prabhupada founder of ISKCON initiated tens and thousands of followers to his Goudiya Vaishnavism, gave them new names and even performed Upanayanam to study our Scriptures. Arya Samaj founded by Swami Dhayananda Saraswathi, introduced the "Sudhi" movement to reconvert people who had gone to other faiths and reconverted "Hindus" were called "Arya Samajists". Similarly Brhmo Samaj of Raja Ram Mohan Roy (which is almost defunct at present) resorted to convertion and called the converts as "Brahmos". It is also true that nowadays many of the inter religious/ Caste Marriages are performed under the Arya Samaj traditions for the sake of getting legal and religious authenticity. Being mostly a Patriarchal Society we follow the Caste of the father in case of inter caste marriages among Hindus in our Country. Otherwise if it is a Matriarchal Society as found mostly in Kerala and to some extent in Meghalaya, the name of the Mother's Caste is taken for the family.


Pranams and Regards,
Brahmanyan.

 

[Brahmanyan]

Dear Sri Saab.,

I wish to make a factual correction to your statement that "before Ramanuja Acharya there was only Smartha Sampradhaayam". But the fact is "Sri Vaishnavam" has a long list of Guru Parampara starting from "Lord Vishnu to Sri-Devi to Visvaksena to Satgopa to Nathamuni to Pundarikaksha to Rama Mitra to Yamunacharya to Parankusha and then to Sri Ramanuja Acharya. Of course it was Sri Ramanujacharya ( CE:1017-1137) who revived and systematized Visishtadhvaitha Philosophy by writing Sri Bhashyams. There were also "Alwars" who propagated Sri Vaishnavam very much before Sri Ramanujacharya in Tamil speaking world.

There are "Naamakkara Smarthas" in Coimbatore district (Singanallur) and Tirunellai village in Palghat, native place of Sri TN Seshan. who adorn themselves with "Srichoornam".

Regards,
Brahmanyan.

 

[Saab]

Dear Sri Brahmanyan,

You are right that Sri Vaishnavam was in vogue long before Ramanuja. But Iyengars are not only Vaishnavites but also Visishtaathwaithins. Therefore it is right to say that there were no Iyengars before Ramanuja.

Regards,

 

[appaiah]

Dear Sri Brahmanyan

Since I was the one who raised the question as to whether there was Iyengars during Mahabharata days to Sri Malgova Mango, I feel bound by duty to answer your post on the subject.

As earlier stated by me, dvaita followers are madhwas and they are vaishnavaites. As stated by you the Alwars are vaishnavites. The followers of vishistadvaita are vaishnavites. But, the smarthas following advaita are not necessarily the worshippers of shiva alone, they do worship vishnu as well. This is because Sri Bhagavat Pada Adi Shankara brought about the unity of the six religions namely, Ganapathyam, Shaivam, Saktham, Vaishnavam, Kaumaram and Sauram and formed the Sanatana Dharma as what it is to-day. In fact, Bhagavat Pada's tenets on Advaita show us the path to realise the Brahman within and therefore the need for idol worship would not rise. Yet in order to bring the worshippers of various Devatas under one banner, He developed the present system of worship of various deities together as otherwise the worshipper of one deity was not prepared to worship the other. He managed to bring all of them together to worshippers of all the above six disciplines together. Therefore the smarthas wearing sri choornam is within the proponance of Sri Adi Shankara. More interestingly, there is an old Sri Krishna Temple in Kalady near the place where his mother's place of worship is located. And it is believed that His forefathers worshipped there. The history is that His parents were blessed by Tiruchur Shivan to get Him as the child.

Thus my query as to whether iyengar, meaning the vishistadvaitins, were there during the Mahabharata days. During those days it could only have been vaishnavites and not vishistadvaitins, the present day iyengars.

In fact the Naidus and Chettiars are known vaishnavites even till date.

Regards

Appaiah

 

[appaiah]

Dear Sri Saab

I enjoy the coincidence. Even as I had been writing the post, you had made your post and we had not only been thinking alike but also at the same time.

Regards

Appaiah

 

[Brahmanyan]

Dear Sri Appaiah and Sri Saab,

I fully agree with your clarifications. I took only one point from Sri Saab's post for factual correction, otherwise I am in agreement with the post. It is nice to see we have a healthy discussion on this tread.

Regards,
Brahmanyan.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Brahmanyan Ji,

I had an ulterior motive in starting this thread. As it is, you are the first person, who caught me, but I must thank all other contributors, especially Sri Appiah Ji, who have addressed the issues periperal to my initial motive.

Some of the most ardent conservatives in our religion now quote the westerners such as Sri Gautier, Sri Morales, Sri Elst etc., who all proclaim to be Hindus. They have 'converted'. Our thought leaders in our religion who write their opinions all over the place, in addition to 'cut and paste' quote them extensively about the decline of our community, etc. And a lot of these folks, though scholors, in my opinion, bring their own Hindu outlook based on anti-Hindu outlook practiced by their former religions. For example, Dr. Elst in a famous article that was circulated widely a few years ago chastised the 'nuevo Hinduism' as propunded by Saint Ramakrishna and negatively commented on His universal teachings about all religions have the same goal. Generally, these folks see our creed which says that 'all paths lead to the same source' as saying that 'all religions are equal' and argue that this tenet has led to our decline as the Hindu civilization.

This is the point that I do not agree with. Religion is not only based on philosophy, but also on the fabrix of the socio-xultural identity of a society. This is why even Maha Periaval, who has addressed the conversion issue had said that it is an abomination for one to change one's birth religion.

We as Brahmins, do not accept our own brethren within our religion when they attempt to do certain things that we used to do, but would gladly look up at these westerners who get initiated in to our religion as Brahmins!

This is why I raised this issue. There are a whole lot of complex issues raised by these 'conversions'!

Pranams,
KRS

Dear Sri KRS.,

At the outset I wish to admit that I do not understand the purport of this question. As your learned self very well know that our Dharma do not believe in Conversions. And to my knowledge there is no samskara in our Scriptures for converting some one to our Dharma. In fact when an European approached HH Sri Chandrasekhara Bharathi Swamigal of Sringeri to get converted to "Hinduism", the Maha Sannidanam dissuaded him from the same and asked him to continue to be a good Christian and not to waste his gifts on airy speculations as to relative value of various religions and apply his God given gifts on the stable background of his God-chosen faith, Christianity. According to Maha Sannidhanam the word "Hinduism is the name which has now been given to our system, but its real name has always been Sanatana Dharma or the eternal law. It does not date from a particular point of time or begin from a particular founder. Being eternal it is also universal. It knows no territorial jurisdiction. All beings born and to be born belong to it".(Ref. "Dialogues with The Guru").


Coming to the question of Caste of the "converts", it is my personal view that he or she can attach themselves to any Caste of their choice and call themselves by the caste name accordingly ! HH Acharya Sri AC Bhaktivedandtha Swami Prabhupada founder of ISKCON initiated tens and thousands of followers to his Goudiya Vaishnavism, gave them new names and even performed Upanayanam to study our Scriptures. Arya Samaj founded by Swami Dhayananda Saraswathi, introduced the "Sudhi" movement to reconvert people who had gone to other faiths and reconverted "Hindus" were called "Arya Samajists". Similarly Brhmo Samaj of Raja Ram Mohan Roy (which is almost defunct at present) resorted to convertion and called the converts as "Brahmos". It is also true that nowadays many of the inter religious/ Caste Marriages are performed under the Arya Samaj traditions for the sake of getting legal and religious authenticity. Being mostly a Patriarchal Society we follow the Caste of the father in case of inter caste marriages among Hindus in our Country. Otherwise if it is a Matriarchal Society as found mostly in Kerala and to some extent in Meghalaya, the name of the Mother's Caste is taken for the family.


Pranams and Regards,
Brahmanyan.

 

[malgova.mango]

Dear Sir Appaiah!

Can I say Hindus don't worship idols, we worship only Gods, we invoke the "GOD" in idols and relate to "HIM" and worship only "HIM" and definetly not the IDOL.

Regards

 

[appaiah]

Dear Sri Malgova Mango. Yes. I also say so.

Kallaaik kaNdAl kal
silaiyenak kaNdAl silai
KadavuLAyk kaNdAl kadavuL

We can elevate ourselves to see God in these three stages one by one, that is the manner in which we move from Bhakti Marga to Gnana Marga.

the first stage is uruvam
the next stage is aruvuruvam
the next stage is aruvam

As Tirumoolar says uLLam koyilAga veNDum.

PoosalAr NAyanAr constructed a temple for Shiva and conducted kumbabhishekam in his mind itself. It should be possible for a true bhakta.

Regards

 

[malgova.mango]

Dear Sri Appaiah!

Thanks for the reply, When I read your post as quoted below, I was not comfortable, ....Anyway I'm clear of your stand on it now.

Can I say, Aruvam and Ooruvam are "HIM" only. So does it matter if one follows aruvam or oruvam?

Thinking about it, what is aruvam - formless - I couldn't think of anything formless, ok things may be devoid of physical form , but everythought is a subtle form. (eg) take emotions - like shyness, anger, desire etc... all have a form, not at physical but subtle level. So is there anything formless really?

Just wondering...........

Regards,
malgova.mango

Dear Sri Brahmanyan

Since I was the one ......................

In fact, Bhagavat Pada's tenets on Advaita show us the path to realise the Brahman within and therefore the need for idol worship would not rise.

Regards

Appaiah

 

[appaiah]

Dear Sri Malgova Mango

Sages have advised us to realise the Brahman within. The concept is Aham Brahmasi. In our nitya anushtanam (sandhyavandanam) we chant "asAvAdityO Brahma Brahmaiva Ahamasmi" and at this time we shall assume that Sri Surya Bhagavan is Brahma Swaroopi and we ourselves are also Brahma Swaroopi. When we practice this dhyanam regularly and reach a level where we realise Brahman within our own being, where is the need for visualising the Brahman in any form. This is what I referred to.

Bhagavan Ramana asks us to do the Atma vicharanai to reach this level. Even the oft repeated call of "Know thyself" by Socrates is in a way leads to this, one could say.

Regards

Appaiah

 

[malgova.mango]

Dear Sri Appaiah!

Thanks for your patient reply!

"Swayam Jyothi Avan ParaN Jyothi Avan
Siva Sankaranai Paninthaduvoom , Pugazh Paduvoom Dhiname
Avan Pugazh paduvoom Dhiname..."


Regards

 

[malgova.mango]

Dear Readers!

Can anyone answer my question, Is there any possibility for formless entity?

Regards

 

[appaiah]

Dear Sri Malgova Mango,

What is Chidambara Rahasyam?

What is Akaasam? Where is it? Have you seen it?

Is the sky that you see the akaasam?

Regards

Appaiah

 

[appaiah]

Dear Sri Malgova Mango,

What is the form of water?

Does water have form? Have you seen its form? If you have, has that form been permanent?

Regards

Appaiah

 

[appaiah]

Dear Sri Malgova Mango,

What is the form of Fire?

Whatever you see as its form, is it permanent?

If its form changes in fractions of a second to another form, then can we call it as form?

Is fire itself permanent?

Regards

Appaiah

 

[appaiah]

Dear Sri Malgova Mango,

What is the form of wind? Air? Any gaseous substance?

If it has the shape of its container, is the shape its own or its container?

Regards

Appaiah