what is Tamil Brahmin "CULTURE"?

[C RAVI]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

.....(Cmon not everyone gets such a comprehensive test for free, its a lottery offer, consider it your lucky day).

It is up to me to decide what can be the great offer for me that would make my day a lucky day.

 

[palindrome]

It is up to me to decide what can be the great offer for me that would make my day a lucky day.

So you accept or not? Well, don't you think it will be nice to discuss some of those results wrt your assumption on "Brahmin exclusivity" with regard to genes in practices,habits, behavior, thinking, learning, inclinations, habit etc..etc. patterns.

 

[sarang]

Don't try to answer every post filled with nonsense. The internet has provided some to copy/paste extensively from dubious and unknown sources. There is a barn full of self generated slime as backup when net is down.

If you read the first and last lines, that is enough to evaluate the junk content.

YES!! And say that he/she is ashamed by the stupidity of a fellow member who was wrongly assumed as a learned member. LOL!!

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri கால பைரவன் Ji, Sir,

We are an accomplished community and a proud community. We have achieved a lot despite the hurdles put before us after independence.

I do not agree with palindrome on every issue - we have our differences in opinions.

But, I also used to be a Physicist. So, when science like genetics is interpreted wrongly to prove a point, I speak against it. I don't fault palindrome at all in trying to establish this. We should encourage in knowing the truth, not label someone just because she is speaking the truth on this.

I think Sri Ravi Ji's interpretation of what Basal Genetics is wrong. He could have used a lot of different paradigms (Karma etc.) to prove his thesis, because they are all belief based. I think he unfortunately chose Science, without really understanding it.

We don't need such tall stories to be proud of our community. This is what I object to.

Regards,
KRS

The same genetic theory and mtDNA studies have been quoted before right in this forum to justify dravidianist racial hatemongering against brahmins. I wonder why no one expressed any indignation then?!

It has become a feature nowadays to gang up against anyone who has something positive to write about brahmins or brahmin culture. It is quite sad!

 

[sangom]

I have hardly any knowledge about genetics nor am I competent to define "culture" scientifically. But it looks to me that 'culture' has two distinct facets — one, the external - from which we may easily derive "Indians get Americanized in the US, Telugus get Tamilized in TN, Tamilians get Bollywoodized in Mumbai etc.", as Shri Biswa says; two, a more deeply embedded collection of traits, inclinations, tendencies etc., which may not be apparent in the externalized cultural behaviour. I will say that this deep-seated culture may be destroyed sometimes by the outwardly culture which may be antithetic to it. And then we may just consider the outwardly 'culture' as everything.

This is just my pov and I will like others to comment on this.

 

[palindrome]

So, when science like genetics is interpreted wrongly to prove a point, I speak against it. I don't fault palindrome at all in trying to establish this.

I think Sri Ravi Ji's interpretation of what Basal Genetics is wrong. He could have used a lot of different paradigms (Karma etc.) to prove his thesis, because they are all belief based. I think he unfortunately chose Science, without really understanding it.

Right sir. I was wondering why he chose basal lineage and left off evolutionary lineage. You see, it wud have taken us back to the African Ape. Just in case one is wondering what it means, this can help -- Recent African Ancestry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

Long back, i was into this habit of checking how much similarity my genome has with various animals, like mus musculus, bos taurus, etc and viola i find the gorilla is my ancestor (my sequence was pretty close to a sequence from one Pan troglodytes (chimpanzee) also).

 

[C RAVI]

I have hardly any knowledge about genetics nor am I competent to define "culture" scientifically. But it looks to me that 'culture' has two distinct facets — one, the external - from which we may easily derive "Indians get Americanized in the US, Telugus get Tamilized in TN, Tamilians get Bollywoodized in Mumbai etc.", as Shri Biswa says; two, a more deeply embedded collection of traits, inclinations, tendencies etc., which may not be apparent in the externalized cultural behaviour. I will say that this deep-seated culture may be destroyed sometimes by the outwardly culture which may be antithetic to it. And then we may just consider the outwardly 'culture' as everything.

This is just my pov and I will like others to comment on this.

Exactly Sir!!!

I hold the typical view. And I was not given a chance to elaborate on my genetic reference. And I chose to ignore further discussion on this with the interested party when a couple of members already started pitying about me, stating the wiki link that I posted is bogus, at the drop of a hat! LOL!!

 

[palindrome]

Exactly Sir!!!

I hold the typical view. And I was not given a chance to elaborate on my genetic reference. And I chose to ignore further discussion on this with the interested party when a couple of members already started pitying about me, stating the wiki link that I posted is bogus, at the drop of a hat! LOL!!

Oh no, i did not say your wiki link is bogus. See this post: http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/general-discussions/12246-what-tamil-brahmin-culture-8.html#post190574

And am not pitying you either.

So why not elaborate your genetic reference here? Cmon Ravi why try escapism?

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri C. Ravi Ji,

I did not make such an accusation.

If I am wrong on the science, please correct me. And, by the way, I am not beyond admitting I am wrong, if contrary facts are presented. Thanks.

Regards,
KRS

Exactly Sir!!!

I hold the typical view. And I was not given a chance to elaborate on my genetic reference. And I chose to ignore further discussion on this with the interested party when a couple of members already started pitying about me, stating the wiki link that I posted is bogus, at the drop of a hat! LOL!!

 

[C RAVI]

Oh no, i did not say your wiki link is bogus. See this post: http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/general-discussions/12246-what-tamil-brahmin-culture-8.html#post190574

And am not pitying you either.

So why not elaborate your genetic reference here? Cmon Ravi why try escapism?

Did I say it was you??

You or any one has the right to say that, I resort to escapism or I am an idiot or I am a coward etc..etc.. as imaginations go wild!! I don't care.

I have to decide if its worth discussing further here, in this forum, amidst highly tactical members and some/many of the agitated members.

 

[palindrome]

Did I say it was you??

You or any one has the right to say that, I resort to escapism or I am an idiot or I am a coward etc..etc.. as imaginations go wild!! I don't care.

I have to decide if its worth discussing further here, in this forum, amidst highly tactical members and some/many of the agitated members.

Yes of course it may not be worth discussing. For whatever reasons you assume.

You need not explain your theory but can let us know what is the the genetic reference you wanted to give (just mentioning the scientific term will do).

 

[sarang]

Science research: three problems that point to a communications crisis

A big caution; one has to be careful and not to take as gospel truth what is published either in wiki or elsewhere; Excerpts from an article in the Guardian. Link at the end. My credentials: I have published in international and indian journals and conferences.

Science research: three problems: Retraction rates, the decline effect, politics of prestige

Retraction:

Scholarly publishing regularly gives the highest status to research that is most likely to be wrong. This system determines the trajectory of a scientific career and the longer we stick with it, the more likely it will deteriorate.

Retraction is one possible response to discovering that something is wrong with a published scientific article. When it works well, journals publish a statement identifying the reason for the retraction.
Retraction rates have increased tenfold in the past decade after many years of stability. According to a recent paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, two-thirds of all retractions follow from scientific misconduct: fraud, duplicate publication and plagiarism.
More disturbing is the finding that the most prestigious journals have the highest rates of retraction, and that fraud and misconduct are greater sources of retraction in these journals than in less prestigious ones.
Among articles that are not retracted, there is evidence that the most visible journals publish less reliable (in other words, not replicable) research results than lower ranking journals. This may be due to a preference among prestigious journals for results that have more spectacular or novel findings.

The decline effect; replicability

One cornerstone of the quality control system in science is replicability – research results should be so carefully described that they can be obtained by others who follow the same procedure. Yet journals generally are not interested in publishing mere replications, giving this particular quality control measure somewhat low status, independent of how important it is, for example in studying potential new medicines.
When studies are reproduced, the resulting evidence is often weaker than in the original study. Brembs and Munafò review research leading them to claim that "the strength of evidence for a particular finding often declines over time." The truth wears off.

The politics of prestige: Publish or perish

[FONT=&quot]Publishingin journals with high impact factors feeds job offers, grants, awards, andpromotions. A high impact factor also enhances the popularity – andprofitability – of a journal, and journal editors and publishers work hard toincrease them, primarily by trying to publish what they believe will be themost important papers.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]However, impact factor canalso be illegitimately manipulated. For example, the actual calculation ofimpact factor involves dividing the total number of citations in recent years bythe number of articles published in the journal in the same period. But what isan article? Do editorials count? What about reviews, replies or comments?

[/FONT]Science research: three problems that point to a communications crisis | Higher Education Network | Guardian Professional
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

 

[palindrome]

A big caution; one has to be careful and not to take as gospel truth what is published either in wiki or elsewhere; Excerpts from an article in the Guardian. Link at the end. My credentials: I have published in international and indian journals and conferences.

Science research: three problems: Retraction rates, the decline effect, politics of prestige

Retraction:

Scholarly publishing regularly gives the highest status to research that is most likely to be wrong. This system determines the trajectory of a scientific career and the longer we stick with it, the more likely it will deteriorate.

Retraction is one possible response to discovering that something is wrong with a published scientific article. When it works well, journals publish a statement identifying the reason for the retraction.
Retraction rates have increased tenfold in the past decade after many years of stability. According to a recent paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, two-thirds of all retractions follow from scientific misconduct: fraud, duplicate publication and plagiarism.
More disturbing is the finding that the most prestigious journals have the highest rates of retraction, and that fraud and misconduct are greater sources of retraction in these journals than in less prestigious ones.
Among articles that are not retracted, there is evidence that the most visible journals publish less reliable (in other words, not replicable) research results than lower ranking journals. This may be due to a preference among prestigious journals for results that have more spectacular or novel findings.

The decline effect; replicability

One cornerstone of the quality control system in science is replicability – research results should be so carefully described that they can be obtained by others who follow the same procedure. Yet journals generally are not interested in publishing mere replications, giving this particular quality control measure somewhat low status, independent of how important it is, for example in studying potential new medicines.
When studies are reproduced, the resulting evidence is often weaker than in the original study. Brembs and Munafò review research leading them to claim that "the strength of evidence for a particular finding often declines over time." The truth wears off.

The politics of prestige: Publish or perish

Publishingin journals with high impact factors feeds job offers, grants, awards, andpromotions. A high impact factor also enhances the popularity – andprofitability – of a journal, and journal editors and publishers work hard toincrease them, primarily by trying to publish what they believe will be themost important papers.
However, impact factor canalso be illegitimately manipulated. For example, the actual calculation ofimpact factor involves dividing the total number of citations in recent years bythe number of articles published in the journal in the same period. But what isan article? Do editorials count? What about reviews, replies or comments?

Science research: three problems that point to a communications crisis | Higher Education Network | Guardian Professional

How come people who distrust scientific research claim to have sattvik genes, claim to have "brahmin exclusivity" with genes determining behavioral, thinking, learning, inclinations, habit etc..etc. patterns). :flypig:

 

[sarang]

You must ask this question to Rice , the author of this report. He has given references for his readings. As usual, you jump - who has said distrust all scientific research. The paper concludes that if the problems discussed are not addressed, scientific communication will lose its credibility. The paper is simple and not verbose as some of the cut and paste posts here.

Whether you like it or not, many brahmins have a very long lineage, so have other varnas and jatis. It is upto the individual sarma or varma or sinha or das to feel proud or depressed. First and second issues are different.

In the recent discussion on 'brahmins responsible for downfall of budhism', two papers from the bibliography have referred to the same source, almost copied verbatim, but draw 180 degree out of phase conclusions; one says brahmins eliminated bhdhists physically; the other says, it is wrong to conclude brahmins eliminated budhists because they won in debates. I included this in my post, edited it out as not relevant then.

I repeat, however mush you shout, brahmins are brahmins and have a strong benevolent tradition and culture and way if life.

How come people who distrust scientific research claim to have sattvik genes, claim to have "brahmin exclusivity" with genes determining behavioral, thinking, learning, inclinations, habit etc..etc. patterns). :flypig:

 

[prasad1]

I have hardly any knowledge about genetics nor am I competent to define "culture" scientifically. But it looks to me that 'culture' has two distinct facets — one, the external - from which we may easily derive "Indians get Americanized in the US, Telugus get Tamilized in TN, Tamilians get Bollywoodized in Mumbai etc.", as Shri Biswa says; two, a more deeply embedded collection of traits, inclinations, tendencies etc., which may not be apparent in the externalized cultural behaviour. I will say that this deep-seated culture may be destroyed sometimes by the outwardly culture which may be antithetic to it. And then we may just consider the outwardly 'culture' as everything.

This is just my pov and I will like others to comment on this.

Sir,
Please read my post#99.

 

[prasad1]

A big caution; one has to be careful and not to take as gospel truth what is published either in wiki or elsewhere; Excerpts from an article in the Guardian. Link at the end. My credentials: I have published in international and indian journals and conferences.

Science research: three problems: Retraction rates, the decline effect, politics of prestige

Retraction:

Scholarly publishing regularly gives the highest status to research that is most likely to be wrong. This system determines the trajectory of a scientific career and the longer we stick with it, the more likely it will deteriorate.

Retraction is one possible response to discovering that something is wrong with a published scientific article. When it works well, journals publish a statement identifying the reason for the retraction.
Retraction rates have increased tenfold in the past decade after many years of stability. According to a recent paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, two-thirds of all retractions follow from scientific misconduct: fraud, duplicate publication and plagiarism.
More disturbing is the finding that the most prestigious journals have the highest rates of retraction, and that fraud and misconduct are greater sources of retraction in these journals than in less prestigious ones.
Among articles that are not retracted, there is evidence that the most visible journals publish less reliable (in other words, not replicable) research results than lower ranking journals. This may be due to a preference among prestigious journals for results that have more spectacular or novel findings.

The decline effect; replicability

One cornerstone of the quality control system in science is replicability – research results should be so carefully described that they can be obtained by others who follow the same procedure. Yet journals generally are not interested in publishing mere replications, giving this particular quality control measure somewhat low status, independent of how important it is, for example in studying potential new medicines.
When studies are reproduced, the resulting evidence is often weaker than in the original study. Brembs and Munafò review research leading them to claim that "the strength of evidence for a particular finding often declines over time." The truth wears off.

The politics of prestige: Publish or perish

Publishingin journals with high impact factors feeds job offers, grants, awards, andpromotions. A high impact factor also enhances the popularity – andprofitability – of a journal, and journal editors and publishers work hard toincrease them, primarily by trying to publish what they believe will be themost important papers.
However, impact factor canalso be illegitimately manipulated. For example, the actual calculation ofimpact factor involves dividing the total number of citations in recent years bythe number of articles published in the journal in the same period. But what isan article? Do editorials count? What about reviews, replies or comments?

Science research: three problems that point to a communications crisis | Higher Education Network | Guardian Professional

Mr. Sarang,
When ever someone quotes someone else's finding, you jump up and down shouting "CUT AND PASTE", but now you are doing the same thing. How come you could not come with your original (virgin) thinking?

 

[palindrome]

You must ask this question to Rice , the author of this report. He has given references for his readings. As usual, you jump - who has said distrust all scientific research. The paper concludes that if the problems discussed are not addressed, scientific communication will lose its credibility. The paper is simple and not verbose as some of the cut and paste posts here.

Whether you like it or not, many brahmins have a very long lineage, so have other varnas and jatis. It is upto the individual sarma or varma or sinha or das to feel proud or depressed. First and second issues are different.

In the recent discussion on 'brahmins responsible for downfall of budhism', two papers from the bibliography have referred to the same source, almost copied verbatim, but draw 180 degree out of phase conclusions; one says brahmins eliminated bhdhists physically; the other says, it is wrong to conclude brahmins eliminated budhists because they won in debates. I included this in my post, edited it out as not relevant then.

I repeat, however mush you shout, brahmins are brahmins and have a strong benevolent tradition and culture and way if life.

Why bring in Rice ? You and your likes use science so selectively. When convenient, you claim brahmin exclusivity of genes. When inconvenient, you claim science can be doubted. Rest is usual crap.

If you want to claim lineage and whatever else with regard to exclusivity, claim heritage or such stuff. Don't pass it off on genetics. Your own lineage maybe derived from an adivasi, madiga, lambadi, santhal, bhil, and such like who are still very much around.

Whatever you shout, it is clear brahmins do not have a common origin. No point claiming benevolence for all of them. Go try telling former dalits in bihar that bhumihars are benevolent.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

Dear KRS,

Referring to your post # 104,

You have been in this forum much longer than I have and I think you know very well that this is not the first time genetic link to caste is discussed. The same genetic theory have been cited before to claim brahmin migration/invasion etc etc. It was not taboo then. So I find it amusing that members would jump on a single statement by Ravi. That is why I asked where was the indignation when brahmins were considered outsiders citing the same genetic theory.

We come to the same forum and follow the same posts and threads. If our observations differ, so be it. I don't think my observation is unreasonable.

 

[Iyyarooraan]

very euphemistic and comprehensive statements. it can apply to everybody with every viewpoint here.

good one for self analysis and self criticism. hope to see more of it here, particularly from 'traditional' folks... people are not abandoning practices for no reason whatsoever. even the most ardent of traditionalist, i bet, has given up, some of customs of his own dad.

i dont know if is futile to compel a blind to see, but i bet, if a blind could see, he certainly would. for sight is a gift, denied to the blind. no? or am i missing something here?

Others say, say by seeing your 'quirks', you are a Brahmin. But you say you are not one. That is you cannot see yourself. Are you not blind, at least selectively?

 

[C RAVI]

Yes of course it may not be worth discussing. For whatever reasons you assume.

My answer for why I mind not to respond to your query is in your own statement..

 

[kunjuppu]

Others say, say by seeing your 'quirks', you are a Brahmin. But you say you are not one. That is you cannot see yourself. Are you not blind, at least selectively?

iyya,

let me reproduce sangom's post from another thread here.. please read it..and btw i never said i am not a brahmin. no where. you find me one post.. all along my take is that changes are happening fast..and it is upto us to MANAGE the change to our benefit. the key word is MANAGE. because the changes are happening no matter what.

some sections of us have adapted and moved on. our tambram girls appear to have moved on. but there are pockets of folks who have their head in the ground, and that is not an issue. but it is their claim as guardian of 'culture' which is questioned. who are they to claim anything except they are also brahmins, like me. they are hypocrites, because they selectively pick and choose from today's world what they want, but abuse the others who might have taken different pickings, and are more open and honest about it.

it is all about hypocracy and arrogance. ..here is sangom's wonderful note..

So long as you or anyone else cannot get me a caste certificate stating that I do not belong to the Brahmin caste/ I belong to some other caste (preferably one of the Scheduled castes of Kerala, according to the Depressed Classes Act of 1937), it will be legal and ethical on my part to call myself as a brahmin, I suppose. But as a Brahmin, there is no clear-cut rule anywhere today about what belief system I should follow, what daily routine I must observe, what kind of jobs I am allowed to do or prevented from doing etc. It is because of this complete lack of strict community/caste codes and its adherence, that you - Shri Sarang can claim to be a Brahmin (or are you not, in reality?) and participate in this Forum; I am also an equal beneficiary, that's all.

That said, and precisely because of the very lax caste code of conduct, I or any one else for that matter, has the freedom to criticize our brahmin customs, beliefs, scriptures, etc. These are personal views and need not be taken as anything more. But people like yourself seem to have a highly fragile sort of belief only in following the traditions, customs, etc., as also in the preachings of the scriptures; it is because of such a very fragile belief that you feel threatened by someone else's personal opinions which question your customs, traditions and interpretation of scriptures etc. The disease therefore lies inside yourself. Please don't search elsewhere for its cause.

 

[palindrome]

Dear KRS,

Referring to your post # 104,

You have been in this forum much longer than I have and I think you know very well that this is not the first time genetic link to caste is discussed. The same genetic theory have been cited before to claim brahmin migration/invasion etc etc. It was not taboo then. So I find it amusing that members would jump on a single statement by Ravi. That is why I asked where was the indignation when brahmins were considered outsiders citing the same genetic theory.

We come to the same forum and follow the same posts and threads. If our observations differ, so be it. I don't think my observation is unreasonable.

Hi KB, you have not replied to this yet (well, first you came up with your hate-mongering theory there). Now in this post its migration/invasion.

So what's it with brahmin migration/invasion -- what connection does it have with Ravi's statement?

The single statement by Ravi is what majority of your likes assume anyways. Why palm off your pet notions on genetics ?

Seriosuly, what's that with certain folks making statements such as satvik genes, basal lineage wrt brahmin exclusivity with genes determining "behavioral, thinking, learning, inclinations, habit etc..etc. patterns".

Looks like some folks have great many assumptions; when these are broken they play the victim mentality. Or they claim it is brahmin-bashing. Such folks need to ask themselves why such assumptions. In what way is it going to help them?

 

[palindrome]

My answer for why I mind not to respond to your query is in your own statement..

Is it because you do not know the scientific term of your so-called "genetic reference" ?? Seriously Ravi, attitude is the reason why some are in the state they brought themselves in. Never hurts to admit one was incorrect about assumptions. Better than having people forming negative opinions on tabula rasa stuff here...even teens seem to know folks making tall statements on brahmin exclusivity of genes are kinda doing a :flypig: job. Please, hope you read this post by KRS sir.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Sangom Ji, Sir,

I do not understand this post, even though I have gone over it many times.

Can you give me some examples on 'traits, inclinations and tendencies' at least for our community that are unique?

Please tell me also what 'external culture' with examples.

I can then respond to your post properly.

Regards,
KRS

I have hardly any knowledge about genetics nor am I competent to define "culture" scientifically. But it looks to me that 'culture' has two distinct facets — one, the external - from which we may easily derive "Indians get Americanized in the US, Telugus get Tamilized in TN, Tamilians get Bollywoodized in Mumbai etc.", as Shri Biswa says; two, a more deeply embedded collection of traits, inclinations, tendencies etc., which may not be apparent in the externalized cultural behaviour. I will say that this deep-seated culture may be destroyed sometimes by the outwardly culture which may be antithetic to it. And then we may just consider the outwardly 'culture' as everything.

This is just my pov and I will like others to comment on this.

 

[C RAVI]

Is it because you do not know the scientific term of your so-called "genetic reference" ?? Seriously Ravi, attitude is the reason why some are in the state they brought themselves in. Never hurts to admit one was incorrect about assumptions. Better than having people forming negative opinions on tabula rasa stuff here...even teens seem to know folks making tall statements on brahmin exclusivity of genes are kinda doing a :flypig: job. Please, hope you read this post by KRS sir.

I don't bother to respond to those who have their own conclusions. Otherwise it would mockery of myself by myself!