The Great Hindu Tradition

[sangom]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

The movment doesn't speak of the nature of social discrimination, or of all upper castes discriminating lower castes, but only of brahmins because it was Periyar's own seething vengance which because he was not allowed to eat with brahmins in Kashi. While I can understand his personal indignation and support it, it didn't solve the issue or bring it in right perspective. Casteism still exists in many TN villages - in violent forms too; and this is because the movement was more like a vendetta against brahmins than the fight for justice of lower castes.

A twentieth century Chanakya, or, one better than him even, because Chanakya did not have the guts to launch a programme to wipe out the Nandas although he was also "seething with rage", but had to take the help of an able fellow. EVR launhed a party and achived his objective. Is not EVR's legacy then higher than that of Chanakya? Wondering!!

 

[Vivek_V]

@ Sri Sangom

"A twentieth century Chanakya, or, one better than him even, because Chanakya did not have the guts to launch a programme to wipe out the Nandas although he was also "seething with rage", "

Comparing Chankya with DK/DMK heads is a joke. One "seeting with rage" established what is considered to be the greatest civilization of India, other established a hate-movement into which you and many Tamilians have been taken into believing. Chankya took it to helping an under-previlaged boy establish a kingdom, DMK was only interested in its vendetta against brahmins which is why rampant casteism in villages and other areas goes unspoken of and still exists. Sure, then Nara should come to speak of it as "Brahminical Tamil Nadu" when its DMK's TN.

***

This forum cares to speak of my age, and Nara comments on it like it is an important matter above the validity for the reason in my posts. In this community you are carrying a string of site-given-accomplishments but spreading a message to the TBs that their only destiny is to be alienated, their own purpose is to be the social evil, and their only hope is to stay quiet. Hardly enlightening and actually very detrimental, given that we should follow the path of men who actually did fight casteism - which includes many brahmins too. Hardly does your blame taking even care to shed light on the actual nature of any social discrimination.

What is the place of ill-treating people on caste basis in our sacred texts like BG or Upanishads? It doesn't even have a place. And these are not some casual rosy messages - they form the basis of the text and the philosophy that was spread and saved till this day in the 21st century.

Did men like Rabindranath Tagore, Bharatiyar, leaders of the Arya Samaj movement look at themselves as derailing from an "original" brahmin culture or look at themselves in guilt? Why should the statue of Kondadev be removed when it was indeed true that he was Shivaji's teacher? Would you or others reproach such an act as trying to overlook and erase a brahmin legacy? In the same way DMK has tried to make it look like brahmins were nothing but a social evil - which you sit and digest like a sweet.

What we have today with the mutts is a perversion of the culture which is exactly why it needs to be changed. Sadly, people like you have started to look at them as the basis of brahmin ideals, when it goes back to a even earlier time.

Brahmins had contibuted to Buddhism too only if you care to read. And there was no contradiction in them being brahmins and Buddhists either - Buddhist monks were themselves called brahmana in many occassions. Of all texts, the Manu Smriti is important to you, when it was actually written in a negative ethos of society as a whole and not just the brahmins. When it comes to casteist practices, its called "brahminism", otherwise there is a plea to not "own Hinduism". First get out of your shell of guilt and self-hate, then you can see things more clearly.

So what does this boild down to? It boils done to allaying a false accusation that casteism has to exclusively do with brahmins which is a view the DK/DMK propagated. Have you checked villages in TN and the violence there on lower castes? The most violent forms of casteism still exist for which the DMK government wouldn't care because their own vendetta is over. The seniors of this forum like yourself should be ashamed of themselves for not looking at things in the right perspective and spreading a dark prospect and guilt-psychosis to the community.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[Nara]

....Which is where we disagree. I for one can find mixed ideas, many philosophies, stories respecting the very idea of individual's ethic of life rather than birth. I am not denying that what you have typed exists, but you seem to see only this.

IMO, these stories are just stories, having very little practical significance. Contrary to what you keep repeating, I do see both sides, but I have also seen the practical side of both sides as well.

For instance, SV literature is filled with rejection of birth-based superiority, but all of that have been ingeniously interpreted in line with Dharma Shasthra by Brahmin commentators, and now, SV is no less castiest than other Brahminical traditions. Brahminism only pays lip service to equal respect; in practice, caste superiority is the only immutable principle that has guided the conduct of its followers. This is why I reject Brahminism outright for it is incapable of reforming itself.

So in short you see brahminism as that aspect of Hinduism which teaches to ill-treat people on basis of caste. "Brahminism" is thus a convenient term for caste discrimination made to look like the exclusive blame of brahmins. Therby reviling them, thereby demonizing them and attempting to spread a guilt-psychosis within the community.

If I have said it once, I have said it 1000 times, Brahmins are not exclusively to blame for caste atrocities. What I object to is the Brahmins washing their hands of any responsibility whatsoever. They are the ones who have given, and continue to give, moral justification for this system. So, they have to take the primary responsibility for all the ills that come out of the Varna system. Yet they refuse to take any responsibility at all.

Whether you agree or not, Varna/jati based hierarchical separation is at the core of Brahminism. The orthodox Brahmins don't feel any guilt about it, they are quite content to follow these edicts. It is the half-brahmins, the ones who lead a secular life in the business world most of the time, and put on the guise of a Brahmin occasionally who feel guilty and struggle to find some sort of justification for these inexcusable practices. I am not spreading any guilt-psychosis, as you put it, all I am doing is urging them to cast aside this Varna/Jati nonsense and become guilt free. I am not demonizing Brahmins, all I am doing is to point out what sort of demon Brahminism really is. Whether to persist in it or not is up to them.

Brahmins have existed through different eras, and frankly I can't see why you would choose to be blind to references that clearly say that caste was originally not birth based concept at all.

I really don't know the genesis of Varna system, it could have evolved organically. But what comfort is it to the untold suffering of masses for many centuries. As far back as Satyakama Jabala we can see that birth played a role in the determination of Varna, why else did Gauthama ask Satyakama for his father's name? Chapter 1 and Chapter 9 verses clearly show the author of BG wanted Lord Sri Krishna to say Varna was birth based. Stories of Azhvars and Nayanmars clearly show their castes were based on birth. So, as far back as we can see in the past, birth has been the determinant of Varna/caste.

The references that you say my blind eyes choose not to see, are even more pernicious. They don't say birth has no role, they only say birth is not a sufficient condition. These references never deny that birth is not a necessary condition. On top of this, they add all kinds of elevating qualities to be considered a Brahmin, but this is only theory, in practice birth is the only criterion that matters. They wax eloquent about how great true Brahmins are, and yet, in practice birth is the only criterion that determines who a Brahmin is. This is the most diabolical aspect of those who consider themselves Brahmins.

Your genuine opinion comes in the second when you speak of "monster they created" which again shows you have a skewered and myopic understanding of how things unravelled. And sure, any NB upper caste who hurts a low caste is "brahminist" too according to you.

You are at liberty to characterize my views as "skewered and myopic". But, it is undeniable that high caste and low caste are constructs of Brahminism, and still practiced with vigor and vitality. Therefore, anyone who practices casteism is a follower of Brahminism and is a Brahminist.

Caste was the early class system in India, which branched out to what we see it as today - a communities identity. Politicians and religious heads convenienetly use it to play power cards.

Politicians do play the caste card. Everyone plays the caste card, why would the politician, whose first priority is to get elected, be any different. The caste system gives the politicians one more weapon to exploit the poor. This is another "gift" of Brahminism to the masses.

"No self-respecting upper class Brahmin will ever consider an upper-class NB or a lower-class Brahmin as worthy of his respect."

And from where do you make this observation?

From my long years of experience. I am a first hand witness to this kind of behavior time and time again.

You mean DMK atheist-party ruled TN which institutionally exiled the brahmins. When things go wrong TN is "brahminical" all of a sudden.

Brahmins are doing just fine in TN, they have not been "institutionally exiled". The power of the Brahmins is diminished now compared to some 40 or 50 years ago, but Brahmins still hold powerful positions in government and in industry. Brahmins still are able to own property, lead their way of life, go about their life without any harassment. It is a canard to keep claiming DMK rule has exiled Brahmins.

"Me: Why do low castes practice untouchability with other low castes? Why does corruption and casteism prevail in TN after "evil" brahmins have been exiled?

Nara: The same reason the supposedly educated elites of their societies do. "

You haven't explain why one exploited would use the same exploitation on another.

Replication of the village system into the cheri is not that hard to understand.

but only of brahmins because it was Periyar's own seething vengance which because he was not allowed to eat with brahmins in Kashi.

Whatever motivated EVR, the fact remains, Varna system is a nasty one, and all Indians, and especially Brahmins, will be better off by getting rid of it.

Varna was no "edifice" of the brahmins, it was the class structure of early society and didn't say anyone had to be ill-treated.

Manu Dharma Shasthra, which is held in very high esteem and was defended not so long ago in this very forum, is full of the very thing you are denying.

 

[sravna]

None of these criticizers of brahmin founded systems, I am sure can suggest any lasting solution. The assessment techniques that are employed today in personnel selection ignores the most crucial aspect needed for good job performance, which is, the extent of higher intelligence. The present day techniques mainly test the extent of lower intelligence. Varna based ones therefore are more authentic fits and a person of a particular occupation is competent in his job.

What is wrong with the concept that a rajassic guna person who finds it difficult to control his emotions is not allowed to teach self control to others? Similarly a person with sattvic disposition cannot be handed the responsibility of being in charge of a country and protecting it against hostile forces?

A philosophy that is pragmatic to the core in many such ways and also offering hope and optimism for everyone by saying that all are in essence God, though each may be in a different stage of evolution at any point in time for the varied expereinces required for that evolving, prescient enough to classify the period of the universe into different yugas according to the extent of dharma, and now exactly witnessing what it proclaimed.

It seems that people who are decrying the "evils" of brahminic systems, want to be blissfully ignorant of modern day realities.

 

[Vivek_V]

@ Sri Nara -
1. "Lip service of brahmin philosophy" like BG, Upanishads was the inspiration for revolutions against casteism
2. EVR's work was a personal war, nothing to do with trying to abolish casteism which is why it still exists in TN
3. Caste ill-treatment is not a puppet show played by brahmins, all previlaged castes practice it out of their own arrogance
and pride.

"these stories are just stories, having very little practical significance."

No, these stories were written for a time like this - when injustice would be rampant and justified.

"but I have also seen the practical side of both sides as well. "

And I have actually seen the practical side - the various facets of caste discirmination, having nothing to do with only the brahmins. Like all upper castes, they came to discirminate because they were in a previlaged position - while they did in temples other upper castes did in their own way like in payment of wages etc. So the issue does boil to on thing and that is the previlaged exploiting the under-previlages which is what you fail to acknowledge.

" SV literature is filled with rejection of birth-based superiority, but all of that have been ingeniously interpreted in line with Dharma Shasthra by Brahmin commentators, and now, SV is no less castiest than other Brahminical traditions. Brahminism only pays lip service to equal respect"

The fact that it is written gives a base to fight on, and that is exactly the inspiration many movements had. The nature of casteism is what I mention above in the second answer of this post.

"If I have said it once, I have said it 1000 times, Brahmins are not exclusively to blame for caste atrocities. What I object to is the Brahmins washing their hands of any responsibility whatsoever."

No you are saying this the first time. This is new when you blamed the brahmins for have spreading caste ill-treatment to all other castes - a biased and unrealistic view propagated by the DK/DMK to justify the exile of brahmins and complete their vendetta. And that is exactly why you called it "brahminism", while the other naive brahmins in this community nod their head having known only that the position of them as brahmins was a social evil.

The only people who have washed off their hands are people in the DMK ranks or so, including upper caste NB who have made this like an exclusive blame of brahmins. From the very word "brahminism" it respresents a biased view - when Upanishads or BG have no mention of it. This was the legacy of the brahmins, Law books are a legacy of society - all upper castes, kings, merchants and even brahmins who had to appease them by spreading the ideology.

"They are the ones who have given, and continue to give, moral justification for this system."

Yes, yes, sure. Rabindranath Tagore, Arya Samaj, Bharatiyar, BG give justification for it (sarcasm). What brahmins are opposed to is solely blaming them and justifying their exile - which is what was/is done. Its come to such a pathetic position where people like Sangom believe there is no hope to be absolved because people like you have come to drill this skewered view of DMK/DK into the minds of people.

" So, they have to take the primary responsibility for all the ills that come out of the Varna system. Yet they refuse to take any responsibility at all. "

Everyone has to take responsibility! Evil part of India's past which included caste ill-treatment was not a puppet show run by the brahmins. Many movements in present and even the past (including the rise of Buddhism) had the efforts of brahmins in it. Do other upper caste take responsibility for casteist ill-treatment without behaving like the bad part of India's history was a puppet show run by the brahmins? Here itself you put the blame quiet exculsively on brahmins and yet claim you are not doing that.

"Whether you agree or not, Varna/jati based hierarchical separation is at the core of Brahminism."

Yet it finds no place in the most respected and widely read religious treatise like Upanishads or BG - which are even older than the commentaries of some mutt heads' comments. So how is it that those "core" literature don't speak of it?

"The orthodox Brahmins don't feel any guilt about it, they are quite content to follow these edicts. It is the half-brahmins, the ones who lead a secular life in the business world most of the time, and put on the guise of a Brahmin occasionally who feel guilty and struggle to find some sort of justification for these inexcusable practices."

The orthodox brahmins are the half-brahmins to be honest if we give attention to actual meanings of what it means to be brahmin according to the earlier texts. Buddhist texts themselves for this reason use the word brahmana for buddhist monks which is why Ashoka's edicts also claim respect for brahmins is good - of course in that time it spoke of the varna, not the community which is today's meaning due to identity politics.

And again you put sole blame on the brahmins, for that matter hardly any upper castes in rural area feel bad about following caste ill-treatment or the plight for lower castes. The reason for that is because they are uneducated and unenlightened. These "edicts" have no literary or past base they are an occurance of a dark era of society.

"I am not spreading any guilt-psychosis, as you put it, all I am doing is urging them to cast aside this Varna/Jati nonsense and become guilt free."

You are spreading a guilt-psychosis by expecting brahmins to feel guilty about this while you don't speak of it in the larger context of previlaged disciminating the uner previlaged. Jati/Varna "nonsense" is from the cultures various communities came to follow - to me, its not their existence that is the problem, but the ill-treatment. These were after all jobs to start with - not lineages, and I would rather that all people be given opportunities. And I believe brahmins like Bharatiyar or the establishers of Arya Samaj and Ramkrishna mission did just this. Instead what DMK did was exiling the brahmins and ignoring casteism practiced by NB upper castes, still existent in rural areas.

The documentary India Untouched, showed how NB upper castes violently and attacked the house of a low caste. DMK ever spoke of this facet? Now you would want to blame brahmins for it, like you would for anything.

"I really don't know the genesis of Varna system, it could have evolved organically. But what comfort is it to the untold suffering of masses for many centuries."

Atleast now you are admitting. Suffering of masses happens because of human arrogance and exercise of it. Varna system was a class system like in our very own society - which turned to communities. I explained this in a post to Sangom.

If you take time and read about it instead of reviling against one community you too will gain a better prespective.

"You are at liberty to characterize my views as "skewered and myopic". But, it is undeniable that high caste and low caste are constructs of Brahminism"

Your myopic view lies in calling it "brahminism". Classes were the original varna, it was not heriditary to begin with, its purpose was occupation/job and not ill-treating others. The present way its practiced and people are ill-treated- its a product of society's rigidity not "brahminism". Even what brahmins wrote in law texts is a voice of the ethos not that they were playing a puppet show all through history. For that matter Upanishads, and BG don't speak of it like heriditary and don't even speak of ill-treating anyone/any thing.

"still practiced with vigor and vitality."

Yes, by all upper castes. Brahmins on one hand have opposed caste ill-treatment on many occasions actually only because they drew inspiration from our texts which you claim is "lip service of brahminism". In today's society brahmins and all upper castes in villages practice this on their own accord, not taking inspiration from anyone. So don't make the negative aspects of Indian society look like a puppet show played by brahmins.

"Politicians do play the caste card. Everyone plays the caste card, why would the politician, whose first priority is to get elected, be any different. The caste system gives the politicians one more weapon to exploit the poor. This is another "gift" of Brahminism to the masses."

Castes were not granted like tickets on a railway line, you yourself admitted it came out to "evolve organically"
that is the nature of ANY social structure. Is it possible to pin-point at what point teachers profession or sweepers profession came? The fact remains that they exist. What does become wrong is condeming a person to a low life by his birth, and not respecting a person like a human being for being a sweeper. No Upanishads or BG speak of such, instead only to allow a person's temperament to decide. Its taking inspiration from this that many brahmins came to fight caste ill-treatment.

"Whatever motivated EVR, the fact remains, Varna system is a nasty one, and all Indians, and especially Brahmins, will be better off by getting rid of it."

"Varna system" is an ancient system disappeared today - it was the class system of ancient India, and had job, not ill-treatment as its core basis. Society established and no brahmins. DMK however, didn't fight caste ill-treatment, they only practiced a vendetta against brahmins which was nothing more than a political war waged by one upper caste (like Naicker named E.V. Ramasami) against another upper caste the brahmins. This is why casteism exists still in TN in violent forms.

"Manu Dharma Shasthra, which is held in very high esteem and was defended not so long ago in this very forum, is full of the very thing you are denying."

Manu Smirti was a work of upper caste Indian society during a time - it hardly has a place more important than the Shruitis or texts like BG, or Upanishads. You will certainly not go to those because they don't speak of what you want to accuse the brahmins of. You will not speak of brahmins who fought casteism taking inspiration from their philosophy of "brahminist lip service" because it doesn't justify your stance of hatred against them.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[Nara]

.... Its come to such a pathetic position where people like Sangom believe there is no hope to be absolved because people like you have come to drill this skewered view of DMK/DK into the minds of people....

There is persuasive reason why people like Sangom have no hope Brahmins will abandon Brahminism. Whether my views are skewered, time will tell, irrespective of what DK/DMK does.

Victor's monster can die only after it takes its vengeance. At least the Victor's monster had some remorse, but this monster, not being anthropomorphic, is incapable of it, and the progeny of its creators are no Victor -- Victor showed remorse and tried to destroy the monster he created.

 

[kunjuppu]

vivek,

i came across this below piece in another forum. so the words are not mine, but i would agree 100% with the sentiments. it addresses your concerns, from what i consider, an intelligent and coherent view. the author has dealt with three important aspects of our culture. i find that i can zero this right on the bulls eye towards our own TB values and expectations.

i think as a community, we are doing ok in this rather complex environment. as individuals, there may be drop outs, economically or (like you i think) socially ostracized. i do not know how you can attempt to find a social solution to many of the issues that you have raised, because by and large, we are individualistic and by and large, most of us have solved our issues to the best of our ability.

the alienation that perhaps you feel, that i suspect, needs a little more drilling down. you need to give us a little more background of yourself, for us to appreciate your byandlarge expression of anguish over the decline of tambram culture and identity. what did it do to you to say that? most of us do not feel that way, i think.

Social structures in India. As far as a foreigner can see it, caste system and community separation didn't do any good to anyone so far. Social bias on a large scale, ostracizing people because of their skin colour, religion, gender, education, place of birth, parents' occupation and income, political affiliations, or even looks are things which constantly drag India down. Todays superpower can only be a modern community – not modern in a sense of blindly accepting everything and anything that comes, but with a huge dose of tolerance and understanding for what is different. Indians don't tolerate different, and bad news for them is, the world is becoming more and more heterogeneous, no one can escape that. If you don't, you are left far behind.

2. No rights for women – From the fact that parents prefer boys, though the appalling concept of a dowry, forced marriages, lack of knowledge about contraception, family planning, sex education, child protection, to no financial independence. Indian women live in the shade of their men and are considered of no use when on their own. Their education goes for nothing because they end up as housewives with no chance of any career. Indian women lack even basic knowledge of which rights they are missing and how to legally solve certain problems (e.g. domestic abuse). Those who decide about the shape of Indian society (men) don't realize that the country won't move forward unless women are free and powerful.

3. Intolerance for individuality. Indians, as a model example of a collective society, don't tolerate individuals. There is no freedom and no place for creativity, difference, opposition. Indians prefer to live as an overall mass, where each puzzle matches exactly the other, and people are assigned to earlier prepared for them roles, regardless of their personal wishes. Egoism is as present in Indian society as in any other country, just that it works in a different way. You need to be old enough and respected enough to rule over the others and manipulate within e.g. your children's lives. If there is no place for self-expression and focus on personal goals, the society will remain this unhappy grey mass with no better perspectives for the future.

 

[Vivek_V]

@ Sri Nara

"There is persuasive reason why people like Sangom have no hope Brahmins will abandon Brahminism."

Brahmins who fought against casteism were inspired by their own philosophy. You for one, have certainly not read my post to you. It is people like Sangom who have been brought into believing that they are exclusively the reason for caste ill-treatment. And that is because of people like you and the DMK/DK rhetoric.

"Whether my views are skewered, time will tell, irrespective of what DK/DMK does. "

Your views are skewered - very well shown by the fact that you don't bother to speak of other facets of casteism, only about brahmins even when you agree that the varna system evolved in society. The very fact that you regard the past evil like a puppet show played by brahmins.

"Victor's monster can die only after it takes its vengeance. At least the Victor's monster had some remorse, but this monster, not being anthropomorphic, is incapable of it, and the progeny of its creators are no Victor -- Victor showed remorse and tried to destroy the monster he created."

Frankly, I didn't understand your analogy in this, explain your point.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[Vivek_V]

@ Sri Kunjuppu

"i do not know how you can attempt to find a social solution to many of the issues that you have raised, because by and large, we are individualistic and by and large, most of us have solved our issues to the best of our ability."

Yes, I agree we are individualistic but this issue has to be attacked at some point. This community website exists and we have come here I believe to relate with other TBs issues in general.

"the alienation that perhaps you feel, that i suspect, needs a little more drilling down. you need to give us a little more background of yourself, for us to appreciate your byandlarge expression of anguish over the decline of tambram culture and identity"

I don't bother of a tambram culture declining. If it has to, let it - I believe that destroying a culture may be important if it has come through a violation of something more enlightening before it, and that is exactly how I see casteist ill-treatment. The point I am against here is also about a false accusation on what brahmins respresented. People like Nara here believe that texts like BG and Upanishads were carefully preserved over thousands of years till today to do "lip service" and that they hardly are actual opinions. They are to say that brahmins absolutely had no role but being the social fragmenting power and those who ill-treated others. To think that Upanishads or the BG are not important is silly given that they were preserved with great effort - definitely for an era like this. I find that a clear bias in Nara's interpretation of what represents brahmins. He is ready to consider everything evil as pertaining to brahmins, anything else is merely a "lip service" or a remote scenario - like he said of Bharatiyar " was different".

Next, if we need to fortify our idea as Indians, there shouldn't be the type of hate propagated by the DMK government or blame passing. I look at caste system from what I understand psychological as the most correct perspective - those in power exploiting those who aren't. Fact is neither Nara, nor many others have the perspective to see it that way having bought the DMK/DK governments own rhetoric drilled into their heads. Its for reasons like that people like Sangom feel that the guilt-feeling in brahmins cannot be removed.

I have nothing much to say about my background or anything. I am a Tamil Iyer and I stay in Mumbai.

But let members in this very forum tell me if, from Nara's posting or the DMK government's rhetroic the issue of casteism is actually attacked intellectually. Was the DMK movement against brahmins or against casteism? The ranks of the DMK themselves include NB upper castes whose communtiies, like brahmins and all previlaged classes practiced casteism. They never bothered mentioning that in their anti-brahmin rhetoric, yet Nara believes its the brahmins washing their hands off the issue.

The movements of men like Rabindranath Tagore, or of the Arya Samaj etc. spoke against casteism for what it was which was ill-treating the less previlaged, they took inspiration from our philosophy not against it. That is a perspective Nara has trouble getting into because it damages the blame-game rhetroric he and the DMK were playing.

**********

The three points raised by the foreigner are quiet true even if they seem like generalization, It is clearly what a foreigner would see. But its but not an universal observation of Indian society. The three are typical examples of how Indian society has changed for the worse.

1. It is because of tolerance that so many faiths exist in India though. Which other country? Not many others. Buddha was not "crucified" like when he denied the authority of the vedas, or the interpretations of the brahmins of his time. He went forth to establish his own philosophy without violence from others, instead with support from disciples to establish his thought and these included brahmisn like Nagarjuna. *The issue of "religion" too was not so community based, it was actually a philosophy of life an individual followed if they were convinced by it. This is clear by the fact that three rulers of the Mauryan dynasty were Chandragupta, a Jain; his son Bindusara, an Ajivika; and his son Ashoka a Buddhist. Other kings, and individuals too seemed to have taken the idea of it seriously to consider it to themselves as individuals - not from where they were born. Chankya who was Chandragupta's advisor himself wasn't a Jain, which hints to us about the methods of teaching may have themselves be based on tapping decision-making in a person, rather than indoctrinating him with something.

2. Womens' roles were restricted in the past throughout the world - not only in India. But still there have been prominant women figures in our history, more so than probably many other countries too. The role of women is increasing in today's world and that is a positive thing. But even seeing our own history, issues like arguments between a woman and a man, or women in discourses is something I have only noticed in Indian texts. Have you read Amartya Sen's Argumentative Indian? If you haven't try to - atleast the chapters that speak of gender and roles. If you have read Ashok Bankar's books (on Ramayana) in one he mentions that the actual (original) Valmiki Ramayana has an argument between Sita and Ram, in which Sita accuses Ram harshly too. This argument is not a small part of it, he says it is almost as huge as the Bala Khand (Childhood chapters). The argument was editted out by later authors probably because idea of how women should behave unfortunately, changed for the reason that the decision makers were men who sought to put forth their order.

3. Regarding individuality, expressions of individuality become more pronounced in a civilization that is not poor. Have you noticed why poorer nations tend to be socialist? Because they need to forgo individual passions to strive for something bigger. Having said that, I don't think such a society is ideal - it cramps the human, but sadly certain times in history called for that. I neither believe in the western extreme of individual over society, nor vice versa. We must strike a mean between our own life and its liberties, and our sense of duty towards and with others. Also regarding individuality in India's past I point to *

The three points loudly tells us how our society has changed.

Regards,
Vivek

 

[Nara]

@ Sri Nara - Okay, let me not be hostile. I am sorry for personal comments. But explain

When you said the above, I believed you, my bad. You have gone right back to Nara this and Nara that.

So far, you have not put up a single valid argument against my position, instead, you are (a) complaining with condescending "people like Nara" comments, and (b) making up things that I never said. I give below a typical example that contains both (a) and (b).

People like Nara here believe that texts like BG and Upanishads were carefully preserved over thousands of years till today to do "lip service" and that they hardly are actual opinions.

My comment on lip service was the following from post #28:

Brahminism only pays lip service to equal respect; in practice, caste superiority is the only immutable principle that has guided the conduct of its followers. This is why I reject Brahminism outright for it is incapable of reforming itself.
​

For a fruitful discussion we need to adhere to some basic rules of debate. In the absence of such discipline, I see no point in further exchanges.

Cheers!

 

[Vivek_V]

Nara, it is your rhetoric - when I say "people like Nara" I am not being hostile to you, I am actually speaking of people like yourself who make a social issue into justifying an attack against a particular community making them the scapegoat, which is what you are doing.

When Rabindranath Tagore, Arya Samaj fought casteism it was directed against the practice - not a people. Because it was correctly understood as a falling of our society, it was not used as an opportunity to make one community the scapegoat for a problem. DMK started a vendetta - nothing less, which is why casteism still exists in the worst forms in TN villages today. They shifted the blames for why all other communities practiced casteism to the brahmins conveniently. So you tell who washed their hands off this.

"caste superiority is the only immutable principle that has guided the conduct of its followers. This is why I reject Brahminism outright for it is incapable of reforming itself."

When you say this you are completely ignoring the philosophies from which many people took inspiration to fight casteism was from our own texts. Your bias is placed in the very word "brahminism" you use to speak of caste ill-treatment, and exclusively label it by the one community's name. It goes to incorporate in the very word itself that casteism is exclusively a brahmin-thing, when it is not. The evil of casteism was not a puppet show played by brahmins.

I had explained that lower castes were ill-treated by all upper castes and continue to too - be it from not entering temples to not being paid wages. Did DMK in all of this speak of NB upper castes? Thus the perspective was skewered and completely unfair. What more, people like Sangom have actually been taken into it so much that they believe that their very position in TN society as a brahmin is to be forever reproached and demonized.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[sangom]

I had explained that lower castes were ill-treated by all upper castes and continue to too - be it from not entering temples to not being paid wages. Did DMK in all of this speak of NB upper castes? Thus the perspective was skewered and completely unfair. What more, people like Sangom have actually been taken into it so much that they believe that their very position in TN society as a brahmin is to be forever reproached and demonized.

Regards,
Vivek.

Dear Shri Vivek,

This is with reference to the portion in blue above.

Let me begin by stating, in the very beginning, that I have personally lived - at least for a few years of my childhood - when brahmins, including Tabras, enjoyed privileges and recognition which perhaps you now get to know only partially, even if you read research papers on the subject. And this was both in Kerala (old Travancore State) and present day T.Nadu also.

It is a topic for historians and research scholars to discuss and decide whether the "Dharma Sastras" which are the source for casteist practices right from very ancient times, were merely written by "obedient" brahmin scribes at the command of the then higher castes (probably the kings and rich traders). But the fact remains that brahmins were the final arbitrartors, in the sense that practically any king who owed allegiance to the vedic religion (today's hinduism) consulted brahmins - rajagurus - for guidance, especially in matters relating to caste practices.

You have of course read a lot, as is evident from your various posts. But you seem to think that a certain pov which you have gained is the only correct thing and all the rest are to be condemned. That is where things go awry.

First of all I don't understand what you intend by your words, "they believe that their position in TN society as a brahmin is to be forever reproached and demonized". FYI I do not live in TN. Further, who is to reproach and demonize?

You seem to believe that simply by saying repeatedly that (1) brahmins were not the authors of the casteist rules, (2) even if TBs did indulge in some caste atrocities, it was not only they but all other higher castes which also did the same crime (and so TBs should not be accused) and (3) going out at community level to the religious heads, questioning them (a string of questions), making them submit to your pov and making overt signals to others that brahmins no longer believe in castes/casteism and so on, quick results on the caste front can be achieved. I think this is not a workable idea and will, if at all, only exacerbate the problem, not cure it. Since your level of tolerance to differing povs is very low, you seem to go off making personal remarks and all that.

When I put forward a certain pov, I have something to back it up. In this case, Kerala (old Travancore) and how brahmins - both Tabras and Namboodiris, Pottis, Tulu brahmins etc., - who have been here for centuries reacted to the social changes and what results these had.Though TN has had very stiff anti-brahmin movement, in Kerala also there was anti-brahmin sentiment. The brahmins here have behaved in the manner I describe and the result has been that brahmins are not facing the kind of treatment you complain of. (Actually, I have info from people living in some of the rural areas and that does not corroborate the picture you paint but still, I concede there could be problems of the type you mention elsewhere.)

Last, but not least, "skewer (verb)" means "Drive a skewer - A long pin for holding meat in position while it is being roasted - through". Hope you are not branding Nara's ideas/thinking as skewered.

 

[happyhindu]

..it was not used as an opportunity to make one community the scapegoat for a problem. DMK started a vendetta - nothing less, which is why casteism still exists in the worst forms in TN villages today. They shifted the blames for why all other communities practiced casteism to the brahmins conveniently. So you tell who washed their hands off this.

Couple of things:

1) NBs do not have any religious injunction to uphold untouchability and dharmashastras.

2) The dharmashastras clearly mention that it is the responsibility of the king to uphold the varna system. So the kshatriyas were enjoined in the dharmashastras to ill treat the shudras. If a shudra aspired for anything that was not sanctioned to him by the shastras, he could be tortured.

So far this is what was followed in the society in the name of 'dharma'. In a bid to be recognised as higher castes (esp as kshatiyas), each (low) caste sought to keep other (lower) castes down, while imitating the ways of the upper castes themselves.

This got reflected in the society at all levels of the hierarchy. For example, you had vanniyars who fashioned themselves as upper caste by giving up beef in the past, but they did not allow dalits to sanskritise in a similar fashion, nor did they allow dalits to enter their temples.

This system, upheld in the dharmashastras as "dharma", till date remains rampant in rural areas.

For all talk on "upholding dharma" and that too propagating it as something divine, brahmins need to recognise these things :

a) NBs did not create these dharmashastras.

b) NBs have no moral responsibility to uphold such a crappy system today.

c) Any NB (or B) in rural areas with education and awareness should be able to give up caste differences.

d) For that matter, anyone with a broad-mind can give up caste difference. Today if a paraiyar is a rich man or a popular man, like say Ilayaraja, then a vanniyar or a brahmin craves to be associated with him. This is how hindus are functioning today.

e) Today brahmin mutts and some brahmins are the only ones who seek to uphold a birth-based caste system from the religious POV in the name of 'dharma'.

f) Unless a religion adapts and grows with changing times, it will only become more and more irrelevant and obsolete.

g) Instead of going on complaining against DK, eveyone should ask themselves -- why did they allow exploiters like DK and Mayavati to make a career for themselves out of the caste system? What was / is the necessity for brahmin mutts and some brahmins to propagate caste system of the birth-based kind?

h) Brahmin mutts must recognise that as vanguards of orthodoxy, every single word they propagate does make a difference to the society at large (this esp did make a huge difference in the past). Today, if they make efforts to eliminate birth-based caste differences, it can definitely make a difference to people in the rural areas. I beleive, this is what hindusim needs today.

Regards.

 

[sangom]

...
g) Instead of going on complaining against DK, eveyone should ask themselves -- why did they allow exploiters like DK and Mayavati to make a career for themselves out of the caste system? What was / is the necessity for brahmin mutts and some brahmins to propagate caste system of the birth-based kind?

Smt. HH,

This point is not at all taken into account by the group which thinks that brahmins who are blameless have been subjected to atrocities for no fault of their own and, in this vicious game (according to them) the NBs sided with the rest and hunted down the Bs. They don't take into account that although our common people are/were illiterate, abjectly poor, uncultured and so on, they had enough intelligence to remember the treatment which was meted out to them by the other high castes. Hence, if the brahmins had been really blameless and innocent, it would not have been possible for EVR/DK to make their anti-brahmin campaign so successful, IMO. That it still remains is proof of the fact that at least in TN the brahmins did not enjoy the goodwill of the dalits or SC/STs or even the other NB high castes sufficiently enough. The NB high caste-born EVR could sense this situation and take his revenge for the Kasi incident on the TN brahmins. I find a close parallel for this in Gandhi's humiliation in SA and his seeking ouster of the British from India. (He was at one time very greatly inspired by the western mores, we should recall.) In India at least political parties have grown only on some negative sentiments, not positive.

h) Brahmin mutts must recognise that as vanguards of orthodoxy, every single word they propagate does make a difference to the society at large (this esp did make a huge difference in the past). Today, if they make efforts to eliminate birth-based caste differences, it can definitely make a difference to people in the rural areas. I beleive, this is what hindusim needs today.

Regards.

The brahmin mutts have not much relevance today in shaping the community's attitudes and mores. They exist simply as a kind of 'totemic' entities. They will have to reinvent and position themselves accordingly if they want to even have a wide following like some of the modern day neo-gurujis and gurumayis have today. Still they serve as centres for the orthodoxy to reassure and recharge themselves with the feeling of satisfaction that their orthodox views have support and encouragement from the mutts; in turn, the mutts get some followers to depend on.

However I find some subtle changes in the attitudes of these centres of orthodoxy in recent days. I don't know if my inference is correct, but. The SVBC (Shree Venkateswara Bhakti Channel) shows clips of festivals and programmes in Siva temples; the Shree Sankara channel airs programmes re. jain festivals, lectures by jain holy men, gives good coverage of Sringeri mutt and all that. This is a welcome trend and if this results in a pan-hindu scenario ultimately, that will be a decisive step towards further changes, I hope.

 

[Vivek_V]

@ Sow. Happyhindu - Don't shift blame of other castes on brahmins. NB uppercastes who ill-treat don't do so because brahmins told them to, they do so on their own.

"NBs do not have any religious injunction to uphold untouchability and dharmashastras."

Neither do brahmins. Manu Smriti is not a religious text, not a text of philosophy. Another thing the people who fought casteism did so taking inspiration from Upanishads and texts like the BG. Secondly, irrespective of what religious injunction they have, NB uppercastes did practice casteism - thus for DMK to make this look like an exclusive brahmin thing was unfair.

Just today, a report in TOI came on how certain people broke the houses of dalits and stole things - has this got anything to do with brahmins?

"The dharmashastras clearly mention that it is the responsibility of the king to uphold the varna system. So the kshatriyas were enjoined in the dharmashastras to ill treat the shudras. If a shudra aspired for anything that was not sanctioned to him by the shastras, he could be tortured. "

Nice attempt to make it again look like a puppet show run by brahmins. The dharmashastras speak on basis of a person of a job doing only what he is fit for, it doesn't speak of birth-based system at all. So the comments are more like asking a civilian to not carry a weapon, or only permit teachers to teach. Kshatriyas, as were all upper castes, at a time used their opportunity to ill-treat low castes. Them ill-treating other has nothing with what brahmins asked them to do, so don't shift blame cheaply (Nara can now tell me who is "Washing their hands off the issue").

And varna system was about occupations - not a basis to ill-treat people. Even areligious, secular academicians agree that it was originally not heritidary. So the varna system was similar to today's social setup, the fact that it became heriditary and was used for ill-treating people is a separate chapter. The fact Mayawati et al, use this historical thing to play corrupt political games is their fault - not of brahmins.

"In a bid to be recognised as higher castes (esp as kshatiyas), each (low) caste sought to keep other (lower) castes down, while imitating the ways of the upper castes themselves. "

Yes, this evil tendency has got to with human nature, nothing sacredly prescribed. The original varna system used a person's temperament to assign him an occupation - this is clear from the definitions. Upanishads, BG make it completely clear.

"a) NBs did not create these dharmashastras."

Yes, and brahmins did create the upanishads, and BG, all of them speak of enlightenment as a thing of the HUMAN spirit, not based on caste or other social divisions. Secondly, many brahmins and NBs do practice it in villages, how does the actions of NBs come to the blame of brahmins? Nara spoke of wiping hands off this issue. Who is doing that now?

"b) NBs have no moral responsibility to uphold such a crappy system today. "

Neither do brahmins have the moral responsibility for it actually. Just as NB upper castes will give justifications, the mutts also give justifications. In the documentary India Untouched I saw what justification Rajputs give for ill-treating low castes. All upper castes have ready answers, just that people go an ask the mutts. If NB upper castes didn't want to follow casteism, they wouldn't. Period. Fact is many do, on their own accord - even in violent ways. Further, by repeating this rhetoric people like yourself, the DMK ranks and Nara try to spread a guilt-psychosis among the brahmin community. Remember that the many brahmins who fought against caste ill-treatment did it taking inspiration from hindu philosophy. How is it that Nara won't call that "brahminism"?

"For that matter, anyone with a broad-mind can give up caste difference. Today if a paraiyar is a rich man or a popular man, like say Ilayaraja, then a vanniyar or a brahmin craves to be associated with him. This is how hindus are functioning today. "

That is how society in general functions. What you don't see is that even the affluent "low castes" (as per community) are ill-treating people. Why then should this be squared on brahmins?

"Today brahmin mutts and some brahmins are the only ones who seek to uphold a birth-based caste system from the religious POV in the name of 'dharma'. "

lol. So you are saying other upper caste NB will be ready to take dalits in their fold? You are a world apart in the real situation of what is happening. Violent forms of casteism are practiced by the "kshatriya" clans on dalits and workers. A report came just today and is in a time after DMK has successfully exiled brahmins from TN.

We see that casteism was hardly tackled, what was done is hating brahmins for a personal reason.

"Unless a religion adapts and grows with changing times, it will only become more and more irrelevant and obsolete."

Yes, and Arya Samaj, Ramkrishna mission were all trying to establish and destroy the caste system as it is followed today because it is not the real idea at all. These people didn't find the need to become brahmin-haters, or ex-brahmins, infact they took inspiration from what brahmins wrote of way of life earlier. What DMKs movment did with brahmin-hating was merely attack brahmins, while other upper castes still practice casteism in DMK TN (not "brahminical TN" Nara)

"Instead of going on complaining against DK, eveyone should ask themselves -- why did they allow exploiters like DK and Mayavati to make a career for themselves out of the caste system? What was / is the necessity for brahmin mutts and some brahmins to propagate caste system of the birth-based kind? "

What makes you say brahmins propagated this birth-based system? It is what happened in society as it got rigid, in every single caste. Secondly, people like DMK and Mayawati will use anything to make a career in exploiting people. Instead of blaming them, you are out to target brahmins again.

" Today, if they make efforts to eliminate birth-based caste differences, it can definitely make a difference to people in the rural areas. I beleive, this is what hindusim needs today."

This is exactly what Arya Samaj, and many other did. But caste has become a community identity in politics, also the previous structure of society is no more. So caste will remain a community identity. But this is not so important as the actual message in the various tales of Hinduism which you and Nara have clearly missed. Can you come up with one legend or tale that justifies ill-treating low castes or ends with a moral that says it is right to do so?

Those were written for a time like this, not for "brahminist lip service" as Nara said.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[kunjuppu]

Dear vivek,

Just a few days ago, it was announced that the actor vidya balan was named the ‘hottest’ vegetarian by some prominent vegetarian societies. Also included was madhavan and priyamani. I am not so sure as to how most members here feel about tambrams in the film field. But it must be noted that these influence more people than the kanchi mutt, I think, and that too the youth and also across wide geographical areas.

Vivek, what I am trying to say, is that it is very important, for a community to be viewed in good light, that it has proper representation and good PR. I feel that we tambrams, have ignored this vital aspect of interaction in the society that we live.

To compare to the jews, which happens in this forum occasionally – the jews of usa have their voices right across the political spectrum – from the extreme right to the radical left. Underneath all the veneer of policy politics, these ensure the jewish entity is respected. Compare that with us. Right across the Dravidian revolution, in all its facets, barring the voice of bharathiar, no other tambram is heard.

I think the absence of this representation has hurt us more than any single edict from periar or MK.

You might say that since the Dravidian movement is essentially anti Brahmin, how can a salt of the earth tambram ever embrace it?

This is where, the rajathanthiram skills come into play. It takes a superior type of people to influence and win friends. I think the tambram leaders, like rajaji either underestimated the intensity of depravation among the NB tamil masses or felt they could ride through the storm.

I think it has been the biggest miscalculation and the cause of the greatest sorrow for the community. Also matts like kanchi, has had several historical occasions like Indian independence, the voting in of DMK or even as late as the 2000 millenium, to call for reformation and new thinking to bring hindus of all varnas and dalits together under one umbrella. Again, nothing was done.

Today, the only tambram politician who gets ink is Subramanian swamy, and that too, for all negative reasons. there is no one of vision, who can show a path of reformation and brighter inclusive future for tamils across the spectrum. So it is left to folks like vidya balan or madhavan, to provide pockets of influence and earn goodwill for the community.

I will go along with sangom, that we devote ourselves to service to all and let the concept of ‘brahminism’ over time develop into an amnesiac entity. Otherwise, it appears that we are constantly festering a self inflicted cancer of the mind, which I fear, will only cause backlash, and above pains of self inflicted anguish.

India of today, is going through probably the greatest social revolution ever in its history. After 61 years there may still not be a single dalit whose name comes to mind through eminence.

But the chances are high, that if you were ever to involve in a car accident in rural tamil nadu, and need emergency care, it might be a dalit doctor treating you.

to me, that is gratifiying and heartwarming. Atleast the society has made great progress towards social equalization – not because but inspite of tambrams. The latter point, I feel, should be a matter of shame to all of us, who are atleast aware of the world and the concept of equality & fraternity.

there have been efforts by arya samaj and swami vivek your namesake, to do away with the evils of castes.

on the events of swami vivek's 100th birth centenary, several years ago, there was an exhibition. it was fully manned by brahmin youths, with their viboothis and names, and paying lip service to the concept of the evils of casteism, which to me appeared insincere.

so in the context of popularization, we have to consider arya samaj or swami vivek as bit players, while the influence of periyar has been overwhelming in its adherence and conversion.

barring the tambrams, every other community in tamil nadu and beyond, hold periyar in high esteem. they steadfastly proclaim periyar to be the architect of breaking down the exclusivity tentacles which tambrahminism had over the tamil society.

such of us, who still cling to the 'loss' of that priveleged position, would put periyar on par with hitler and genghiz khan. others, like me, would rather be glad, that in a way, periyar awoke us from our soporofic which those privileges had provided and kindled us the desire to 'go out and conquer beyond tamil nadu'.

social revolutions are often bloody and merciless. in that context, credit must go to nonbram tamil hindus, for having spared the blood of the tambrams. a few millerniums ago, when tambrams as saivites, were among the court priests of madurai, they had no hesitations in putting the entire jain community to the sword, such that for weeks vaigai ran red with the blood of the jains.

thank you.

 

[Nara]

..... in a way, periyar awoke us from our soporofic which those privileges had provided and kindled us the desire to 'go out and conquer beyond tamil nadu'.

K, a few weeks ago Saidevo wrote about an exclusive Brahmin enclave near Rockfort in Trichy. His narration included an incidence of couple of elderly day laborers, presumably Dalits, removing their footware when crossing this enclave. Upon my questioning he clarified that this was voluntarily done as a show of respect to the Brahmin enclave, not forced.

This little incidence that Saidevo observed and reported clarifies the level of mental subjugation that was prevalent and to a large extent still prevalent. To instill a modicum of self-respect, the willing acceptance of inferior status had to be tackled. Which is what EVR did, with a full frontal assault against Brahminism/Varna system and everything associated with that. EVR showed these people, for whom getting trodden over is their divine destiny, that by just being a human they are entitled to self-respect. They don't have to remove the thuNdu from their head at the sight of a Brahmin, they don't have to fold their hands in submission, they don't have to remove their slippers when crossing an agraharam. This is why a catch phrase of his movement was சுயமரியாதை.

This was not an easy task. To build this confidence some long revered icons of Brahminical superiority had to be broken, and break he did. When he did that, the Tamil NBs of all stripes were thrilled, overjoyed. TBs need to pause and think it over, why did his iconoclastic rhetoric get so much traction? Why did all his mocking of Brahmnical ways resonate among all Tamils, except Bs? Sweeping rejection that it is all because he hated Brahmins, he wanted revenge for the treatment he received in Kasi, is self-serving and delusional.

For all the anti-Brahmin rhetoric of EVR, DK and DMK, TBs have flourished in Tamilnadu. Brahmins are doing wonderfully well thanks to the accumulated social and cultural assets. When social changes came elsewhere, to Europe, to China, etc., the privileged of the time paid the ultimate price.

Cheers!

 

[sangom]

...
But the chances are high, that if you were ever to involve in a car accident in rural tamil nadu, and need emergency care, it might be a dalit doctor treating you.
...to me, that is gratifiying and heartwarming. Atleast the society has made great progress towards social equalization – not because but inspite of tambrams.

Dear Shri Kunjuppu,

Your post cannot be bettered, and I hope it makes our young Vivek to at least pause, think and then write - his retort, as usual.

But the above lines make me recount one incident. Last time when I went to my native place Haripad in Alappuzha Dt., as usual i went to the house of my relative who stays next to (no longer) our ancestral house. While talking we came to a new 3 or 4 storeyed building coming up nearby. My relative then told me it was the polyclinic being built by a brain surgeon. When I asked him who it is he told me it was one of the many (I can't remember how many children were there) kids of a "chovan" who lived in a small thatched hut in a small property (purampokku, I feel) and was one of the lowly paid farm workers. It seems this boy was very bright and thanks to the reservations, he became a surgeon and is earning also well. I really felt happy.

there have been efforts by arya samaj and swami vivek your namesake, to do away with the evils of castes.

on the events of swami vivek's 100th birth centenary, several years ago, there was an exhibition. it was fully manned by brahmin youths, with their viboothis and names, and paying lip service to the concept of the evils of casteism, which to me appeared insincere.

Just as it happened throughout history the hindutva movement has absorbed Vivekananda, Shirdi Saibaba, etc., etc., and will soon make them spokesmen of their pov.

social revolutions are often bloody and merciless. in that context, credit must go to nonbram tamil hindus, for having spared the blood of the tambrams. a few millerniums ago, when tambrams as saivites, were among the court priests of madurai, they had no hesitations in putting the entire jain community to the sword, such that for weeks vaigai ran red with the blood of the jains.

thank you.

The sad part is that this event seems to be still "celebrated" with a special utsavam or the deity going around the temple or some such things, even today.

 

[Vivek_V]

@ Sri Kunjuppu

"Vivek, what I am trying to say, is that it is very important, for a community to be viewed in good light, that it has proper representation and good PR. I feel that we tambrams, have ignored this vital aspect of interaction in the society that we live."

10/10. This is exactly what concerns me, and I feel my quietly sitting and accepting that we are solely responsible for caste atrocities is wrong. Given that many Bs are against and even fought against casteism.

"Compare that with us. Right across the Dravidian revolution, in all its facets, barring the voice of bharathiar, no other tambram is heard."

And does DMK even speak of Bharatiyar as a brahmin who fought against caste atrocity? Right here in this forum we have Nara who is putting the whole blame exclusively on brahmins and people like Sangom agreeing - does it put forth the true picture of casteism, which even Nara admitted to have evovled "organically"? Are brahmins responsible for the arrogance of even other castes? Its playing this epic blame game, which the DMK started that casteism has really not been tackled in TN and still exists rampantly.
To Nara, that is not a concern. What is the concern is saying that brahmins are "responsible" when he agreed that it was a construct of society.

"I think the tambram leaders, like rajaji either underestimated the intensity of depravation among the NB tamil masses or felt they could ride through the storm."

No they fought for independence and were against casteism. There is no "NB mass" this polarized view comes from the DK/DMK propaganda through the years - there is only previlages and under-previlaged people. Leaders like Rajaji had the same temperament as Sangom - to accept the blames other load on them and be okay with it. TB have done huge contributions to TN society which goes unspoken of, is it right to view a community with a such a one sided view? Peace will not return to people as their minds continue to heat-up about them having to hate a particular community. And this is exactly what DMK instigates people to do.

"I will go along with sangom, that we devote ourselves to service to all and let the concept of ‘brahminism’ over time develop into an amnesiac entity. Otherwise, it appears that we are constantly festering a self inflicted cancer of the mind, which I fear, will only cause backlash, and above pains of self inflicted anguish."

I disagree with Sangom for the simple fact that one post of his clearly stated that he has no hope of getting out of the guilt-psychosis people like Nara and Happyhindu are placing the community into. We can definitely fight castesim, and many brahmins have! Our philosophy of life was not to ridicule people on basis of birth - this is a development of a dark era. I can challenge people like Nara and Happyhindu to point one texts which, written in legends morally justifies condemning a person due to his birth. The reason casteism has happened is because of the previlages stamping on the underprevilaged - be it from entering temples, or paying wages. It has nothing to do which what brahmin culture originally preached.

"India of today, is going through probably the greatest social revolution ever in its history. After 61 years there may still not be a single dalit whose name comes to mind through eminence. "

Ambedkar.

"But the chances are high, that if you were ever to involve in a car accident in rural tamil nadu, and need emergency care, it might be a dalit doctor treating you. "

And why does that matter as long as the doctor can cure? Fact is that our society was not in bad shape only because of one caste, education was not so necessary for survival at a time and many chose not to pursue it. It was in the brahmin culture however to pursue it, which is why we always made ourselves a previlaged people in society. On the other hand not all were given chance to be educated. This was more of a social stigma (from all of society) than of just brahmins hoarding knowledge as is alleged.

" it was fully manned by brahmin youths, with their viboothis and names, and paying lip service to the concept of the evils of casteism, which to me appeared insincere."

If the message spoken is taken seriously why should it be considered "lip service". The reason casteism can't be tackled is because true leaders like Vivekandana, Rabindranath Tagore who took inspiration from our actual phlosophy are no more. What we do have are people using this social problem to gain political mileage.

"credit must go to nonbram tamil hindus, for having spared the blood of the tambrams. a few millerniums ago, when tambrams as saivites, were among the court priests of madurai, they had no hesitations in putting the entire jain community to the sword, such that for weeks vaigai ran red with the blood of the jains."

Enough of this, you are now praising people for not killing, when what was done in the propaganda of DK was itself bad. DK did issue statements to kill brahmins. And millenium ago was different from now for the simple reason that DK is a state government, not national government. And keep in mind that its likely that some (like myself probably) were Jains. I understood this from the fact that we supposedly came from the Ennaiyarm village which was at one point filled with 8000 Jains. Its possible we would have been taken into the fold. And all of TN society was for some reason against Jains - my mother read the Thirupugal in which there are verses to wipe out Jains.

What I see is the brahmin community completely unaware of its position in TN society for so many years, that all of a sudden then have been thought to look at themselves as a social evil that existed throughout. Anything evil is attributed to brahmins, the rest of their legacy is a Tamil legacy spoken as unconnected to them. Your own talk here is okay praising people for "not killing" when the very view of bias propagated has maligned one community in the name of an social problem that exists throughout the society.

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[Vivek_V]

@Sri Sangom - Who are you talking about? EVR and Gandhi's revenge are very different.

"This point is not at all taken into account by the group which thinks that brahmins who are blameless have been subjected to atrocities for no fault of their own and, in this vicious game (according to them) the NBs sided with the rest and hunted down the Bs."

When did anyone say brahmins are blameless? I said all of our society was to "blame", but this blame game has no meaning. What is relevant is solving the issue, which is what people in the past have tried. You only tell me if you justify DMKs attack on only the brahmin community, when this issue of casteism was a heirarchy. The varna system did evolve "organically" and shaped up, its not like brahmins made people stand in line and handed their caste. All previlaged people came to misuse it by their own nature, and continue to. So whether Mayawati or anyone is playing caste politics has to do with them misusing anything they can find. Lastly, I don't think NBs are against Bs. What I am against is DK/DMK's (which is a political party) propaganda polarizing people's views and taking opportunity of a social problem to make it a hate-war against brahmins. This is exactly why their movement didn't solve the issue. Do you agree to DK when it exiled the brahmins?

" Hence, if the brahmins had been really blameless and innocent, it would not have been possible for EVR/DK to make their anti-brahmin campaign so successful, IMO."

Propaganda is the word Sangom. No upper caste community is "blameless". What DMK did though was IGNORE casteism as followed by NB upper castes, enumerate casteism followed by brahmins, and ignore brahmins' and their efforts to destroy casteism in history and the amount they have contribued. Its a selective ennumeration of historical events isn't it?
Secondly, brahmins always had a culture of education which allowed them a previlaged position and this worked against DK's vision of a brahmin-less society because of EVR's hate. In short, it was nothing different from what Nazis thought of Jews. Yet, here you are justifying the it and being completely fine when people demonize you for something you are not exclusively to blame for. Then you try to tell me that being hated like this is the only position our community can hope for.

"The NB high caste-born EVR could sense this situation and take his revenge for the Kasi incident on the TN brahmins. I find a close parallel for this in Gandhi's humiliation in SA and his seeking ouster of the British from India."

And yet Gandhi didn't hate the British people, he hated the practice of Imperialism. He never issued statements to kill British people.

Is it justified that EVR didn't ever speak of NB upper castes practicing casteism? Tell me how this perspective of casteism is right according to you. For NB upper caste youths making a dalit eat faeces, or for attacking houses, are brahmins to blame?

Infact, the situation of dalits in poverty and dependency has to do with the wealth-system very well handled by NB upper castes, not brahmins. Brahmin organizations like Arya Samaj teach a way of life where one can depend on themselves and live simple. I agree brahmins have ill-treated them by not letting them enter temples etc. But the rhetroic of you, Nara or DMK will not solve any of this unless the finger pointing at exclusively one community ends. All in all, all upper castes including brahmins are responsible. What is unfair is shifting blame exclusively to brahmins by labelling this "brahminism" when Nara himself also agreed correctly that it evovled in society and when many brahmin literature speak against ill-treating people.

And what's with "young Vivek", you discuss my points for what they are. You may be old, but you still don't understand the dangerous such an ideology like that of DK or DMK poses to the nation, similar to the views of Hindutva on Muslims. This is the key difference between what Vivekananda or Rabindranath Tagore taught and what DMK's message was. Vivekananda, Rabindranath Tagore saw these as social evils. DMK used it as an opportunity to send TBs out on exile to other places in India.

You will pass on to your children and his children that because they were born brahmins they are a social evil and that any NB who reviles or lynches them would be justified because of some skewered perspective on a social problem?

Regards,
Vivek.

 

[Vivek_V]

@ Sri Nara - Brahmins were forced to migrate, while other NB upper castes were allowed to "wash their hands" off the issue.

"To instill a modicum of self-respect, the willing acceptance of inferior status had to be tackled. Which is what EVR did, with a full frontal assault against Brahminism/Varna system and everything associated with that. "

EVR's self-respect movement was for himself against the brahmins. Not for dalits in TN who are lynched and houses attacked till today. Tackling casteism is from reaching the lowest strata of people and helping them, not starting a vendetta against a community.

"For all the anti-Brahmin rhetoric of EVR, DK and DMK, TBs have flourished in Tamilnadu. Brahmins are doing wonderfully well thanks to the accumulated social and cultural assets. When social changes came elsewhere, to Europe, to China, etc., the privileged of the time paid the ultimate price."

Brahmins are not doing wonderfully with a whole negative rhetroic against them in the political ethos. There are NB upper castes, much richer and who practiced casteism too - why was EVRs movment not also targetted on them?
Because EVR was one of them!

Hating brahmins was justified by the ruling, and quotas leveled against them, which is why they migrated (institutionally and forcefully) to other countries and places within India where they are indeed did start doing wonderfully. It doesn't change the fact that DK successfully passed a skewered idea of history of them as "Aryan invaders" and what not, to revile them to such an extent that people like Sangom think that their only position in TN society is to be seen as representing a culture of social evil for which he needs to feel permanently guilty. While all upper castes did have social evil practices, only brahmins were targetted. And on the other hand the cultural contributions brahmins made to look like they never existed and that brahmins were nothing more than an evil invasive force in TN which needs to be subjected to ethnic cleansing.

Regards,
Vivek

 

[Nara]

.... even Nara admitted to have evovled "organically"?

Vivek is doing it again, putting words into my mouth, he is making a habit of it. Here is what I actually said:

I really don't know the genesis of Varna system, it could have evolved organically. But what comfort is it to the untold suffering of masses for many centuries. As far back as Satyakama Jabala we can see that birth played a role in the determination of Varna, why else did Gauthama ask Satyakama for his father's name? Chapter 1 and Chapter 9 verses clearly show the author of BG wanted Lord Sri Krishna to say Varna was birth based. Stories of Azhvars and Nayanmars clearly show their castes were based on birth. So, as far back as we can see in the past, birth has been the determinant of Varna/caste.

As can be seen clearly, I did not admit to anything like what he is claiming.

Post #34 contains another example of Vivek making false statements about what I was saying about lip service -- please see post #35.

 

[happyhindu]

@ Sow. Happyhindu - Don't shift blame of other castes on brahmins. NB uppercastes who ill-treat don't do so because brahmins told them to, they do so on their own.

Yes they did it on their own. In the hope of being promoted to a higher varna and being recognised as a higher varna by brahmanism.

A few years back, one nadar had claimed that nadars were kshatriyas and all those slum fellows used to be their subjugated servants. It is amazing to think that even in this age there are people who think their varna is based on who had subjugated whom as their adimeyis.

"NBs do not have any religious injunction to uphold untouchability and dharmashastras."

Neither do brahmins. Manu Smriti is not a religious text, not a text of philosophy. Another thing the people who fought casteism did so taking inspiration from Upanishads and texts like the BG. Secondly, irrespective of what religious injunction they have, NB uppercastes did practice casteism - thus for DMK to make this look like an exclusive brahmin thing was unfair.

"b) NBs have no moral responsibility to uphold such a crappy system today. "

Neither do brahmins have the moral responsibility for it actually. Just as NB upper castes will give justifications, the mutts also give justifications. In the documentary India Untouched I saw what justification Rajputs give for ill-treating low castes. All upper castes have ready answers, just that people go an ask the mutts. If NB upper castes didn't want to follow casteism, they wouldn't. Period. Fact is many do, on their own accord - even in violent ways. Further, by repeating this rhetoric people like yourself, the DMK ranks and Nara try to spread a guilt-psychosis among the brahmin community. Remember that the many brahmins who fought against caste ill-treatment did it taking inspiration from hindu philosophy. How is it that Nara won't call that "brahminism"?

Sorry Vivek, Brahmin Mutts and Orthodox Brahmins do propagate and uphold dharmashastras and birth-based discrimination. Infact they are the only ones who do so in an independent secular india at an institutional level.

And Manusmrithi is a religious text. You cannot claim it is not just based on your fancies.

How do you claim that those who fought against casteism took inspiration from upanishads and bhagvad gita?

The Rajputs (a section of them despite being illegitimate and/or harem descendents themselves) ill treat the dalits because they want to feel socially powerful by keeping some populations down. In the old past, the brahmins were advisors to the kings, so rajputs ill-treating dalits was expectable (see below on duties of a king in manusmrithi). But today it makes no sense to ill treat people based on caste.

"Today brahmin mutts and some brahmins are the only ones who seek to uphold a birth-based caste system from the religious POV in the name of 'dharma'. "

lol. So you are saying other upper caste NB will be ready to take dalits in their fold? You are a world apart in the real situation of what is happening. Violent forms of casteism are practiced by the "kshatriya" clans on dalits and workers. A report came just today and is in a time after DMK has successfully exiled brahmins from TN.

"The dharmashastras clearly mention that it is the responsibility of the king to uphold the varna system. So the kshatriyas were enjoined in the dharmashastras to ill treat the shudras. If a shudra aspired for anything that was not sanctioned to him by the shastras, he could be tortured. "

Nice attempt to make it again look like a puppet show run by brahmins. The dharmashastras speak on basis of a person of a job doing only what he is fit for, it doesn't speak of birth-based system at all. So the comments are more like asking a civilian to not carry a weapon, or only permit teachers to teach. Kshatriyas, as were all upper castes, at a time used their opportunity to ill-treat low castes. Them ill-treating other has nothing with what brahmins asked them to do, so don't shift blame cheaply (Nara can now tell me who is "Washing their hands off the issue").

These are a few quotes from Manusmrithi (just a small sample of quotes)

1) To show that the system was birth-based:

Manu 2.30:
...let (the father perform or) cause to be performed the Namadheya (the rite of naming the child), on the tenth or twelfth (day after birth), or on a lucky lunar day, in a lucky muhurta, under an auspicious constellation.

Manu 2.31:
Let (the first part of) a Brahmana’s name (denote something) auspicious, a Kshatriya’s be connected with power, and a Vaisya’s with wealth, but a Sudra’s (express something) contemptible.

So a baby at birth was already a shudra and had to be given a name that expressed something contemptible.

--------------------
2) To show that the King was responsible for upholding the varna system:

This is from chapter 8 on the duties of the king:
Manu 8.410: (The king) should order a Vaisya to trade, to lend money, to cultivate the land, or to tend cattle, and a Sudra to serve the twice-born castes.

Manu 8.413: But a Sudra, whether bought or unbought, he (the king) may compel to do servile work; for he was created by the Self-existent (Svayambhu) to be the slave of a Brahmana.

Manu 8.418: (The king) should carefully compel Vaisyas and Sudra to perform the work (prescribed) for them; for if these two (castes) swerved from their duties, they would throw this (whole) world into confusion.
-----------------------

3) To show that a Shudra was denied knowledge of the shastras:
Manu 4.80:
Let him not give to a Sudra advice, nor the remnants (of his meal), nor food offered to the gods; nor let him explain the sacred law (to such a man), nor impose (upon him) a penance.

Manu 4.81:
For he who explains the sacred law (to a Sudra) or dictates to him a penance, will sink together with that (man) into the hell (called) Asamvrita.

Manu 4.99:
Let him not recite (the texts) indistinctly, nor in the presence of Sudras; nor let him, if in the latter part of the night he is tired with reciting the Veda, go again to sleep.

This is a quote from Al-Beruni to show what system was followed in 1030 AD:

The Brahmins teach the Veda to the Kshatriyas. The latter learn it, but are not allowed to teach it, not even to a Brahmin. The Vaisya and Sudra are not allowed to hear it, much less to pronounce and recite it. If such a thing can be proved against one of them, the Brahmins drag him before the magistrate, and he is punished by having his tongue cut off.
- Al-Beruni's account of India in 1030 AD.

A shudra could not wear the marks of a brahmana either:

Manu 9.224: Let the king corporally punish all those (persons) who either gamble and bet or afford (an opportunity for it), likewise Sudras who assume the distinctive marks of twice-born (men).
------------------------------

4) To show that apart from slavery, the shudra could not have any other occupation:

Manu 8.414: A Sudra, though emancipated by his master, is not released from servitude; since that is innate in him, who can set him free from it?

Manu 8.417: A Brahmana may confidently seize the goods of (his) Sudra (slave); for, as that (slave) can have no property, his master may take his possessions.

9.248. But the king shall inflict on a base-born (Sudra), who intentionally gives pain to Brahmanas, various (kinds of) corporal punishment which cause terror.

And please note what is included in "giving pain to brahmanas":
Manu 10.129. No collection of wealth must be made by a Sudra, even though he be able (to do it); for a Sudra who has acquired wealth, gives pain to Brahmanas.
-------------------

This means a shudra could not accumulate wealth and had to remain a slave. If he accumulated wealth, a brahman could seize it and/or a king could inflict punishments on him --- and this is exactly what was/is being followed by self-appointed kshatriyas. They inflict / infllicted physical violence on the dalits just to keep them socially down. The brahmin mutts and orthodox brahmins, on their part, uphold the dharmashastras from the religious pov.

And varna system was about occupations - not a basis to ill-treat people. Even areligious, secular academicians agree that it was originally not heritidary. So the varna system was similar to today's social setup, the fact that it became heriditary and was used for ill-treating people is a separate chapter. The fact Mayawati et al, use this historical thing to play corrupt political games is their fault - not of brahmins.

Sorry the varna system was heredity and formed the basis to ill-treat people. Which is why even till today low-castes are ill-treated on account of their caste.

If there was no caste system, then nobody (Mayawati, Raja, DK, BSP, etc) could have made a career out of the caste system.

In the past the upper castes did the looting, now the lower castes are looting everybody. What a shame.

"In a bid to be recognised as higher castes (esp as kshatiyas), each (low) caste sought to keep other (lower) castes down, while imitating the ways of the upper castes themselves. "

Yes, this evil tendency has got to with human nature, nothing sacredly prescribed. The original varna system used a person's temperament to assign him an occupation - this is clear from the definitions. Upanishads, BG make it completely clear.

It was sacredly prescribed to keep the shudras down as slaves.

What is the "original varna system" you speak of, that is based on temperment? When did it exist? Even a blatant womaniser like Indra was considered arya varna in the vedic period. His character did not make him a dasyu.

"a) NBs did not create these dharmashastras."

Yes, and brahmins did create the upanishads, and BG, all of them speak of enlightenment as a thing of the HUMAN spirit, not based on caste or other social divisions. Secondly, many brahmins and NBs do practice it in villages, how does the actions of NBs come to the blame of brahmins? Nara spoke of wiping hands off this issue. Who is doing that now?

The dharmashastras portrayed occupations as something that is 'divinely granted' (chapter 1 of manusmrithi). In the name of such divinity, a man was not allowed to change his occupation. If he tried, he was punished.

The root of casteism is the dharmashastras. Nowhere in history was a harijan allowed to become a ruler, a trader or a brahmin.

How do you know brahmins created the upanishads? The authors of several upanishads are unknown.

"For that matter, anyone with a broad-mind can give up caste difference. Today if a paraiyar is a rich man or a popular man, like say Ilayaraja, then a vanniyar or a brahmin craves to be associated with him. This is how hindus are functioning today. "

That is how society in general functions. What you don't see is that even the affluent "low castes" (as per community) are ill-treating people. Why then should this be squared on brahmins?

The blame should be shared by
1) Mainly brahmins for inflicting mental, emotional and social torture on dalits by upholding labor laws in the guise of a "divine" varna system; and
2) Next by self-appointed kshatriyas and vaishyas for physically ill-treating dalits.

BTW, Low castes successfully merged into the upper caste starta periodically (usually clandestinely), and especially so in colonial india (where caste claims and mergers were done rather openly). It is only a matter of awareness. Let everyone become aware that low castes managed to become high castes over time. Automatically, people will give up caste discrimination and casteism.

We see that casteism was hardly tackled, what was done is hating brahmins for a personal reason.

What is the personal reason?

"Unless a religion adapts and grows with changing times, it will only become more and more irrelevant and obsolete."

Yes, and Arya Samaj, Ramkrishna mission were all trying to establish and destroy the caste system as it is followed today because it is not the real idea at all. These people didn't find the need to become brahmin-haters, or ex-brahmins, infact they took inspiration from what brahmins wrote of way of life earlier. What DMKs movment did with brahmin-hating was merely attack brahmins, while other upper castes still practice casteism in DMK TN (not "brahminical TN" Nara)

If you have anything to say to nara sir, say it to him directly on a post addressed to him. Do not make snide and side remarks on him on posts addressed to me, sangom sir or anyone else. It is very unbecoming and indecent of you to do that.

According to the brahmanical mutts, what arya samaj did is wrong. Read this: Can a new Brahmin Caste be Created ? from the Chapter "Grhasthasrama", in Hindu Dharma : kamakoti.org:

If arya samaj is doing a positive job in removing casteism, then why are brahmin mutts (and specifically why is the kanchi mutt), intent on discrediting their work?

"Instead of going on complaining against DK, eveyone should ask themselves -- why did they allow exploiters like DK and Mayavati to make a career for themselves out of the caste system? What was / is the necessity for brahmin mutts and some brahmins to propagate caste system of the birth-based kind? "

What makes you say brahmins propagated this birth-based system? It is what happened in society as it got rigid, in every single caste. Secondly, people like DMK and Mayawati will use anything to make a career in exploiting people. Instead of blaming them, you are out to target brahmins again.

Sorry, brahmins do need to take a major portion of the responsibility in propagating shastras and caste-system.

" Today, if they make efforts to eliminate birth-based caste differences, it can definitely make a difference to people in the rural areas. I beleive, this is what hindusim needs today."

This is exactly what Arya Samaj, and many other did. But caste has become a community identity in politics, also the previous structure of society is no more. So caste will remain a community identity. But this is not so important as the actual message in the various tales of Hinduism which you and Nara have clearly missed. Can you come up with one legend or tale that justifies ill-treating low castes or ends with a moral that says it is right to do so?

Arya samaj cannot make headway in removing caste differences as long as brahmanical mutts keep caste-discrimination alive. There are several tales on caste discrimination (from ramayana, mahabharat, puranas, etc).

The problem with you Vivek is that you make fantastic claims in an aggressive manner without reading the relevant texts. And ofcourse, the key element in your conversation skill is to go on repeating the same thing again and again.

On an other thread you claimed that the Aryavarta means fertile-land and that the boundries of aryavarta changed as per course of a river. I did not continue on that thread because anyone who has read some of the dharmashastras will know that the boundries of aryavarta were fixed, and purificatory rites were prescribed for those who crossed the boundries of aryavarta. Your claims will stand discredited to them anyways.

Those were written for a time like this, not for "brahminist lip service" as Nara said.

Again, let me know which time period was this? When did an "original varna system" exist, during which a man's profession was decided based on qualities and abilities alone (and not on the family into which he was born)?

Regards.

 

[happyhindu]

My relative then told me it was the polyclinic being built by a brain surgeon. When I asked him who it is he told me it was one of the many (I can't remember how many children were there) kids of a "chovan" who lived in a small thatched hut in a small property (purampokku, I feel) and was one of the lowly paid farm workers. It seems this boy was very bright and thanks to the reservations, he became a surgeon and is earning also well. I really felt happy.

Dear Sir,
The boy must have done MBBS thru reservations. But after that, to do neurosurgery he must have qualified on merit. Because for PG in Neurosurgery afaik there are no reservations.

Regards.

 

[sangom]

Dear Sir,
The boy must have done MBBS thru reservations. But after that, to do neurosurgery he must have qualified on merit. Because for PG in Neurosurgery afaik there are no reservations.

Regards.

Smt HH,

I am not aware of the minute details. But even with reservation benefit, in Kerala it is an achievement for an "abjectly poor" person's son (belonging to the lower caste) to come up so well - even an MBBS pass - is a good achievement I would say. If, as you state, the PG is based on merit, then it is all the more creditable.

Apart from all that, one aspect of this incident is that in just one generation - 25 or so years - a low caste person can exhibit such high acumen, brilliance and intelligence, which some members here even, consider as something of an exclusive trait of brahmins (if confronted, they simply don the "varna" hat instead of the "caste" hat which they have in mind), falls to the ground. No wonder then that brahmins have to buck up to compete successfully with the rest if, say, reservation system is removed one fine morning - of course that may not happen.