• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Are Not Tamil Brahmins Tamilians ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
dear members
the aryan invasion theory does not hold water now. there are many theories floating around now.
however it is possible that brahmins migrated from central india (kannauj)and spread out . over the years there has been some integration of culture and traditions and also.
similarly all the kings of tamilnadu have strange surnames!!
foe ex CHOLAN=Chohan?
desingu= TEZ singh?
PAndian= pandeys?
 
dear members
the aryan invasion theory does not hold water now. there are many theories floating around now.
however it is possible that brahmins migrated from central india (kannauj)and spread out . over the years there has been some integration of culture and traditions and also.
similarly all the kings of tamilnadu have strange surnames!!
foe ex CHOLAN=Chohan?
desingu= TEZ singh?
PAndian= pandeys?
cheran= chouhan
 
What is the definition of a foreigner

Hello,
Just a few points to add to some of the points above. There is a project called the genographic project that is undertaken by the National Geographic in collabaration with IBM in mapping the human genome and tracing the history of human migration.
This project has been going on for years and supported by several reputed researchers across the world. One can even get ones DNA tested for about 100 US $. The results show exactly which gene marker that one belongs to. This project is the most scientific approach so far ever adopted by scientists, because they have actually taken thousands of gene samples from the world and have analysed the human races, using well known genetic theories and mathematical/statistical methods.

https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/index.html

The whole human population has been dividied into several genetic markers, and the whole of all India is supposed to contain a few markers only , and the entire indian population is technically classifed as belonging to the same genetic marker as the central asians/iranians etc. Of course the presence of some other markers is also there in varying proportions.

I read a book about this project and in the discussions on the results of this project , one of the trends the authors have pointed out, is that any sub groups ( like castes ) seem to resemble more the local population. In other words, a caste, say tamil brahmins, tend to genetically cluster with a tamil non-brahmin ( of any caste ). This also means that they will be more similar to their non-brahmin counterparts than they are to a north indian brahmin. This is true for European jews, Russian Jews, southern italians.
This is definitely not to say that, there are no north indian genes in TB. It is possible some sections of Tb were from the north, but the predominant genes in TBs must be from the local population.

The most fairest among southindians are found in the west coast of india, along the kerala and karnataka coast. The kodavas in coorg district are fairer than any other south indian caste I know and in fact they look fairer than an average person north indian ( except may be punjabis ). And TBs , definitely look very south indian and tamil to me.

More than the genetic differences , it does seem the cultural differences are more sharper between TBs and other tamils, but then again when compared to a North Indian brahmin, TB are more closer to tamils. This is true for Kannada Brahmins and Telugu brahmins as well. And again, within non-brahmins tamils, different castes have different customs, a farming caste follows rituals little different than that of a trading caste.

And i also remember reading somewhere that the Pallava dynasty was started somewhere in the 4-6 centuries in TN by Bactrian tribes from the Iranian region, who obviously got integrated into Tamil society with time. http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/india_parthian_colony1.php . and mind you, this article is not from an indian web site , but from the Iranian web site by an Iranian author.
Of course this is only speculation, and if true, means that the numerically small ruling class must have been of foreign origin , but the numerically large local population must have been genetically tamil and the invaders must have got mixed with locals over time. If this is true, some of their blood must be present in many non-brahmins in TN.

All this will definitely put a question mark on who is of foreign origin and who is indigenous in TN. One thing is for sure, detailed and scientific research like the genographic project will reveal much more than quoting barely educated demagogues like Periyar.

Things to ponder , huh?

- Krishnamoorthy
 
Dear Krishnamoorthy:
A very nice posting with good research background. I also read about the Pallavas (Pahalvi from Iran) were from Iran.
 
Very good postings.

Only the kodavars and other Indo-African tribes are the original inhabitants of TN. All others were migrants at one time or the another.

The main problem is with the communist historians like Romilla Thapar. They keep insisting on the Aryan invasion myth.

NEwspapers with communist/leftist tinge like the Frontline,The Hindu etc., also propagate it.

But the "no Aryan invasion" group got a setback when Mr.Rajaram (a archeologist) altered some archeological findings to show a non-existent vedic horse in Indus valley civilization. His forgery ?? or manipulation got exposed.

But the recent genetic studies have shown that there was some migration that happened in the mesolithic period (15-20000 years ago)to India and not during the decline of Indus Valley civilization time frame.
 
Dear Kabali:
According to all anthropologists, the ancestors of human beings (homo sapien) originated in Africa and then started on the migration to different parts of the world. Naturally, therefore, the migration to India is a plausible theory.

I would like to read up on this Rajaram's story. Where can I get some more info on this?
Also, why are the communists in India propagating the Aryan invasion theory? What have they got to benefit from this?
 
Dear Friends,

The Aryan Theory has been used, some claim, to diminish the accomplishments of the local Indian population and give the credit for Indus Civilization to others from Eurasia.

I find it very amusing to read the skin colour comparisons. It has been generally observed around the world that the pigmentation of the skin, corresponds over the centuries to the activity of one's predecessors. So. Africans, who are native, because of their hot to moderate climate and fierce sun, and who worked out in the open a lot while hunting and gathering have dark pigmentation. So are some of our Hindu brethren whose forefathers worked a lot in the open fields. But the Brahmins, ususally, who worked out of protected environments, working out of shade, used to have lighter skins, somewhat analogous to the Europeans, who sheltered themselves from the harsh elements. But if you look at the 'Red Indians' and even some Alaskan Tribes, who ventured out for long hours, have darker pigmentation, even though they have lived in harsher climes.

Of course, there are variations along the way, based on mixture etc.

While the research in to genetics is important to understand where we come from, it does not throw any other light on anything else. So what if we are all Aryans? or Dravidians? or whatever? What does it matter? How does that matter? This is one more way to divide the sentiments of the current population.

It is easy to seperate. But very hard to look at our brethren and say we are all the same, through adversary and other superficial differences. The art of negotiation and compromise always start from common ground, not from differences.

Pranams,
KRS
 
Kabali

Thanks for the link. One of the authors of the article, Michael Witzel is a well known anti-hindu-historian who propogates the Aryan Invasion theory. He teaches Sanskrit at Sanford. Recently he was also involved in the California Text Book controversary. No wonder Ram's frontline posted his article.

There have been a number of studies that have debunked the Aryan invaion theory. Here is one of the latest ones.

"http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/103/4/843#SEC2"

Good reading.

Ramki

KRS said:
Dear Friends,

The Aryan Theory has been used, some claim, to diminish the accomplishments of the local Indian population and give the credit for Indus Civilization to others from Eurasia.

I find it very amusing to read the skin colour comparisons. It has been generally observed around the world that the pigmentation of the skin, corresponds over the centuries to the activity of one's predecessors. So. Africans, who are native, because of their hot to moderate climate and fierce sun, and who worked out in the open a lot while hunting and gathering have dark pigmentation. So are some of our Hindu brethren whose forefathers worked a lot in the open fields. But the Brahmins, ususally, who worked out of protected environments, working out of shade, used to have lighter skins, somewhat analogous to the Europeans, who sheltered themselves from the harsh elements. But if you look at the 'Red Indians' and even some Alaskan Tribes, who ventured out for long hours, have darker pigmentation, even though they have lived in harsher climes.

Of course, there are variations along the way, based on mixture etc.

While the research in to genetics is important to understand where we come from, it does not throw any other light on anything else. So what if we are all Aryans? or Dravidians? or whatever? What does it matter? How does that matter? This is one more way to divide the sentiments of the current population.

It is easy to seperate. But very hard to look at our brethren and say we are all the same, through adversary and other superficial differences. The art of negotiation and compromise always start from common ground, not from differences.

Pranams,
KRS
Click to expand...
 
Dear Ramki Ji,

Michael Witzel is at Harvard (not Stanford), I think. There is a huge battle going on in the academic circles between the 'Secularists' and the 'Traditionalists' on this, each accusing the other side of intentionally skewing the History.

My opinion is that, irrespective of the History, we are here and now. As you have said, we have problems to solve. And we come from a great culture to be proud. We do not need to take a back seat to anyone in the world, regarding our people's contributions to Arts and Sciences over the centuries.

Pranams,
KRS
 
Thanks KRS. You are right. I stand corrected.

KRS said:
Dear Ramki Ji,

Michael Witzel is at Harvard (not Stanford), I think. There is a huge battle going on in the academic circles between the 'Secularists' and the 'Traditionalists' on this, each accusing the other side of intentionally skewing the History.

My opinion is that, irrespective of the History, we are here and now. As you have said, we have problems to solve. And we come from a great culture to be proud. We do not need to take a back seat to anyone in the world, regarding our people's contributions to Arts and Sciences over the centuries.

Pranams,
KRS
Click to expand...
 
Are Not Tamil Brahmin Tamilians?

I am jayashree shankar, from secunderabad, settled here for the past 20 years, basically born and brought up in Madurai, temple city..I am a Tamil Brahmin and am very proud to be here with you all as a member. It is very pity that nowadays the Brahmin culture is fading slowly.....atleast 80% is slightly shakened by the technology and the modern world...No doubt they have tremendous thinking capacity, and rational thinking knowledge and so on...but you see, how many families are still following the basic principle of being a brahmin....performing the daily Gayathri Jabam....Very rare....Either husbands nor sons....doing the basic things here..What to say??? All cuffed with situations.....and became escapist.....:popcorn:
 
[KRS-But if you look at the 'Red Indians' and even some Alaskan Tribes, who ventured out for long hours, have darker pigmentation, even though they have lived in harsher climes.]

Dear KRS:
A small correction!! First of all, the so-called 'Red Indians' (as we were taught when I grew up in India) are not at all RED! They all have mangolian facial features. Besides, the white man has more or less destroyed the true Native Americans (this is the correct term to name the original people who lived in the US when Columbus arrived); most of them have mixed blood (mostly white).
Alaskan tribes (Eskimos) don't have darker skin; they have fair skin with a yellowish shade.
Speaking of skin color, we, the Indians, should be classified as racists. Don't we all want to be fair! and we look down on persons with darker skin?! Look at all the matrimonial columns - they all want the brides and grooms to be very fair (no one says how to measure 'fairness'!), tall (again, they are very coy about these requirements!).
 
Dear Silverfox,

You are correct. Some even mention that the colour 'Red' does not refer to a skin colour, but rather to a vegetable dye paint they adorned themselves with. I used to live in Minnesota some twenty odd years ago. There I came across several American Indians, and you mention, their culture as people is totally destroyed by the invaders, first by bringing in diseases and later by subjugating.

Yes, as I have often told my friends, we the 'Upper Class/Caste" Indians in particular are very racist. During my life in the States for the past thirty six years, I have always observed that 'we' rarely befriend the 'black' people. This is of course a generalization.

It is also very funny to note that even among American Blacks, there is this skin colour shade preference, for lighter skin. I don't know why it is. I can only ascribe it to the victims identifying with the abusers with power and wanting to be like them. There have been numerous studies done where a black child instinctively prefers a white doll in preference to a black doll!

But if we Indians are prejudiced, it must be recent in it's origin. Lord Vishnu is black and so are Rama and Krishna. Krishna's black handsomeness is celebrated in our Scriptures.

This shows that there is hope that as one learns to be prejudicial on the basis of irrelevant attributes, one can also learn not to be so.

Pranams,
KRS
 
Dear KRS:
Beautiful observations! Looks like you beat me to it in terms of living in the US! I have been living here for almost 40 years and am planning to return to my roots!
 
Dear Silverfox,

No, looks like you have about 3 years of seniority of living here - I came here during 1970.

I wish I can go back to my roots. But not having adopted detachment, and having children who have entirely grown up here and who would not want me to go back, I am afraid I will spend my "VanaPrastha' and 'Sanyasa' years here.

As I said, I also lost my dad when I was very young. And looks like you are in the IT industry also. Many Similarities.

Namaskarams,
KRS
 
dear silverfox,
you are very correct. we are colour sensitive. it may take ages before it gets out of the system. instead of engaging in a loosing battle, we should concentrate more on eradication of dowry , prejudice towards girl child , maamiyar -nattanar kodumai , wife beating etc within our community. these issues can be easily defeated by joining hands and educating thru all available forums. i know of people shedding tears in front sitcoms and repeating the same within the family!!
regards
eswaran
 
iam_not_a_tambrahm said:
In reply to adidravidans post above, I would like to point out that i have met many kannada brahmins and telugu brahmins who are proud of their culture and seem to identify with their history, their kings, their past, and are equally proud of many of their non-brahmin leaders etc. Telugu brahmins mostly never say anything bad about their telugu politicians , to non-telugus (of course this is a generalisation!). Even today many telugus ( of all castes ) consider telugu brahmins to be generally moderate and honest and simple in thinking. I do not know if such perception exists about tamil brahmins among the populace in TN.

Many years ago ,one of my classmates, a kannada brahmin, was really proud of one of the famous kannada kings, (krishnadevaraya ? may be i cant remember) , and he used to say that (in a lighter vein !) he feels superior because his king defeated some body from another state.
May be some (definitely NOT ALL) of the tamil brahmins are indifferent (or do not identify with) to their own tamil culture. Or atleast perhaps there is such perception among non-brahmins. I remember one of my tamil friend ( not a brahmin ) mention that some of the tamil brahmins think they are seperate and different from other tamilians. This was several years back .
Incidentally , what I observed is that many tamil brahmins in karnataka , seem to be more proud of their tamil culture than their counterparts in TN. May be this is in reaction to the propaganda by Kannada chauvinist leaders like Nagaraj?.
In any case, I do not want to propagate any stereotypes against anybody.
Whatever may be the case, the sustained propaganda predominantly by DMK , specifically karunanidhi, is the main reason why many stereotypes exist about tamil brahmins among common populace in TN, irrespective of what Tamil Brahmins did or did not do.

- Krishnamoorthy
Click to expand...


Messrs Adidravidan & Mr.Krishnamoorthy, I'm soory both of you are wrong. There was no anti-brahmin movement anywhere in India except Tamil Nadu. Telugus Kannadigas and Malayalees don't think of their brahmins as aliens but they regard them as Telugus, Kannadigas & Malayalees. In fact the worst behaved brahmins were the Nambudiris of Kerala. But there is no anti-Brahminism there. Even within T.N., as I had said earlier, it is only in the central & southern districts that there is virulent anti-brahminism. But even those guys vote for Jayalalitha!!! It is a paradox!!!

:violin: :yo:
 
KRS said:
Dear Silverfox,
No, looks like you have about 3 years of seniority of living here - I came here during 1970.
I wish I can go back to my roots. But not having adopted detachment, and having children who have entirely grown up here and who would not want me to go back, I am afraid I will spend my "VanaPrastha' and 'Sanyasa' years here.
As I said, I also lost my dad when I was very young. And looks like you are in the IT industry also. Many Similarities.
Namaskarams,
KRS
Click to expand...
Dear KRS:
Yes, I came here in Oct.1967 to go to Graduate school, as naive, frightened, shy young lad!
Speaking of going back to our roots, didn't you leave your folks when you left for the US? I left my mom, brother, sister and everybody else. My take on this is that my children can come visit me in India. This way, they will be in touch with our culture and tradition.
Yes, I was in the IT industry (worked for GE, IBM and had my own company).
I am leaving for Chennai via London/Scotland and am arriving in Chennai on Oct.29th. I am very excited!
 
Not Only Brahmins But Dalits & Muslims Are Hated In T.n.

adidravidan (Offline)
Junior Member


Posts: 2
Join Date: Sep 2006
Zodiac Sign: Virgo
tamil brahmins are not broad minded like the other brahmins?? - 09-30-2006, 11:44 AM
may be tamil brahmins are short tempered as compared to other brahmins.

How do you say Tambrams are not broad-minded? For nearly a decade I had an old ADI DRAVIDA lady by name MARY alias ELLAMMA as servant-maid & she used to clean even our kitchen. In our place, NO UPPERCASTE NON-BRAHMIN EVER ALLOWS A DALIT INTO HIS/HER HOUSE, LEAVE ALONE EMPLOY A DALIT. Even now an ADI DRAVIDA by name THIRUVENGADAM is a part time employee of mine and he fetches my tiffin,etc. Once a Mudaliar asked me, " What kind of a brahmin are you? You are employing a 'PARIAH'" (sic). There is a township near a Sengundhar-dominated village in Vellore. A Dalit was running a tea-shop in that township. I used to drink coffee & tea there but the Sengundha Mudaliars of that village used to scrupulously avoid that tea-shop. So much for the "narrow-mindedness" of Tamil Brahmins & the "broad-mindedness" of others!!!

But then Dalits & Muslims are hated throughout T.N. In fact in the northern districts of T.N. Brahmins are not hated so much but the Dalits & Muslims are. What have you got to say about this? Moreover, not only Brahmins but Dalits are also regarded as non-Tamils in T.N. THOL. THIRUMAAVALAVAN. the Dalit leader had once stated in a Tamil magazine that there was an AGARADHI (dictionary) IN MADRAS UNIVERSITY WHICH SAID THAT "AARIYARUM, PARAIYARUM THAVIRTHA PIRA SAATHIYINARAE THAMIZHARGAL " ("Only castes other than Aryans & Paraiahs are Tamilians"). What have you got to say about this?



From the above it must be clear to you that Brahmins are not the enemies of Dalits. Once a Vanniya Gounder family went to Tirupathi & they had invited me and others for lunch. Myself & a relative of mine (both brahmins) went for the lunch but TWO VELLALAS, ONE A LOCAL VELLALA AND THE OTHER A THONDAI MANDALA SAIVA VELLALA OF TANJAVUR, ran away saying that they would not eat at a "PALLI'S" house!!! The beauty is that the second one was an ardent admirer of Periyar E.V.R.!!!

:violin: :behindsofa:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anti-brahmin movements in other states

KAUNDINYA said:

Messrs Adidravidan & Mr.Krishnamoorthy, I'm soory both of you are wrong. There was no anti-brahmin movement anywhere in India except Tamil Nadu. Telugus Kannadigas and Malayalees don't think of their brahmins as aliens but they regard them as Telugus, Kannadigas & Malayalees. In fact the worst behaved brahmins were the Nambudiris of Kerala. But there is no anti-Brahminism there. Even within T.N., as I had said earlier, it is only in the central & southern districts that there is virulent anti-brahminism. But even those guys vote for Jayalalitha!!! It is a paradox!!!

:violin: :yo:
Click to expand...
Hello Kaudinya,
If you read my post carefully, I was in fact clearly stating, not disputing , what you said above, that there seems to anti-brahminism only in TN and not elsewhere. If you read my article further, you will also see that I have discussed a few possible reasons behind this phenomenon.
Yes you were right about the Nambudiris, but their past arrogance also stemmed from the fact they , along with Nairs, held close to 100 of all cultiveable land in Kerala, before the land reform movement. But after the land was redistributed, many of them were reduced to near poverty, and with it their brahminism also disappeared . Ironically, a large number of Nambudiris were also in the forefront of the communist movement that was responsible for the land reforms. ( EMS Namboodiripad being the best example, he was revered by the whole state , irrespective of caste ).

Kerala is one of the most educated states in India today, and no anti-brahminism exists there, because there is no politician there who has taken up anti-brahminism as full time occupation, like Karunanidhi has in TN. Same is true for politicians in Andhra and Karnataka, where nobody has taken anti-brahminism to ridiculous heights, there is virtually no anti-brahminism there.


- Krishnamoorthy
 
I Had Lot Of "tamil Patru" When I Was In School

iam_not_a_tambrahm said:
In reply to adidravidans post above, I would like to point out that i have met many kannada brahmins and telugu brahmins who are proud of their culture and seem to identify with their history, their kings, their past, and are equally proud of many of their non-brahmin leaders etc. Telugu brahmins mostly never say anything bad about their telugu politicians , to non-telugus (of course this is a generalisation!). Even today many telugus ( of all castes ) consider telugu brahmins to be generally moderate and honest and simple in thinking. I do not know if such perception exists about tamil brahmins among the populace in TN.

Many years ago ,one of my classmates, a kannada brahmin, was really proud of one of the famous kannada kings, (krishnadevaraya ? may be i cant remember) , and he used to say that (in a lighter vein !) he feels superior because his king defeated some body from another state.
May be some (definitely NOT ALL) of the tamil brahmins are indifferent (or do not identify with) to their own tamil culture. Or atleast perhaps there is such perception among non-brahmins. I remember one of my tamil friend ( not a brahmin ) mention that some of the tamil brahmins think they are seperate and different from other tamilians. This was several years back .
Incidentally , what I observed is that many tamil brahmins in karnataka , seem to be more proud of their tamil culture than their counterparts in TN. May be this is in reaction to the propaganda by Kannada chauvinist leaders like Nagaraj?.
In any case, I do not want to propagate any stereotypes against anybody.
Whatever may be the case, the sustained propaganda predominantly by DMK , specifically karunanidhi, is the main reason why many stereotypes exist about tamil brahmins among common populace in TN, irrespective of what Tamil Brahmins did or did not do.

- Krishnamoorthy
Click to expand...

I received my primary & secondary education through the medium of Tamil. I had a lot of "TAMIL PATRU" when I was in school. But many books that were presented to me for winning essay competitions and elocution contests in Tamil contained a lot of anti-Brahmin stuff. When I went to college I happened to read books by Periyar EVR, Anna & other DK & DMK leaders.So naturally my "tamil patru" started waning. You cannot blame me for that. If at all anyone has to be blamed it is the DK, DMK & other anti-brahmin leaders, speakers & writers. You must remember that every human being has self-respect. Even Dr.Ambedkar hated Hinduism because it advocated untouchability & called himself a non-Hindu. Even if some guys in T.N. do not regard me as a Tamilian, the Andhras, Kannadigas & Keralites call me a Tamilian only. What if I am a Tamilian or not a Tamilian? I am a human being and a Hindu. I am proud of being a Hindu.:violin: :laugh:
 
It is not true that there has been no anti-Brahmin sentiment against Telugu Brahmins. The anti-brahmin movement in Andhra Pradesh was spearheaded by Ramaswamy Choudhary, a Kamma by caste, and continues in some form to date. However, there has been no physical violence to the anti-brahmin movement of Andhra, as Telugu Brahmins constitute hardly 1% of the population of Andhra Pradesh, and were never economically as strong as, say, Reddys or even the Balija Naidus. It was more of a symbolic struggle by Kammas against a system, which they saw as Brahminical.

Secondly, like the link to the research paper in www.tamilnation.org says, there was a practicality associated with the spread of Brahminism from north to south. Wherever the king wanted to turn wasteland into a sprawling pastoral habitation, he would send a manager to maintain the order & flow of things (a Brahmin), with a contingent of skilled and unskilled workers belonging to other communities. The Agraharas developed this way, and while the Agraharas were exclusively Brahmin, around them would live various other communities, the artisans, agricultural labour, washermen, barbers etc., who would share a symbiotic relationship with the folk living inside the Agraharas. Sometimes, by the time some of these non-Brahmin folks moved out and started separate settlements elsewhere, they would be Sanskritized enough so as to proclaim themselves as Brahmins, and live that way. Such movements occurred several times in course of history, mainly owing to the patronization by one king, or to avoid the wrath of another.

There were many non-Brahmin kings who were great patrons of Brahmins, and the Telugu Brahmins to this day fondly remember them, Krishna Deva Raya being one of them. Infact the first "Brahmanical Kings" of Andhra Pradesh, the Satavahanas, were horse-riding nomads from Maharashtra. Once they settled down in Andhra, they needed good managers and orderliness in the society. So they brought Apasthamba (who wrote Apasthamba Smriti as opposed to Manusmrithi, which many South Indian Brahmins follow even today) and his associates from Kashi, and also a few Brahmins from the present day north Kanara District of Karnataka, and settled them in Andhra. A mere examination of the origins of the Andhra Brahmins alone throws up a bewildering variety (some of them turn out to be from as far as Awadh). I am sure the same must be the case with Tamil Brahmins also.

Krishna Deva Raya, who was described as a "Dasi Putra", a Shudra born between the king and his non-Kshatriya maid-servant, was a great patron of Brahmins, and brought many Telugu Brahmins to both Karnataka and Tamilnadu, and settled them there. Some of these settlements exist even today in Tumkur and Kolar Districts of Karnataka. The Reddy kings, on similar lines, were great patrons of Brahmins. So as you can see there has always been a symbiotic relationship between Brahmins and other castes. The discordant notes came from those communities who were not accepted into the fold of the traditional Brahmanical society. Once they too are accepted, and become sufficiently Sanskritized (= in the sense coined by Dr. M.N. Srinivas), their anti-Brahminism starts waning away. According to Dr. M.N. Srinivas, some sections of Reddys in Andhra Pradesh are more Sanskritized than the so called Telugu Brahmins.

The problem with Tamilnadu as I see it (as an outsider), is the inherent opposition to the Sanskritization of non-Brahmin communities, supported by a flawed ideology.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest ads

Follow us on Social Media

Back
Top