Are you a Brahmin?

[tbs]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Sorry, it is thadam puranda brahmins,

Thadam is the groove made by carts on roads by going over the same tracks. Easier for the carts to move. The 'thadams' or tracks followed by brahmins is now wide enough to span the entire road (the permitted half of the road, before someone accuses of lane discipline). Those who follow the different schools of brahminism are happy with the travel with high, medium or low degrees of adherence. Those who do not like this road are free to take a diversion and follow a different road. They have found new paths, gurus and values and are free to travel in the new 'thadam'. Only the thadam puranda brahmins are indulging in brahmin hate and brahmin bashing because, perhaps, the route they have chosen has not given them a positive aim, direction and the mindset to let others live their own way.

hi sarang sir,
thadam puranda brahmins are dreailed brahmins......like poorvasrama brahmins.....not anymore....they hate brahminism/brahmin

caste bashers......its okay....who cares?..............

regards
tbs

 

[Govinda]

but from a sense of (misguided) superiority from the feeling that your group is the legal inheritors of whatever Vashista, Kashyapa, Parasara etc., have left behind (including amorous instincts during boat rides? ). Did we not have many individuals even in the ancient days who derided and questioned the vedas - like kautsa who said the vedas have no meaning, and Charvaata?

O.K. Acc. to the same vedas, all are the creation of/dependent on Brahman, and everyone is entitled to know Him. Plus, all humanity were born from those 7 sapta Rishis called MahaBrahmanas, by that logic, all are in fact originally Brahmins and inherit the gotra of those Rishis. Everyone owns those Rishis and Brahman. So, we all are equally qualified to praise or bash them. Permission granted The grantor of our will is the same AntaryAmin(Lord) in everyone, I cannot have any reservations. One can also bash Brahmins or Sudras, as one's Self awareness is not going to be hurt, unless driven by mind rather than Self. The case of Kausta or CharvAkas bashing were only restricted to logic.

And, where in the vedas or elsewhere, is it stated that the performance of the few rituals done by you is sufficient to claim "vedic belief", whatever you may mean by that?

No one says that, but Vedas don't deny the gradual evolution of Consciousness either. The vedic belief was completed embedded in most of our every daily routines, just that we have not been doing some of them recently owing to societal changes. So, we have moved away form that thought system, we would have to gradually take up those lost ones, which would develop further. You want us to be a dictator or a pacifist, but not in-between Then we should have just remained as a child and not to grow up with age/experience/knowledge.

I understand what you are saying, Just practice those aspects of karma, jnana and Bhatki yoga. Any spiritual by qualities is just enough. Gita, has those suggestions for these Kali Yuga, but still Karma Yoga is doing one basic nithya karmAs - like we brush, bathe, etc, we have those others to salute and worship the divine. Being conscious of God (Yoga) in every of our actions is Spiritual, which is impossible right away, as we have been in Sun TV, Star TV all while, and always looking for monetary rewards and ownership attitude.

For kali yuga, Krishna has come down to this level, "If one offers Me with love and devotion a leaf, a flower, fruit or water, I will accept it." Gita-9.26, we should take responsibility in performing more actions to focus our mind towards Him. That is all, if it means doing nithya karmAs. Then one cannot suggest, once we have developed such focus, let us leave those karmAs. As long as this body exists, "distracted mind" exists, we have to do those karmAs always, Krishna was careful in saying that "Always chanting My glories, endeavoring with great determination, bowing down before Me, these great souls perpetually worship Me with devotion" Gita 9.14

 

[sangom]

O.K. Acc. to the same vedas, all are the creation of/dependent on Brahman, and everyone is entitled to know Him. Plus, all humanity were born from those 7 sapta Rishis called MahaBrahmanas, by that logic, all are in fact originally Brahmins and inherit the gotra of those Rishis. Everyone owns those Rishis and Brahman. So, we all are equally qualified to praise or bash them. Permission granted The grantor of our will is the same AntaryAmin(Lord) in everyone, I cannot have any reservations. One can also bash Brahmins or Sudras, as one's Self awareness is not going to be hurt, unless driven by mind rather than Self. The case of Kausta or CharvAkas bashing were only restricted to logic.

Shri Govinda,

As I have tried to explain elsewhere, the Rigveda (and so perhaps the other two, yajus and saama also) do not reckon a Brahman of the Sankara variety. If you look at Sankara's brahmasutra bhashya, out of nearly 1900 citations from different scriptures, his reliance on vedas, aranyakas and braahmanas is less than 100; those on rigveda (samhita) just 15 only. Hence, there is adequate grounds to conclude that the "Brahman" concept which you refer to is an Upanishadic, and not Vedic construct, imo.

It is not correct to hold that the entire humanity sprung from the Saptarishis. If one is to believe Purusha Sookta, "तॆन देवा अयजन्त साध्याः ऋषयश्च ये। तस्माद् यज्ञात् सर्वहुत: (tena devā ayajanta sādhyāḥ ṛṣayaśca ye| tasmād yajñāt sarvahuta", the rishis did the yajna and the four castes were formed therefrom. Hence all are infact not brahmins even originally, if we believe Purusha sooktam to be true and not mere blah blah.

No one says that, but Vedas don't deny the gradual evolution of Consciousness either. The vedic belief was completed embedded in most of our every daily routines, just that we have not been doing some of them recently owing to societal changes. So, we have moved away form that thought system, we would have to gradually take up those lost ones, which would develop further. You want us to be a dictator or a pacifist, but not in-between Then we should have just remained as a child and not to grow up with age/experience/knowledge.

Frankly, I do not understand your line of thinking. AFAIK, the vedas proper don't mention anything about "evolution of consciousness" in the sense we speak of evolution of species. Upanishads, at least the earliest and more significant of them (on which Sankara wrote commentaries) talk about atman, if that is what you mean by "consciousness", and experiencing of the atman. But I doubt very much if this can be called as an "evolution of the consciousness" because (1) the jeeva which is the same as brahman, according to advaitha, is perfect and just cannot 'evolve', and (2) the consciousness (jeeva) itself is elusive and to experience it, is supposed to be the very purpose of human birth, according to the scriptures.

I do not understand how the "vedic belief was completed embedded in most of our every daily routines". I will be very grateful if you will elucidate. may be the ordained daily routine of brahmins was in tune with the vedic injunctions and nothing more.

Same for the rest of the quoted portion, I can't guess what you want to say.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

I found this post among my old files. I think it may be relevant here.

Many of the discussions in this forum center around the definition or description of a Brahmin.

According to the Sasthirigal/Purohidhar who makes a living out of his Brahminhood

A Brahmin is one

1. Who does not eat meat or drink alhcoholic drinks. Of course it is another matter that some of them do drink in private. A sasthirigal who drinks is still accepted by his customers though some puritans may avoid such Brahmins.

I had posted in another thread how vegetarianism is not a pre requisite to be a Brahmin.

Neither is avoidance of Alcohol. Soma pana drinking Brahmins. Tharpanam is done with Wine in some Pujas by Brahmins. But not in Tamil Nadu.

2. One who wears a pancha kaccham. What has the wearing of a dress to do with being a Brahmin? The Namboodiris just to quote an example do not wear pancha kaccham. Of course you could even extend this by saying that a Brahmin should only wear a Koupeenam/Kovanam. Some members have propounded this theory earlier in this forum.

3. One who keepas Kudumi. Or some modification of that.

4. One who does Trikala Sandyavandhanam.

Why not the daily Homa? How did the Tamil Brahmins give it up? What about the other duties of the Brahmins?

5. One who does Amavasai Tharpanam and Pitru Shraddham.

6. One who knows the Vedas. But your own definition of the Vedas.

The emphasis is never laid on the learning or recitation of the Vedas. Because many of the Sasthirigals have never attended a Veda patashala. Even when they have been through the Veda Patashala, most of them rarely if ever recite the Vedas daily. Their recitation is restricted to what is required for carrying out the Samskaras for the Yajamanas. Most of them do not know Sanskrit. They carry a Tamil version of Taittriya Mantra Kosam for reference.

The strange thing that even Acharyas do not insist on their learning Sanskrit.

6. One who believes in total denial of the right of the women to do anything religious.

7. One who believes that Brahmins are a superior caste.

This definition has been inbred into the Tamil Brahmin for ages. Without this indoctrination it would be difficult for the professional Brahmins to survive.

Most of the Brahmins find it extremely difficult to get over these age old prejudices/opinions.

Even when they break out they feel guilty. Even when they call themselves reformers, non-believers and what not, they are not able to shed this narrow definition of a Brahmin. This sort of conformation is what defines Brahminism to them.

Anyone who does not conform to this narrow definition is called by all sort of names. When provoked they are even called Chandalas and non-Brahmins.

I remember another religious forum with most of the members belonging to a religious cult. Their definition of Hinduism is very narrow. In that forum all other apects of Hinduism which do not conform to their definition is called Neo Hinduism. All other Gods are called demi-Gods. Even when a person rejects the cult his definition and perception of other Gods as demi Gods does not change.

There is a concerted effort to reinforce these views on the younger generation. Unfortunately some young people are taken in by this propaganda. They come to believe that a golden age for Brahmins would dawn if we revert to the Medieval age.

Many of us have been questioning these ideas and practices which are meant simply to benefit the professional Brahmins. It is a necessary because the younger generation should be able to decide on their own.

 

[sangom]

I found this post among my old files. I think it may be relevant here.

Many of the discussions in this forum center around the definition or description of a Brahmin.

According to the Sasthirigal/Purohidhar who makes a living out of his Brahminhood

A Brahmin is one

1. Who does not eat meat or drink alhcoholic drinks. Of course it is another matter that some of them do drink in private. A sasthirigal who drinks is still accepted by his customers though some puritans may avoid such Brahmins.

I had posted in another thread how vegetarianism is not a pre requisite to be a Brahmin.

Neither is avoidance of Alcohol. Soma pana drinking Brahmins. Tharpanam is done with Wine in some Pujas by Brahmins. But not in Tamil Nadu.

2. One who wears a pancha kaccham. What has the wearing of a dress to do with being a Brahmin? The Namboodiris just to quote an example do not wear pancha kaccham. Of course you could even extend this by saying that a Brahmin should only wear a Koupeenam/Kovanam. Some members have propounded this theory earlier in this forum.

3. One who keepas Kudumi. Or some modification of that.

4. One who does Trikala Sandyavandhanam.

Why not the daily Homa? How did the Tamil Brahmins give it up? What about the other duties of the Brahmins?

5. One who does Amavasai Tharpanam and Pitru Shraddham.

6. One who knows the Vedas. But your own definition of the Vedas.

The emphasis is never laid on the learning or recitation of the Vedas. Because many of the Sasthirigals have never attended a Veda patashala. Even when they have been through the Veda Patashala, most of them rarely if ever recite the Vedas daily. Their recitation is restricted to what is required for carrying out the Samskaras for the Yajamanas. Most of them do not know Sanskrit. They carry a Tamil version of Taittriya Mantra Kosam for reference.

The strange thing that even Acharyas do not insist on their learning Sanskrit.

6. One who believes in total denial of the right of the women to do anything religious.

7. One who believes that Brahmins are a superior caste.

This definition has been inbred into the Tamil Brahmin for ages. Without this indoctrination it would be difficult for the professional Brahmins to survive.

Most of the Brahmins find it extremely difficult to get over these age old prejudices/opinions.

Even when they break out they feel guilty. Even when they call themselves reformers, non-believers and what not, they are not able to shed this narrow definition of a Brahmin. This sort of conformation is what defines Brahminism to them.

Anyone who does not conform to this narrow definition is called by all sort of names. When provoked they are even called Chandalas and non-Brahmins.

I remember another religious forum with most of the members belonging to a religious cult. Their definition of Hinduism is very narrow. In that forum all other apects of Hinduism which do not conform to their definition is called Neo Hinduism. All other Gods are called demi-Gods. Even when a person rejects the cult his definition and perception of other Gods as demi Gods does not change.

There is a concerted effort to reinforce these views on the younger generation. Unfortunately some young people are taken in by this propaganda. They come to believe that a golden age for Brahmins would dawn if we revert to the Medieval age.

Many of us have been questioning these ideas and practices which are meant simply to benefit the professional Brahmins. It is a necessary because the younger generation should be able to decide on their own.

A very enlightening post. After many years of leading the life of a typical, humdrum, tabra, when I started thinking seriously where all the mantras, bhajans, temple visits, idols and murtis, ritualls and so on are leading me to, I felt the first thing is to know exactly what these various mantras meant. It was due to my efforts in that direction that I became an agnostic in the end.

iniyan is correct when he says that most ideas and practices in brahmin/Hindu way of life are meant simply to benefit the professional Brahmins i.e., the purohitas. If a serious study is made by some scholar it may be found that this sort of a change came about when the yajurveda was in the formation/compilation stage. The legend of Yajnavalkya and Shukla- and Krishna- yajurveda, most probably refer to some sort of internal revolt by some perspicacious brahmanas who questioned the growing complexities and monopolization of the sacrificial (priestly) duties by one class of people and that in the end the questioners ended up forming their own rival guild of priets.

Since we tabras have been brainwashed into not accepting anything outside what our own scriptures say, and these uniformly extol and explain whatever is contained in the vedas, there has been no serious dissent since the times of Buddha. Even Vivekananda who found many important lacunae/deficiencies in Hindu scriptures, somehow became (was made to become?) an ardent proponent of the very same hinduism. That, to me, shows the coercive power of Hindu religion even as late as the end of the 19th. century.

 

[Nara]

...

2. One who wears a pancha kaccham.
3. One who keepas Kudumi. Or some modification of that.
4. One who does Trikala Sandyavandhanam.
5. One who does Amavasai Tharpanam and Pitru Shraddham.
6. One who knows the Vedas. But your own definition of the Vedas.
6. One who believes in total denial of the right of the women to do anything religious.
7. One who believes that Brahmins are a superior caste.

When it is said that Brahmanyam comes from conduct not merely by birth, the conduct refers to the above, not what one would consider good conduct in a secular world. The above defines who a Brahmin is.

Cheers!

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

These are a set of rules created by the Tamil Brahmins in the medieval ages and has nothing to do with conduct. Dress and rituals do not ensure good conduct. Then you compile a compendium of Dharmasasthras to justify these. Not one single Dharmasasthra by which you swear in your abhivadaye. But a collection of rules from different Dharmasasthras to justify the prevalent practices. Every Brahmin community in India has its own set of rules.

None of these seem to conform to the basic duties of a Brahmin

“Adhyaapanam Adhyayanam

Yajanam Yaajanam Tathaa

Daanam Pratigraham Chaiva

Brahmanaanaamakalpayaat”

Teaching, learning, performing Yaaga, make performing Yaga, accept Daana, and give Daana are the six duties of a Brahmin.

Then this also goes against Hinduism which had its own Female Rishis like Vak Ambirini, Gargi and others. Lopamudra is the Guru of Hadi vidya.

What is seen is that almost all the saints of Tamil Nadu had come out of this rigid rules which bound the Brahmins to his purohita and totally prohibited original thinking.

In fact if one has to progress in spirituality he has to come out of this rigid patterns of behaviour.

I do not think any of my pravara rishis followed this so called code of conduct.

I can go on. I have posted about this so often in this forum.

According to this set of rules even Bagavan Ramana Maharishi did not have Brahmanyam!!! That is why Bagavan Ramana Maharishi does not have as many followers among Tamil Brahmins as one would expect.

 

[prasad1]

​

I am surprised the so called computer literate people post totally absurd information. There is no mention of dress defining a brahmin, it is total nonsense.

The belief that people born in brahmin caste, automatically become brahmins, is a much later concept in the very ancient land of India. In the pre-Gita period (before the beginning of the Christian era) a Brahmin was a person who had attained highest spiritual knowledge (brahmavidya). This was an extremely difficult path of discipline of body, mind , and intellect, and people irrespective of their birth or class, who dedicated to such an austere life were recognized as brahmins.A great example of this tradition (that a person becoming a brahmin, rather than born as one) is the case of Vishwamitra, a warrior (kshatriya), who became a brahmin after attaining brahmavidya, and composed the Gayatri mantra, the most sacred hymn of the Hindus.
A smritis, or code of conduct composed by sage Atri defines brahminhood very clearly.

"By birth, every man is a Shudra (an ignorant person). Through various types of disciplines (samskaras), he becomes a dwija (twice born). Through the studies of scriptures, he becomes a vipra (or a scholar). Through realization of supreme spirit (brahmajnana), he becomes a brahmin."

​

The Bhagavad-Gita divides[SUP]1[/SUP] the class of people into four categories of Brahmana, Kshtriya, Vaishya, and Shudra depending on the traits (svabhava) inherent in individuals.

Kamat's Potpourri: Brahmins - Who is a Brahmin?

 

[Nara]

The belief that people born in brahmin caste, automatically become brahmins, is a much later concept in the very ancient land of India. In the pre-Gita period (before the beginning of the Christian era) a Brahmin was a person who had attained highest spiritual knowledge (brahmavidya). This was an extremely difficult path of discipline of body, mind , and intellect, and people irrespective of their birth or class, who dedicated to such an austere life were recognized as brahmins....

Folks, here is another example of this perennial problem, the thinking that to be a Brahmin is to attain this or that, discipline, intellect, austerity, pile on whatever else that comes to mind, when in fact all that is required to be a brahmin is to be born into that caste and have big chip on the shoulder.

I have never seen a Shudra saying, ever so earnestly, one does not become a Shudra by simply be born into that caste, you have to be really lazy, stupid, and fit only for manual labor which by definition is menial.

The widespread brahmin obsession with who a real Brahmin is, is proof positive of their narcissism.

Cheers!

 

[sarang]

Hasty generalization and non observation. If narcissism means self love and exceptional interest in and admiration for yourself, then we have narcissist atheists, n.scientists, n.politicians, n.pontiffs, n.communists, n.capitalists. Brahmins will be way down the list.

Brahmins have a rich past and a value-tradition; those who acknowledge it, have faith and practice their time hollowed tradition to the extent possible (1 to 99%) need not worry about those who shout from the pits.

 

[sarang]

That implies that all have to accept 'varna' concept, as enunciated by Lord Krishna. A new smruti which accepts the vedas has to be written and approved and accepted by all varnas. Rules and codes of conduct which are in line with dharma and in line with laws of the land are to be written. Procedure and 'sadangus' for migration to preferred varnas must be defined.

Kamat.com is an excellent, long surviving site with interesting information.

I am surprised the so called computer literate people post totally absurd information. There is no mention of dress defining a brahmin, it is total nonsense.

The belief that people born in brahmin caste, automatically become brahmins, is a much later concept in the very ancient land of India. In the pre-Gita period (before the beginning of the Christian era) a Brahmin was a person who had attained highest spiritual knowledge (brahmavidya). This was an extremely difficult path of discipline of body, mind , and intellect, and people irrespective of their birth or class, who dedicated to such an austere life were recognized as brahmins.A great example of this tradition (that a person becoming a brahmin, rather than born as one) is the case of Vishwamitra, a warrior (kshatriya), who became a brahmin after attaining brahmavidya, and composed the Gayatri mantra, the most sacred hymn of the Hindus.
A smritis, or code of conduct composed by sage Atri defines brahminhood very clearly.

"By birth, every man is a Shudra (an ignorant person). Through various types of disciplines (samskaras), he becomes a dwija (twice born). Through the studies of scriptures, he becomes a vipra (or a scholar). Through realization of supreme spirit (brahmajnana), he becomes a brahmin."

​

The Bhagavad-Gita divides[SUP]1[/SUP] the class of people into four categories of Brahmana, Kshtriya, Vaishya, and Shudra depending on the traits (svabhava) inherent in individuals.

Kamat's Potpourri: Brahmins - Who is a Brahmin?

 

[sarang]

By the way, Kamats are traditional madhva brahmins; I wonder whether Sri K.L. Kamat will claim that he is a brahmin or not.

 

[Nara]

Hasty generalization and non observation. If narcissism means self love and exceptional interest in and admiration for yourself, then we have narcissist atheists, n.scientists, n.politicians, n.pontiffs, n.communists, n.capitalists. Brahmins will be way down the list..

Sarang, You are missing the point. Please answer the question I raised in myh post. Narcissists exist among other groups do not absolve this excessive obsession with who a real brahmin is.

Thank you ...

 

[sangom]

I am surprised the so called computer literate people post totally absurd information. There is no mention of dress defining a brahmin, it is total nonsense.

The belief that people born in brahmin caste, automatically become brahmins, is a much later concept in the very ancient land of India. In the pre-Gita period (before the beginning of the Christian era) a Brahmin was a person who had attained highest spiritual knowledge (brahmavidya). This was an extremely difficult path of discipline of body, mind , and intellect, and people irrespective of their birth or class, who dedicated to such an austere life were recognized as brahmins.A great example of this tradition (that a person becoming a brahmin, rather than born as one) is the case of Vishwamitra, a warrior (kshatriya), who became a brahmin after attaining brahmavidya, and composed the Gayatri mantra, the most sacred hymn of the Hindus.
A smritis, or code of conduct composed by sage Atri defines brahminhood very clearly.

"By birth, every man is a Shudra (an ignorant person). Through various types of disciplines (samskaras), he becomes a dwija (twice born). Through the studies of scriptures, he becomes a vipra (or a scholar). Through realization of supreme spirit (brahmajnana), he becomes a brahmin."

​

The Bhagavad-Gita divides[SUP]1[/SUP] the class of people into four categories of Brahmana, Kshtriya, Vaishya, and Shudra depending on the traits (svabhava) inherent in individuals.

Kamat's Potpourri: Brahmins - Who is a Brahmin?

Shri Prasad,

One Viswamitra, like one swallow, does not make a general rule of "people irrespective of their birth or class, who dedicated to such an austere life were recognized as brahmins.", imho.

Again how are you so sure that Viswamitra could have composed the Gaayatree mantra only after attaining Brahmavidya and becoming a brahmin?

Again, according to your proposition "the highest spiritual knowledge (brahmavidya) was an extremely difficult path of discipline of body, mind , and intellect, and people irrespective of their birth or class, who dedicated to such an austere life were recognized as brahmins." Why is it that people claiming themselves to be brahmins seem to have forsaken this grand brahmavidya route to becoming real brahmins and prefer serving mleccha masters in the US, and why do some of them extol this old path here? Is it some sort of hypocrisy or a genetic trait — like the two sets of teeth of the elephant - one to show off, another, less good-looking set to chew?

 

[vvskoman]

100% brahmins may reply....

So good so good..

why this forum was discontinued... for this website especially this kind of discussions are necessary and specific...

i liked mr. sangom`s knowledge.. sir u r a treasure of knowledge.. and capacity to put what is what.. great

mr. sarang ur arguments are precise...

ok applying londonji`s friends`s percentage formula....

sorry i score only 50% of all subjects.... ha ha ha ha...
because i tasted everything and left .

chee chee indha pazham pulikkum..... hi hi hi hi...

so am I 50% brahmin......

sorry u lose bahmin hood once u even think about those subject ,, isnt it...

sari, ippo only 100% brahmins must reply my post....

(sorry editors of tamilbramins.com i didnt mean to close this website) ...ha ha ha ha