Brahmins and Jews

[sravna]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Brahmins and Jews are two groups that are generally considered to possess high intelligence. I would say that the aspects of intelligent that these two groups possess are very diverse in nature. One way of grouping people can be on the basis of those who are predominantly analytical in thinking and those who are predominantly holistic in thinking. The former group is very good at getting the details whereas the latter is adept at seeing the big picture.

Different fields of study require these two types in varying degrees. Holistic thinking is always helpful whereas analytical thinking might suffice in many cases. The greater the component of holistic thinking the greater the durability of the ideas produced. One can say that field such as philosophy require a good level of holistic thinking as the big picture is sought. Technology, Science and Business for example do without such depth of thinking and still produce results.

If you see brahmins and jews, the field of strength of the brahmins has been philosophy. I think there is no Jewish philosopher whom you can place alongside Sankara or Ramanuja when it comes to the profundity of thoughts. Jews on the other hand have been extremely successful in modern times because mainly due to the emphasis on analytical thinking. People want quick results and analytical thinking is better at it and therefore the Jews have succeeded well.

But even in Science works of enduring value comes because of the ability to see the whole. I am sure the best of science is yet to come and when it does I won't be surprised if the holistic ability of the brahmins help them to beat the jews in their areas of dominance.

 

[vgane]

Jews are basically from money lending class...The comparison can at best be with the Vaishyas-the Baniya class of North India ie Marwaris who possess similar traits as the Jews...

Lenders need skills in mathematics-especially fluency in numbers, book keeping besides social skills that included winning trust, cultivating connections and a bit of aggression (as in collections)

Jews have prospered because of the above skills

I think writers compare Brahmins with Jews as far as being the whipping boy in Tamil Nadu is concerned...

Hope this discussions does not turn into another discussion on genes!

 

[sravna]

Jews are basically from money lending class...The comparison can at best be with the Vaishyas-the Baniya class of North India ie Marwaris who possess similar traits as the Jews...

Lenders need skills in mathematics-especially fluency in numbers, book keeping besides social skills that included winning trust, cultivating connections and a bit of aggression (as in collections)

Jews have prospered because of the above skills

I think writers compare Brahmins with Jews as far as being the whipping boy in Tamil Nadu is concerned...

Hope this discussions does not turn into another discussion on genes!

Yes you are right in the sense the ability the jews seem to exhibit are similar to those exhibited by a businessman. In addition to the business skills jews also have demonstrated creative skills in science. But I think those works are not at a depth that could be called profound. Something profound in Science is fundamental in nature and lasts for at least several centuries and almost none of the so many nobel prizes jews have won have been for profound discoveries. So these science skills exhibited by jews are more characteristic of a person of rajo guna who are intelligent but yet not far sighted to be totally on their own.

 

[sangom]

Brahmins and Jews are two groups that are generally considered to possess high intelligence. I would say that the aspects of intelligent that these two groups possess are very diverse in nature. One way of grouping people can be on the basis of those who are predominantly analytical in thinking and those who are predominantly holistic in thinking. The former group is very good at getting the details whereas the latter is adept at seeing the big picture.

Different fields of study require these two types in varying degrees. Holistic thinking is always helpful whereas analytical thinking might suffice in many cases. The greater the component of holistic thinking the greater the durability of the ideas produced. One can say that field such as philosophy require a good level of holistic thinking as the big picture is sought. Technology, Science and Business for example do without such depth of thinking and still produce results.

If you see brahmins and jews, the field of strength of the brahmins has been philosophy. I think there is no Jewish philosopher whom you can place alongside Sankara or Ramanuja when it comes to the profundity of thoughts. Jews on the other hand have been extremely successful in modern times because mainly due to the emphasis on analytical thinking. People want quick results and analytical thinking is better at it and therefore the Jews have succeeded well.

But even in Science works of enduring value comes because of the ability to see the whole. I am sure the best of science is yet to come and when it does I won't be surprised if the holistic ability of the brahmins help them to beat the jews in their areas of dominance.

I do not know much about Jewish history. But I have read that Jews were not liked by the rest of the population even as far back as the early Roman empire and that therefore, an additional tax was levied from all Jews! Then I know of Hitler and the Nazi. Hitler, I think, could become what he became and do whatever he did, because the non-Jews easily bought all his (Hitler's) anti-Jewish ideas and arguments. I don't think that Hitler had neither some magic power, nor such superhuman oratorial skill, to brainwash and convert such large numbers into anti-semitic hordes. Therefore, once again it looks as if the non-Jewish german population had its resentment of the Jews in a sub-terranean level and Hitler could find a method for them to give vent to their dislike.

Today's Israel also seems to be repeating the very same historical mistakes, oblivious of history and cocksure about US support and protection to it.

Perhaps Brahmins have been lucky in that they did not have to suffer any holocausts in their long history. But if we bring in comparison between brahmins and Jews, it is likely to create the wrong impression that brahmins also possess such undesirable qualities as Jews possess. Hence let us not try to claim intelligence for brahmins through Jews.

My considered opinion is that all human beings of normal health are equally endowed; persons suffering from certain diseases or disease-like conditions may possess lower intelligence capacity. But the actual way in which the intelligence blossoms and radiates, will depend to a very large extent on the actual circumstances and surroundings in which a child grows up. For example K.J. Yesudas, who is not a brahmin, grew up in an atmosphere of Carnatic music and he was also fortunate to get the protection of Chemmankudi (during his music academy student life) and later on from Chembai, Dakshinamurthy etc. So KJY's music did shine to national or even international level. I therefore feel that if brahmins are considered to be generally more intelligent than the rest, it has to do with our social system which made all study to be the monopoly of the brahmin group.

Hundred years from now we will find SCs and STs also generally as intelligent as any other group of people in India.

Having said that how many brahmins have made any world-changing inventions/discoveries as compared to the western people? (I am not talking about Nobel Prize here.)

All this constant talk about guna, intelligence, brahmins etc., is really not doing any good for our future generations, according to me.

 

[sravna]

All this constant talk about guna, intelligence, brahmins etc., is really not doing any good for our future generations, according to me.

This constant talk I think is important when there are so many people who want to constantly try to prove that brahmins are supremacists but in reality think that western people are superior to brahmins.

 

[auh]

Having said that how many brahmins have made any world-changing inventions/discoveries as compared to the western people? (I am not talking about Nobel Prize here.)

Necessity is the mother of invention.

I remember you writing in one of your posts that brahmins enjoyed superior status and power over other castes - in short, they were a powerful group. If it were true then where was the need then to invent anything at all in such a scenario? So I am surprised that you have raised this doubt.

 

[sangom]

This constant talk I think is important when there are so many people who want to constantly try to prove that brahmins are supremacists but in reality think that western people are superior to brahmins.

I, for, one do not consider western people are intrinsically superior to Indians, nor do I think that brahmins are intrinsically superior to other non-brahmin Indians. That is why the post equating brahmins and Jews and then claiming that both are a cut above the rest in intelligence, and so on, appears to me as sly attempt to project brahmin supremacy.

Why can't we feel that we brahmins are as good or as bad as any other clas, caste, group, etc?

 

[sangom]

Necessity is the mother of invention.

I remember you writing in one of your posts that brahmins enjoyed superior status and power over other castes - in short, they were a powerful group. If it were true then where was the need then to invent anything at all in such a scenario? So I am surprised that you have raised this doubt.

In the west also there was feudalism and some powerful groups enjoying superior status with fiefdom and serfdom. Yet there were world-changing discoveries & inventions from both the superior groups and others. So, my remark does not rule out that brahmins cannot be expected to make discoveries/inventions. May be, as you say, they did not need any such inventions at all. But we see them adopting all those avidly. Why, if there is no need?

 

[Nara]

..... That is why the post equating brahmins and Jews and then claiming that both are a cut above the rest in intelligence, and so on, appears to me as sly attempt to project brahmin supremacy.

Why can't we feel that we brahmins are as good or as bad as any other clas, caste, group, etc?

It has become a routine, every few days somebody or other make up such supremacist <deleted in response to Narayan's post> and triumphantly deposits it in the forum. Just yesterday there was another one, in another thread, another wise one made yet another case for the concept of guna-based varna. If we raise objections to such odious ideas the gang of usual suspects will come out of their woodworks post haste with their usual complaints of BB or Boo Boo or whatever. These people are the very reason why everyone belonging to the Brahmin jAti are viewed with so much derision by NBs on the whole.

regards ...

 

[sravna]

It has become a routine, every few days somebody or other make up such supremacist turd blossom and triumphantly deposits it in the forum. Just yesterday there was another one, in another thread, another wise one made yet another case for the concept of guna-based varna. If we raise objections to such odious ideas the gang of usual suspects will come out of their woodworks post haste with their usual complaints of BB or Boo Boo or whatever. These people are the very reason why everyone belonging to the Brahmin jAti are viewed with so much derision by NBs on the whole.

regards ...

Dear Shri Nara,

The fact is you are hated only if you are intelligent. No body really hates you if you only project yourself to be intelligent without any substance. So the question is, Is projecting oneself as intelligent really despicable? If this age were a satya yuga then yes but this kali yuga and I am afraid self promotion today is indispensable. But still I think we need to play fair. Self promotion definitely not by denigrating others but by highlighting your own merits I think is not bad.

 

[tbs]

hi
i agreed...both are basically highly intellegent and favorite to god too....both are pluralism in worship....i think both some kind of same

tribes.....EVEN BOTH ARE MOST HYPOCRATIC COMMUNITY IN THE WORLD.....

 

[Jaykay767]

Brahmins in the last 100+ yrs or more, were more focused on survival & getting food, water & shelter & more importantly fighting off these BB & Boo Boo fellows. so they did NOT have time to pursue scientific research, modern innovation etc.. Now that most of the Brahmins are done with the basic survival, you will find the next generation excelling in scientific research, innovation & in time many will get Nobel Prizes as well !!

 

[zebra16]

self edited

 

[auh]

------ But we see them adopting all those avidly. Why, if there is no need?

Times have changed, haven't they? The old social setup is no longer in vogue and whatever support mechanisms that existed for the brahmins have been washed away.

On a different note, do you think that two individuals would need to exhibit the same skillset to prove their intellect levels?

 

[sangom]

Times have changed, haven't they? The old social setup is no longer in vogue and whatever support mechanisms that existed for the brahmins have been washed away.

The social set up did not undergo a sudden change and there was enough of a period during which the brahmins' "superior status and power over other castes" gradually disappeared. So, if the brahmins were really all that intelligent, they could and should have come out with inventions which assured their comforts. But they did not, and when anything came from the Mlecchas (a pejorative term, etymologically) of the west, we avidly grabbed each and everything right from the pocket watches.

On a different note, do you think that two individuals would need to exhibit the same skillset to prove their intellect levels?

It is not possible to measure the IQ of a people and compare it with that of another group; this is my understanding. If one group exhibits capacity in one line while it is poor in another, then the fact is that it is unintelligent in the latter line or skillset. Its ability in the former cannot offset this weakness.

 

[auh]

It is not possible to measure the IQ of a people and compare it with that of another group; this is my understanding. If one group exhibits capacity in one line while it is poor in another, then the fact is that it is unintelligent in the latter line or skillset. Its ability in the former cannot offset this weakness.

Hello Sir, exhibition is a conscious projection and its opposite may not always mean a deficiency.

Thank you.

 

[Nara]

Please have a look at the word you have used. You should not have any complaints if others term your posts as purgative.

These words are the very reasons for viewing such posts and the persons posting them with derision and a mirror is shown to them from time to time to have a look at their own faces.

Dear Narayan, of all the obnoxiously supremacist things that people keep bringing up at regular intervals it is quite revealing that your tender sensibilities are outraged by the phrase I used which more than accurately characterizes them -- e.g. talk such as genes, guna-varna, etc. In any case, in response to your objection I have deleted the phrase that offended you. It will still stay as cited text of some who have responded, but at least readers will get to know that I have deleted it.

regards ...

 

[sangom]

Hello Sir, exhibition is a conscious projection and its opposite may not always mean a deficiency.

Thank you.

I am not into semantics and kind of nit-picking, in order to win a point. I used that word in the general sense of natural manifestation, just like a rose bush exhibits rose buds at some stage of its growth. I do not know whether the rose bush does it as a result of conscious and deliberate self-effort.

Hope my point has been made sufficiently clear.

 

[auh]

I am not into semantics and kind of nit-picking, in order to win a point. I used that word in the general sense of natural manifestation, just like a rose bush exhibits rose buds at some stage of its growth. I do not know whether the rose bush does it as a result of conscious and deliberate self-effort.

Hope my point has been made sufficiently clear.

I wouldnt put it as mere semantics and a matter of nit-picking; a rose bush does not have a choice, unlike humans. But I know where you stand and thanks for engaging me.

Regards,

 

[tbs]

hi
both comminites are famous for migration......

 

[renuka]

Hope this discussions does not turn into another discussion on genes!

LOL! Not possible cos you see Jew practice Kosher method of slaughter..NOT Sattva in my opinion..so no Sattva Genes here.

 

[renuka]

Dear Sravna,

I wonder why you started this thread?

Why do you actually need to compare and contrast Brahmins with Jews?

Would a Jew do that? Would he want to compare and contrast himself with a TB?

Brahmins have been an intellectual community so far and going by that if they still feel they shine in intellect they should also know a gem should shine on its own and not compared with another gem to know its value.

Sometimes when we compare and contrast it just shows that we are looking for recognition of some kind to feel the endorphin release.

 

[auh]

self edited

I cannot record my like for the same post a second time, and hence this...

 

[sravna]

Dear Sravna,

I wonder why you started this thread?

Why do you actually need to compare and contrast Brahmins with Jews?

Would a Jew do that? Would he want to compare and contrast himself with a TB?

Brahmins have been an intellectual community so far and going by that if they still feel they shine in intellect they should also know a gem should shine on its own and not compared with another gem to know its value.

Sometimes when we compare and contrast it just shows that we are looking for recognition of some kind to feel the endorphin release.

Dear Renuka,

We can talk about anything as long as it is done in an objective way and equally importantly it doesn't unduly hurt others even if the discussion is done in an objective way.

The primary reason I started this thread was to emphasize that too much importance to analytical intelligence is not good. And that seems to be sadly what is happening today But we know brahmins are traditionally holistic thinkers. That is the reason we see so much of the idea of complementarity being used by them. Brahmins prefer to see what forms the whole and only second in importance to that are the details.

I strongly think that this is the type of thinking that we need today. Today's social , political and economic systems will create a million times more evil at least than what was possible in the ancient systems because these are products of cold people who can only think of themselves and not the society as a whole.

My intent was certainly not to assure myself about the superiority of the brahmins but only to argue that only holistic thinking produces products of enduring value and brahmins who traditionally employed such thinking would become globally dominant in the future unless the world wants itself to be destroyed.

 

[sangom]

Dear Renuka,

We can talk about anything as long as it is done in an objective way and equally importantly it doesn't unduly hurt others even if the discussion is done in an objective way.

The primary reason I started this thread was to emphasize that too much importance to analytical intelligence is not good. And that seems to be sadly what is happening today But we know brahmins are traditionally holistic thinkers. That is the reason we see so much of the idea of complementarity being used by them. Brahmins prefer to see what forms the whole and only second in importance to that are the details.

I strongly think that this is the type of thinking that we need today. Today's social , political and economic systems will create a million times more evil at least than what was possible in the ancient systems because these are products of cold people who can only think of themselves and not the society as a whole.

My intent was certainly not to assure myself about the superiority of the brahmins but only to argue that only holistic thinking produces products of enduring value and brahmins who traditionally employed such thinking would become globally dominant in the future unless the world wants itself to be destroyed.

Shri Sravna,

Permit me to intrude. The adjective 'holistic' has the dictionary meaning :

1. Characterized by comprehension of the parts of something as intimately interconnected and explicable only by reference to the whole.

So, you see, the idea is not like investigating only the whole coconut (முழு தேங்காய்) all the time, but holistic thinking also envisages comprehension of the parts and then coming to the full realization that all these myriad parts are just components of one whole.

I agree that modern science has been concerned with the analysis and understanding of the parts or components. But I doubt whether today's political, economic or social systems "a million times more evil at least than what was possible in the ancient systems"; there have been many evils in the ancient days as well and Man has probably never had the perfect heaven on this earth, ever.

But the quest of science is slowly but surely moving towards the "whole" and the inquisitiveness about the grand unified theory, multiverses, origin of the universe, the super string theory, etc., will, I hope, lead human knowledge to that one whole which actually matters. It is like a child learning to count and ultimately grasping (at least some notion about) Infinity/zero.

Our ancient seers also seem to have spent a good part of their energy in the analysis of the components, as may be seen from vaiseshika, nyaaya and saamkhya darsanas. In my view it is the 'Siddhars' who perhaps had the best understanding of the "whole", though it is not clear whether they also went from components to the whole or not.

In short, I think there is no shortcut to holistic method until our knowledge of the component parts reach an optimum level.