• 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.

Brahmins and Tamil society

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi,

I am a Tamil christian vellala, my ancestors were sozha and saiva pillais from near tiruvarur and from another side of the family from palayamkottai.I saw this thread about hatred for brahmins in Tamil Nadu. I felt I could add another perspective to this great forum and take this discussion in a different direction.

There have been brahmins in the tamil country since very ancient times. However I see two periods in history when there were new influx of brahmin immigrants to the tamil country. Of course there would have been constant movement of people throughout history but documented large scale settlements occured during the reign of Rajaraja chola and again five centuries later during Vijayanagar rule.
Brahmins who settled in tamil country had fairly well established roles which was as priests, teachers, tutors and accountants. But it was primarily I believe as sustainers of religious culture and as a bulwark of Shaivite faith that the later Chola kings patronised brahmins and made huge grants of land to the brahmin run temples.
After the fall of the tamil dynasties in the 13th century there was a long period of poltical flux and invasions. Then the political establishment stabilised with the Vijayanagar rule during which time a new class of brahmins came to the tamil country then again with the Maratha rulers.
A bit about the the well known non varna system of tamil society. Tamil society was never governed by the varna system and I really doubt if any society in India really was in a 'water tight' manner. The main proponents were the brahmins who sought to understand and later 'fit' tamil society into this system. Social groups were not very defined and there was mobility on the social scale at various levels in most parts of India and more especially in tamil country.
Brahmins by nature of their established role in society favoured the maintance of status quo. Yet were amenable to change when it was worthwhile or inevitable. A bit about Vellalas, unlike present configurations the Vellala were a hugely diverse group of people not necessarily of the same stock. You must realize tht the Vellala group is not confined to the tamil ethnic group of today. There are the ballalas and tuluva vellalas of karnataka and vellalas of kerala and the telugu rajas and more distantly the reddis. The term denoted a agricultural class and which actually reveled in its 'agricultural culture'. This group gave rise to ruler classes as evidenced by the sozha vellalas, the karkatha (pandya) vellalas and the vellala gounders (cheras). And in turn were not totally cut off from the maravar classes currently classified as thevars and kallars. The maravar groups were in turn small farmers when there no wars. The vellalas were also merchants and when the nagrathars settled in tamil country in another millenia they are documented to have married sozha vellala girls.
Now coming to the discussion, the current dislike of brahmins has of course a long history. You read about similar feeling during the heyday of buddism and jainism. That was because people associated the ills of the Hindu faith with the principal and most visible proponents. But in tamilnadu the reasons are a little different as brahmins were essentially invited to practice the ancient faith of shaivism in tamilnadu. Brahmins who came even in chola times came from a more sanskritised society and had links to ancient heart of sanskrit culture the ganges basin. They could not fully grasp the structure of tamil society and constantly strived to mould it into its northern counterparts. I believe when the later cholas invited and settled Brahmins in the cauvery basin they made a conscious choice to integrate with the Sanskrit culture of other parts. However they wanted to do it on their own terms. But when the later groups of Brahmins moved to tamil country they were able to be more vocal with their concept of society. They as the ancient rules prescribed saw agriculture as the work of shudras but this remained in the realm of esoteric discussion as the vellala groups lrgely held ownership of land through the nayak and maratha periods. But there were changes in the Vellala groups as a result of the Brahmin interaction. I believe the occurence of the vaishnava vellalas are a result of these cultural interactions.

A new phase opened when Europeans first came to India. The Europeans first sought to use the land owning groups as their liaisons in their power centres. These liasions were in tamil country the vellala landowners who looked for social ascendancy within their own groups. Yet they were not cooperative enough for the british and with the slow decline of Indian princes the English wanted a more academic and clerical civil staff to govern the empire. Thus it was during the late 1700s and the early 1800s that the Brahmins began to take up English education and work for the british. It was symbiotic relationship, the Brahmins who till that time did not have socially authorized access to land or wealth found a new calling which suited their abilities. It was during this period that the real rifts started. Brahmins moved from clerical jobs to academic endeavors. The links of sanskrit to german and other European languages gave rise to a new ethnic theory with proponents from the European and Indian academia. The Aryan theory was reborn in a new light with the Europeans cast as Western Aryan and the Brahmins and select higher caste groups as Indo-Europeans. This found hearty support in the anglicized Brahmin groups in India. In Tamil Nadu this social theorizing gave rise to various theories. This new Indo-European theory was combined with the north Indian varna concept to produce a more vocal Dravida-Shudra concept. This was being put onto serious academic discussions by the second half of the 19th century. This theory had varying reaction from the land owning groups some who were 'hindu believers' and in fact most of tamil society were accommodating the dravida-shudra theory by creating a 'sat-shudra' entity. But there were others who saw this as a Brahmin ploy to 'build into' the system the new scheme of things under British patronage - the immigrants now trying to take the upper hand in socio-political arrangements. By the early 1900s there were Vellalas, Naickers and Reddis who were grouping to reverse this development. The avenues which they employed varied.
This was accompanied by an altogether new behavior among Brahmins, in several places in the Cauvery basin. Land had been granted to temples by the chola kings and farmed by tenant farmers and the income passed onto temple coffers in the ideal scheme of things. There was a new move by several Brahmin families to appropriate temple land and using the British government changed the ownership of these prime agricultural tracts to private ownership. This created a new class of Brahmin mirasdars. This broke an ancient rule where Brahmins were not allowed to be directly involved in agriculture and created a new land owning group in direct and serious competition to the Vellala land owners.
By the 1900s political developments added another aggravating factor- the Congress party. The congress was almost overwhelmingly an association of anglicized Brahmins who kept everyone else out. This on a national scene meant that once the british were out the new direct rulers would be Brahmins a first in Indian history. So the scene among the tamil non Brahmins got heated up. Rajaji choosing Kamaraj Nadar was seen by the Vellala elite as a deliberate ploy to by pass them to get to the lower castes. The rationalist theories of Periyar were probably an unexpected unifying factor. These ideologies created a 'Dravidian' movement which started to demonify Hinduism in its ancient stronghold. And portrayed Brahmins as caricatures to be hated. This naturally did not hold well as is seen from the separation of the DMK from the DK and again the formation of the AIADMK.
Yet the path once taken took a life of its own. I believe that Brahmins are yet to understand and grasp the ancient structure of tamil society. They should also understand that Tamil society had created a non-sanskritic culture with an emphasis on agriculture and overseas trade from very ancient times. This was independent of the Vedic civilization of the North. However tamil society took what it liked from the Sanskrit culture and tamil merchants took the Ramayana epic to the Far East. That being said tamil society was more fluid than that in other parts of India. Brahmins in the late 1800s and early 1900s in Tamil Nadu were in social conflict with the other high castes with whom they had lived for centuries. At the core was a social re-arrangement among several others which took a relatively economically impoverished priestly class and transformed it into a land owning class which wielded direct political power. The equations are still being written.
I would urge everyone everywhere however to look beyond these issues and appreciate each other and cherish this new gift of India. I call it new because as anyone can see 60 years is a very short period and nations like relationships can be broken and out of broken relationships comes hatred. The north Indians need to appreciate the quiet living of the south and the southerners have admire the entrepreneurial qualities of the northern merchant classes. The Vellalas and other groups have to appreciate the discipline and academic qualities of the Brahmins and Brahmins and all of Indian society should admire the ancient agricultural and merchant classes of the south and stop applying the varna classifications. Not just in public but in the privacy of their homes and hearts.
 
Dear Sri Tanjoreculture Ji (I am assuming that I can call you Sri),

Welcome to the Forum.

Very thoughtful posting. This adds to what Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji's scholorly writings on this subject under the 'Why?' thread. All these writings add a bit more knowledge about our past.

I especially appreciate the deep sentiment expressed by you at the end of your posting. Unless we all first start with the thought that we are all 'Indians' first, our future will not be prosperous. Very well said.

Thank you.

Regards,
KRS
 
Last edited:
hi tanjore,

welcome to the club. what a delightful romp through history. i am with you all along. i did not know the details to this extent, but always am in awe of the ancient tamil culture.

i like your tone and the way you have presented it. i hope you stay with us, and continue to participate. i sincerely wish that in case you hear some harsh words, please teflon it, and remember that there are people like me, who need people of your perspectives.

thank you.
 
A good write up tanjoreculture. But there are certain wrong impressions which are sought to be perpetuated.

1. Tamil religion and the so called sanskritization: Saiva saddhanta which is the major religion in Tamil Nadu originated in Kashmir. The Saiva Agamas which form the basis of the religion are in Sanskrit. Just because the later texts like Thiru Mandiram were written in Tamil does not make it a Tamil religion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaiva_Siddhanta

http://www.himalayanacademy.com/ssc/

Skandha Purana which deals exclusively with Skandha or Murugan is in Sanskrit. Kalidasa wrote Kumara Sambhava which deals with the birth of Murugan in Sanskrit. The worship of Skandha has declined in the north. But that does not make him an exclusive Tamil god. Even deities like Mariamman are mentioned in the puranas.

There are Vaishnava agamas and Saktha agamas. Whether the agamas and tantras are part of the Vedic culture or distinct from it has been academically discussed for a long time with no conclusive opinion. I could quote from Thrumandiram about the Vedas. There are scholars like Dayananda Saraswati (founder of Arya Samaj) who argued that the present day Hinduism is entirely non-Vedic.

This is not surprising since many of the puranas were written in the south. These early literature were in Sanskrit because it was considered the literary language. There was a similar development in the west where books were written in Latin and not English. There was tremendous opposition to the translation of the Bible to English and the first man who started it was murdered. There was a lot of opposition initially to service in Tamil in churches.

The Adheenam had absolute control over the major temples. They could have changed the language of Archanai to Tamil if they wanted. The priests were only lowly paid employees. But the Adheenams did not do it for a long time for their own reasons.

2. Brahmins and caste: This has been discussed in detail in tamilnation.org. There was and is a caste system in Srilanka where there are very few Brahmins. In fact temple entry for all castes came to Srilanka much later. It is the Saiva Vellalas who were responsible for the caste system in Srilanka.

All the castes practiced the caste system and untouchability. You may find it politically expedient to single out the Brahmins. But it is not true. The brahmins are not responsible for the two tumbler system or the atrocities committed on the dalits in Tamil Nadu after independence.

What is shocking is that people who speak Telugu, Kannada and Malayalm are called Tamilians whereas the Brahmins who speak Tamil are called non Tamilians. Thanthai Periyar will be turning in his grave with the recent developments of North Indian Brahmins occupying high positions in the government in Tamil Nadu. It seems to be the policy to be only anti Tamil Brahmins. All other Brahmins are welcome.

I come from a village where only two castes are there in the main village. Brahmins and Saiva Vellala Pillais. There is no anti Brahminism and the communities have worked together for generations. Politicians have always adapted the rule of Divide and Rule.
 
Last edited:
Welcome "tanjoreculture" to the forum. It is interesting to read your views on "Brahmins and Tamil Society". Though I do not intend to enter into the discussions, I wish to point out a factual error about Perunthalaivar K.Kamaraj. You have stated that " Rajaji choosing Kamaraj Nadar was seen by the vellala elite as a deliberate ploy to by pass them to get to the lower castes". Rajaji did not bring Sri K.Kamaraj to prominence in Congress. It was his Guru and mentor, the great orator and Parliamentarian Sri S.Satyamurthy who brought Sri K.Kamaraj as Secretary of TN Congress, when he was the President. For more details you can refer the following site:
http://www.perunthalaivar.org/english.catagory/politics/

Regards,
Brahmanyan.
 
Another Myth which has been perpetuated by the Brahmins and others is the migration at the time of the Cholas from the north. There is no shred of evidence to support this.

In fact history states about the migration of Brhamins from South India to Bengal. The Senas who were ruling Bengal at the time of the Cholas were South Indian Brahmins. The Cholas defeated the last Pala king in Bengal. After that the Sena dynasty ruled. They brought Brahmins from Ujjain and south India to propagate Hinduism. There is historical evidence for all this.

Again Brahmins were involved in propagating Hinduism in the far east. One south Indian Brahmin family exercised tremendous influence for generations in Thailand. Even today the coronation ceremony of the King is performed by South Indian Brahmins who have settled down there. This is history.

It is believed that Bodhidharma, the founder of Shao Lin school of Martial Arts and the Chan (later Zen ) religion was a Brahmin from Kanchipuram.
 
Corrections

First I would like to appreciate the warm words and polite opinions expressed.

My idea about Rajaji and Kamaraj Nadar is mistaken and I have based it on hearsay. And I did not mean to put the blame on the caste system on Tamil Brahmins. Social stratification and sadly oppression of fellow humans is a feature of all human societies.
The classification of Vellala and related groups as Shudras seems to have been a cause for a rift. Even though this had a much older history some specific event maybe a census or government notification in the late 1800s seems to have sparked off specifically directed feelings against Brahmins. Maybe some one has more facts.
However it must be said that the four plus one system seems to gain ascendancy in the later period of the cholas. Interestingly where there are simultaneous sabha and nadu temple inscriptions on the subject, the sanskrit of the sabha version mentions the four varnas and the nadu version in tamil does not.
Besides several community groups seems to have straddled a range extending across the spectrum defined by varnashrama. Take a few examples the Kallars were highway robbers, warriors, chieftains and kings in Ramnad. The Nadars were not all Marameri Nadars as is widely believed there were also Gramani Nadars and Nadars in small merchant guilds. The Vellalas consisted of subsistence farmers, peasants, large landowners, inland and overseas merchants, royal body guards, some form of bureaucrats (muvenda- velars) and kings. Some Nagarathars owned land and were agriculturists. Certain hill tribes are described to have become landowners and members of guilds.
On another topic the tamil connection with SE Asia and the far east has not got half the attention it deserves. There was a study published in 'Human Biology' where it was shown that Tamil Iyers had genetic affinity to SE Asia. Apparently there were Tamil queens in Korea and Japan. The common public in Busan still remember the name of a very popular tamil queen in the Korean royal house from a thousand years ago. But the name apparently does not make much sense to tamil speakers who have visited Busan recently. There are Japanese records of priests from the chola coast officiating in royal ceremonies. There was a recent article about a Thai lady who said her ancestor went from Chidambaram and had a family name of 'senaithalaivan'. She looked properly 'chinese' to me!
 
Talking about professions Brahmins had taken to all professions. The drama "Mricchakatika" by Sudraka shows that Brahmins had become Merchants thousand years back. In Tamil Nadu only a very small number were priests in temples. This was restricted mostly to the Saiva Brahmins. Historically it is seen that most of the Brahmins were Saivas in Tamil Nadu. The conflict during the Chola period was between the Saivas and Vaishnavas. Had there been a Smartha matam at the time of Ramanujacharya, they would have engaged in some debate with him. There is no such history.

It is quite likely that Smartha religion which believes in the synthesis of all the sects became popular because of the sectarian conflicts. Again only a hypothesis.

The Aryan/Dravidian theory which forms the basis of the present day politics in Tamil Nadu is not accepted by all historians for want of sufficient evidence. Dravida was the name for a region in India given in the Puranas. In fact it is a classification of the Brahmins.

Pancha Dravida Brahmins. Please see

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmins

Dravid is a Brahmin surname. There are Brahmins in U.P also with the surname Dravid.

Again there is no established connection between the Indus Valley civilization and Dravidians or Tamil. It is all theories and wishful thinking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilization

http://www.harappa.com/har/har0.html

Unfortunately the rabble rousing politicians of Tamil Nadu have convinced the people of Tamil Nadu that they belong to a different race and they were driven to the south by the invading Aryans. There is absolutely no evidence for these theories.

The history of Tamil Nadu reveals that all the communities have ruled some parts of Tamil Nadu at sometime or the other. Their caste did not prevent them from becoming rulers. The only communities who never ruled Tamil Nadu are the Dalits and the Brahmins. Chandragupta Maurya being born a sudra did not prevent him from becoming one of the greatest rulers of India and establishing a dynasty.

The historians of India were rarely concerned with the happenings in South India. After independence this has been rectified to some extent. But even today the historical knowledge of South India is woefully inadequate. History is not popular in Tamil Nadu. Historians who want to present the true history are discouraged since it is not politically acceptable.

To quote one simple instance. We have all heard of the 18 siddhars. There is very little historical evidence about the Siddhars. Two of them are Gorakkar and Maccha Muni. Anyone who is familiar with Nath/Siddhas would know that these Siddhas could be Goraknath and Matsyendranath the legendary Gurus of the Siddhas. But not in Tamil Nadu. Because they are from the North. Because the siddhars wrote in Tamil they can have no connection with the North.

It is time that the Tamilians give up their extreme parochialism.
 
Talking about Tamil culture, why are obsessed with only the later Cholas? Puranic Hinduism had come to Tamil Nadu by that time as shown by the writing of Kamba Ramayanam.

But the golden period of Tamil culture was in the Sangham age. The Brahmins were there and contributed to the Tamil literature. Unfortunately we have forgotten this age. This article gives a short description of Tamil literature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_literature

Who remembers Imayavaramban Neduncheralathan one of the greatest Tamil Kings. Or Vanchi Maanagaram. How we traded with the Roman empire through the port of Musiri. We erect a statue for Kannagi, but do not remember the temple for her in Kodungalloor. How many Saivites in Tamil Nadu have visited the temple at Thiruvanchikulam famous for its association with Sundarmurti Nayanar?
 
Dear Sri “Tanjoreculture”


Namaskarams.

It is heartening to see some one who feels that one could add another perspective to the hatred while there are many who try to add only hatred to hatred. I hope the approach to get at the cause will lead us to a solution. I appreciate your good intentions expressed in the last paragraph of your posting in seeking harmony with one another.

While I agree with some of your noting on history, I find that there are a number of infirmities in certain portions of history. As you know, these arise because the Indian more particularly South Indian history has been written to suit the European conveniences. In the nineteenth and twentieth century the “European historians” were actively engaged in distorting the history of India so that they could divide and rule India and loot the mineral and agricultural wealth of this great Nation.

I will deal with the infirmities one after other in separate posts as other wise this post my be too long. Forumites may please bear with me for a number of posts.
 
Reply to Sri Tanjoreculture continues

The infirmities are dealt hereinafter:

1.
However I see two periods in history when there were new influx of Brahmin immigrants to the tamil country. Of course there would have been constant movement of people throughout history but documented large scale settlements occurred during the reign of Rajaraja chola and again five centuries later during Vijayanagar rule.

The actual position:

There was no influx of Brahmins into Tamil country. The tamil country of current times is in itself a shrunk portion. This concept of influx was brought in slowly during the British days. The evidence against this concept are in our history, literature and temple archaeology. Brahmins were existing in Tamilnadu much before Rajaraja Chola or Vijayanagar Rulers.

The idea that the Brahmins came during the Raja Raja Chola days or Krishna Devaraya days is a canard or utter lie spread not in 1800s or 1700s but only during 1920s by the British through the Justice Party. Before the Justice Party was born there was no hatred really against the Brahmins in the Madras Presidency. It is the British attempt to instigate the “higher” caste Hindus against the Brahmins, that they created the Justice Party through some willing persons like the “Sir” Thyagaraya Chettiar, “Rajah Sir” Annamalai Chettiar, “Rajah Sir” Muthiah Chettiar, “Sir” Pitie Rajan Pillai, and a host of others. Invariably all these were “knighted” by the British Crown even as the freedom fighters were fighting for freedom. The creation of Justice Party for creating a wedge against the Brahmins was necessitated because a good number of Brahmins like Rajagopalachariar, Sathyamurthy, Vanchinathan, Subramaniam Siva, Subaramania Bharatiyar, Shenbakaraman were leading the Freedom struggle both in the Congress party and in the INA. There were the other leaders like V.O.Chidambaram Pillai of the higher caste who had a good working relationship with the freedom fighters including Brahmins like Subramaniam Siva. There was necessity to break the union between the intelligent and brave Brahmins and rich and affluent Chettiars and Pillais. The Justice Party came in handy and there were leaders like Annamalai Chettiar who were willing to do the British bidding for recognition as the “King of Chettinad” a country that did not exist before. They were happy with titles like “Sir” “Divan Bahadur” “Rao Bahadur” and the like. Some Brahmins also accepted these “Rao Bahadur” title.

Let us now look at history to show that Brahmins existed from time immemorial in the entire India Deccan included.

1. Sri Bhagavat Pada Aadhi Shankara was born in 509 B.C.E in Kaladi, presently located in Kerala. At the time of birth of Aadhi Shankara, the whole deccan plateau was Tamil country. Thus he was a Tamil Brahmin. Telugu was born about 1300 years ago, Kannada was born about 1000 years ago and Malayalam was born about 600 years ago. The age of these languages has been accepted by historians so far without any demur. But after the present TN rulers made much fanfare about the grant of “Classical Language status to Tamil” by the Government of India, some Telugu scholars are “bringing” some new evidence that Telugu was 2500 years old!! That is the kind of politics in history that goes on till date to suit the political mileage for the so called Rulers, be it in democracy or monarchy. The modern day democracy is slowly inching towards family rule or monarchy in another form – that is another matter altogether.

2. Raja Raja Chola ruled between 985 CE and 1014 CE.

3. Tiruvalluvar who is said to have lived before Christ has written about “Anthanar”, a term used to denote Tamil Brahmins. Thus they existed in Tamil country before Christ or before 2000 years.


4. Thillai Moovaayiravar, a Tamil Brahmin sect existed 2000 years ago and this is found in Tamil literature.
5. Thirugnanasambandar born in Sigazhi in 7th century CE was a Tamil Brahmin. He composed his first song when he was but a toddler of three and is believed to have written 16,000 verses. But less than 4,000 have survived today. He is said to have composed his songs in about 23 Panns all of them in Tamil.
6. Appoothi Adigalar, a Shivite saint lived in Thingalur near Tiruvaiyaru during the 7th Century CE. He was a Tamil Brahmin.
7. Sundarar born in Tirunavalur in 8th Century CE was a Tamil Brahmin.
8. Paranchothi Nayanar, was the Chief of Army staff of Narasimha Pallavan (630 CE to 638 CE) Later he became a saint and ardent devotee of Shiva. He was a Tamil Brahmin.
9. Saint Manickavacagar lived during the 8th Century CE. He was a Tamil Brahmin.
10. There are many more nayanmars who were Tamil Brahmins from among the 63 nayanmars who lived between 6th and 9th Century CE.
Therefore the “history” that records that the Brahmins came to present day Tamilnadu is mischievously lie, to say the least and this is the work of the British and European historians.

Interestingly Sri Raghavendra was born in Bhuvanagiri in Tamilnadu as a Tamil Brahmin and he went to the Present day Karnataka and founded the Matham there.
 
Last edited:
Reply to Sri "Tanjoreculture" continues

2.
Brahmins who settled in tamil country had fairly well established roles which was as priests, teachers, tutors and accountants. But it was primarily I believe as sustainers of religious culture and as a bulwark of Shaivite faith that the later Chola kings patronised brahmins and made huge grants of land to the brahmin run temples.


The Brahmins were just not priests, teachers, tutors or accountants.

As stated earlier, Paranchotiyar or Siruthondar Nayanar was the Chief of Army staff of Narasimha Pallavan and he played a key role in the victory of Vatapi.

Saint Manickavacagar was the Chief Minister in the Pandiya Kingdom in Madurai.

Sundarar was the King of his area.

Appayya Dikshitar (1520 to 1593 CE) was the Chief Minister in the Kingdom of Chinna Bomma Nayak of Vellore. It is said that his father was a Shaivite and his mother was from a family of Vaishnavites. He was a Tamil Brahmin born in Adayampalam villege near Arni.

Appaiah Dikshitar had only two female issues and there was no male issue. His brother’s grand son, Neelakanta Dikshitar was the Chief Minister in the Kingdom of Tanjavur.

It is just not the Chola Kings, but every King patronised the Brahmins who were political advisors, priests, Administrators in the Kingdom or army, Vedic scholars, musicians, composers, poets and philosophers. The temples were not Brahmin run but the poojas were performed by them and the temples were administered only by the Kings generally.

3. After the fall of the tamil dynasties in the 13th century there was a long period of poltical flux and invasions. Then the political establishment stabilised with the Vijayanagar rule during which time a new class of brahmins came to the tamil country then again with the Maratha rulers.

You are right when you say that the Tamil dynasties fell by 13th Century. An unsung hero in Indian history is King Veera Ballala III who was the first King to rule the entire Deccan Plateau and south of Vindhiyas. It was due to him that Mohamed Bin Thuglaq wanted to have his capital moved to Devagiri and later he had to get back. His mother tongue was Tulu. He was a Ballala. His capital was Hampi in the north and Tiruvannamalai in the South. Malik Kafur was conquered and arrested by this King but he let him off when Malik Kafur sought pardon, truly the Indian way. Later by foul means Malik Kafur’s men killed this King near Tiruvannamalai and skinned him alive and put the stuffed skin in the walls of Madurai Fort. He died without issues. His Chief of Army staff succeeded to the Kingdom. Why I detailed all these is – it is during his time the Ballalas (they are the present day Ballals of Karnataka – who have Tulu as their mother tongue) came to the present day Tamilnadu and settled there. They were the warriors in his kingdom and their descendents are the Tuluva Vellala Mudaliars or Pillais in most of Tamilnadu’s northern parts and some in the south.

There is no history of the Brahmins having come from anywhere in north to south during the time of either Veera Ballala or the time of Harihar and Bhukkar (the two sons of the Army chief of Veera Ballala) who founded the Vijayanagar Kingdom. Or even during the times of Krishna Deva raya. These are all again a story generated by the present day politicians who have their lineage to Justice Party, whose boss was the British.

It is but a fact that the Maratha rulers took over Vellore and Thajavur regions. Shivaji lived between 1627 to 1680 CE. During the times of Shivaji, he regained the areas from the Muslim invaders who had started their spreading since the death of Krishna Deva Raya in 1535.

The movement of a large number of Brahmins from the Arcot kingdom took place around the time of the invasion of Vellore by Hyder Ali in 1752. It is during these days the Shankara Matham shifted from Kanchipuram to Kumbakonam. My own ancestors moved from Vellore to Tiruvaiyaru during this time and they were as you have said patronised by the King of Thanjavur.

It is this influx of a few thousands from Northern Tamilnadu to Thanjavur is sought to be highlighted by the present day politicians as the influx from north into Thanjavur.
 
Reply to "Sri Tanjoreculture" continues

4. A bit about the the well known non varna system of tamil society. Tamil society was never governed by the varna system and I really doubt if any society in India really was in a 'water tight' manner. The main proponents were the brahmins who sought to understand and later 'fit' tamil society into this system. Social groups were not very defined and there was mobility on the social scale at various levels in most parts of India and more especially in tamil country.
I generally do not discuss the varna system. This topic is being dealt in detail and in extreme heat in this forum itself in a different thread. Suffice it to say the blame for this is wrongly applied on the Brahmins. They are not to be blamed for this misery. The varna system is not new to Tamil country. Works of Tiruvalluvar speak of Anthanar, vanigar, kuyavar and what not. Silappathikaram’s maasaathuvan and Kovalan are Vanigar or chettiars, Madhavi is from KaNigaiyar kulam. The 63 Nayanmars of Saivism are from all the varnas.

5.A bit about Vellalas, unlike present configurations the Vellala were a hugely diverse group of people not necessarily of the same stock. You must realize tht the Vellala group is not confined to the tamil ethnic group of today. There are the ballalas and tuluva vellalas of karnataka and vellalas of kerala and the telugu rajas and more distantly the reddis.


I have already mentioned the origin of the Tuluva Vellalas of Tamilnadu.

6.Now coming to the discussion, the current dislike of brahmins has of course a long history. You read about similar feeling during the heyday of buddism and jainism. That was because people associated the ills of the Hindu faith with the principal and most visible proponents. But in tamilnadu the reasons are a little different as brahmins were essentially invited to practice the ancient faith of shaivism in tamilnadu. Brahmins who came even in chola times came from a more sanskritised society and had links to ancient heart of sanskrit culture the ganges basin. They could not fully grasp the structure of tamil society and constantly strived to mould it into its northern counterparts. I believe when the later cholas invited and settled Brahmins in the cauvery basin they made a conscious choice to integrate with the Sanskrit culture of other parts. However they wanted to do it on their own terms. But when the later groups of Brahmins moved to tamil country they were able to be more vocal with their concept of society.

This whole concept is based on the misconception that the Brahmins came from North. It is not so. Thiruvalluvar’s words are a strong evidence apart from the list I have given above. Brahmins never ever practiced any hatred towards anyone as it is against the Advaita Philosophy. An advaitin is required to see the presence of Brahman or the God in every living being just not the humans. There was never ever any animosity in the society against any Brahmin by any other prior to the Goebulsian lies of the British. The words of “Lord” Macaulay in the British Parliament in 1835 bears ample testimony to this fact that there was no internissine feud or quarrel among the masses in India and that Indian culture was the best. After the finding given by this “Lord” the British started the lies and created hatred among the masses in India on caste lines.
 
Last edited:
Reply to Sri "Tanjoreculture" continues

7. It was symbiotic relationship, the Brahmins who till that time did not have socially authorized access to land or wealth found a new calling which suited their abilities. It was during this period that the real rifts started.

As I had outlined earlier, it is wrong to assume that the Brahmins never had access to land. They had been warriors, Chief of Army, Chief Ministers and were given land by the Rulers. My forefathers had good extent of lands so given by the Kings of Thanjavur and the last bit of them were sold in 1967.

8. Brahmins moved from clerical jobs to academic endeavors. The links of sanskrit to german and other European languages gave rise to a new ethnic theory with proponents from the European and Indian academia. The Aryan theory was reborn in a new light with the Europeans cast as Western Aryan and the Brahmins and select higher caste groups as Indo-Europeans. This found hearty support in the anglicized Brahmin groups in India. In Tamil Nadu this social theorizing gave rise to various theories. This new Indo-European theory was combined with the north Indian varna concept to produce a more vocal Dravida-Shudra concept.
I agree with a difference. The Aryan theory was born only now and it was never before. It is during this time the concept of Dravida-Shudra was given any life at all. This is because Saint Tirugnansambandar, a Tamil Brahmin, was referred to as “Dravida Sisu” in tamil literature way back in the 7th century CE! There was no association of Sudra to Dravidas and Brahmin to Arya until after the British spread this canard. Please forgive me if I sound firm or rude. When the untruth is denied, a certain amount of firmness creeps in and it is necessary to bring truth to light as well. Please do not take it as affront to you. I hold you in high esteem because of your desire towards harmony despite all odds.

9. This was being put onto serious academic discussions by the second half of the 19th century. This theory had varying reaction from the land owning groups some who were 'hindu believers' and in fact most of tamil society were accommodating the dravida-shudra theory by creating a 'sat-shudra' entity. But there were others who saw this as a Brahmin ploy to 'build into' the system the new scheme of things under British patronage - the immigrants now trying to take the upper hand in socio-political arrangements. By the early 1900s there were Vellalas, Naickers and Reddis who were grouping to reverse this development. The avenues which they employed varied.

As we all know, the second half of 19th century was the crucial time for the British as the freedom struggle had taken “ugly” shape in the Sepoy Mutiny in 1857. They had now invented a new weapon the “canard” of discord among the people of India in the name of castes. I do admit the sin of untouchability was being committed but that was not just the Brahmins alone, by all those other than the so called “untouchables”. But the British sought to put all the blame on the Brahmins through the Justice Party. Therefore rather than the second half of 19th century, it was during the first half of 20th century the rift really take shape.



10. This was accompanied by an altogether new behavior among Brahmins, in several places in the Cauvery basin. Land had been granted to temples by the chola kings and farmed by tenant farmers and the income passed onto temple coffers in the ideal scheme of things. There was a new move by several Brahmin families to appropriate temple land and using the British government changed the ownership of these prime agricultural tracts to private ownership. This created a new class of Brahmin mirasdars. This broke an ancient rule where Brahmins were not allowed to be directly involved in agriculture and created a new land owning group in direct and serious competition to the Vellala land owners.


As my family itself was the beneficiary of the Manyams by the King of Thanjavur, I had seen one of the Manyam document during 1960s. This apart, I have also seen some grants by the Madurai Kings to the Brahmins – in the form of Copper inscriptions. It is another goebalsian lie to say that the Brahmins usurped temple lands. They will never do that as the faith is “Sivan Sotthu Kula Naasam” I wish you verify your sources on this score.

11. By the 1900s political developments added another aggravating factor- the Congress party. The congress was almost overwhelmingly an association of anglicized Brahmins who kept everyone else out. This on a national scene meant that once the british were out the new direct rulers would be Brahmins a first in Indian history. So the scene among the tamil non Brahmins got heated up. Rajaji choosing Kamaraj Nadar was seen by the Vellala elite as a deliberate ploy to by pass them to get to the lower castes.


EV Ramasamy Naicker’s and K.Kamaraj’s life sketch show that both of them were upset with C.Rajagopalachariar. EVR shifted from Congress party to Justice party because of his displeasure with CR. He took his personal defeat due to the manipulations of CR as a challenge and started his onslaught against the whole community. CR and Satyamurthy did not get along well, though they both were Brahmins. But unlike EVR Satyamurthy stayed on in Congress because he was first a patriot and then a congressman unlike EVR. Satyamurthy cultivated Kamaraj and used Kamaraj against CR to give a fitting reply to the manipulations of CR. CR lost the battle and started Swatantra Party, to the delight of EVR. When CR caused the exit of EVR from Congress, Mahatma was alive. When CR had to face Kamaraj, Mahatma was not alive and this time he faced another South Indian Brahmin from behind. That did him in. This had no Brahmin = non Brahmin development though some followers of EVR relish the defeat of a Brahmin in Congress!
 
Reply to Sri "Tanjoreculture" continues

12. The rationalist theories of Periyar were probably an unexpected unifying factor. These ideologies created a 'Dravidian' movement which started to demonify Hinduism in its ancient stronghold. And portrayed Brahmins as caricatures to be hated. This naturally did not hold well as is seen from the separation of the DMK from the DK and again the formation of the AIADMK.
Yet the path once taken took a life of its own.

As we all know, in the past 60 years the Brahmins have changed a lot. They do not practice untouchability at all. They do not discriminate anyone based on caste at all. But the present day demography of Tamilnadu is such that the Vanniars are dominant in Northern districts, the Kongu Vellala Gounders are dominant in Western districts, the Nadars in Southren districts, the Thevars in Southern and South eastern districts and the Scheduled castes in the entire state spread at around 15% of population. It is the dominant castes who practice caste discrimination against the Scheduled castes and not Brahmins. Even the two tumbler system is practised only by them. Yet, the Brahmins are hated by the whole population. The reason is sheer politicisation. The politicians can use the 3% vote bank as punch bag and divert the attention of the Scheduled castes from the real culprits and in return reap the vote bank of nearly 15% in each of the dominant castes, thus a total of whopping 75%. This is the stark but simple fact of the game. EVR used the Brahmins as the punch bag to settle his score against Rajaji. Both are dead but the hatred sown is digging one whole community down. The blunder by CR in introducing Kula Kalvi Thittam gave a good handle in the hands of EVR to beat the Brahmins as a whole and the whole population sees the Brahmins as the villain even after fifty years of the burial of the Kula Kalvi Thittam and thirty years of death of both EVR and CR. That is fate, simple.

13. I would urge everyone everywhere however to look beyond these issues and appreciate each other and cherish this new gift of India. I call it new because as anyone can see 60 years is a very short period and nations like relationships can be broken and out of broken relationships comes hatred. The north Indians need to appreciate the quiet living of the south and the southerners have admire the entrepreneurial qualities of the northern merchant classes. The Vellalas and other groups have to appreciate the discipline and academic qualities of the Brahmins and Brahmins and all of Indian society should admire the ancient agricultural and merchant classes of the south and stop applying the varna classifications. Not just in public but in the privacy of their homes and hearts.
As I stated a vast majority of the Brahmin population is very modern in outlook and doesnot practice any form of discrimination. As I highlighted, it is a community that bears the brunt for the sins continuing to be perpetrated by certain other dominant communities. It is the very same dominant communities that paint the Brahmin community a villain of the piece. That is the way they can steal their bread. I for one still have very good number of best friends in the so called atheist camps and they respect me very much because they cannot accuse me of any of these sins at all. There are many Brahmins like me so respected by them. So they keep saying “we are not opposed to Brahmins, we are opposed to Brahminism” When asked what is Brahminism they will never be able to say pin-pointedly what it is. For if they say so, they will have to expose the dominant communities! And they will lose their votes and wealth.
 
Last edited:
Please keep this up!

I have to thank Sri Tanjoreculture Ji for opening up this topic.

I really appreciate the historical perspectives presented here by both Sri Apiah Ji and Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji. I haven't really heard the history of my birth place recounted this way. I am sure the youngsters in this Forum are especially learning. I rue the fact that such historical facts were not taught during the time I went to scholl in TN.

Swami Vivekananda in a speech in Madras, clearly has said that the Brahmins of Tamil Nadu did not come from anywhere else, but are the same people who inhabited the land since the dawn of history.

Pranams,
KRS
 
Reply to "Tanjoreculture".

I appreciate "appaiah" for the detailed reply to the points raised by "Tajoreculture" and wish to add a few lines regarding Caste discrimination.

It is futile to accuse Brahmin Community alone for Caste discrimination. This is a Social malady for which every Caste and community is responsible. It is my view that Caste discrimination is more acute where the economic interests of individual castes are in conflict . For instance I come from Coimbatore (Kongu Nadu) where Brahmins do not have major share in Agriculture, except perhaps a few pockets in "K."Villages on the Amaravati basin. Most of my friends are non-brahmins, mainly from among Kongu vellalars (Gounders).We were good friends and I still have some good friends even now. I never knew there was the so called anti-brahmin tendency till I left Coimbatore, after my College education.

Caste discrimination is not confined to Hindus alone. There is such discrimination among the Christians and Muslim community also. You may find detailed account on this subject in the following sites:

Caste Discrimination against Dalits by Christians:
http://indianhope.free.fr/site_eng/article_5.php3

Islam and Caste inequality Among Indian Muslims:
http://www.countercurrents.org/sikand150204.htm

This subject should go into the realm of Sociology.

Regards,

Brahmanyan.
 
Excellent posts appaiah. Thank you.

We have to only look at the situation in Srilanka to understand how Brahmins are in no way responsible for the caste problem. Caste discrimination and untouchability was widely prevalent in Srilanka where there are hardly any Brahmins. Because the caste which practiced this was in a majority, there was hardly any opposition.

Again the Tamilians held a dominant position in Govt. jobs and everywhere in Srilanka before independence. This is one of the major reasons for the start of the Singalese-Tamil problem. As a Brahmin who is facing discrimination for exactly the same reason, I can emphathise with the Tamils in Srilanka.

Last about the divide and rule. In Srilanka the groups are divided into Singalese, Tamils, and Muslims. Why are the Muslims classified according to their religion whereas the others according to language. Is it not a fact that the Muslims speak Tamil? A classic and tragic example of Divide and Rule.

Again the policy of the political parties in Tamil Nadu where they started with a anti North Indian policy has affected Srilanka. The Singalese claim North Indian descent.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the nice words Sri KRS, Sri Brahmanyan and Sri Nacchinarkiniyan.
I have been enjoying the amutham from Sri Nacchinarkiniyan silently.

I have asked the very question as to why the Tamils of Sri Lanka doesnot include the Muslims whereas in Tamilnadu, the Tamils include the Muslims and not the Brahmins !!! This question has been put to the "Champions of the Tamil Cause" and as usual they have no answer.

The division of Muslims and Tamils in Sri Lanka has only helped the genocide of the 1980s.
 
Last edited:
Dearsirs
this is like pattimandram i am a new member and enjoed the style of launguage, the quatations from varius sources are nice
keepitup
visveswaran jr member
 
hello,
remarkable,enlighting and amazing display of history by both u guys, appaiah and nacchinarkiniyan. how so true ur arguments are. we have been truly fed a healthy dose of you know what in our history classes. I am sure if we stood up to this garbage, we would shut down very fast. thanks to the "British Raj". That is the ploy of the Anglo-Saxans and their playbook used in every part of the world they went. divide and rule, make treaties and break them as they feel for their own gains. thank you both for opening my eyes. written so eloquently.
appaiah i have a question for u, doesnt concern the topic we are discussing. I am not well versed in the english language like u are. could you please explain to me what the phrase "goebalsian lies" means. I cant seem to find the meaning for it anywhere on the net. pl and thank you.
 
Dear Sri anandr91 Ji,

I think this was a typo - it should have been typed as 'goebbelsian'. Goebbels was the PR guy for Hitler and he is (in)famous for heading up the propaganda machine that portrayed Hitler's regime as the most benign and good.

If Sri Appaih Ji meant it to be something else, I am sure he would correct me.

Pranams,
KRS
 
Goebbels was a kindergartner when compared to our politicians ably supported by the intellectuals. A Malayalee becomes a Tamilian. Muslim League and all other caste based parties are secular. Casteism of the worst sort is not communal. I could go on.

We have redefined many terms like secularism, democracy. Democracy in India is being redefined as a rule by families and dynasties. You know what this is called? Nepotism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepotism

Surprising that noone has added the Indian ruling families here.

Of course we admire Singapore which is a one family repressive state.

Our democracy will become the laughing stock of the entire world.

I do not think in any other country such large scale brain washing goes on and is accepted. Our intellectuals are literate but not educated.
 
thank you Sri KRS for explaining the term to me. well maybe to suit our needs or to suit our way in TN, maybe we can change it to Periyarian lies. jokes aside, thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top