-
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.
How Varna/Caste System Harmed Brahmins
- Thread starter Nacchinarkiniyan
- Start date
- Status
Dear Sri Saab,
You are welcome to disagree with Sri N.
But can you please avoid branding him?
Regards,
Chintana
You are welcome to disagree with Sri N.
But can you please avoid branding him?
Regards,
Chintana
I enjoyed this exchange very much.
Sri. Malgova Mango - I feel that you were much calmer in your responses to this post than you have been in others. I don't know that I agree with all of your views. Just that your tone is even, which I appreciate.
This is a great example to show that you don't need great eloquence - but if your ideas are well considered the language skill issue can be managed.
Thanks and keep it going.
Regards,
Chintana
Sri. Malgova Mango - I feel that you were much calmer in your responses to this post than you have been in others. I don't know that I agree with all of your views. Just that your tone is even, which I appreciate.
This is a great example to show that you don't need great eloquence - but if your ideas are well considered the language skill issue can be managed.
Thanks and keep it going.
Regards,
Chintana
Dear Sowbhagyavathi Chintana Ji,
The only reason I have engaged in any dialog in this thread is to support Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji's right to say what wants to say.
Seems like one can not say anything 'controversial', even though it is a debatable point without getting pilloried.
If my discussions seemed 'emotional' to you, I want to dispel that notion. And I thought I was putting forth the merits of my point of view. I thought this topic was specifically designed to bring forth such discussions as the topic title says.
My relationship with my Guru is my personal affair. The only reason I even divulged it is because of the relevant context. Discussing the viewpoints of all great Mahans (by the way I have no problems with Maha Periaval's words at all) is to show that Hiduism is not dogmatic and even the luminaries interpret the scriptures differently. And one should appreciate ALL different view points without getting upset.
Also, my comment about Sri Vijisesh Ji was not posted because I thought there was something 'sinister' underlying his joke. I merely said that it took away from what Sri Ramaa Ji was saying against some others here - and his subsequent comment about 'clowns' confirm my point.
Apparently, I have failed in this, otherwise you would not have made the comments you have made. Seems to me, I am not adding any value to this Forum.
I thank you and others for the opportunity you have given me in sharing my thoughts here. Thank you.
Namaskarams,
KRS
The only reason I have engaged in any dialog in this thread is to support Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji's right to say what wants to say.
Seems like one can not say anything 'controversial', even though it is a debatable point without getting pilloried.
If my discussions seemed 'emotional' to you, I want to dispel that notion. And I thought I was putting forth the merits of my point of view. I thought this topic was specifically designed to bring forth such discussions as the topic title says.
My relationship with my Guru is my personal affair. The only reason I even divulged it is because of the relevant context. Discussing the viewpoints of all great Mahans (by the way I have no problems with Maha Periaval's words at all) is to show that Hiduism is not dogmatic and even the luminaries interpret the scriptures differently. And one should appreciate ALL different view points without getting upset.
Also, my comment about Sri Vijisesh Ji was not posted because I thought there was something 'sinister' underlying his joke. I merely said that it took away from what Sri Ramaa Ji was saying against some others here - and his subsequent comment about 'clowns' confirm my point.
Apparently, I have failed in this, otherwise you would not have made the comments you have made. Seems to me, I am not adding any value to this Forum.
I thank you and others for the opportunity you have given me in sharing my thoughts here. Thank you.
Namaskarams,
KRS
Dear Sri malgova.mango Ji,
I thought we were having a good discussion. Thank you for that.
But, please do not think your fellow T.B. brethren who may hold different theistic views from yourself as 'opponents'. We are all in this together.
I will not be posting anymore. My only parting word is this - everyone in this Forum is one of us, regardless of sect and beliefs.
Regards,
KRS
I thought we were having a good discussion. Thank you for that.
But, please do not think your fellow T.B. brethren who may hold different theistic views from yourself as 'opponents'. We are all in this together.
I will not be posting anymore. My only parting word is this - everyone in this Forum is one of us, regardless of sect and beliefs.
Regards,
KRS
vijisesh
0
Dear Readers,
At this juncture , I can feel tensed emotions in this thread , due to the exchange of power play by some posters in this forum demonstrating their supremacy , I thought the following link may be of some help and may be able to guide us during interactions !!
Pl check the following link !
http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_...53&PHPSESSID=f42a4ce353424b092a15e5c1e931571f
It reads ...
Knowledge, and skills are different but related sorts of things. Knowledge has to do with what you know; what you are aware of and what you understand about how things work and how things fit together. You may have come by knowledge first hand through life experience, or you could have taken it from books, websites and other means of recording. Skill or ability, on the other hand describes your ability to influence things; to take what you know and apply it so as to cause a real effect to occur. A certain amount of knowledge is a prerequisite of skill; you can't be skillful without first being knowledgeable However, you can easily be knowledgeable without being very skillful. Knowing something intellectually is a very different thing than knowing how to make practical use of knowledge.
When the world was young and people lived exclusively in small tribal and family groups everyone knew each other intimately. Everyone's areas of strength and weakness were common knowledge and there was no need for certification. The modern world is a far more complex place. Knowledge has become highly developed and specialized and it is no longer possible for one person to know it all, first of all. Secondly, it is now normal for people who are essentially strangers to one another to work together for the same employer. People need to have ways of demonstrating that they have mastered bodies of knowledge and skill to strangers who don't know them. Credentials, such as high school and university diplomas, professional certifications, and commercial licenses issued by trusted institutions and governments have become the way that people demonstrate their accomplishments to one another.
...... and so it goes !!
At this juncture , I can feel tensed emotions in this thread , due to the exchange of power play by some posters in this forum demonstrating their supremacy , I thought the following link may be of some help and may be able to guide us during interactions !!
Pl check the following link !
http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_...53&PHPSESSID=f42a4ce353424b092a15e5c1e931571f
It reads ...
Knowledge, and skills are different but related sorts of things. Knowledge has to do with what you know; what you are aware of and what you understand about how things work and how things fit together. You may have come by knowledge first hand through life experience, or you could have taken it from books, websites and other means of recording. Skill or ability, on the other hand describes your ability to influence things; to take what you know and apply it so as to cause a real effect to occur. A certain amount of knowledge is a prerequisite of skill; you can't be skillful without first being knowledgeable However, you can easily be knowledgeable without being very skillful. Knowing something intellectually is a very different thing than knowing how to make practical use of knowledge.
When the world was young and people lived exclusively in small tribal and family groups everyone knew each other intimately. Everyone's areas of strength and weakness were common knowledge and there was no need for certification. The modern world is a far more complex place. Knowledge has become highly developed and specialized and it is no longer possible for one person to know it all, first of all. Secondly, it is now normal for people who are essentially strangers to one another to work together for the same employer. People need to have ways of demonstrating that they have mastered bodies of knowledge and skill to strangers who don't know them. Credentials, such as high school and university diplomas, professional certifications, and commercial licenses issued by trusted institutions and governments have become the way that people demonstrate their accomplishments to one another.
...... and so it goes !!
R
Ramaa
Guest
Dear Sri Nachi,
By introducing Vajrasucikopanishad into this discussion Sri R.Venkataramanji has indicated that the varna is Guna born (which seemed to be the contentious issue of this thread).
Guna is neither inherited from the parents nor carried forward from poorva janma. Guna of each janma is by Easwara Sankalpam based on one's karma.
All Sruthis dealing with the prakrthi is always learnt from the Guru who administers the knowledge in secret by the use of manthropadesam. Only Aathma Gnana and the Panchaakshari and Rama naama are freely given as everyone is entitled. (Bhagavan Ramana has said so).
Sri Venktaramanji's Sanskrit quotes were ignored and the a Frenchman's translation of Brahma Gnanam is hilited.
Gnana is never attained in partisanship. It is beyond the opposites.
Partisanship is due to innate fear (bhayam). Only a Guru can help us overcome this handicap. He has the 'abhayakara hastham'. Usually he touches the sishya on the head.
This is the tradition.
Regards,
Ramaa
By introducing Vajrasucikopanishad into this discussion Sri R.Venkataramanji has indicated that the varna is Guna born (which seemed to be the contentious issue of this thread).
Guna is neither inherited from the parents nor carried forward from poorva janma. Guna of each janma is by Easwara Sankalpam based on one's karma.
All Sruthis dealing with the prakrthi is always learnt from the Guru who administers the knowledge in secret by the use of manthropadesam. Only Aathma Gnana and the Panchaakshari and Rama naama are freely given as everyone is entitled. (Bhagavan Ramana has said so).
Sri Venktaramanji's Sanskrit quotes were ignored and the a Frenchman's translation of Brahma Gnanam is hilited.
Gnana is never attained in partisanship. It is beyond the opposites.
Partisanship is due to innate fear (bhayam). Only a Guru can help us overcome this handicap. He has the 'abhayakara hastham'. Usually he touches the sishya on the head.
This is the tradition.
Regards,
Ramaa
Last edited:
OP
OP
The intent of the my original post was to show how the Varna system had harmed the Brahmins more than the so called benefits.
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/showthread.php?t=1254
It was not intended to be a discussion on the Varna system. But later it became a discussion on the basis of Varna system. Of course I have not posted regarding this as in my opinion it is immaterial how the system evolved or what it turned out to be.
The caste system is dead and no amount of effort can revive it. Thank God.
The original translation of Vajrasucikopanishad is in English by S. Radhakrishnan What is given in the web site is the French version of the original translation.
The only requirement for learning the Vedas is Upanayanam. Gayatri Mantra is intiated by the father during this ceremony. No other initiation is necessary for learning the Vedas.
There has been some posts about Gurus. There also seems to be some confusion between Acharya and Guru. From 2001, I have posted a number of articles about Gurus, intiation, Deeksha and Mantra Yoga. These are still available on the internet. Some web sites have copied portions of these messages.
Gurus and Acharyas are for spiritual advancement. They show the path to Moksha/Mukthi/Salvation. Lowkika matters like the Caste system have no relevance there.
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/showthread.php?t=1254
It was not intended to be a discussion on the Varna system. But later it became a discussion on the basis of Varna system. Of course I have not posted regarding this as in my opinion it is immaterial how the system evolved or what it turned out to be.
The caste system is dead and no amount of effort can revive it. Thank God.
The original translation of Vajrasucikopanishad is in English by S. Radhakrishnan What is given in the web site is the French version of the original translation.
The only requirement for learning the Vedas is Upanayanam. Gayatri Mantra is intiated by the father during this ceremony. No other initiation is necessary for learning the Vedas.
There has been some posts about Gurus. There also seems to be some confusion between Acharya and Guru. From 2001, I have posted a number of articles about Gurus, intiation, Deeksha and Mantra Yoga. These are still available on the internet. Some web sites have copied portions of these messages.
Gurus and Acharyas are for spiritual advancement. They show the path to Moksha/Mukthi/Salvation. Lowkika matters like the Caste system have no relevance there.
R
Ramaa
Guest
Dear Sri Nachi,
Varna and caste are two different things. Varna is prakrthi and caste is vikrthi. varna is divine and caste is man-made. What is divine has no beginning and has no end either. What is man-made has a beginning. All that has a beginning will have an end. Caste has a beginning and no wonder you see end to it.
You started with the notion that the varna system is the ruin of the Brahmins. This statement is contradictory. If you understand that Brahmin is a varna then your statement concludes as 'Brahmin is his ruin', 'Brahmin is the ruin' etc. Of course you have not concluded that Brahmin is not a varna. If that was the case or should I say 'as this is the case' (with no ifs or buts) then the statement that 'Varna system had harmed the Brahmins' would not be apt as it would be senseless.
Guna is the driving force of the prakrthi. In Vajrasucikopanishad the revealing fact that the varna is Guna based has been glossed over. Only that portion where a Brahmana is equated to Parabramam is sought to be emphasised in the posting. Then one should have asked why a kshathriya or a vaisya or a sudhra is not emphasised as Parabrahmam. The fact is they are also equated to parabrahman if they be who they are! Hope you have not missed that point.
Like all upanishads Vajrasucikopanishad starts off with the prakrthi and ends up indicating the Purusha. A learned person understands this method. Unfortunately the Brahmin of the prakrthi and the Brahmin of the Purusha are two different things just as you as an ignorant man and you as a wise man, both look same but also not the same!
Yes it is true that Gayathri is the manthrOpadesam for the learning of the Veda. A non-Brahmin visits Ramanasramam and sees that a group of pandits put so many questions quoting from the Veda seeking clarification from Bhagavan. The meeting was over and the pandits left. The layman approached Bhagavan and said he is the sinner because he is not equipped with all the knowledge of the pandits. Bhagavan said to the humble devotee that those knowledges are not necessary to seek the liberation and he is no greater sinner than others. Bhagavan asked the devotee to be himself which awareness is the easiest (rather than to be a pandit which is extremely difficult for him) and that is liberation. After all, we are all liberated and only that we don't know! The easiest way of knowing oneself is to be himself and that is liberation.
In this light if you have advised the Brahmins to be Brahmins then you would have advised them the road to enlightenment. But suggesting that being a Brahmin is the greatest handicap is in my humble opinion a road to disaster. There is no greater paapam than advising a person to leave his nature.
And also from the story of Bhagavan that I have narrated and by your own statement, manthropadesam is required for the learning of the knowledge of prakrthi only. Such knowledge of prkrthi includes laukika matters and like all learnings, laukika matters very much need the Guru. And the manthra is invoked as often.
In so far as the gaining of Aathmagnanam the mere suggestion by the Guru of the fact 'Tat Tvam Asi' as brought out by my narration of Bhagavan's story above would suffice. There is no manthropadesam is involved to be invoked. You get the revealation at the mere suggestion of the Guru and it stays for ever!
Any suggestion of difference between the Guru and Acharyaal is from one's mindset and would not be real in the ultimate analysis.
In Vishnu Sahasranamam Parvathi asks Parameswara: "KenOpaayEna laguna vishnOrnaama sahasrakam?" How would it be easy for ordinary people to know of the thousand names of Vishnu? To which Easwara says: "Sri Raama Raama Raamethi RamE RaamE manOramE, sahasranaama thatthulyam Raamanaama varaananE." Just calling out the name of Sri Rama is equal to the thousand names of Vishnu! You would have noticed that when reciting Vishnusahasranamam we recite this line three times to emphasise the point!
The fleeting glory and trifling dazzle is in this prakrthi. In that pursuit you suggest that being a Brahmin (by which we both mean the Varnaasrama Dharma) is the ruin of the Brahmin. In the most satisfying and everlasting bliss a person is most content by being who he or she is. When someone asked him how he felt when he had to beg for his food in those early days, Bhagavan Ramana replied: 'Like an emperor'! He clearly indicated that being oneself whether a prince or a pauper is the swaraat. Unfortunately your message through this thread robs oneself, whether he is Brahmin or otherwise, of his swaraat.
(Once again, if you were suggesting that a Brahmin is a mere caste, then the heading of the thread is not apt.)
The secularists have said that a person can be anything under right conditions and given the opportunity. It is nice and easy to say but in practice it is mere utopia. In pursuit of the elusive object they have merely put up a system wherein you and me are just commodities traded in the open market either by our own selves or by a trade union. And as commodities we are subject to the glut and scarcity which would determine our economic well being. And we are seeing it almost on a daily basis that this system itself is collapsing by our side. People who would condemn our dhaarmic system should realize that they fall into the fire of the secularists like the flying insects.
Regards,
Ramaa
Varna and caste are two different things. Varna is prakrthi and caste is vikrthi. varna is divine and caste is man-made. What is divine has no beginning and has no end either. What is man-made has a beginning. All that has a beginning will have an end. Caste has a beginning and no wonder you see end to it.
You started with the notion that the varna system is the ruin of the Brahmins. This statement is contradictory. If you understand that Brahmin is a varna then your statement concludes as 'Brahmin is his ruin', 'Brahmin is the ruin' etc. Of course you have not concluded that Brahmin is not a varna. If that was the case or should I say 'as this is the case' (with no ifs or buts) then the statement that 'Varna system had harmed the Brahmins' would not be apt as it would be senseless.
Guna is the driving force of the prakrthi. In Vajrasucikopanishad the revealing fact that the varna is Guna based has been glossed over. Only that portion where a Brahmana is equated to Parabramam is sought to be emphasised in the posting. Then one should have asked why a kshathriya or a vaisya or a sudhra is not emphasised as Parabrahmam. The fact is they are also equated to parabrahman if they be who they are! Hope you have not missed that point.
Like all upanishads Vajrasucikopanishad starts off with the prakrthi and ends up indicating the Purusha. A learned person understands this method. Unfortunately the Brahmin of the prakrthi and the Brahmin of the Purusha are two different things just as you as an ignorant man and you as a wise man, both look same but also not the same!
Yes it is true that Gayathri is the manthrOpadesam for the learning of the Veda. A non-Brahmin visits Ramanasramam and sees that a group of pandits put so many questions quoting from the Veda seeking clarification from Bhagavan. The meeting was over and the pandits left. The layman approached Bhagavan and said he is the sinner because he is not equipped with all the knowledge of the pandits. Bhagavan said to the humble devotee that those knowledges are not necessary to seek the liberation and he is no greater sinner than others. Bhagavan asked the devotee to be himself which awareness is the easiest (rather than to be a pandit which is extremely difficult for him) and that is liberation. After all, we are all liberated and only that we don't know! The easiest way of knowing oneself is to be himself and that is liberation.
In this light if you have advised the Brahmins to be Brahmins then you would have advised them the road to enlightenment. But suggesting that being a Brahmin is the greatest handicap is in my humble opinion a road to disaster. There is no greater paapam than advising a person to leave his nature.
And also from the story of Bhagavan that I have narrated and by your own statement, manthropadesam is required for the learning of the knowledge of prakrthi only. Such knowledge of prkrthi includes laukika matters and like all learnings, laukika matters very much need the Guru. And the manthra is invoked as often.
In so far as the gaining of Aathmagnanam the mere suggestion by the Guru of the fact 'Tat Tvam Asi' as brought out by my narration of Bhagavan's story above would suffice. There is no manthropadesam is involved to be invoked. You get the revealation at the mere suggestion of the Guru and it stays for ever!
Any suggestion of difference between the Guru and Acharyaal is from one's mindset and would not be real in the ultimate analysis.
In Vishnu Sahasranamam Parvathi asks Parameswara: "KenOpaayEna laguna vishnOrnaama sahasrakam?" How would it be easy for ordinary people to know of the thousand names of Vishnu? To which Easwara says: "Sri Raama Raama Raamethi RamE RaamE manOramE, sahasranaama thatthulyam Raamanaama varaananE." Just calling out the name of Sri Rama is equal to the thousand names of Vishnu! You would have noticed that when reciting Vishnusahasranamam we recite this line three times to emphasise the point!
The fleeting glory and trifling dazzle is in this prakrthi. In that pursuit you suggest that being a Brahmin (by which we both mean the Varnaasrama Dharma) is the ruin of the Brahmin. In the most satisfying and everlasting bliss a person is most content by being who he or she is. When someone asked him how he felt when he had to beg for his food in those early days, Bhagavan Ramana replied: 'Like an emperor'! He clearly indicated that being oneself whether a prince or a pauper is the swaraat. Unfortunately your message through this thread robs oneself, whether he is Brahmin or otherwise, of his swaraat.
(Once again, if you were suggesting that a Brahmin is a mere caste, then the heading of the thread is not apt.)
The secularists have said that a person can be anything under right conditions and given the opportunity. It is nice and easy to say but in practice it is mere utopia. In pursuit of the elusive object they have merely put up a system wherein you and me are just commodities traded in the open market either by our own selves or by a trade union. And as commodities we are subject to the glut and scarcity which would determine our economic well being. And we are seeing it almost on a daily basis that this system itself is collapsing by our side. People who would condemn our dhaarmic system should realize that they fall into the fire of the secularists like the flying insects.
Regards,
Ramaa
Last edited:
OP
OP
For most of us it is one and the same. So I chose the heading. My posts are basically meant for the Samanyan as I am a Samanyan. I generally avoid using Sanskrit terms and quotations for the same reason.
This is a point of view of many people who have not had the privilege of a real Guru. Only persons who have received Mantra Diksha and follow different Margas would know who a real Guru is.
This difference becomes very real when we start talking about Mantra Diksha We talk about Guru, Prama Guru, Parameshti Guru and Sampradhaya. When we are dealing with things like Purna Diksha or Medha Samrajya Diksha it makes a lot of difference.
When we talk about Mantras we are talking about Vedas, Agamas and Tantras and not Smiritis.
Of course this is not relevant to this discussion.
This is where we are in the opposite ends. I believe that the Brahmin community is the Intellectual Aristocracy. This is the period when Intellectuals have better opportunities than at any point of time in history. ( I do not mean Political power). So our community has a glorious future.
The glorious days of Hinduism was at the time when there was prosperity. As prosperity increases we will see a rejuvenation of our culture.
Last edited:
Dear Sri KRS,
Dear Sowbhagyavathi Chintana Ji,
The only reason I have engaged in any dialog in this thread is to support Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji's right to say what wants to say.
Sri N has clarified what he intended to say in this thread - i.e., he meant to highlight what has happened because of the Varna system and that he didn't mean to start a discussion on Varna per se.
Seems like one can not say anything 'controversial', even though it is a debatable point without getting pilloried.
Seems like I cannot question an inconsistency if I see one!
If my discussions seemed 'emotional' to you, I want to dispel that notion. And I thought I was putting forth the merits of my point of view. I thought this topic was specifically designed to bring forth such discussions as the topic title says.
No. I didn't mean to say that you are emotional without being rational.
Just that you seemed to use Maha Periyava's words and works of other authors as a standard for some of your ideas. I was confused by that. As you probably noticed we as a community don't have a 'general' understanding of Varna. Some members I am sure, don't even want to know about this anymore than what they already do because they are interested in starting from what they have right now. All we know is a practical form of caste. We start there. For all other clarifications we seek the help of whomever we consider our Guru. For some it is Maha Periyava, for others it is Sai Baba and for a few others it is Bhagavan Sri Ramana.
In your case your Guru, as you have acknowledged in several threads, is Bhagavan Sri Ramana.
All I asked was - if you seek to clarify ideas about Varna why are you not using your Guru's views as the standard?
My relationship with my Guru is my personal affair. The only reason I even divulged it is because of the relevant context.
Spousal relationship is a personal affair. But if the society notices one member of the couple behaving in a way that is not expected of a couple, it is quite natural to have questions.
I was not trying to tell you how you have to be with your Guru. Just like the way nobody can tell a person how to behave with one's spouse.
But as a society we do notice anomalies in behavior. In a sense that is fair. For we are our brothers' keepers, no?
Discussing the viewpoints of all great Mahans (by the way I have no problems with Maha Periaval's words at all) is to show that Hiduism is not dogmatic and even the luminaries interpret the scriptures differently. And one should appreciate ALL different view points without getting upset.
I think your views are a little more than that. I thought I read in one of your posts that we cannot 'go back' to our old ways as prescribed by Maha Periyava because we have come far from there.
That is a perfectly fine view - you have disagreed with and refuted some of Periyava's ideas with good reason.
The problem comes when you try to harp on this too much. It has an effect of being too bent on what you see. An example is this thread. Sri N was trying to present a different angle or aspect of Varna. But the word Varna seems to have specific associations in your mind which I believe, we have all heard and have agreed as valid.
On this specific topic, I would encourage you to move on.
Also, my comment about Sri Vijisesh Ji was not posted because I thought there was something 'sinister' underlying his joke. I merely said that it took away from what Sri Ramaa Ji was saying against some others here - and his subsequent comment about 'clowns' confirm my point.
Right. I didn't particulary say your comment was about Vijisesh or Sri Ramaa. I just said that you interpreted it as a veiled threat.
Sri KRS - I think by now you recognize that your view points are pretty liberal to many folks in this forum. I personally have enjoyed reading your views as they are well thought-out. I cannot say the same for everybody.
While we at the admin do our best to keep this forum free of insults and barbs - our actions are more of defense - which occur after the fact.
It is unrealistic to expect no offense to occur at all especially if there are ardent adherents to both ends of the spectrum - Did you expect that?
Apparently, I have failed in this, otherwise you would not have made the comments you have made. Seems to me, I am not adding any value to this Forum.
Sri KRS - as a moderator in this forum it is my job to point out issues which are frequent points of contention - in the hope that it will pave the way for better understanding and a more fruitful exchange.
I am always confused about what to do when posters misunderstand this as an attack on their ego.
You have frequently supported the admin's ideas of trying to create a unified forum.
Yet you seem to want to stay only if people agree with you all the time.
How is this possible?
I thank you and others for the opportunity you have given me in sharing my thoughts here. Thank you.
I don't know what to say.
Namaskarams,
KRS
Regards,
Chintana
Dear Sowbhagyavathi Chintana Ji,
The only reason I have engaged in any dialog in this thread is to support Sri Nacchinarkiniyan Ji's right to say what wants to say.
Sri N has clarified what he intended to say in this thread - i.e., he meant to highlight what has happened because of the Varna system and that he didn't mean to start a discussion on Varna per se.
Seems like one can not say anything 'controversial', even though it is a debatable point without getting pilloried.
Seems like I cannot question an inconsistency if I see one!
If my discussions seemed 'emotional' to you, I want to dispel that notion. And I thought I was putting forth the merits of my point of view. I thought this topic was specifically designed to bring forth such discussions as the topic title says.
No. I didn't mean to say that you are emotional without being rational.
Just that you seemed to use Maha Periyava's words and works of other authors as a standard for some of your ideas. I was confused by that. As you probably noticed we as a community don't have a 'general' understanding of Varna. Some members I am sure, don't even want to know about this anymore than what they already do because they are interested in starting from what they have right now. All we know is a practical form of caste. We start there. For all other clarifications we seek the help of whomever we consider our Guru. For some it is Maha Periyava, for others it is Sai Baba and for a few others it is Bhagavan Sri Ramana.
In your case your Guru, as you have acknowledged in several threads, is Bhagavan Sri Ramana.
All I asked was - if you seek to clarify ideas about Varna why are you not using your Guru's views as the standard?
My relationship with my Guru is my personal affair. The only reason I even divulged it is because of the relevant context.
Spousal relationship is a personal affair. But if the society notices one member of the couple behaving in a way that is not expected of a couple, it is quite natural to have questions.
I was not trying to tell you how you have to be with your Guru. Just like the way nobody can tell a person how to behave with one's spouse.
But as a society we do notice anomalies in behavior. In a sense that is fair. For we are our brothers' keepers, no?
Discussing the viewpoints of all great Mahans (by the way I have no problems with Maha Periaval's words at all) is to show that Hiduism is not dogmatic and even the luminaries interpret the scriptures differently. And one should appreciate ALL different view points without getting upset.
I think your views are a little more than that. I thought I read in one of your posts that we cannot 'go back' to our old ways as prescribed by Maha Periyava because we have come far from there.
That is a perfectly fine view - you have disagreed with and refuted some of Periyava's ideas with good reason.
The problem comes when you try to harp on this too much. It has an effect of being too bent on what you see. An example is this thread. Sri N was trying to present a different angle or aspect of Varna. But the word Varna seems to have specific associations in your mind which I believe, we have all heard and have agreed as valid.
On this specific topic, I would encourage you to move on.
Also, my comment about Sri Vijisesh Ji was not posted because I thought there was something 'sinister' underlying his joke. I merely said that it took away from what Sri Ramaa Ji was saying against some others here - and his subsequent comment about 'clowns' confirm my point.
Right. I didn't particulary say your comment was about Vijisesh or Sri Ramaa. I just said that you interpreted it as a veiled threat.
Sri KRS - I think by now you recognize that your view points are pretty liberal to many folks in this forum. I personally have enjoyed reading your views as they are well thought-out. I cannot say the same for everybody.
While we at the admin do our best to keep this forum free of insults and barbs - our actions are more of defense - which occur after the fact.
It is unrealistic to expect no offense to occur at all especially if there are ardent adherents to both ends of the spectrum - Did you expect that?
Apparently, I have failed in this, otherwise you would not have made the comments you have made. Seems to me, I am not adding any value to this Forum.
Sri KRS - as a moderator in this forum it is my job to point out issues which are frequent points of contention - in the hope that it will pave the way for better understanding and a more fruitful exchange.
I am always confused about what to do when posters misunderstand this as an attack on their ego.
You have frequently supported the admin's ideas of trying to create a unified forum.
Yet you seem to want to stay only if people agree with you all the time.
How is this possible?
I thank you and others for the opportunity you have given me in sharing my thoughts here. Thank you.
I don't know what to say.
Namaskarams,
KRS
Regards,
Chintana
Dear Vijisesh,
Can I ask you to do us all a favor?
Can you state just in one or two sentences what exactly you wanted to convey here?
Your post is more confusing than clarifying.
Be sure to point out who you are addressing your point to, and what exactly you are saying.
Your posting as it stands makes no sense to me.
Regards,
Chintana
Can I ask you to do us all a favor?
Can you state just in one or two sentences what exactly you wanted to convey here?
Your post is more confusing than clarifying.
Be sure to point out who you are addressing your point to, and what exactly you are saying.
Your posting as it stands makes no sense to me.
Regards,
Chintana
Dear Sri Ramaa,
Your posting is a response to Sri N - the part about Varna and Caste - Sri N has answered you.
My response is to this specific part of your posting.
Two points:
1. By "secularists" are you referring to Sri KRS? If you are, then why don't you just say KRS? Why all this branding and naming - as if KRS does not have any other identity?
2. Also, I hear your frustration about being traded as commodities in the open market - but globalization and capital markets are exactly the tools by which Britain and now America rule(d) the world.
Are you saying the most effective way of combating global capitalism is to follow one's "dharma"? (In the case of Brahmins of course it translates to following rituals and Vedic chanting). Do you believe that rituals and vedic chanting are an effective answer to global money and power?
How exactly do you propose we achieve this?
I believe I raised this question to you before - there are several of us working for very profitable multinational corporations who propagate free trade.
Are you suggesting that all of us should resign our jobs and take up rituals and vedic chanting?
Do present workable alternatives if the "secularists'" arguments annoy you so much.
Also, I am sure you are aware that you are in a thread where the description says that if you believe that traditions should be left untouched then this is not the place for you - there is another thread in the Customs and Traditions section which will suit your needs better. So since you are here I am assuming you are not going to be offended if some of us say that traditions are not exactly the best way to go.
Regards,
Chintana
Your posting is a response to Sri N - the part about Varna and Caste - Sri N has answered you.
My response is to this specific part of your posting.
Two points:
1. By "secularists" are you referring to Sri KRS? If you are, then why don't you just say KRS? Why all this branding and naming - as if KRS does not have any other identity?
2. Also, I hear your frustration about being traded as commodities in the open market - but globalization and capital markets are exactly the tools by which Britain and now America rule(d) the world.
Are you saying the most effective way of combating global capitalism is to follow one's "dharma"? (In the case of Brahmins of course it translates to following rituals and Vedic chanting). Do you believe that rituals and vedic chanting are an effective answer to global money and power?
How exactly do you propose we achieve this?
I believe I raised this question to you before - there are several of us working for very profitable multinational corporations who propagate free trade.
Are you suggesting that all of us should resign our jobs and take up rituals and vedic chanting?
Do present workable alternatives if the "secularists'" arguments annoy you so much.
Also, I am sure you are aware that you are in a thread where the description says that if you believe that traditions should be left untouched then this is not the place for you - there is another thread in the Customs and Traditions section which will suit your needs better. So since you are here I am assuming you are not going to be offended if some of us say that traditions are not exactly the best way to go.
Regards,
Chintana
Last edited:
R
Ramaa
Guest
Dear Sow. Chintanaji,
Namaskaram. Thanks for your posting addressed to me.
I also wish to take this opportunity to thank Sri Nachi for the understanding and clarification. He is honest and straight forward to admit that he is 'saamaanyan'. I appreciate it. As you all know the original name of the thread caused me deep anguish and I had commented "vinaasa kaale vipareetha buddhi". After some meandering the discussion gained strength and vitality when Sri Saabji came in with his profound knowledge. His clarity of vision is known from his succinct writings especially contrasting Hinduism and the abrahamic religions, on the Guru and the treatise on ignorance among many other things. I thank Sri KRS for questioning Sri Saab that he brought out the gems.
I also thank Malgovaji and Sri Vijisesh for the company of friendship they kept in the discussion.
Regards,
Ramaa
Namaskaram. Thanks for your posting addressed to me.
Why would anyone have a trade mark on being a secularist? Such self-branding is not my concern. As you would have noticed the noun 'secularists' is in plural. I and perhaps many others in the forum refer to this entity 'secularists' that is out there not necessarily in this forum haunting the Indian psyche and politics. That is the reason I talk about it. If I wanted to refer to Sri KRS I would have done so specifically mentioning his name or addressing him directly. Personally if I have issues with anyone then I talk to that person, if there is a problem then I talk to the authorities and finally if it is nothing that seriously hurts me then I ignore that person. Sri KRS like anyone else would fall into my three options.
Lots of very good questions. Actually I wish to seriously address these profound questions in great detail. I am thinking in terms of starting new threads to give each one of these specific focus. Hope I can do it and in which case I need time.
I also wish to take this opportunity to thank Sri Nachi for the understanding and clarification. He is honest and straight forward to admit that he is 'saamaanyan'. I appreciate it. As you all know the original name of the thread caused me deep anguish and I had commented "vinaasa kaale vipareetha buddhi". After some meandering the discussion gained strength and vitality when Sri Saabji came in with his profound knowledge. His clarity of vision is known from his succinct writings especially contrasting Hinduism and the abrahamic religions, on the Guru and the treatise on ignorance among many other things. I thank Sri KRS for questioning Sri Saab that he brought out the gems.
I also thank Malgovaji and Sri Vijisesh for the company of friendship they kept in the discussion.
Regards,
Ramaa
Last edited by a moderator:
Dear Sri Ramaa,
Dear Sow. Chintanaji,
Namaskaram. Thanks for your posting addressed to me.
Why would anyone have a trade mark on being a secularist? Such self-branding is not my concern. As you would have noticed the noun 'secularists' is in plural. I and perhaps many others in the forum refer to this entity 'secularists' that is out there not necessarily in this forum haunting the Indian psyche and politics. That is the reason I talk about it. If I wanted to refer to Sri KRS I would have done so specifically mentioning his name or addressing him directly. Personally if I have issues with anyone then I talk to that person, if there is a problem then I talk to the authorities and finally if it is nothing that seriously hurts me then I ignore that person. Sri KRS like anyone else would fall into my three options.
I am quoting you here:
The secularists have said that a person can be anything under right conditions and given the opportunity.
If what you said in your response is true the next time I see statement such as this one I will expect you to quote exactly where you found this statement or view point. Why am I being a little strict on this? Because in this forum we have a history of how the term "secularists" has been used - it has often been used to negatively indicate Sri KRS. So while I concede that you may have referred to some other person I will expect a little bit more responsibility as far as how this specific term is used.
People may not like one another - but NO indirect references and NO disrespectful references, negative sarcasm included.
I hope you understand what we as a forum stand for and will be able to see the point I have raised here.
Lots of very good questions. Actually I wish to seriously address these profound questions in great detail. I am thinking in terms of starting new threads to give each one of these specific focus. Hope I can do it and in which case I need time.
Good. I hope you know that your topic will fall under Customs and Traditions. This thread is for people who believe that traditions are not always right. And for people who are at least willing to see that point of view.
Regards,
Chintana
Dear Sow. Chintanaji,
Namaskaram. Thanks for your posting addressed to me.
Why would anyone have a trade mark on being a secularist? Such self-branding is not my concern. As you would have noticed the noun 'secularists' is in plural. I and perhaps many others in the forum refer to this entity 'secularists' that is out there not necessarily in this forum haunting the Indian psyche and politics. That is the reason I talk about it. If I wanted to refer to Sri KRS I would have done so specifically mentioning his name or addressing him directly. Personally if I have issues with anyone then I talk to that person, if there is a problem then I talk to the authorities and finally if it is nothing that seriously hurts me then I ignore that person. Sri KRS like anyone else would fall into my three options.
I am quoting you here:
The secularists have said that a person can be anything under right conditions and given the opportunity.
If what you said in your response is true the next time I see statement such as this one I will expect you to quote exactly where you found this statement or view point. Why am I being a little strict on this? Because in this forum we have a history of how the term "secularists" has been used - it has often been used to negatively indicate Sri KRS. So while I concede that you may have referred to some other person I will expect a little bit more responsibility as far as how this specific term is used.
People may not like one another - but NO indirect references and NO disrespectful references, negative sarcasm included.
I hope you understand what we as a forum stand for and will be able to see the point I have raised here.
Lots of very good questions. Actually I wish to seriously address these profound questions in great detail. I am thinking in terms of starting new threads to give each one of these specific focus. Hope I can do it and in which case I need time.
Good. I hope you know that your topic will fall under Customs and Traditions. This thread is for people who believe that traditions are not always right. And for people who are at least willing to see that point of view.
Regards,
Chintana
R
Ramaa
Guest
Dear Chintanaji,
I thought I made it clear that I did not have Sri KRS in mind while I used the word 'secularists'. Demanding that I do not use the word 'secularists' because it would hurt Sri KRS is beyond my comprehension. Why bend backwards so much?
Regards,
Ramaa
P.S: I do not think anyone can foresee which of his writing would draw criticism from whom.
I thought I made it clear that I did not have Sri KRS in mind while I used the word 'secularists'. Demanding that I do not use the word 'secularists' because it would hurt Sri KRS is beyond my comprehension. Why bend backwards so much?
Regards,
Ramaa
P.S: I do not think anyone can foresee which of his writing would draw criticism from whom.
Dear Sri Ramaa,
I thought I made this clear in my previous posting.
This is not bending over backwards.
This is called being responsible.
If I feel there is someone unduly attacking you, I will call-in that behavior too.
Regards,
Chintana
I thought I made this clear in my previous posting.
This is not bending over backwards.
This is called being responsible.
If I feel there is someone unduly attacking you, I will call-in that behavior too.
Regards,
Chintana
M
malgova.mango
Guest
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Dear Sow. Chintana,[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]You can conclude anything, But I take this oppurtunity to tell Mr. KRS that there is no ill-intention of insulting or be sarcastic about anybody.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]My intention is to have a word of caution to Brhamasri Saba than any other thing. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]BTW, what you understand? [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]regards[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]malgova.mango[/FONT]
M
malgova.mango
Guest
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Dear Mr KRS,[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]By saying “opponents” , I meant in a very matter of fact way and definetly not in a unbrotherly way. The diction “Vasudeivaka Kudmbakam” is constantly ringing in my heart and thanks for your reminder.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Since you clarified your intention is to support the thread initiator and not for open discussion, I 'm no longer interested in continuing any further discussions with you. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Many thanks and Good bye to you. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Regards[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]malgova.mango[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]By saying “opponents” , I meant in a very matter of fact way and definetly not in a unbrotherly way. The diction “Vasudeivaka Kudmbakam” is constantly ringing in my heart and thanks for your reminder.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Since you clarified your intention is to support the thread initiator and not for open discussion, I 'm no longer interested in continuing any further discussions with you. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Many thanks and Good bye to you. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Regards[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]malgova.mango[/FONT]
M
malgova.mango
Guest
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Dear Ramaa[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Please answer my questions to Mr. KRS on the connection between guna,karmaand re-birth. I preceive your reply quoting Sri RV's post have some mis-conception and the idea of the post by RV is very different from what you have concluded. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Again a word of caution, if it is open discussion ,then proceed but if you feel the view is very close and do not want to be disturbed then just leave it. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Please continue with your discussion on either this post or in another post as advised by our moderator. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Regards[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]malgova.mango[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Please answer my questions to Mr. KRS on the connection between guna,karmaand re-birth. I preceive your reply quoting Sri RV's post have some mis-conception and the idea of the post by RV is very different from what you have concluded. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Again a word of caution, if it is open discussion ,then proceed but if you feel the view is very close and do not want to be disturbed then just leave it. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Please continue with your discussion on either this post or in another post as advised by our moderator. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Regards[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]malgova.mango[/FONT]
M
malgova.mango
Guest
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Dear Sri R.Venkataraman,[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]My greetings and respects to you...[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I also take this opportunity to repeat, The Upanishads are not to be quoted for our present discussion as we are only dealing with Purva part of Veda and not Vedanta. The reasoning is the Veda purva serves as the ladder to reach Veda-anta. After reaching the abode we don't need the ladder for our-sake but it is definetly a must for the others who wants to climb and reach the “Lotus feet of HIM”.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Please also consider that our elders and “Maha Perieva” are not that ignorant about “Upanishads”.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Maha-Periva give sufficient reasons to believe that the Jati-system is the very life beat of our vedic culture.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]As far the Shastra – “Janmana jayeta Shudraha...” This is the very fist quote I 've posted. The intention of this sloka is to drive the Brahmins to complete the purpose of their birth without giving to any haughtiness to think that the very birth alone is sufficient and waste their life-time in other pursuits. This alone is the intention of this sloka. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Of course other Jati people also attain the “Lotus feet of HIM” that's why we have the term “Raja Rishi” , “Sutha rishi” etc..[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]What is argued here is the Jati-sytem is vital infrastructure for bringing all classes of people to “Krama Mukthi” and with the disappearance of this order the two important pursuits are at stake.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]For a fortunate person with a lot of “purva punyas” even one mantra is enough, Rishi Vamadeva attained his enlightement in the womb itself. But in perspective many of beings like me who don't have the punyas and need the order of Jathi system to gather punyas to attain “THE LOTUS FEET OF HIM” .[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]My preceptions may be right or wrong.....[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]regards[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]malgova.mango[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif](just another nick-name)[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]My greetings and respects to you...[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I also take this opportunity to repeat, The Upanishads are not to be quoted for our present discussion as we are only dealing with Purva part of Veda and not Vedanta. The reasoning is the Veda purva serves as the ladder to reach Veda-anta. After reaching the abode we don't need the ladder for our-sake but it is definetly a must for the others who wants to climb and reach the “Lotus feet of HIM”.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Please also consider that our elders and “Maha Perieva” are not that ignorant about “Upanishads”.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Maha-Periva give sufficient reasons to believe that the Jati-system is the very life beat of our vedic culture.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]As far the Shastra – “Janmana jayeta Shudraha...” This is the very fist quote I 've posted. The intention of this sloka is to drive the Brahmins to complete the purpose of their birth without giving to any haughtiness to think that the very birth alone is sufficient and waste their life-time in other pursuits. This alone is the intention of this sloka. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Of course other Jati people also attain the “Lotus feet of HIM” that's why we have the term “Raja Rishi” , “Sutha rishi” etc..[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]What is argued here is the Jati-sytem is vital infrastructure for bringing all classes of people to “Krama Mukthi” and with the disappearance of this order the two important pursuits are at stake.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]For a fortunate person with a lot of “purva punyas” even one mantra is enough, Rishi Vamadeva attained his enlightement in the womb itself. But in perspective many of beings like me who don't have the punyas and need the order of Jathi system to gather punyas to attain “THE LOTUS FEET OF HIM” .[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]My preceptions may be right or wrong.....[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]regards[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]malgova.mango[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif](just another nick-name)[/FONT]
R
Ramaa
Guest
Dear Friends,
After reading post No.89 by Sri Saabji it kept me thinking.
Varnasrama Dharma and the caste explosion were hotly debated issues in this forum. There were numerous castes that came into existnce in Indian history since the days of antiquty but they were seen to have found themselves in harmony with varnasrama dharma until the British intoduced their system of 'commodity economy' during their colonial rule and later secular outfits (specifically not meaning KRS) who became the rulers who put secularism in the constitution and entrusted the caste reservation and usurpation of temples and other institutions of Hindu faith and writing rules of Hindu society by making enticed conversions to other religions legal thus opening alien religions to attack the age old religion of Hindus and enabling fifth columns as defenders of secularism to attack Hinduism as we have witnessed in Tamilnadu. The secularists have entrenched into the constitution that Hindus are forbidden to settle in Kashmir while Hindus are being driven into a minority from Kashmir to Kanyakumari.
In this background, the DK and the DMK have been claiming during their initial stages that there existed a Utopian Dravidian culture of casteless society. Since attaining power in Tamilnadu the leadership of these outfits got entrenched into the hands of the BCs and OBCs and became open mouthpieces and promoters of the BCs and OBCs while still mouthing the so called casteless society.
This is the context. I am reproducing a writeup by my friend Sri Venkatsaubramanian that caste proliferation is an ancient and historical phenomenon. My effort to initiate discussion is to show that secularism actually creates and intensifies caste conflicts in India. I encourage members to discuss this topic and put forth their solutions.
Here is Sri Venkatsaubramanian's writeup.
"There was no time when there was no caste! But the rigidity was not there.
Even as late as a few centuries before, the pillai caste (who were clerks, ministers, officers, diwans etc) emerged from the Thevar community. There is a saying ' Agamudiar mella mella pillaiyanar' meaning- the Agamudiar (the subsect of Thevar caste) became Pillai.
Also, Kalki, in his 'Ponniyin Selvan' mentions 'Kailkkolar' as a segment of the Chola Army. But today we find Kaikkola mudaliar as a separate caste.
If there were no caste, why should Naladiar, an anicient Tamil collection of Poems, say ' Jathi Irandolia verillai...'
Avvaiyar, a contemporary of Thiruvalluvar says this '.....kulatthalave Agumam Gunam'
The Thillai moovayiram anthanar story is a very old one tracing back to the very beginning of the Chidambaram temple.
Silappadikaram is a classic example of casteist Tamilnadu. Kannagi was a Vaisya Chettiar (trader) girl. Madhavi was a Sudra girl.
Manicka vasagar calls Siva as 'Arya' in Thiruvasagam many a time.
Thirumoola Nayanar , said to belong to the 3000 BC timeline, was a cowherd by choice of body, and he was managing the cows of brahmins of the village of sattur.
Interestingly many Nayanmars, the revolutionary apostles of Bhakti, were first introduced by their caste by the writers like Chekkilar and Sundarar.
The ancientness of Tamil caste system has to be seen in the Archaka community , called kurukkal, also called Adi Saivar in Tamil literature. They are as old as Saiva Tradition and Saiva Literaturelike Agamas.
The so called blabbers about 'no caste' are only from the OBC community (the Hard core Tamil, the Saivite and so on). But they are casteist to the core. It is they and only they who keep the caste
system alive. The Dalits suffer only from them. This phenomenon can be seen all over India."
Regards,
Ramaa
After reading post No.89 by Sri Saabji it kept me thinking.
Varnasrama Dharma and the caste explosion were hotly debated issues in this forum. There were numerous castes that came into existnce in Indian history since the days of antiquty but they were seen to have found themselves in harmony with varnasrama dharma until the British intoduced their system of 'commodity economy' during their colonial rule and later secular outfits (specifically not meaning KRS) who became the rulers who put secularism in the constitution and entrusted the caste reservation and usurpation of temples and other institutions of Hindu faith and writing rules of Hindu society by making enticed conversions to other religions legal thus opening alien religions to attack the age old religion of Hindus and enabling fifth columns as defenders of secularism to attack Hinduism as we have witnessed in Tamilnadu. The secularists have entrenched into the constitution that Hindus are forbidden to settle in Kashmir while Hindus are being driven into a minority from Kashmir to Kanyakumari.
In this background, the DK and the DMK have been claiming during their initial stages that there existed a Utopian Dravidian culture of casteless society. Since attaining power in Tamilnadu the leadership of these outfits got entrenched into the hands of the BCs and OBCs and became open mouthpieces and promoters of the BCs and OBCs while still mouthing the so called casteless society.
This is the context. I am reproducing a writeup by my friend Sri Venkatsaubramanian that caste proliferation is an ancient and historical phenomenon. My effort to initiate discussion is to show that secularism actually creates and intensifies caste conflicts in India. I encourage members to discuss this topic and put forth their solutions.
Here is Sri Venkatsaubramanian's writeup.
"There was no time when there was no caste! But the rigidity was not there.
Even as late as a few centuries before, the pillai caste (who were clerks, ministers, officers, diwans etc) emerged from the Thevar community. There is a saying ' Agamudiar mella mella pillaiyanar' meaning- the Agamudiar (the subsect of Thevar caste) became Pillai.
Also, Kalki, in his 'Ponniyin Selvan' mentions 'Kailkkolar' as a segment of the Chola Army. But today we find Kaikkola mudaliar as a separate caste.
If there were no caste, why should Naladiar, an anicient Tamil collection of Poems, say ' Jathi Irandolia verillai...'
Avvaiyar, a contemporary of Thiruvalluvar says this '.....kulatthalave Agumam Gunam'
The Thillai moovayiram anthanar story is a very old one tracing back to the very beginning of the Chidambaram temple.
Silappadikaram is a classic example of casteist Tamilnadu. Kannagi was a Vaisya Chettiar (trader) girl. Madhavi was a Sudra girl.
Manicka vasagar calls Siva as 'Arya' in Thiruvasagam many a time.
Thirumoola Nayanar , said to belong to the 3000 BC timeline, was a cowherd by choice of body, and he was managing the cows of brahmins of the village of sattur.
Interestingly many Nayanmars, the revolutionary apostles of Bhakti, were first introduced by their caste by the writers like Chekkilar and Sundarar.
The ancientness of Tamil caste system has to be seen in the Archaka community , called kurukkal, also called Adi Saivar in Tamil literature. They are as old as Saiva Tradition and Saiva Literaturelike Agamas.
The so called blabbers about 'no caste' are only from the OBC community (the Hard core Tamil, the Saivite and so on). But they are casteist to the core. It is they and only they who keep the caste
system alive. The Dalits suffer only from them. This phenomenon can be seen all over India."
Regards,
Ramaa
R
Ramaa
Guest
Dear Malgovaji,
Namaskaram. [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The connections between guna, karma and re-birth have been amply answered by Sri Saabji. I have nothing more to add to them. Please send me a private mail if you wish further discussion on these.
Regards,
Ramaa
[/FONT]
Namaskaram. [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The connections between guna, karma and re-birth have been amply answered by Sri Saabji. I have nothing more to add to them. Please send me a private mail if you wish further discussion on these.
Regards,
Ramaa
[/FONT]
R
Ramaa
Guest
"Converstion destroys religious harmony"
by Swami Dhayananda Saraswathi
http://arisebharat.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/swami-dayananda-conversion-destroys-harmony.pdf
by Swami Dhayananda Saraswathi
http://arisebharat.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/swami-dayananda-conversion-destroys-harmony.pdf
- Status
Share this page
Share this page
Latest ads
-
Service [Cook Available] Samaiyal mami -ChennaiBrahmins cook ( samaiyal. Mami) required for. Your home month salary basis please contact - And...- Kum (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
-
Wanted Wanted female Brahmin cook and caretaker in CoimbatoreNeed a female Brahmin cook and caretaker in Kovaipudur, Coimbatore, please contact
- Peace$ (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
- Expires
-
For sale [Property for Sale] 1 BHK Flat In Anuradha Tower For Sale In Sion Koliwada, Mumbai1 BHK Flat In Anuradha Tower For Sale In Sion Koliwada, Mumbai
- The God (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
-
Announcement Bhagavad Gita - A Layman's Decode to UnderstandingYou can Know the Contents of BG in 60 pages. It is a flow. Easy to Read over weekend. Continuity...
- akjagan12 (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
-
For rent Independent House for rent in ChromepetLandmark: Near Vivekananda School and Kumaran Kundram Temple
- Mahaperiyava82 (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
- Expires