Is the Community digging its own grave

[Nara]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

....I think there is no need to create a new scientific definition for sattvic as sattvic is already well defined.

Dear sravna, you asked me "Why cannot the inclination to be a vegetarian be the result of the genetic inclination to be sattvic?" If we want to find an universally acceptable answer to this question one must come up with a rational definition of what satvik is, show how that is related to being a vegetarian and isolate the gene that directly links to being satvik. To claim a genetic link to being satvik or being vegetarian one must demonstrate such a link beyond reasonable doubt. You can't simply assert it and expect everyone to accept.

thanks ...

 

[sravna]

Dear sravna, you asked me "Why cannot the inclination to be a vegetarian be the result of the genetic inclination to be sattvic?" If we want to find an universally acceptable answer to this question one must come up with a rational definition of what satvik is, show how that is related to being a vegetarian and isolate the gene that directly links to being satvik. To claim a genetic link to being satvik or being vegetarian one must demonstrate such a link beyond reasonable doubt. You can't simply assert it and expect everyone to accept.

thanks ...

Dear Shri Nara,

How can a definition be rational or irrational?

Let's have clarity on the above first.

 

[Nara]

Dear Shri Nara,

How can a definition be rational or irrational?

Let's have clarity on the above first.

Dear sravna, I don't think there is much disagreement about what is rational and what is not. Even so, one can definitively say that what is rational is not something you simply assert, but is something you can demonstrate with evidence.

regards ....

 

[sravna]

Dear sravna, I don't think there is much disagreement about what is rational and what is not. Even so, one can definitively say that what is rational is not something you simply assert, but is something you can demonstrate with evidence.

regards ....

Dear Shri Nara,

I am not simply asserting.

I said:

1. Genes can determine many of one's personality traits
2. If a person is predominantly sattvic in nature, he is likely to pass on the sattvic traits to his children
3. So one can have a genetic inclination to be sattvic.

Why do you not find the above rational?

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri Nara,

I am not simply asserting.

I said:

1. Genes can determine many of one's personality traits
2. If a person is predominantly sattvic in nature, he is likely to pass on the sattvic traits to his children
3. So one can have a genetic inclination to be sattvic.

Why do you not find the above rational?

Dear Shri Sravna,

Here again, we need to define clearly what is "sattvic nature". According to the original yoga darsana, if a person has too much of sattvic in him, then it is not conducive to that person being eligible for moksha; he is a deficient personality. All three gunas - sattva, rajas and thamas - should be well-balanced for a person to proceed in his path to liberation.

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Sravna,

Here again, we need to define clearly what is "sattvic nature". According to the original yoga darsana, if a person has too much of sattvic in him, then it is not conducive to that person being eligible for moksha; he is a deficient personality. All three gunas - sattva, rajas and thamas - should be well-balanced for a person to proceed in his path to liberation.

Dear Shri Sangom,

I agree that predominance of any one guna prevents one from attaining perfection. But I think one can say that the gunas are graded according to the extent of balance that a guna can provide to one's thinking. So I am not wrong if I say that a sattvic person is more balanced than a rajassic person though a sattvic person is still deficient in some sense.

 

[sangom]

Dear Vaagmi Sir,

I am surprised you quote Robert Boyd over and over again...that too asking me to look at his findings.

For all practical purposes he is a Non Brahmin and according to you the NB gene expresses its way in a different manner as per your theory..so why would you want to use a Non Brahmin Robert Boyd's theory here to support your theory?

I just fail to understand you>

Smt. Renuka,

Since Shri Vaagmi burst out (as seems to be his wont) when I said "vaagmi gene" I was trying, for the last few days to find out what is it that Boyd had written which showed that the so-called brahmin culture had written into the brahmin genetic code etc. Since Vaagmi seems to be primarily cantankerous, I am bringing my doubt to you.

Wikipedia says, "Most mammals normally cease to produce lactase, becoming lactose intolerant, after weaning, but some human populations have developed lactase persistence, in which lactase production continues into adulthood. It is estimated that 75% of adults worldwide show some decrease in lactase activity during adulthood.[SUP][5][/SUP] The frequency of decreased lactase activity ranges from 5% in northern Europe through 71% for Sicily to more than 90% in some African and Asian countries.[SUP][6][/SUP] This distribution is now thought to have been caused by recent natural selection favoring lactase-persistent individuals in cultures in which dairy products are available as a food source.[SUP][7][/SUP] While it was first thought that this would mean that populations in Europe, India, and Africa had high frequencies of lactase persistence because of a particular mutation, it was later shown that lactase persistence is caused by several independently occurring mutations.[SUP][8]" ([/SUP]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactose_intolerance).

It therefore appears as if lactose intolerance is the normal thing for all mammals and if the brahmin way of using milk and milk products in their food is considered, then indian population should have high frequencies of lactase persistence; but the opposite seems to be the truth.

Again I find that lactose intolerance can set in suddenly as a result of acute gastroenteritis, diarrhea, chemotherapy, intestinal parasites or other environmental causes.[SUP][9][/SUP][SUP][12][/SUP][SUP][13][/SUP][SUP][14][/SUP]

So what is Vaagmi saying? Kindly elucidate.

 

[sangom]

Dear Shri Sangom,

I agree that predominance of any one guna prevents one from attaining perfection. But I think one can say that the gunas are graded according to the extent of balance that a guna can provide to one's thinking. So I am not wrong if I say that a sattvic person is more balanced than a rajassic person though a sattvic person is still deficient in some sense.

A person with more balance in the three gunas will be more balanced in his thoughts and behaviour, obviously. Many have this erroneous grandeur feeling about sattvika guna.

 

[C RAVI]

A person with more balance in the three gunas will be more balanced in his thoughts and behaviour, obviously. Many have this erroneous grandeur feeling about sattvika guna.

Shri Sangom,

I too agree with your above statement. The crux of the posts highlighted in favor of dominant Sattvika Guna is -

1) It is this predominant Sattvika guna that helps in stalling creating wide spread damages to self and others in any given undesirable situation".

2) As well - "Anything done in retaliation while having this predominant Sattvika guna (along with other gunas) would certainly have some good intentions and actions that would help sorting out the issues for a common interest.

Thus, there exists enormous (not erroneous) and grandeur feeling about Sattvika guna.

 

[tks]

Sri Vaagmi


I have a few questions.


In a thread about survival of a community and IC/IR marriages your citation of Robert Boyd's work makes sense to me.


1. Do you think Boyd's work is an established science?
2. As a result of his work what should be the 'take away message' for any community including today's Brahmin community in your analysis?


I know it is difficult to have a open discussion amidst noise created by a few 'holier than thou' posts advocating destruction to 'Brahminism' whatever that word might mean for them.

Let us try anyway


Thanks

 

[auh]

Dear Sir,

A person with more balance in the three gunas will be more balanced in his thoughts and behaviour, obviously. Many have this erroneous grandeur feeling about sattvika guna.

I made a reply to your post in the "Your thoughts" thread but by the time I clicked the post button, the thread had been closed.

I am just giving the crux of my post:

1) Brahmins needed patronage, which shows that they were not the rulers. If not the thevars, nayakars, gounders, chettiars (TNGC) who were the kings really?
2) I wanted to point out that the hate rally by the NBs (whatever caste they may be) readily took up cudgels against the brahmins, and this is notwithstanding the smugness of the community.
3) It is after all a discussion, and we are here to give our point of view. I only feel this about the UP, in the tanglish language - "Chethule nambo vizhundhaalum, cheru nambo mele vizhundhaalum, azhukku ennamo nambo mele thaan padum" (If there are any grammatical errors, members are free to correct it).

 

[auh]

Dear Shri Sravna,

Here again, we need to define clearly what is "sattvic nature". According to the original yoga darsana, if a person has too much of sattvic in him, then it is not conducive to that person being eligible for moksha; he is a deficient personality. All three gunas - sattva, rajas and thamas - should be well-balanced for a person to proceed in his path to liberation.

The Sri Vaishnavas believe that Vaikuntam is Shuddha-Satvam !

 

[auh]

1. Genes can determine many of one's personality traits
2. If a person is predominantly sattvic in nature, he is likely to pass on the sattvic traits to his children
3. So one can have a genetic inclination to be sattvic.

I am not into this discussion about satvam, but just wanted to know if you think that all the characteristics exhibited by an individual are the result of genetic traits only? Are there no acquired tastes, beliefs etc?

Your point 1 seems ok, but point 2 is ambiguous. If a person is predominantly sattvic, it has to be proved that the satvam is due to the gene and further proved as to whether this satvam gene could be inherited. "He is likely" means that it is a probability and not a certainty.

Then point 3 is again a probability and not a certainty, but only after proof of 2.

 

[Vaagmi]

Dear Tks,

Your post #534:

1. Do you think Boyd's work is an established science?
2. As a result of his work what should be the 'take away message' for any community including today's Brahmin community in your analysis?

1. I think Boyd's work is an established science. Anthropology is indeed one.

2. The message in the Indian context is this:

Our ancestors in the distant past had wisely and for some reason(we can only speculate on this) chosen to form different groups among themselves and have chosen different cultures-includes food habits, ahimsa, being restrained, cultivating a strong inclination to delve into intellectual pursuits or martial (daggers drawn) kind of pursuits, money making pursuits, Supporting with excellent services etc., etc., Since there can be many I am not listing them all. Every behavior that was needed for the society to live prosperously and peacefully can be called a cultural facet here. These choices in course of time (thousands of years) got embedded into the genes. We understand from Boyd's research that genes, though they can be reduced to physical(or chemical!!) strands, had a knack of absorbing from their environment the cultural traits to modify what they had in their content. There is really no visible interface between the genes and the environment or the cultural aspects in the environment and we know that. But it appears the genes do have this ability. This is what Boyd has proved in his research work. To put it in one compact sentence will be to say, cultural elements impact on the genes over a period of time to modi fy them. Now the message can be that we should let this genetic evolution to be as it is. There is no need to destroy this path of evolution by an IC or IR marriage which will be equivalent to making a detour. May be our ancestors were more intelligent than the other races that lived on this globe in choosing this unique method of gene management. Whether they did this knowingly by observation and recording or they just got a feel of it and did it is a moot point. It is beautiful, brilliant and harmless. It is rather useful for humanity and society. Look at the frequency with which brilliance flashes in the B community and you will agree that I have a point.

I need to touch on two points here to complete this. a)I do not consider the culture of NB compared to B as some thing lower or undesirable or condemnable or less preferable. They are different and just that. b) Those IR and IC marriages that happen are also not to be condemned. But I would certainly prefer the marriages to be within the community for reasons I have given above. Marriages do not happen on the basis of scientific facts or societal welfare considerations. They happen between two individuals and there these are not reckoned with at all. But even in this our elders have chosen to be careful. The B marriages in which the parents play a very central role should also continue so that the mechanics of evolution in our community is not tampered with.

This in a nut shell is my argument. I have said enough about this. So I do not intend to write any more about this or enter into an argument or a lengthy conversation again. Thank you because you gave me an opportunity to sum up. Thanks.

 

[sangom]

I am not into this discussion about satvam, but just wanted to know if you think that all the characteristics exhibited by an individual are the result of genetic traits only? Are there no acquired tastes, beliefs etc?

Your point 1 seems ok, but point 2 is ambiguous. If a person is predominantly sattvic, it has to be proved that the satvam is due to the gene and further proved as to whether this satvam gene could be inherited. "He is likely" means that it is a probability and not a certainty.

Then point 3 is again a probability and not a certainty, but only after proof of 2.

Even if we assume that the three points are true, if a predominantly sattvic person has to procreate, then he has to have the necessary rajOguNa. This means that it is not an ideal thing for anybody to be 100% sattvic.

In this connection, it will be relevant for us to note that much of the talk about these three gunas and the castes arises out of the Bhagavadgita slokas in Chapter XIV. If we consider the sAmkhya-yOga philosophies, we find that the three gunas are not qualities only but these are ultimate subtle entities or matter; we may liken them today to our concept of atoms, for a ready understanding of this concept, though we have now further split the atoms.

Both thought and gross matter are made up of these three elements or gunas. Though permanent and indestructible, they continually suffer modifications from one category to another, by mutual groupings and regroupings and are thus not primarily and unalterably constant like the souls or Purusha.

Hence, it is simply bunkum to put forward theories like brahmins have predominant sattvaguna, this can be inherited through the genes and so on. All these talks only reveal that the concerned people are completely misinformed and have not bothered to read and understand clearly the ideas put forward by Kapila and Patanjali.

 

[Nara]

....Hence, it is simply bunkum to put forward theories like brahmins have predominant sattvaguna, this can be inherited through the genes and so on. All these talks only reveal that the concerned people are completely misinformed and have not bothered to read and understand clearly the ideas put forward by Kapila and Patanjali.

Dear Sangom, we as human beings come in all sorts of shades of grey, not just 50. One could easily think of a continuum from overwhelmingly compassionate ones like Bhudda, MLK, etc., to irremediable psychopaths like Ariel Castro. This disposition does not remain fixed over time as people move along this scale over time for the better or for the worse. To neatly calibrate people into discrete groups based on three guna dials has no objective basis other than unfailing devotion to the presumed immutability of Vedic Brahmnical teachings. One could perhaps suffer this tendency if only this monstrosity is not extended to birth-based exclusivity for all that is supposed to be "satvik", worse still are the arguments that ape scientific rationality for this nonsense. But, it becomes absolutely insufferable when a connection of மொழங்காலுக்கும் மொட்டைத்தலைக்கும் kind is made a la Brahminical gene or something like that with absolutely zero solid verifiable scientific evidence. These kinds of claims can emanate only when a mind gets infected with the supremacist cocktail of hypocrisy and arrogance.

regards ....

 

[tks]

Dear Tks,

Your post #534:



1. I think Boyd's work is an established science. Anthropology is indeed one.

2. The message in the Indian context is this:

Our ancestors in the distant past had wisely and for some reason(we can only speculate on this) chosen to form different groups among themselves and have chosen different cultures-includes food habits, ahimsa, being restrained, cultivating a strong inclination to delve into intellectual pursuits or martial (daggers drawn) kind of pursuits, money making pursuits, Supporting with excellent services etc., etc., Since there can be many I am not listing them all. Every behavior that was needed for the society to live prosperously and peacefully can be called a cultural facet here. These choices in course of time (thousands of years) got embedded into the genes. We understand from Boyd's research that genes, though they can be reduced to physical(or chemical!!) strands, had a knack of absorbing from their environment the cultural traits to modify what they had in their content. There is really no visible interface between the genes and the environment or the cultural aspects in the environment and we know that. But it appears the genes do have this ability. This is what Boyd has proved in his research work. To put it in one compact sentence will be to say, cultural elements impact on the genes over a period of time to modi fy them. Now the message can be that we should let this genetic evolution to be as it is. There is no need to destroy this path of evolution by an IC or IR marriage which will be equivalent to making a detour. May be our ancestors were more intelligent than the other races that lived on this globe in choosing this unique method of gene management. Whether they did this knowingly by observation and recording or they just got a feel of it and did it is a moot point. It is beautiful, brilliant and harmless. It is rather useful for humanity and society. Look at the frequency with which brilliance flashes in the B community and you will agree that I have a point.

I need to touch on two points here to complete this. a)I do not consider the culture of NB compared to B as some thing lower or undesirable or condemnable or less preferable. They are different and just that. b) Those IR and IC marriages that happen are also not to be condemned. But I would certainly prefer the marriages to be within the community for reasons I have given above. Marriages do not happen on the basis of scientific facts or societal welfare considerations. They happen between two individuals and there these are not reckoned with at all. But even in this our elders have chosen to be careful. The B marriages in which the parents play a very central role should also continue so that the mechanics of evolution in our community is not tampered with.

This in a nut shell is my argument. I have said enough about this. So I do not intend to write any more about this or enter into an argument or a lengthy conversation again. Thank you because you gave me an opportunity to sum up. Thanks.

Sri Vaagmi


Thanks for the details. I respect your wish to not write more on this topic.

Let me share with everyone my views - I do not expect a response from you. I have less than layman's notion of genes and even less of fields such as Anthropology. I do have opinions to offer though

1. I do not consider work in Anthropology, psychology and other disciplines to meet the level of rigor expected in certain accepted theories of Physics or Chemistry etc. There are many opinions and ideas in Physics also but to be accepted across the board they have to meet a very rigorous test.

2. Having said this let me also say that I had browsed Boyd's book back some years ago and thought he made compelling argument with statistical data for his proposal.

3. It is a leap of faith to apply this theory in my view to any culture to draw conclusions for the following reasons

a. We really have no definitive proof of how our ancestors lived. There could have been all kinds of mixes of races. After all there were warring factions and it is unclear what happened if a community was 'taken over' by force. We could make assumptions and I tend to assume like you do that they probably lived a life in accordance to the Dharma overall. In the end it is all based on assumptions.

b. To lead a life of Satvik Sadhaka one needs extensive understanding of our scriptures - I can say from my minimal experience that teachings embodied in Upanishads is precise and rigorous (and scientific though subject matter is not science). I did not sense that level of scholarship in many people that I remember from my childhood. For most part they represented the notion that 'it is all in our scriptures' without bothering to learn. Again it is a minimal sample. They all did some work to earn a living like everyone else. My unsubstantiated guess is that they exhibited many negative traits and now a days it is lot worse (e.g., false and unearned pride on silly things)

c. Even if there was a gene there is no reason how it is almost guaranteed to pass from generation to generation.

My points above fall in the category of opinions only.

I think all these concepts of Satvik genes is unnecessary contortion since it tends to mock the rigors of teaching in our scriptures. There are better ways to understand using these teachings why children born in families that embrace Dharma are likely to lead a conflict free life and embrace Dharmic lifestyle themselves.


No one grows up wanting to go for IC/IR marriages. It happens because of opportunity presented is higher in today's lifestyle and due to the inability to find suitable matches for some people.

I will encourage anyone to marry a person who has had similar long term views. It is risky to guide children to marry across cultures if one has a choice in the matter.

I have seen many cross cultural, and cross caste marriages that are somewhat successful. I have not seen many IR marriages to be all that successful in my limited sample.

Last week I attended wedding of a TB girl (born in USA but raised as a TB) . She married a Islamic family person that seem to have given up Islam having settled in the USA for more than three decades. The wedding function was abbreviated but conducted as a Vedic wedding by a qualified priest.

The boy and his family fully seem to have embraced the TB cultural aspects of the wedding. I know this girl from young age and her father was initially against this wedding for few months.

I found the boy to be Satvic, kind, compassionate and very mature - again based on limited conversation of 20 minutes. I think this marriage is likely to last given his parents also were very nice people. At least our blessings is that they lead a long and happy life.

The girl had a well known Gotra and the boy was given Vishnu Gotra by the priest .. Only vegetarian food was served and he plans to be a vegetarian at home for sure ..

Life goes on .. Change is the order of the day indeed and change is unstoppable

 

[கால பைரவன்]

Dear TKS,
Even if you disagree with someone, you are able to write a response without crying hoarse about anyone's arrogance or hypocrisy or infection or what not! Not all have such qualities!

 

[vgane]

Dear Praveen,

I got a mail on my Black berry from the site but this is not appearing on our site...Message is posted by Chandru1849...He is a member of this site, I have seen his messages earlier in other threads..Was received by me at 10:51 PM....Ref no 12760...He has responded to the thread but it is not appearing here...Is there some technical glitch..

 

[sangom]

According to sAmkhya-yOga darsana(s), as I stated earlier, sattva, rajas and thamas are the three ultimate fundamental guNa particles which constitute the entire prakriti (as different from the Purusha). The sattva particles are bright (shining) and plastic, and represent the intelligence stuff; rajas is activity or energy and tamas is obstruction or niyama (control). These three gunas also cause the feelings of pleasure, pain and dullness respectively. It may be noted that sattva is at the root of all pleasure while rajas causes pain.

Sattva is predominant in all thoughts (along with rajas) but this sattva is at its lowest limit, subordinated by rajas and thamas in all matter. Since human body is matter and not thought, the sattva content is low and overshadowed by the other two guna particles, as a rule.

The above are some of the basic axioms and necessary supporting evidence may be found in yOgavArttikA, Tattva vaiSAradee, etc.

 

[sravna]

There is a certain definite perception of what brahmins are like in nature such as brilliant, soft, tolerant, law abiding etc. Nobody can really deny that such perceptions exist even though some may not be willing to admit the positive traits openly. The fact that these people so vociferously object to brahmins even having positive feelings, about their roots leave alone displaying it in attitude, strongly points to the fact that such people begrudge the positive traits of the brahmins.

Since many traits are common among brahmins, there is a strong case for inherited behaviour. Why do these people need proof for a brahmin gene and its superiortiy? If it is proved will they accept it wholeheartedly and so accept wholeheartedly that brahmins are superior? Their intention is not to arrive at a rational conclusion but to find one pretext or the other to put down the brahmins and their culture. They will keep objecting whatever you do. Ironically it is such people who really don't care for a rational assessment of the situation.

 

[sarang]

Mr. Gurumurthy's words in his speech during vali's book (on 45th azhagiyasingar) release function - "we care a lot and spend time and energy in protecting and preserving old buildings' but we do not pay the same attention in preserving our ancient thoughts and scriptures' - not exact words, but substance. We must have a healthy respect for our scriptures, tradition and culture, and we must do what we can to preserve and propagate what we consider valuable.

Even within a varna, sects, sub sects, sub sub sects were formed when groups of people followed a specific acharya, doctrinal differences, or personal preferences. When a group is able to attract a sufficient strength, it can survive and provides continuity. for example, thenkalai and vadakalai sampradayams following pillai lokacharya and vedanta desika. Many such examples can be found in all varnas. Differentiation and assimilation are possible; I believe the iyengar community may merge as the doctrinal differences are less important today. Saiva and vaishnava mutts and aadeenams exist with unbroken tradition with practicing followers.

Movements like chinmaya, ramakrishana, mahesh yogi (it is a big list) established by the charisma of the founder concentrate on mostly the philosophy part of sanatana dharma, attract huge followers from traditional practicing set and modern educated set. Some lose disciples and weaken after the founder passes away; some survive and flourish by various means - publishing, training, philanthropy etc. All these have faith in sanatana dharma, vedas, upnishads and gita, and in general promote hindutva.

All kings in bharatavarsha, north or south, east or west, have followed dharmasastras as interpreted by their gurus. There is no recorded instance of pouring lead in anyone's ears in either pre islamic or post islamic british days or after 1947. Ranting against manuvadis or tambrams or bhashyams has no substance.

Brahmins who respect and value their tradition and way of life must strive to live it the way it is possible in today's world.

 

[vgane]

August 5, 2013


is the community digging its own grave?

It is very unfortunate to note large number of brahmins, expecially girls, marrying

outside their caste. The reasons may be due to:

1. Economic independence
2. Lack of faith in the caste
3. Lack of faith in the religion
4. Marriage is not a serious affair
5. Disrespect to parents

since the majority of the people in the world follows paternal system, i don't

know how many brahmin girls after ic/ir marriages, follow brahminical system or

advise their children to follow. It think it is highly impossible, within the religion

or outside.

However, there is no harm if a brahmin boy marrying a nb girl, since the girl will

become a brahmin after marriage, it is exactly on the opposite if a brahmin girl

marrying a nb boy. Hence, we may even encourage a b boy to marry a nb girl.

If the situation is really alarming and brahmins want to maintain their identity,

the need of the hour is:

1. Abolition of various categories of brahmins (iyers/iyengars/madhwa) etc. And
subsects and follow only one system acceptable to all communites. This has
to be done immediately and only by the concerned acharyas and, if not, by the educated brahmin people, both men and women, who have interest in the
community.

2. Identify the brahmins (both men and women) who are seriously interested in the
community and appoint them as caretakers.

3. Conduct meetings at least once in two months and explain the importance of
preserving the identity of the community.

4. Publishing a newspaper exclusively for the community.

5. Take oath from brahmins not to disclose the subsect or category.

6. Common fund for helping poor brahmins.

7. Identify the reasons for ib / ir marriages thru professionals like
psychiatrists, psychologists etc., and try to eliminate them.

8. Give equal importance to women for the empowerment of the community or
even the responsibility of managing the affairs may be given to women.

9. Constant interaction is a must to avoid further erosion.

I am sure the educated and those who have interest will come forward the
stop the erosion.

With warm regards,

s chandrasekaran

Dear Chandru,

Your message is very relevant, concise and actionable...I think Thambras has to take this up..You can forward to them also

 

[tks]

Dear TKS,
Even if you disagree with someone, you are able to write a response without crying hoarse about anyone's arrogance or hypocrisy or infection or what not! Not all have such qualities!

Dear KB - Thanks, I appreciate it especially coming from you since in my view you have been most astute in figuring out what is going on any thread and calling out what is happening overall always

 

[sangom]

Dear Chandru,

Your message is very relevant, concise and actionable...I think Thambras has to take this up..You can forward to them also

Dear Shri gane,

I am talking mostly about this tendency only. You were most agitated about IC/IR marriages and when somebody gives some action points, immediately your knee-jerk reaction is to point to Thambras. Why is it that you have not asked your equally brahminist members like Vaagmi, Sravna, Ravi and side actors like Zebra, Sarang, Kalabhairavan, etc., to consider these suggestions at least? That is why I am constrained to point out the weaknesses of tabras which immediately becomes 'brahmin bashing'; I am sure this tactic of calling brahmin bashing is also an equally disgraceful strategy to shirk any possible task of doing something to make this community active.

Anyway, I feel we can at least discuss the suggestions of Shri Chandru and what can be done in/by/through this forum.