• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Let a Dalit become a Sankaracharya !! தலித்தை சங்கராச்சாரியாராக ஆக்குங

Status
Not open for further replies.
The part I have highlighted is totally opposed not only to the reality but also Brahmins. All brahmins in my circle incuding me have more NB friends (including Dalits) and we eat together, go together, and what not. Brahmins are the ones to break the caste first. Bharathi adorned Daliths with poonal. Vaidnatha IYER took them to Madurai Meenakshi amman temple. Brahmins were one of the firsts to go and live in flats. Brahmins were quick to seize the opportunity to go overseas. In all these cases, they knew they had to accept other castes and they did it. Just because brahmins have their own identity in culture or custom or language does not mean that they uphold casteism.
I did not refer to everyday 'brahmins'. I specifically meant those of mutts. They are the ones who uphold brahmanism (smrithis). A mathadipathi is busy trying to promote a political party. He interferes in areas that are not meant for a sanyasi, even speaks against baba ramdev. What is this mathadhipathi's contribution to advaita? On the other hand, i feel people like Sravna are more qualified to become a mathadipathi if they are willing to take sanyasam.

Humans have the tendency to group and re-work their groupings. Such things are no excuse to keeping caste-discrimination alive. We are speaking of a democracy where each man has the freedom to choose. Which is precisely why 'brahmins' too choose to do things as they please...
 
Last edited:
Nachi it may already be too late with lot of inter-subcaste marriages. Not easy to find a 100% pure sample. We will have to dig as far as Vada desha vadama , Choladesha Vadama, Inji, Sabhayar etc and the rather unknown autarra vadama. Similarly Mangudi, Palamaneri , Malanadu all this and more. But all these segments have not only intermarried we cannot be absolutely sure when one segment might have kept a marriage with a particular vadama group.

Vathima, Gurukkal are the few good samples we might have as they are likely to be unmixed for a few centuries atleast in certain economic and traditional segments.

Leaving that aside, I find that the usage of the word-Fraudulent,by Happy Hindu as unnecessary and provocative. Brahminization is a process that has taken different turns in different parts of India. I would not dare to say the means by which brahminization happened without concrete evidences. On one end of spectrum we have inter marriages with other immediate castes, of which we have plenty of literary evidence. At the other end of spectrum we have the situation of non brahmins acquiring brahmin status by virtue of a guru. In such a procedure the guru who becomes like a father could have proposed his gotra for the adopted. I will not go further than this without proof.

One can call someone fraudulent if their intention is to cheat. One can cheat one's caste but cannot cheat one's behavior. A person can be called fraudulently converted only if his behavior does not live up to his reputation. Further the rules of smrithis that prevent such conversion hold only for those who believe in it fully. We have no proof of such unhesitating belief in smrithis even earlier among all sections of brahmins -though the intention is to proclaim so for conformity. Sivaji and the verma family of kerala were converted to kshatriyas. Not all brahmins were prepared for that. That does not mean that their conversion was illegitimate.

Today there is a kind of brahminization by Gaudiya mutts. They hold certain principles above smrithis. Such a conversion cannot be regarded as fraudulent.

There is not much proof of fraudulent means of conversion to brahmins. Even if there was a few examples cannot be used as rule against all. Rishis like Apastamba or Bodhyayana or Manu who have smrithis after them could have arrived late in history. The rules in place might have been different in much earlier periods. So again brahminization cannot be called fraudulent unless one has sufficient data to incriminate a majority.

Brahmins of the present sect have existed for a sufficiently long time. People including Non Brahmins knew the bad fellows amongst them. One cannot however deny that inspite of the hypocrisy and the derision shown towards the low castes, brahmins by and large have tried to abide by the law with definitely a few exceptions. Good behavior was definitely there as much as among chettiars as among vellalars and other respected communities in the country. Moreover they did play a very important role in protecting the vedas in the past. Until that point of time atleast one cannot call them as fraudulent. Deluded may be used , but not fraudulent. But in the medieval times which community in the world was not deluded?

Even in modern times, we suffer from many inaccurate understanding of life and world which will be pinpointed by our descendants. Deluded could still be used against us but fraudulent?

Shri Subbudu,

You have taken offence to the usage of the word "fraudulent". Please note i did not use the word first. I was responding to Shri Nacchinarkiniyan who said - Bengali Brahmins unlike the Non-Brahmins of Tamil Nadu do not have the necessity for creating or re-writing history. A number of Academic studies have been published. The Bengali Brahmins do not need fraudulent researches to justify their position. They have achieved their position on their own merit. They have not achieved their position because of caste. In fact the dominant caste in Bengal are the Kayasthas and not the Brahmins. Please do not drag Brahmins of other states to the political caste researches and patently fraudulent theories of the South Indians especially of Tamil Nadu..

To which my response was: On the contrary, it may even be possible that claims of brahmins about their own origins are fraudulent. Well, sir since you spoke of bengali surnames, we discussed 'brahmins' of other states. Even if political caste researchers make "patently fraudulent claims", it cannot hold water if genetic studies do not prove it. In the case of the bengali brahmins mentioned in the study, actually we were talking about TBs as well : Consanguineous Marriages

Please refer to post http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/genera...t-dalit-become-sankaracharya-6.html#post85330

To me, it seemed that Nachi sir was upset with the finding that posits bengali brahmins with mahisyas and bagdis. Because he then went on to decimate genetic studies (i esp suspect so, bcoz of his utter falsity that genetic studies are being done for racial profiling - i think he did not even look at the quoted paper before he said all that).

Also, the term fraudulent need not indicate the intention to cheat. It cud very well just indicate the desire of some people to portray their origins in a certain way.

If Nachi sir had not used the word fraudulent first, i too wud not have used it.

But then i expected this is how every single person here wud be. They wud not find Nachi sir's usage provocative. Only the 'other side' will be found that way. The 'other side' is anything that contradicts untruths and mere claims. This indeed is kaliyuga...
 
Last edited:
A falsely perceived social imbalance is being used as an excuse to impose a tangible economic discrimination.
Barani sir,

Am surprised you say this. Surely you are aware that social imbalance was not 'falsely perceived". Social imbalance was real and continues to be real in some rural places.

IMO those who complain about caste-reservations and caste-politics have only themselves to blame. If only there was the attitude to "live and let live" by colonial-period brahmins (please note, not all but 'some', but the 'some' were the people who really mattered), then the communal reservation of 1927 wud never have come up. We wud not have seen caste becoming a platform for politics, nor wud we have seen caste-reservations.
 
Last edited:
Dear Subbudu Sir:

I hear you very well..

My solution is this for now:

I estimate that nearly 30% of the private economy is in the hands of Bs in India... they are the solution, plus various Mutts.. they should open good schools and colleges for poor Bs.

In my view, nearly 3/4 of the entire citizens (900 millions) are poor making less than Rs. 150 per person per day. Of this, Bs are only a small portion in my calculation (about 24 millions maximum), still a good number.

Yes, we need to come up with Solutions to ALL of the poor peoples in India.

Cheers.
The present generation of brahmins have done their bit. It will not continue. The writing is in the wall. Most of the modern brahmin youngsters are not too caste conscious that they will ever setup or actively support a completely pro brahmin education institution. Not to leave aside the inevitability of dissolution of caste among highly educated B. One can also question the need for such caste specific organizations.

Take the case of cable television distribution in Tamil Nadu, how many people in this state strongly protested that they need good primary education not TV? Not much , there was hardly that desire except for a few jokes. How many people gheraoed stalin's house and sun tv and asked them to return back the money? Few? All this might have been answered if it had affected the votes. But no, thats not what we want do we or we really care do we?

Let us have a proper educational setup. What is it Dear Yamaka that prevents us from having a poverty line based reservation considering that majority of the poor are the lowest of the low castes? Let people who earn less than 150 Rs a day get level reservation followed by 150 -250 followed by 250-500 and so on with whatever the law wishes to compute. Let us have a further level of reservation for the poor whose parents dont know how to read and write. In this level there are hardly any Bs who will qualify. What prevents this kind of reservation?
 
But then i expected this is how every single person here wud be. They wud not find Nachi sir's usage provocative. Only the 'other side' will be found that way. The 'other side' is anything that contradicts untruths and mere claims. This indeed is kaliyuga...
Let us first not incriminate anybody you or Nachi. I only said the words were provocative not the general opinion expressed. You have every right to propose a theory and ardently believe in it.

patently fraudulent theories of the South Indians especially of Tamil Nadu..
Yes this is also provocative and I did not read much into this . Thanks for bringing it to my notice.
It would have been used as incorrect theories - that would have avoided provocation .But let us not incriminate Nachi , he is a very socially conscious person who has brought inter caste marriage into his family.

I am not sure if your mother tongue is Tamil, but I having lived for many years outside TN have found it difficult to cope up with things when I return to Tamil Nadu. I find the caste politics blatantly evident in TN. It is usually the people who have come up the hard way in life who dont carry on with such notions. There are many Dalits and the lowest of castes who dont have hard feelings against the brahmins. But I have felt it hard, even in prestigious government University of TN,where I returned back. I found that "anti-brahmin" was written on the face of the faculty the moment they had seen me and my color. I could sense it despite my intentions to socialize. I dont blame them because they have been partly brainwashed and partly encountered the snobbishness of the brahmin elite. To you all this is minor reaction to a great injustice. But instead of the offender going punished somebody else is. I left the university for this reason and I hesitate to make a long stint again in TN for this very reason. In srirangam some fanatics removed the statue of periyar. Why should the hands of some poor B( who belong to the 150 rs per day or less category) in Chennai be cut? Have you thought of that? This is not a minor level of brainwashing that has taken place in TN.

I agree with you in many points and my disagreement with you are on specific points and I do disagree with Nachi. I rarely make a statement unless I wish to make a point. I dont go about picking statements of everything I disagree with.
I have no special regards for Nachi and less regards for you. I have supported you based on certain issues and I in this case did not even support Nachi or his view on certain theories. It was the usage of a word in your post, which could have been avoided however ungentlemanly the other person had behaved in his or her post. I have no problems in you raising issues with someone's statement.

Conversions are never fraudulent if one whole heartedly believe he has been converted. We dont know that the original brahmins developed those strange ideas of their origin. It could have been the legacy of the later brahmins or just the need to follow a law already in place( with respect to smrithis), even if one disagrees with the same. Over a period these laws might have got full acceptance among certain descendants. There is nothing wrong about such hypocritic adherence to smrithis, as these laws could have been considered hypocritical in the very first place.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
....One can call someone fraudulent if their intention is to cheat. One can cheat one's caste but cannot cheat one's behavior. [....] So again brahminization cannot be called fraudulent unless one has sufficient data to incriminate a majority.
Dear Subbudu sir,

I am not following this thread very closely, and therefore I may be misunderstanding your stand because I am missing some subtleties. Within the scope of this disclaimer I would like to comment on two issues, (i) fraudulent and (ii) intellectual capital accumulated by brahmins.

I agree with you that when people in the past wanted to move up the caste hierarchy they were not committing a fraud. It is this hierarchical system, one that gives incentives to people to want to move up this pernicious ladder that is fraudulent.

BTW, such movement, AFAIK, did not happen on an individual basis, but an entire caste group made the move, and, this desire to move up this ladder on top of which sits the Brahmin is indicative of Brahmins occupying a position of privilege -- but let us leave that aside.

The fraud is the system, a system that puts people in birth-based hierarchy, a system that manipulates the mind of a large section of the population and make them believe they are unworthy of intellectual pursuits, manipulated to make them believe their salvation is to be found in servitude.

It is this system that is a fraud perpetuated on everyone, even the Brahmins, but more importantly, to the detriment of the so called Shudras and the oppressed Dalits. It is this Brahminical system that is fraudulent, designed and practiced to cheat people. It is Brahminism that is fraudulent.

This brings us to the second point, the intellectual advantage all Brahmins, and other upper castes, enjoyed over centuries. Even the poorest of poor Brahmin family values education, from which all advantages follow. Even the poorest of poor Brahmin child is sent to school and encouraged to believe education is the road to success.

In contrast, a typical Dalit is told by everyone, including his own family, that he/she is not good enough for education. It is drilled into their heads that they are of inferior intellectual mettle. Brahminism has made them believe in this nonsense.

Governments, faced with limited resources, will have to make policy choices that benefit the most needy, in most number. When policy choices involve tradeoffs, it is impossible to make everyone happy.

When I see TBs all around me doing so well, even the poor, even the orthodox with nothing more than Vedic training pulling in upwards of 30K a month, and the fact that Dalits appear among toppers and the cut off marks are so high year after year, I think the reservation policy is an unmitigated success.

Cheers!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Governments, faced with limited resources, will have to make policy choices that benefit the most needy, in most number. When policy choices involve tradeoffs, it is impossible to make everyone happy.

When I see TBs all around me doing so well, even the poor, even the orthodox with nothing more than Vedic training pulling in upwards of 30K a month, and the fact that Dalits appear among toppers and the cut off marks are so high year after year, I think the reservation policy is an unmitigated success.

Cheers!

You are talking about Vaidikas making 30K a month. That is only one another segment. There is still a situation of poorer brahmins who are neither by virtue of their circumstance. Even if one can believe that these individuals did not deserve better , I am concerned with their children. One of the person I know is not a graduate nor a vaidika , yet his children are hard working. They are studying in a village/town school of no great means.
Yes the man has felt that education is an important need for his kids. Yes he does not drink, gamble and every penny he earns goes for his family. Neither are their wife-husband quarrels so there is a quiet atmosphere at home.That cannot be held against him. Can it?

I say forget the parents. Have a good rural primary education and the government has then really leveled the field.

By Poverty and educational background of parents, reservation acceptable. But by caste no sirs, not at all. I am not party to that game. There are leading intellectuals who dont support such a thing. Every child is equal irrespective of its caste and if a B child is worthy to become the head of IIT or IISC, so he must not denied just to solve a social equation.

Government is doing no favor by caste based reservations. And yes , if there is poverty based reservation , then people with vedic training pulling 30 K a month are already excluded from reservation.
 
Let us first not incriminate anybody you or Nachi. I only said the words were provocative not the general opinion expressed. You have every right to propose a theory and ardently believe in it.
Thankyou. Please note i have nothing against anyone. I only brought the post to your notice because you specifically seemed to incriminate me in your post by saying: I find that the usage of the word-Fraudulent,by Happy Hindu as unnecessary and provocative.

Yes this is also provocative and I did not read much into this . Thanks for bringing it to my notice.
It would have been used as incorrect theories - that would have avoided provocation .But let us not incriminate Nachi , he is a very socially conscious person who has brought inter caste marriage into his family.
Sir, am not interested in incriminating anyone. Not ref to Nachi sir, but saying this generally -- just because one brings in inter-caste marriage does not make one socially conscious, esp if weddings took place against one's will.

I am not sure if your mother tongue is Tamil, but I having lived for many years outside TN have found it difficult to cope up with things when I return to Tamil Nadu. I find the caste politics blatantly evident in TN. It is usually the people who have come up the hard way in life who dont carry on with such notions. There are many Dalits and the lowest of castes who dont have hard feelings against the brahmins. But I have felt it hard, even in prestigious government University of TN,where I returned back. I found that "anti-brahmin" was written on the face of the faculty the moment they had seen me and my color. I could sense it despite my intentions to socialize. I dont blame them because they have been partly brainwashed and partly encountered the snobbishness of the brahmin elite. To you all this is minor reaction to a great injustice. But instead of the offender going punished somebody else is. I left the university for this reason and I hesitate to make a long stint again in TN for this very reason. In srirangam some fanatics removed the statue of periyar. Why should the hands of some poor B( who belong to the 150 rs per day or less category) in Chennai be cut? Have you thought of that? This is not a minor level of brainwashing that has taken place in TN.
Again sir, you cud have avoided the sentence marked in bold. It does seem like you are specifically incriminating / portraying / painting me in a certain way. Am aware of the reactions of people in TN. There is no justification for their reactions. It is wrong. But then why did it come this far....is it only because tamilians are brain-washed, only because they encounter snobbish tambrams, no sir. I don't think so. Its a lote more than that.

I agree with you in many points and my disagreement with you are on specific points and I do disagree with Nachi. I rarely make a statement unless I wish to make a point. I dont go about picking statements of everything I disagree with.
I have no special regards for Nachi and less regards for you. I have supported you based on certain issues and I in this case did not even support Nachi or his view on certain theories. It was the usage of a word in your post, which could have been avoided however ungentlemanly the other person had behaved in his or her post. I have no problems in you raising issues with someone's statement.
Am unable to agree sir. Nevertheless i shall leave this and it be. Btw, never have expected support for a "person". If we like the points made, we support, or we don't support. Its about the points made, not the person. However, in this particular forum, it does seem people "want to hear" only a particular shaded view as the truth. And are eager to shut out other voices.

Conversions are never fraudulent if one whole heartedly believe he has been converted. We dont know that the original brahmins developed those strange ideas of their origin. It could have been the legacy of the later brahmins or just the need to follow a law already in place( with respect to smrithis), even if one disagrees with the same. Over a period these laws might have got full acceptance among certain descendants. There is nothing wrong about such hypocritic adherence to smrithis, as these laws could have been considered hypocritical in the very first place.
Nowhere have i said that conversions are fraudulent. Everyone has been reinventing themselves. That's how the society is. As for the remaining part of this paragraph, i don't agree, but i shall let it be.

Regards.
 
YThere is still a situation of poorer brahmins who are neither by virtue of their circumstance. Even if one can believe that these individuals did not deserve better , I am concerned with their children.
Subbudu sir,

Why is the idea of "some brahmins" being poor so much of an issue?

Sorry to say sir, to me, it seems that there is an underlying superiority complex associated with this. I spent a lot of time going thru old posts in this forum. You see lots of posters making a lot of noise that brahmin are designed to be great, are superior, its in the birth, are born to rule, brahmins are this and that...it wud seem that there is a section which is unable to accept that there are "some brahmins" who are poor.
 
In this thread there have been quite a few discussions on caste based discrimination, reservation and theories about brahmin origin.

Let me take the question of origin. If a chemical is flooded into water, and allowed to react with it, and a by product removed from the water and used in making an ornament then how is somebody to know that this product in the ornament comes from River Ganges? This is situation of genetic study and this is what Nachi brought out. However we cannot ignore generalities in the sense what represents the median or average. We can say the average TB( without probing his subcaste ) seems to match with the Bengali brahmin( without probing his origin) and with Mahishya and Bagdi.
But the same pattern is evident in both Iyers and Iyengars. So there is some truth that goes beyond subcastes and it is almost like people who were brought into TN were some similar extract. Therefore Happy Hindu I agree with you that these genetic studies do have relevance.

Reservation - If a person is the son of an educated dalit he is already having some intellectual capital and if a person is the son of a toilet cleaner who is a brahmin and whose parents have not studied, he suffers in many many ways. Good family and responsibility towards the family cannot be used against him. Poverty line and educational bg based reservation is a more fair measure, and that should be the basis. Narayana Murthy did more to change the face of India than an Ambani and a Karunanidhi. Today there is more money with Indian Government because of the IT Revolution even though unfortunately the major participants in this round were the forward castes. We should not prevent a Narayana Murthy from emerging just because he is a B. NM's own life might have taken a different turn if he had not studied in a reputed institution. We cannot take a survey every day and say Vellalars are only 10% of TN population but they are represented in 20% of top posts. That kind of survey is not fair. Having said that reservation is a consequence of injustice. But the injustice happened at a different time and place and kids cannot be presumed guilty of their parents attitudes. I know a kid who copied his parents orthodox views as a child. But as a grown up man he kicked off everything and married breaking all 3 barriers in one go- Caste , Nationality and religion.

Caste discrimination
-
One end of spectrum we have exclusive patashalas for vedas. This is not open to all. This is being remedied by certain institutions in increasing order and if there is more demand and more funding from general society then these institutions are interested in increasing their scale. Why hunt for the exclusive societies when there are liberal options?
Shankaracharyas- Shankaracharya himself probably crafted the infamous shankara smriti of Kerala. He has given the rules for selection of a mutt head, a rule which excludes Non brahmins. Those who believe that they want to carry on shankara's work become shankaracharyas if they are selected. The question of becoming shankaracharya is unnecessary when shankara's views on caste is well known. Why should people who dont believe in shankara want to sustain that institution and follow his philosophy. That question itself seems absurd.

We have seen a hard system for shudras and lowcastes in the age old caste system. There can be no excuse for that. In post independant India, after DMK came to power, the best that TBs could do was to demonstrate snobbishness. As long as one believes in this legacy one will be called to answer for the unfair system of the past. However there is a counter reaction in TN which I dont like. But I found that in TN the B and NB both were in their own world of hurting ,discrimination etc. The whole environment sounds strange to a person who lived away from that. Happy Hindu, I am sorry to use the statement To you all this is minor reaction to a great injustice. It does sound incriminating and I am sorry.
But it is true that by and large a lot of people in TN think that TBS dont suffer by this system. Definitely the poor TB do suffer and the greater sufferers are the children. Discrimination at a place and time is a reality. Nadars believe that at sometime they were kings and the later rulers pushed them down. I dont know the truth but it is not impossible. At one time a group of privileged could have become discriminated. We dont see the past we see the present. I think in a way only a small section of TB suffer today. However situation is dynamic and I will not guess the future. The system in place in India should be robust to attack any disadvantages from being permanent.
 
Subbudu sir,

Why is the idea of "some brahmins" being poor so much of an issue?

Sorry to say sir, to me, it seems that there is an underlying superiority complex associated with this. I spent a lot of time going thru old posts in this forum. You see lots of posters making a lot of noise that brahmin are designed to be great, are superior, its in the birth, are born to rule, brahmins are this and that...it wud seem that there is a section which is unable to accept that there are "some brahmins" who are poor.
Issue is not about poor brahmins. We cannot have poor who deserve better in life. If one is working as a servant the Government cannot deny opportunities to his children what is available to other children of his equal occupation.

I have told Yamaka that I am least interested in these caste specific organizations which promote education for certain castes. We just should not have that. There should just be a level playing field to select the best people available at a given point of time irrespective of who his or her parent is.

.it wud seem that there is a section which is unable to accept that there are "some brahmins" who are poor
such a feeling is there . But my concern as I said is inequality of the system and the fact that a level field is not there for many poor some of whom happen to be Bs. I cannot close my eyes to reality. For even if my children marry a menon or a nair or a marwadi or a baniya or an arya-vaishya their children could still be in that situation for the sole reason of having chosen a compatible partner among forward castes. This is reality Madam and the fact that one's own descendants could be deprived of something unfairly is very much a concern as much a concern that there seems to be ways by which India continue to hold on to one or more different forms / avatars of discrimination
 
Barani sir,

Am surprised you say this. Surely you are aware that social imbalance was not 'falsely perceived". Social imbalance was real and continues to be real in some rural places.

My understanding and opinions about caste, caste statistics, caste history and politics, are vastly different from many people here. So, it would be natural to expect complete disagreements with others.

Here are some of my views:

-Brahmins were historically poor (you will never see any tale that starts with "there lived a rich brahmin", it was always "there lived a poor brahmin").

-The "Upper class" isn't Brahmins, around the country, though Brahmins were inconveniently included in that set. This nonbrahmin upper caste were the rich community, landlords, pawnbrokers, officials of the kingdoms etc. The service class ended up poor and was kept there.

-Upper/Lower caste discrimination existed in an amorphous manner (no organized approach), for a very long time. This was primarily economic class warfare - the Upper Class feeling they are superior because they are rich.

-Brahmins continue to be poor even today, in the same statistics as other caste and I completely disagree with a few illinformed opinions in this forum that Brahmins are now suddenly prosperous after independence. Some who moved to urban areas survived owing to land value appreciation etc but vast majority remained back in villages and they continue to suffer the same fate as NBs. The "reservation" bonanze had only helped the rich-nonbrahmins and the poor NBs continue to remain in poverty and illiteracy.

-Statistically I see no difference between brahmins and nonbrahmins in terms of their economic standing. Economics is a whole different ballgame when compared to Sociology and one cannot solve problems of one realm by manipulation in the other.

-the falsely perceived notion is that a vast majority of NBs are downtrodden because of Brahmins. Brahmins are also poor and downtrodden. They lived an autere life for millenniums. The social oppressions of the "upper caste" is not the sins of Brahmins. As I said before it is easy to beat up a little nerd in the class who won't fight back. Brahmins do not take to arms and fight, so it was easy to demonize them.

-There is no reason to "eliminate caste system". Any discrimination arising from caste can be handled in a legal manner. There are numerous posts even in this forum that appear to implicitly assume "we must get rid of the caste system" to bring equality. I do not agree with that. Only Economic equality can be brought about, since economic disparity is REAL. Social disparity is merely a set of widely varying perceptions and trying to "get rid off it" is like Don Quixote fighting a WindMill.

-As things stand, I see it is the Brahmins who lack unity, and it is this group that deserves my support, as other groups have their own support systems. This is why I stand with Brahmins, not because I don't want the other groups to succeed. As you might infer, that even among brahmins there is such a wide spectrum of opinions, unity is a hard goal to achieve.
 
The reservation system was propounded by Mahatma Gandhi with the intention of uplifting the downtrodden and backward class to bring about a social equity.But even after 64 years we perpetuate the system not for the purpose for which it was initiated but only as a means to garner votes and enjoy power.The system as envisaged by the Father of the nation based on caste considerations has lost its relevance.The system should be rejigged based on the economic considerations of the people, which we can not expect from present day rulers for obvious reasons.
 
why not newly form a NB-sankaracharya and hand it over to the rest?

i think this new head would be more powerful than kanchi, since he would be heading 6 Cr people than the 30lacs whom kanchi mutt heads.
 
I did not refer to everyday 'brahmins'. I specifically meant those of mutts. They are the ones who uphold brahmanism (smrithis). A mathadipathi is busy trying to promote a political party. He interferes in areas that are not meant for a sanyasi, even speaks against baba ramdev. What is this mathadhipathi's contribution to advaita? On the other hand, i feel people like Sravna are more qualified to become a mathadipathi if they are willing to take sanyasam.

Humans have the tendency to group and re-work their groupings. Such things are no excuse to keeping caste-discrimination alive. We are speaking of a democracy where each man has the freedom to choose. Which is precisely why 'brahmins' too choose to do things as they please...

H.H,

right from my first post in this form I have made my stand very clear. I am not in favour of madathpthis, Adeenams, Adigal and self styled Godmen. They were never and never will be community leaders. I respect Paramacharya, some of the Adeenms who were great scholars and Bangaru Adigalar. These people have served Hinduism and promoted Hinduism. That does not mean that I agree with all their views/ I do not agree with all their views.

I do not like self styled Godmen who talk about Universal religion and accept disciples from all religions as long as they worship him as God. They are not committed to Hinduism.

The sad fact is that the self styled godmen has more following today among the Tamil Brahmin community than all the Madathipathis put together. They may criticize and accept criticism of the Madathipathis. But not the self styled God man.

The lead for involvement of these religious heads in politics was taken by one of the Adheenam heads who was an active participant in the anti-Brahmin politics. He was a scholar and spoke eloquently. But what people do not realize that he was the leader of a group which wanted to ensure that anti-Brahminism does not turn to Anti-Hinduism.

I am writing this because repeated discussions on the actions/inactions of the Madathipthi does not benefit any one.

Your harping repeatedly on that makes for heated exchanges. Nothing else.

many of the madthipathis, adeenams and self styled Godmen have been involved in unsavoury scandals.

So if the forum can keep out discussion on self styled Godmen, let us also keep out discussions on Madams and Madathipathis.

I request Praveen to take a decision. If we can ban discussions on self styled God men there is all the more reason that we should impose such a ban on discussing people and institutions whom we revere.

This is a extremely provocative discussion. I had decide not to post in discussions regarding caste issues. But I had to reluctantly do it.
 
Last edited:
Only Economic equality can be brought about, since economic disparity is REAL. Social disparity is merely a set of widely varying perceptions and trying to "get rid off it" is like Don Quixote fighting a WindMill.

-As things stand, I see it is the Brahmins who lack unity, and it is this group that deserves my support, as other groups have their own support systems. This is why I stand with Brahmins, not because I don't want the other groups to succeed. As you might infer, that even among brahmins there is such a wide spectrum of opinions, unity is a hard goal to achieve.

The reservation system was propounded by Mahatma Gandhi with the intention of uplifting the downtrodden and backward class to bring about a social equity.But even after 64 years we perpetuate the system not for the purpose for which it was initiated but only as a means to garner votes and enjoy power.The system as envisaged by the Father of the nation based on caste considerations has lost its relevance.The system should be rejigged based on the economic considerations of the people, which we can not expect from present day rulers for obvious reasons.

Well said Dr.Barani and Shri sadasivam.sridharan,


We are in the 21st century and in ground reality we don't find any one superior or inferior to each other. Little bit social stigma between certain groups do exists. Few Brahmins and few NB's, having discriminating and hateful opinion towards each other, if at all such things exists, doesn't matter in total.

If there exists any superiority-inferiority attitude, it's all purely based on one's economic level and not the caste. The same group/caste of people have such attitude with in their own group and in general with all.

And the differences do exists in terms of one's intelligence/success level. Today pupil from all community are studying hard and scoring good. I am strongly of the opinion that, reservations should be there only based on one's economic level and not the caste.

Can any one here accept that today's all dalit & other low caste children are dumb and all the Brahmin & other forward caste students are extraordinarily brilliant? Can any one here accept that poor Brahmin students doesn't need privileges just because they are born to Brahmin families and rich dalit/low caste students deserves privileges just because they are born to such families? Can any one here justify that a caste tag of dalit/other low casts, Brahmin/other forward caste are all to be considered, to be uplifted/side lined, irrespective of their intelligence and financial status?

The existing ridiculous reservation systems based on caste is nothing but political game play with a gut confidence that people are fools. With a sense that Brahmin community would just keep quiet (due to lack of unity in them) and get aside and the other community would either support the system due to their ignorance or knowingly wants to support and hold on the systems for their benefits (though they are economically sound).


 
Last edited:
siva,

not sure if vaidyanatha iyer could be strung along with bharathiar.

iyer was famous for running an ashram, with two pandhis, one for brahmins, and other for NB, even though the food was the same.

this was one of periyar's grief against the brahmins - no matter what they espouse, when it came to the crux of the matter, they stood apart.

on the whole, i agree with you, that we as a community, have come a long way.

i do not know how many of us practice double tumbler system at home.

not that it matters, as almost all of us, eat outside in restaurants, and who knows who ate in those plates, or drank from those glasses.

i think, the concept of ritual purity is so strongly inbuilt into us, that it will take a few generations to remove the belief that others are 'tainted'.
ganga river may be polluted, but still sacred. a panchama might have just showered, but still 'untouchable'.

surprisingly, in the land where you live, south africa, as per my tour guide, even now, 20 years after apartheid, living colonies are still segregated by race. not because of the law, but because of economic affordability.

the area where you live, is it predominantly indian, expat indian or white or mixed? if you dont mind. this is more a query on post apartheid of south africa - apartheid a concept just as bad as our manu's laws.

btw, i came across a guy, tambram, whose name is manu :)


K sir,

V.Iyer might have had two ashrams. But he still did the noble act of taking the Harijans into the temple. Forget about EVR's grief. Even some members of this forum (who are born brahmins) have grief against brahmins irrespective of the sincerity of brahmins to treat everyone equal. As I mentioned elsewhere, denial of truth does not make the truth non-existent.

When I referred to brahmins "eat out", I did not just mean eating in restarants. I meant being in the company of people of all castes during all occasions.

"ganga river may be polluted, but still sacred. a panchama might have just showered, but still 'untouchable'.
Who believes in it? Defenitely not the TB I know of. This could have been true perhaps in the last century.

I live away from Joburg in a 100% white area. Though aparatheid is legally over, it still exists in practical terms. There are traditional shopping areas, restaurants, etc. for blacks and whites. So is living. Blacks are concentrated in one area and whites in another. Btw, Indians are legally classified as Blacks. Many black colonies still exist which are known as "Black settlement areas" or "township". Yes, mostly due to financial reasons. Vast majority of blacks are still poor. The Govt. has an "Employment Equity" act and promotes Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) through a scaling system. Expats live more in Joburg and are mixed with whites in their residence. Indian expats can not however be treated on par with local Indians and hence can not claim the status of 'Black' to gain mileage.
 
Last edited:
In this thread there have been quite a few discussions on caste based discrimination, reservation and theories about brahmin origin.

Let me take the question of origin. If a chemical is flooded into water, and allowed to react with it, and a by product removed from the water and used in making an ornament then how is somebody to know that this product in the ornament comes from River Ganges? This is situation of genetic study and this is what Nachi brought out. However we cannot ignore generalities in the sense what represents the median or average. We can say the average TB( without probing his subcaste ) seems to match with the Bengali brahmin( without probing his origin) and with Mahishya and Bagdi.
But the same pattern is evident in both Iyers and Iyengars. So there is some truth that goes beyond subcastes and it is almost like people who were brought into TN were some similar extract. Therefore Happy Hindu I agree with you that these genetic studies do have relevance.
I simply cannot understand the ganga, chemical example you are giving. All the same am not inclined to convert this discussion into explanations on genetic studies. So am leaving this.

Reservation - If a person is the son of an educated dalit he is already having some intellectual capital and if a person is the son of a toilet cleaner who is a brahmin and whose parents have not studied, he suffers in many many ways. Good family and responsibility towards the family cannot be used against him. Poverty line and educational bg based reservation is a more fair measure, and that should be the basis. Narayana Murthy did more to change the face of India than an Ambani and a Karunanidhi. Today there is more money with Indian Government because of the IT Revolution even though unfortunately the major participants in this round were the forward castes. We should not prevent a Narayana Murthy from emerging just because he is a B. NM's own life might have taken a different turn if he had not studied in a reputed institution. We cannot take a survey every day and say Vellalars are only 10% of TN population but they are represented in 20% of top posts. That kind of survey is not fair. Having said that reservation is a consequence of injustice. But the injustice happened at a different time and place and kids cannot be presumed guilty of their parents attitudes. I know a kid who copied his parents orthodox views as a child. But as a grown up man he kicked off everything and married breaking all 3 barriers in one go- Caste , Nationality and religion.
Many threads already discuss this. No matter how much noise one makes, it is true that dalits have benefited from the reservation system. And continue to do so. Reservations are designed to give upward mobility to deprived classes. However what is happening is that we are making men rich, yet keeping them in the position of a 'dalit' in hinduism. Which i think is detrimental to the society. It will be hinduism's loss in the long run. We owe caste-reservations to the communal order of 1927, and everyone knows how that came about. I will support caste-based reservations in academic institutions as long as there is caste-based reservations in vedapatshalas. Period.

Caste discrimination -
One end of spectrum we have exclusive patashalas for vedas. This is not open to all. This is being remedied by certain institutions in increasing order and if there is more demand and more funding from general society then these institutions are interested in increasing their scale. Why hunt for the exclusive societies when there are liberal options?
Shankaracharyas- Shankaracharya himself probably crafted the infamous shankara smriti of Kerala. He has given the rules for selection of a mutt head, a rule which excludes Non brahmins. Those who believe that they want to carry on shankara's work become shankaracharyas if they are selected. The question of becoming shankaracharya is unnecessary when shankara's views on caste is well known. Why should people who dont believe in shankara want to sustain that institution and follow his philosophy. That question itself seems absurd.
You are assuming that people (the general janta) is not interested in Shankara's philosophy. Wrong. Please go to any meeting on saiva siddhantam and see what is being discussed there (from whatever have seen so far, i find their discussions eventually come to advaita). I can also understand why saiva-aadhinams are against a particular mutt. However i shall not go into it now. Infact it is the hypocrisy of the mutt that it does wants to perpetuate caste-discrimination, although vedic studies, advaitha are being taught elsewhere. I find it dubious that Shankara wrote Shankara Smrithi. Whether Shankara's hagiographers produced such works, or whether Adi Shankara himself wrote Shankara- Smrithi (and the smrithi-supporting parts in "Shankara's" Bhasya on Brahmasutra) is all subject to debate.

We have seen a hard system for shudras and lowcastes in the age old caste system. There can be no excuse for that. In post independant India, after DMK came to power, the best that TBs could do was to demonstrate snobbishness. As long as one believes in this legacy one will be called to answer for the unfair system of the past. However there is a counter reaction in TN which I dont like. But I found that in TN the B and NB both were in their own world of hurting ,discrimination etc. The whole environment sounds strange to a person who lived away from that.
Counter reaction is from both sides. Bs and NBs. Discrimination is being done by both sides. The players are the orthodoxy versus the politicians. The rest of us are mere spectators or followers or commentators.

Happy Hindu, I am sorry to use the statement To you all this is minor reaction to a great injustice. It does sound incriminating and I am sorry.
Thankyou.

But it is true that by and large a lot of people in TN think that TBS dont suffer by this system. Definitely the poor TB do suffer and the greater sufferers are the children. Discrimination at a place and time is a reality. Nadars believe that at sometime they were kings and the later rulers pushed them down. I dont know the truth but it is not impossible. At one time a group of privileged could have become discriminated. We dont see the past we see the present. I think in a way only a small section of TB suffer today. However situation is dynamic and I will not guess the future. The system in place in India should be robust to attack any disadvantages from being permanent.
Sorry sir, i have far too many Nadar friends from my childhood. And we keep getting invited to their weddings (where one gets to interact with very many of them). At one point they thot they should have been in ST list. Because of their abject poverty. Kingdoms ousting one another was common those days. Wedding alliances as political treaties between squabbling kingdoms were not uncommon either. But not all Nadars think they were kings. There are also many who believe they were toddy-tapers and brewers (shanars). Methinks they owe their rise to Kamaraja Nadar. From my end, am pretty sure the ancient nadans were linked with some ancient kingdoms though. I have deep appreciation for their enterprising nature (petty shops, small businesses but somehow work hard and move up fast). I have no idea why you brought up the topic of nadars. You yourself agree that only a small percentage of TBs are suffering. So i really do not understand what all this anger (against reservations) is about. No matter what you or me say here, reality is reservations are going to remain.
 
Last edited:
The system in place in India should be robust to attack any disadvantages from being permanent.

I dont know if reservations are going to remain or not, I rest my case with this one statement and is applicable to all be it Dalit or be it brahmin or be it muslim. This is not the present situation.
 
My understanding and opinions about caste, caste statistics, caste history and politics, are vastly different from many people here. So, it would be natural to expect complete disagreements with others.

Here are some of my views:

-Brahmins were historically poor (you will never see any tale that starts with "there lived a rich brahmin", it was always "there lived a poor brahmin").
Sorry sir, but you believe in tales / stories?

I dunno if there was ever a poor brahmin. Even the parpanar were into occupations like weaving, bangle-making and such 'jobs'. Even in sangam period, its hard to think they were poor (considering the jobs / occupations available then).

Anyways, please read on Kshatropeta Brahmanas. One example is Brahacharanams (Bhrama-rayars). Military traditions have always been associated with 'brahmins".

The puranic kshatropeta-brahmanas included the Gargas, Samkritis, Mudgalas, Kanvas, Urukshayas, Kapis, Priyamedhas, Vishnu-vridhas, Haritas, Saunakas, etc. (Source: Early Indian Religions by Priyatosh Banerjee, p.124). The bharadvajas have also claimed to be both brahmins and kshatriyas. A proper list of the kShatropetA dvijAtayaH can be obtained from here:http://mahabharata-resources.org/har..._1_32_mpr.html

How do you expect people to believe brahmins were always poor? Any evidence of that?

-The "Upper class" isn't Brahmins, around the country, though Brahmins were inconveniently included in that set. This nonbrahmin upper caste were the rich community, landlords, pawnbrokers, officials of the kingdoms etc. The service class ended up poor and was kept there.
All smrithis explicitly state brahmins are the most superior of all classes. Several kingdoms upheld the smrithis.

-Upper/Lower caste discrimination existed in an amorphous manner (no organized approach), for a very long time. This was primarily economic class warfare - the Upper Class feeling they are superior because they are rich.
IMO there was nothing called a Upper Class in terms of money in those days. Warfare was the domain of brahmins also.

-Brahmins continue to be poor even today, in the same statistics as other caste and I completely disagree with a few illinformed opinions in this forum that Brahmins are now suddenly prosperous after independence. Some who moved to urban areas survived owing to land value appreciation etc but vast majority remained back in villages and they continue to suffer the same fate as NBs. The "reservation" bonanze had only helped the rich-nonbrahmins and the poor NBs continue to remain in poverty and illiteracy.
Sorry sir, but me too feels there are very few poor brahmins today. But instead of arguing on it, its a good idea to see what the caste-census states. So anyone with info on caste-census?

-Statistically I see no difference between brahmins and nonbrahmins in terms of their economic standing. Economics is a whole different ballgame when compared to Sociology and one cannot solve problems of one realm by manipulation in the other.
We imagine we have new classes, and a new ball-game where economic standing decides a lot of things?? Not true.

Even in this forum you can read posts stuff of people who believe that no matter how rich a man is he won't be respected as much as a brahmin (or things to that effect). Casteism is real. Caste-discrimination is real. Otherwise you wud not see people justifying untouchability in secular places (some posters here do). You wud expect more people who are welcoming of a new egalitarian society without caste-discrimination. But alas. Given a chance, such people cud beat us back to the smrithi period.

-the falsely perceived notion is that a vast majority of NBs are downtrodden because of Brahmins. Brahmins are also poor and downtrodden. They lived an autere life for millenniums. The social oppressions of the "upper caste" is not the sins of Brahmins. As I said before it is easy to beat up a little nerd in the class who won't fight back. Brahmins do not take to arms and fight, so it was easy to demonize them.
I disagree that brahmins have lived austere lives for millenia. How many milleniums sir? Why do we have 'brahmins' as military units? And as traders (according to some commentators most traders under vijayanagar empire were brahmins). But then brahmins as traders is not new (ex: ayyavolu trade guild). You do see a vibrant dynamic world of the past where people have switched occupations.

Are you saying present-day brahmins have descended from vedic rishis who practiced austerities? Even then, if vedic-brahmins were into sacrificing animals, eating meat, sura, soma and all, how were they ever practicing austerity?

-There is no reason to "eliminate caste system". Any discrimination arising from caste can be handled in a legal manner. There are numerous posts even in this forum that appear to implicitly assume "we must get rid of the caste system" to bring equality. I do not agree with that. Only Economic equality can be brought about, since economic disparity is REAL. Social disparity is merely a set of widely varying perceptions and trying to "get rid off it" is like Don Quixote fighting a WindMill.
Caste-based discrimination will exist as long as caste-system exists. Initially i was surprised that people opposed the idea of vedic-education for all. I thot it wud be a welcome idea for all. The longer i hang out in this forum, the more i realize quite a few things what 'brahmins' actually "Like". I realise that 'brahmins' here want to have the cake and eat it too. They want to remove reservations, but want to keep caste-discrimination from the core-orthodoxy pov alive.

-As things stand, I see it is the Brahmins who lack unity, and it is this group that deserves my support, as other groups have their own support systems. This is why I stand with Brahmins, not because I don't want the other groups to succeed. As you might infer, that even among brahmins there is such a wide spectrum of opinions, unity is a hard goal to achieve.
This is the same case with others too. However, afaik, to most NBs, infact it is the Bs who are always very united no matter how much they squabble within.
 
Last edited:
H.H,

right from my first post in this form I have made my stand very clear. I am not in favour of madathpthis, Adeenams, Adigal and self styled Godmen. They were never and never will be community leaders. I respect Paramacharya, some of the Adeenms who were great scholars and Bangaru Adigalar. These people have served Hinduism and promoted Hinduism. That does not mean that I agree with all their views/ I do not agree with all their views.

I do not like self styled Godmen who talk about Universal religion and accept disciples from all religions as long as they worship him as God. They are not committed to Hinduism.

The sad fact is that the self styled godmen has more following today among the Tamil Brahmin community than all the Madathipathis put together. They may criticize and accept criticism of the Madathipathis. But not the self styled God man.

The lead for involvement of these religious heads in politics was taken by one of the Adheenam heads who was an active participant in the anti-Brahmin politics. He was a scholar and spoke eloquently. But what people do not realize that he was the leader of a group which wanted to ensure that anti-Brahminism does not turn to Anti-Hinduism.

I am writing this because repeated discussions on the actions/inactions of the Madathipthi does not benefit any one.

Your harping repeatedly on that makes for heated exchanges. Nothing else.

many of the madthipathis, adeenams and self styled Godmen have been involved in unsavoury scandals.

So if the forum can keep out discussion on self styled Godmen, let us also keep out discussions on Madams and Madathipathis.

I request Praveen to take a decision. If we can ban discussions on self styled God men there is all the more reason that we should impose such a ban on discussing people and institutions whom we revere.

This is a extremely provocative discussion. I had decide not to post in discussions regarding caste issues. But I had to reluctantly do it.
The ban on discussing godmen was removed long back. Please refer to posts by Sangom sir. This is an open society. There cannot be a ban on discussions regarding godmen, mutts, churches, mosques, anyone or anything that pertains to the public interest at large. Provocative is in the mind that perceives it. Thankyou.
 
Sorry sir, but you believe in tales / stories?

Story books carry information about history. There is a strong statistical signal from them that shows Brahmins were poor people. Unless you show us some other strong proof they were rich class, this is what I believe. Brahminism teaches them to dedicate themselves to the service of God, not seek wealth and live a simple life. Kindly show me any credible tenet that tells brahmins to go and accumulate wealth.
I dunno if there was ever a poor brahmin. Even the parpanar were into occupations like weaving, bangle-making and such 'jobs'. Even in sangam period, its hard to think they were poor (considering the jobs / occupations available then).

Those days everyone except the king was poor. There was little difference between a farmer and a brahmin by way of wealth.

Clearly, you believe Brahmins were rich, Brahmins did some harm to others by words, Brahmins are united (because NBs say so) and Casteism is wrong because it leads to discrimination.

We are not in the same wavelength. I do not think casteism leads to any discrimination. Whether one likes it or not, the world is driven by economic rules. There is only rich class and poor class discrimination.

And so what if one group claims "We are superior!"? Let the other group also claim "We are superior!". Such claims have no meaning in real world. The Jews claims they are "God's Chosen people". Nobody else in the world cares about such claims. But you seem to bother so much about a phantom superiority and that it somehow affected so many people. If some 2000 year scripture wrote "brahmins are superior", then you write another scripture saying "Dalits are Superior!" and be done with it. But cherrypicking such esoteric scripts and making politics out of it is ridiculous. You are making a mountain out of a mole.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top