No Brahmins, No Tamil!!

[happyhindu]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Yes, there are "middle caste" NBs who ill treat and mistreat the lower caste people.. I condemn it. I argue that this is what they learned from the upper most caste people in the Caste Hierarchy

I very much agree with this point. Its no wonder many 'middle castes' always claim to be 'kshatriyas'. I have spoken to some "middle caste" people why they dislike so-called 'low-castes' so much...The way they speak is self-explanatory. Some comments are -- they are not our equals, they are bad, they are criminals, they will snatch away everything you have, we are equal to brahmins (or) we are like brahmins (or) we are kshatriyas, they have no culture, we cannot associate with them, we are above them, etc, etc..

The whole idea is that they must beget a position in the society, like those of brahmins, simply by supressing other so-called 'low-castes'. In this way, they want to become brahmins. After all in the ancient past also those who captured power and became kings started claiming to be brahmins, kshatriyas or brahmaskhatriyas.

Some northies are very open about this (they openly claim brahmins are kings and born to rule)...but some casteist southies (maybe out of social pressure) play the same lyrics through a very circumvented tune, that is, they still want social power through the venue of religion to decide things in a 'hindu' society...

 

[Raji Ram]

.......... Now you made it clear, and for that I wish all your threads five stars .

Thank you ....

So, you wished me and full filled it too...

Actually, I thought my 'jet lag' made me see stars.

I have to thank you Prof. Sir!

 

[suraju06]

Referenceost #33 by Nara:

The charge is Thirukkural is a text that is not specific to any religion (some say secular) promoting universal moral values, into which Parimelazagar (P) inserted noxious Brahminical Dharmashasthras by way of offering interpretations. It is a fact that P claims Manu as the inspiration for many Kurals. The Dravidian scholars show why this interpretation cannot be the intent of Thiruvalluvar and argue that this is an attempt to contaminate Thirukkural with Brahminical varna ideology. I find their arguments persuasive.

One of the 'universal moral values' (though this may clash with atheists' concept of moral values) promoted by Thikrukkural is surrendering to God. Thirukkural is certainly specific to Indic religions(and not so secular as claimed here). The மலர்மிசை ஏகினான் மாணடி, நீந்தார் இறைவன் அடி சேராதார் , நற்றாள் தொழார் எனின் etc., repeatedly speak about surrendering at the feet of God. If there is to be feet it has to be a personal God, which very idea is anathema to Abrahamic religions. Except the politically oriented dravidian scholars, every Tamil Scholar of some standing has accepted that பரிமேலழகர் உரை is the best available among the many such for Thirukkural. This is the reason why you get Thirukkural with பரிமேலழகர் உரை(as default) when you ask for a copy in the book-shop anywhere in India. This in spite of the fact that some of the urais(among the many) are by Buddhist/jain scholars who had no need to look up to Dharmashastra for reference. This is the reason why people attribute motives to dravidian scholars' politically motivated comments. There is no need to dismiss these apprehensions/suspicions of Tamils about the dravidian scholars' interpretation without looking at them critically with an open mind. Dharmashastras were not brahminical. That was a Hindu dharma shastra and not a brahmin dharmashastra. All Hindus followed it even though there might have been good and bad parts in it. Hindus were brahmins, kshatriyas, Vyshyas, Shudras and panchamans all included. Varna ideology was not brahminical. It was an ideology propounded and owned by the Hindu society of that time. Even Thiruvalluvar could have been only a creature of his times. To paint him as a revolutionary who preached 20th century ideas is, naive.

Now, to rebut their arguments, whatever may be their motives, one needs to show irrefutably that Parimelazhagar's interpretations are what Thiruvalluvar intended.

This is a tall order. How do we know what was in the mind of Tiruvalluvar? In the absence of the knowledge about what was Tiruvalluvar's intentions how can any one prove "irrefutably" that பரிமேலழகர் speaks his mind faithfully? The very term interpretation means there is something which is the product of some one's effort and some one else(who need not be a contemporary of the original owner of the product) looks at it using his mind to intelligently understand it and disseminate it. So the challenge thrown here is a non-sequiter and amounts to taking a cheap shot. As I have said Thiruvalluvar was a product of his times and பரிமேலழகர் had interpreted him faithfully with the reality of that time.

Cheers.

 

[Visalakshi Ramani]

Dear Mr. Swaminathan,

You have set the ball in motion and disappeared. :bowl:

Not one reply from you since you started the thread!

You have thrown a lit match stick in a storage of

gun powder and have completely disappeared.

What kind of discussion is this anyway???

"All against NONE but :violin:
ALL among THEMSELVES??? :llama:

 

[Nara]

....One of the 'universal moral values' (though this may clash with atheists' concept of moral values) promoted by Thikrukkural is surrendering to God.

The point under discussion is whether Thirukkural supports caste system as claimed by KB. Whether or not the first ten kurals refer to personal god is a different debate and is irrelevant in the present context.

Dharmashastras were not brahminical. That was a Hindu dharma shastra and not a brahmin dharmashastra.

Once again, this is completely irrelevant to whether Thirukkural supports caste system.

Even Thiruvalluvar could have been only a creature of his times. To paint him as a revolutionary who preached 20th century ideas is, naive.

Again, not relevant.

This is a tall order. How do we know what was in the mind of Tiruvalluvar?

Yes indeed it is a tall order. Thiruvalluvar never once said anything about Varnashrama Dharma. In fact he heaped praise upon farm labor -- "உழுதுண்டு வாழ்வாரே வாழ்வார்" -- an avocation Brahminical Dharmashasthras including Manu say is lowly and ritually polluting. So, if one tries to inject Manu into Thirukkural like Parimelazhagar did, one has to show that is what Thiruvalluvar had in mind as there is nothing in the words he wrote. That being a tall order does not lessen the standard. This is another logical fallacy, the task of proving a proposition being hard can't be the reason to claim the proposition true.

Parimelazhgar urai was considered gold standard of Thirukkural commentaries by everyone, that is true. But to argue that makes Parimelazhagar urai unimpeachable is ad populum fallacy of logic. It only shows the intellectual space was dominated and closely controlled by Brahminical forces. With Dravidian awakening of the last 60 to 70 years there is a renaissance of fresh ideas that challenges the old one. Old ideas can survive only if it can withstand the heat of rational thought. In as much as Parimelazhagar urai fails to do so, it is no longer the gold standard.

Cheers!

 

[suraju06]

Reference: Post #54 by Nara:

The point under discussion is whether Thirukkural supports caste system as claimed by KB. Whether or not the first ten kurals refer to personal god is a different debate and is irrelevant in the present context..........Once again, this is completely irrelevant to whether Thirukkural supports caste system.......Again, not relevant..

If that single point alone was the subject of discussion then why this irrelevant statement"The charge is Thirukkural is a text that is not specific to any religion (some say secular) promoting universal moral values, into which Parimelazagar (P) inserted noxious Brahminical Dharmashasthras by way of offering interpretations"? (I have highlighted the significant assertions.)
Obviously the intention was to say that the work is a secular one, and that the Parimelazhakar urai is a brahminical one. I have criticised both these propositions. My counter can not be dismissed as irrelevant. It was only a counter to what was presented. If unchallenged what was presented would have passed as "gospel truth" to at least those who click "like". May be statements have to go through a special test to qualify as relevant when it comes to Mr. Nara. If so let him make it public so that we can subject that too to a critical assessment.

farm labor -- "உழுதுண்டு வாழ்வாரே வாழ்வார்" an avocation Brahminical Dharmashasthras including Manu say is lowly and ritually polluting.

Could Mr. Nara quote the original sloka from the Hindu Dharma Shastra (I am sure there is not any 'brahminical' dharmashastra) where this is indeed said this way? It will be really enlightening.

So, if one tries to inject Manu into Thirukkural like Parimelazhagar did, one has to show that is what Thiruvalluvar had in mind as there is nothing in the words he wrote. That being a tall order does not lessen the standard. This is another logical fallacy, the task of proving a proposition being hard can't be the reason to claim the proposition true.

How many times shall we recall the fact that the French Revolution happened long after the times of Tiruvalluvar as well as Parimelazhakar!! So the clarion calls of modern times and the revolutionary fervour of the proletariat can not be a touchstone to judge the Parimelazhakar Urai. P was, as I said earlier, a creature of his times and circumstances. You are setting your standards which are irrelevant to the task in hand. Words can be rearranged nicely and conveniently to conclude that there is a logical fallacy in a statement. When the task of proving a proposition is hard, you make a neutral statement that it is hard to prove or disprove the proposition and leave it at that so that those who look at it differently can draw their own conclusions. You do not look for a non-existent logical fallacy to rubbish the proposition itself.

 

[suraju06]

Reference: Post #54 by Nara:

Parimelazhgar urai was considered gold standard of Thirukkural commentaries by everyone........... With Dravidian awakening of the last 60 to 70 years there is a renaissance of fresh ideas that challenges the old one. Old ideas can survive only if it can withstand the heat of rational thought. In as much as Parimelazhagar urai fails to do so, it is no longer the gold standard.

1. Dalit dignity is rubbished.
2. Dalit literature is suppressed.
3. Basic human rights of dalits are denied.
4. Day in and day out dalits are humiliated.
5. Dalits live a wretched life at subsistence level.

And yet you say there is a renaissance of fresh ideas which challenges the old ones.

Now I tell you the truth as it appears to me. What you call renaissance is nothing but the triumph of majority-ism. You know well what is the majority I am talking about here.The atmosphere is such that every aspect of the culture has to be denigrated, rubbished and ridiculed so that those who have the wherewithal and can challenge the majority-ism have to be kept under a tight leash. Literature is one such cultural aspect. Call a piece of literature as brahminical derisively and half the damage is already done. Then go on to write hundreds of pages in criticism of that piece of literature with a single thrust-that it is bad because it is brahminical-even if that piece is a gem of a literary work.

So where is the renaissance? It is not renaissance. It is hypocracy of the majority-ism parading/cabaret dancing before an inebriated crowd.

Cheers.

 

[Nara]

In the cultural arena that once was dominated by Brahmins is today flourishing with a lot of new faces from all sections of society. This is a sign of Tamil renaissance whether one like it or not. At the root of dalit domination by the middle castes is the pernicious ideology of Brahminism, and to eradicate it Brahminism must end. Brahmins can lead this fight, but instead so many of them keep justifying the system and placing all the blame on others.

This is an unending saga. Moving on to something objective and specific I call upon KB to provide evidence for his claim Thirukkural supports caste system. This is not a matter of opinion, if the claim is true one must be able to cite Thiruvalluvar's own words as evidence.

Cheers!

 

[suraju06]

I quote from Vithura Neethi:

யத்ர ஸுக்தம் துருக்தம் வா ஸமம் ஸ்யாத் மதுசூதன
ந தத்ர ப்ரலபேத் பராஜ்ஞ: பதிரேஷ்விவ காயாக:

and

சோராக்ராந்தம் ததனு விபினம் சோளபான்ட்யாந்த்ரஸ்தம
ஜில்லீநாத ஸ்ரவணபருஷம் சீக்ரமேவ வ்தீயா:
தீர்னே தஸ்மின் பிரகடயஸகே சீதலாம்ஸ்தே நினாதான்
சப்தாயந்தே ந கலு கவய: சன்னிதௌ துர்ஜனானாம் !!

and

இதர கஷ்ட சதானி யதேச்சயா விதர தானி ஸஹே சதுராநன
அரஸிகேஷு கவித்வநிவேதனம் சிரஸி மா லிக, மா லிக, மா லிக !

Cheers.

 

[sangom]

I quote from Vithura Neethi:

யத்ர ஸுக்தம் துருக்தம் வா ஸமம் ஸ்யாத் மதுசூதன
ந தத்ர ப்ரலபேத் பராஜ்ஞ: பதிரேஷ்விவ காயாக:

and

சோராக்ராந்தம் ததனு விபினம் சோளபான்ட்யாந்த்ரஸ்தம
ஜில்லீநாத ஸ்ரவணபருஷம் சீக்ரமேவ வ்தீயா:
தீர்னே தஸ்மின் பிரகடயஸகே சீதலாம்ஸ்தே நினாதான்
சப்தாயந்தே ந கலு கவய: சன்னிதௌ துர்ஜனானாம் !!

and

இதர கஷ்ட சதானி யதேச்சயா விதர தானி ஸஹே சதுராநன
அரஸிகேஷு கவித்வநிவேதனம் சிரஸி மா லிக, மா லிக, மா லிக !

Cheers.

I could not trace even one of the above verses in vidura niti downloaded from Download - Vidur Niti :
Can you furnish chapter & verse of Mahabharata?

I think the second sloka is from hamsa sandesam of Swami Desikan and the third from Kalidasa; am I right?

 

[london swaminathan]

Dear all
Thanks for all the positive comments.

HE WHO KNOWS NOT AND KNOWS NOT HE KNOWS NOT IS A FOOL, SHUN HIM

HE WHO KNOWS NOT AND KNOWS HE KNOWS NOT, HE IS SIMPLE TEACH HIM

HE WHO KNOWS AND KNOWS NOT HE KNOWS, HE IS ASLEEP WAKE HIM

HE WHO KNOWS AND KNOWS HE KNOWS HE IS WISE, FOLLOW HIM

london swaminathan

 

[Nara]

HE WHO KNOWS NOT AND KNOWS NOT HE KNOWS NOT IS A FOOL, SHUN HIM
HE WHO KNOWS NOT AND KNOWS HE KNOWS NOT, HE IS SIMPLE TEACH HIM
HE WHO KNOWS AND KNOWS NOT HE KNOWS, HE IS ASLEEP WAKE HIM
HE WHO KNOWS AND KNOWS HE KNOWS HE IS WISE, FOLLOW HIM

Now, the 64K $ question is, how to know which kind of he knows he is to follow him or not?

If you know not that you know not what kind of he knows he is, then anyone who talks a little gibberish will be a baba to you.
If you know not that you know what kind of he knows he is, then you are ripe to follow someone claiming to be a baba.
If you know that you know not what kind of he knows he is, then you may be skeptical and escape, but may be not.
If you know that you know what kind of he knows he is, then you may join him and become a baba yourself.

 

[kunjuppu]

Now, the 64K $ question is, how to know which kind of he knows he is to follow him or not?

If you know not that you know not what kind of he knows he is, then anyone who talks a little gibberish will be a baba to you.
If you know not that you know what kind of he knows he is, then you are ripe to follow someone claiming to be a baba.
If you know that you know not what kind of he knows he is, then you may be skeptical and escape, but may be not.
If you know that you know what kind of he knows he is, then you may join him and become a baba yourself.

dear nara,

you do sell me real cheap.

ofcourse, i raise my hand, to the first line, but in today's defaced currencies, i had hoped that i would be worth atleast more than 64k.

please bid again mon ami.

danke schoen!

 

[kunjuppu]

Dear all
Thanks for all the positive comments.

HE WHO KNOWS NOT AND KNOWS NOT HE KNOWS NOT IS A FOOL, SHUN HIM

HE WHO KNOWS NOT AND KNOWS HE KNOWS NOT, HE IS SIMPLE TEACH HIM

HE WHO KNOWS AND KNOWS NOT HE KNOWS, HE IS ASLEEP WAKE HIM

HE WHO KNOWS AND KNOWS HE KNOWS HE IS WISE, FOLLOW HIM

london swaminathan

hi london,

very happy to know that you are not a spammer.

i do know of another journalist turned bbc correspondent, working out of chennai - a left wing chap, remarkably honest, and who probably was one of my beacons re reformative thoughts and ideas. his favourite subject was the need for introspection among the brahmins re their inherited 'oththippo values'.

re your very deep quote above, as a rule, it is best to avoid innuendos. as you probably know, it only leaves people confused, as to where in your map, we are located.

i, for one, am very comfortable with your first line. i have always claimed to be a fool, and nothing worse, as i age, than being an old fool. after all, you have heard the old adage, 'there is no fool like an old fool', right?

so, maybe in future, you can feel free to comparmentalize us such:

kunjuppu - fool. shun him

nara, Yamaka- he knows not. teach him.

sangom - he is asleep, wake him

london srinivasan - he is wise. follow him

i hope i am not too wrong in my assessment above. i do beg the pardon of nara, Yamaka, sangom for voting on their behalf, and if they object, would be too willing, to sub some other names.

whatever may be the result, welcome to the forum, and wish you good participation and a jolly good time here.

 

[Nara]

.., i had hoped that i would be worth atleast more than 64k.

K, the $64K comes from an American Quiz show called $64K Challenge. The ultimate question was called $64K question. The $64K does not stand for any particular $ value, but just the maximum prize the correct answer to the ultimate question will fetch. Those unfamiliar with the origin of this idiom change it to million $ question etc.

So, fear not, the $64K is really whatever amount we want to fancy we are worth .

Cheers!

 

[Raji Ram]

Just a flash of thought!

Tamil is a difficult language and writing Thanglish is equally difficult. அ / ஆ; ல / ள and ன / ண should be specific!

If நெடுநல் வாடை is written as 'Nedunal vadai', it might be read as நெடுநாள் வடை!!

So, better to use a - A; la - La; na - Na while writing Thanglish....

Hence, Nedunal vAdai..... Am I correct? :typing:

 

[london swaminathan]

Hi
I agree with you. When I teach Tamil at the university (SOAS,University of London) I follow the same(your) phonetic script. In my Tamil teaching website and You Tube lessons I do the same.Following unicode Tamil and teaching Unicode Tamil script is useful for Non Tamil students.My students are mostly foreigners. When I write articles for the blogs I use the normal Roman script.

You are right in saying
Nedunal vadai can be Nedu NaaL vadai (Vadai gone off)
Nedu nal vaadai (nothern wind- vaadaik kaatRu)
Nedu nal vadai ( Long Good Vadai)
NEdu------ you can do permutation combination and get more words, but without meaning.

 

[sangom]

hi london,

very happy to know that you are not a spammer.

i do know of another journalist turned bbc correspondent, working out of chennai - a left wing chap, remarkably honest, and who probably was one of my beacons re reformative thoughts and ideas. his favourite subject was the need for introspection among the brahmins re their inherited 'oththippo values'.

re your very deep quote above, as a rule, it is best to avoid innuendos. as you probably know, it only leaves people confused, as to where in your map, we are located.

i, for one, am very comfortable with your first line. i have always claimed to be a fool, and nothing worse, as i age, than being an old fool. after all, you have heard the old adage, 'there is no fool like an old fool', right?

so, maybe in future, you can feel free to comparmentalize us such:

kunjuppu - fool. shun him

nara, Yamaka- he knows not. teach him.

sangom - he is asleep, wake him

london srinivasan - he is wise. follow him

i hope i am not too wrong in my assessment above. i do beg the pardon of nara, Yamaka, sangom for voting on their behalf, and if they object, would be too willing, to sub some other names.

whatever may be the result, welcome to the forum, and wish you good participation and a jolly good time here.

K,

I object to your reserving the first line exclusively for yourself; is it also a latent "true brahmin" exclusivity? Am I also not eligible for equal honour?

 

[happyhindu]

Hi
I agree with you. When I teach Tamil at the university (SOAS,University of London) I follow the same(your) phonetic script. In my Tamil teaching website and You Tube lessons I do the same.Following unicode Tamil and teaching Unicode Tamil script is useful for Non Tamil students.My students are mostly foreigners. When I write articles for the blogs I use the normal Roman script.

You are right in saying
Nedunal vadai can be Nedu NaaL vadai (Vadai gone off)
Nedu nal vaadai (nothern wind- vaadaik kaatRu)
Nedu nal vadai ( Long Good Vadai)
NEdu------ you can do permutation combination and get more words, but without meaning.

I read this one -- The National Council of Hindu Temples (UK)

I suppose all humans have the tendencey to map things from their own culture onto the matrix of modern day scientific discoveries.

Fact is, we find links and similarities somewhere, and let our imagination run wild...

Ofcourse there are true discoveries as well....

If Aryabhatta, Varahamihira, Sushruta, etc discovered something it feels great to say "hey they were indians and so am i".

Fact is, we do not think of them as humans who belong to everyone, instead we think of ethnicity....

That is, somehow we want to think we are as intelligent as them, just bcoz we share the same indianness...so infact we love ourselves when we make such statements...after all, as the title of the article says its about "super-intelligence"....

Am not saying there is something wrong in feeling / saying so...maybe people everywhere love the ethnic divide and self-greatness....

Ofcourse am also not saying we must not have pride in the past, sure its great to have it -- but to simply rest on it and go on gloating about it is IMO merely crowing with a sack that became irrelevant long back...

If we have this kind of pride about the past, then how much pride should those who made so much advancement in R & D have?

Am speaking of those who created and launched satellites, mars probe, created modern day surgery, created computational algorithms, discovered technology for internet, for making movies, performing mri scans, communicating at highspeed, etc, etc....

Surely these people have a lot more to take pride in....

Fact is, we are not able to compete, create, invent, to the extent that modern science is doing, so we have found a great excuse to bash it using 'traditional' science....

To top it we claim, modern science is destructive and only traditional science is good. And yet we make fantasy claims that brahmastras were nuclear weapons...We want to bury our head in the sand and not see any destructive side of 'traditional' science...

The same 'traditional' science was modern science during its time in the past, but somehow the spirit of enquiry, discovery, invention stopped and we ended up outdated...today modern science has surpassed 'traditional' science...

To admit we are outdated is beneath the ego of our great hindu intelligence, so we keep making fantasy claims about markendeya story and theory of relatavity, brahmastra and nuclear technology, etc, etc....

Anyways, i very much agree with the last sentence of the article --
"...But I wish someone analyses all such events and publish their findings well before the western scientists reveal them. No one will appreciate if we keep on comparing every new invention with the writings in our old literature".

 

[happyhindu]

K,

I object to your reserving the first line exclusively for yourself; is it also a latent "true brahmin" exclusivity? Am I also not eligible for equal honour?

Please add me also in the first line. No reservations in this also please so it should be

happy, sangom, kunjuppu - fool. shun them

nara, Yamaka- he knows not. teach them

every non-hindu - he is asleep, wake them

london srinivasan - he is wise. follow him

 

[suraju06]

I could not trace even one of the above verses in vidura niti downloaded from Download - Vidur Niti :
Can you furnish chapter & verse of Mahabharata?

I think the second sloka is from hamsa sandesam of Swami Desikan and the third from Kalidasa; am I right?

The first one is from Viduraniti. As I do not have the volume with me right now I am not able to give the Chapter and verse No. I will do it when I get back my book. The verse no 2. is indeed by Swami Desikan. The third one is a Subhashitham which I remember from my school days. I am not sure about the name of the author.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

This is what Nara wrote.

Brahmins for at least 1000 years have attempted to insert this kind of mindset into the Tamil literary landscape. Parimelazhagar urai of Thirukkural is a case in point. He tried to make Thirukkural, which probably preceded Darmashashras, into a rehash of Manu Dharmasashthra. The Dravidian scholars condemn such attempts as adding poison to pure milk, and that is not vidandavadam.

So he is not questioning Parimelazagar's urai alone. To him, the tamil brahmins have always been involved in such interpolations with vested interests. He writes about domination and control of brahminical forces and all such things! Yet, if others write about the vested interests of dravidianist scholars, he takes up cudgels against them! That qualifies as general diatribe but what he did does not!


He says the literary achievements of brahmin scholars should be considered as achievements of individuals! The brahmins as a community should not take credit for them. But, the brahmins as a community should take the fall for the alleged interpolations of Parimelazagar. Such conflicting stands are abundant in his posts. Yet he talks about irrelevancy and logical fallacies in the posts of other members.


He does not realize how silly his judgemental posts appear when he himself routinely churns out illogical and ad-hominem attacks!


In any case, coming to Thirukkural, I do not think it is necessary to depend on Parimelazagar's urai to prove its position with regards to caste system.


பிறப்பின் அடிப்படையில் ஒழுக்கம், அதை கடைபிடிப்பதின் அவசியம், அந்த ஒழுக்கத்தை கடைபிடிக்காவிட்டால் ஏற்படும் பாதகம், உயர்ந்த பிறப்பு, இழி பிறப்பு - இவை பற்றியெல்லாம் திருவள்ளுவர் பல இடங்களில் கூறியிருக்கிறார். Such analyses have been carried out by research scholars at Sishri. Their arguments appear persuasive and I will provide few examples in the next post.

 

[கால பைரவன்]

மறப்பினும் ஓத்துக் கொளலாகும் பார்ப்பான்
பிறப்பொழுக்கங் குன்றக் கெடும்.


வேதத்தை மறந்தாலும் பார்ப்பான் தன் பிறப்புக்குரிய ஒழுக்கத்தை விடக் கூடாது என்கிறார் வள்ளுவர்.


வேறொரு இடத்தில் பார்ப்பனர் வேதம் ஓதுவதின் முக்கியத்துவத்தையும் கூறுகிறார்.


ஆபயன் குன்றும் அறுதொழிலோர் நூல்மறப்பர்
காவலன் காவான் எனின்


பசு பால் தராமல் போவதும் பார்ப்பனர் வேதங்களை மறப்பதும் வள்ளுவருக்கு ஒன்றுதான். ஆனால் இதை விட பிறப்பொழுக்கம் முக்கியம். பார்ப்பானுக்கு மட்டுமல்ல. எல்லாருக்கும் பிறப்பொழுக்கம் முக்கியம் என்பது தான் வள்ளுவர் காட்டும் வழி.


பிறப்பின் அடிப்படையில் பெருமை, ஒழுக்கம் - இவற்றிற்கு மேலும் சில சான்றுகள்.


நிலத்தில் கிடந்தமை கால்காட்டும், காட்டும்
குலத்தில் பிறந்தார் வாய்ச்சொல்


தமிழ் கிராமங்களில் நடைமுறையில் உள்ள சொலவடை "சாதிக்கேற்ற புத்தி". அதுதான் இந்த குறளின் பொருள்.


அன்புடைமை ஆன்ற குடிப்பிறத்தல் இவ்விரண்டும்
பண்புடைமை என்னும் வழக்கு


அதாவது நற்குடியில் பிறப்பது பண்புடைமை என்பதே வள்ளுவரின் கொள்கை.


இற்பிறந்தார் கண்அல்லது இல்லை இயல்பாகச்
செப்பமும் நாணும் ஒருங்கு


இதற்கு மு. வரதராசனார் தரும் பொருள்:


நடுவு நிலைமையும், நாணமும், உயர் குடியில் பிறந்தவரிடத்தில் அல்லாமல், மற்றவரிடத்தில், இயல்பாக, ஒருசேர, அமைவதில்லை.


இதைத் தவிர வேறொரு சான்று தான் வேண்டுமா?

 

[happyhindu]

Such analyses have been carried out by research scholars at Sishri.

Am curious about SISHRI. Who are the researchers there? Is it a Nadar favoring institution (??) - i mean i see 3 articles in english and all 3 are about nadars / chanars
a) What we wrote & what they published: Deccan Chronicle
b) sishri.org: How to look at a Social Institution
c) sishri.org: The Velir - Were they the Velalas

 

[Nara]

....So he is not questioning Parimelazagar's urai alone. To him, the tamil brahmins have always been involved in such interpolations with vested interests.....

He does not realize how silly his judgemental posts appear when he himself routinely churns out illogical and ad-hominem attacks!

KB, if I am guilty of offering logically fallacious arguments that would be pretty bad for me, but that would not make some of the logical fallacies presented by others any less fallacious. So, simply accusing me in return of logical fallacy is like the joke about Indian crabs not letting any other crab from escaping from an open crate.

In any case, I reject your charge that I am also offering fallacious arguments. First, I don't engage in ad hominems <period>, so, that can be batted out right away. If you show me I did, I will immediately offer unconditional apology and withdraw those comments.

Now, to your other charge:

He writes about domination and control of brahminical forces and all such things! Yet, if others write about the vested interests of dravidianist scholars, he takes up cudgels against them! That qualifies as general diatribe but what he did does not!

This is called exchange of ideas, you can say Draividan scholars were motivated by vested interest, and I can say no, not at all. I can say Brahminical forces dominated and controlled, and you can say not at all. While each of us may keep saying what we want, we will be believed only to the extent we provide convincing evidence. As long as we do this without making personally insulting comments, I see no problem.

He says the literary achievements of brahmin scholars should be considered as achievements of individuals! The brahmins as a community should not take credit for them. But, the brahmins as a community should take the fall for the alleged interpolations of Parimelazagar. Such conflicting stands are abundant in his posts. Yet he talks about irrelevancy and logical fallacies in the posts of other members.

KB, this is a false charge and I reject it. My criticism is about Varna/caste system which is a crucial part of Brahminism. I hold all those who defend this ideology, whether it is Sankarachariyar or Senthilraja, accountable.

Next, Brahmins having held establishment power in the past is an undeniable fact. Village after village we have Agraharams with Brahmins involved only in intellectual pursuits, living off of the sweat of others. They enjoyed royal patronage, provided by royalty who were NB in many case, and they were co-opted as part of the Brahminism's upper caste. Strict oppressive caste system was imposed by these practitioners of Brahminism, both B and the co-opted NB castes. These facts have been presented in this forum many times.

So, what I said about Brahmins exerting total domination over literary recognition is true. But your deduction that what I was saying amounted to holding the entire Brahmin jAti, and only Brahmin jAti, responsible is not correct, I am not saying that at all. I only want those who defend this ideology, B or NB, to take responsibility.

There have been snide remarks in the past that we must go to other forums and hold NBs responsible for the atrocities they commit against Dalits. I am aware of only couple of sites, this one and Karuthu. My views will align with the majority in Karuthu, no fun. Here I am in the minority and a lightening rod of sorts. However, I would welcome a chance to post in any other caste-based discussion group of any NB caste. If such a caste-oriented discussion group exists, please provide the link.

Further, when an individual makes literary contributions then it is because of the individual's genius and effort, jAti has no role to play. So jAti cannot claim any credit. However, when an individual inserts jAti ideology and dominance based on strict adherence to Brahminism, then blaming Brahminism and those who defend it is fair game. So, I don't see any double standard. You may not agree with me, that is alright, all I am trying to do is make my position clear.

BTW, the regular caste clashes we see in many villages, perpetrated by middle castes upon Dalits are vestiges of this Brahyminical system that once enjoyed establishment support.

He does not realize how silly his judgemental posts appear when he himself routinely churns out illogical and ad-hominem attacks!

I plead guilty to being silly, that is something I try to do often. But I try my best to be non-judgmental of individuals and also try my best to avoid logical fallacies. But, in spite of what I think of myself, I know I am not perfect. If I commit a logical fallacy I expect others to point it out to me. In this instance, KB, you are wrong, there is no fallacy from my side. As for ad hominem, I can say with reasonable confidence I am not guilty. As I said earlier, if you show me these instances I will make proper amends.

Once again, it is the caste/varna system, Brahminism and those who defend these, whether B or NB, that I am asking to take the "fall" (your word KB), not everyone of any given jAti.

In any case, coming to Thirukkural, I do not think it is necessary to depend on Parimelazagar's urai to prove its position with regards to caste system.

I will write about this later as a separate reply.

Cheers!