the relevance of the brahmin way of life in the 21st. century

[kunjuppu]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

this is the result of a request from sangom. on second thoughts, this is also my salvo to vivek's last query in the 'glimpses' thread.

the way i see it, maybe we should endeavour to keep the perspectives of the post, to be set in future, starting now.

i think we have hashed out the past, and have solidified in our rigidity, as to how much effect of today, the attitutdes and practices of yesterdays, caused.

but, here i see a chance, for us to come together, in analysing our current ways and thoughts, and how based on this trend, we will (1) see ourselves evolving (2) what is the desired ends & (3) how much this easing of traditions (YES we all 100% agree it is easing) will enable to achieve our ends.

there may be also two aspects of discussion re the title of this thread, 'the relevance of the brahmin way of life in the 21st century'.

one is our private self. this is more of an academic interest - say, the practise of daily sandhyavandhanam, which has moved on to the realms of optional from the erstwhile mandatory status. my gut feeling is this will be more a competitive guestimating on the rate of dropout from our aacharam and madi way of life. again i may be proved wrong, as 'religious revivals' have no rhyme or reason for occurring.

i think the more important one ithe'public face' of the community. it is not of individual gadflies of the likes of nara, sangom, myself that i am talking about. or of the high profile reformers. i am talking about the rank and file of our community - whose uncompromising attitudes on quota in education, governmet jobs, tamil vs sanskrit, tamil songs in carnatic music, and above all looking towards the mythical 'true north' of the vindhyas for intellectual salvation. for even when the likes of saidevo or vivek poiint out our reformers like bharathiar, the vast bulk of our community is more entrenched in the mores of kanchi mutt than the revolutionary poet.

hope this preamble atleast makes an effort to satisfy sangom's expectations

thank you sir.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

i think the more important one ithe'public face' of the community. it is not of individual gadflies of the likes of nara, sangom, myself that i am talking about. or of the high profile reformers. i am talking about the rank and file of our community - whose uncompromising attitudes on quota in education, governmet jobs, tamil vs sanskrit, tamil songs in carnatic music, and above all looking towards the mythical 'true north' of the vindhyas for intellectual salvation. for even when the likes of saidevo or vivek poiint out our reformers like bharathiar, the vast bulk of our community is more entrenched in the mores of kanchi mutt than the revolutionary poet.

{emphasis Mine}

This is the problem facing the community. I am the one who had wondered in Public about what I was doing here. I wonder still.

http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/blogs/nacchinarkiniyan/11-what-i-am-doing-tamil-brahmins-forum.html

http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/blogs/nacchinarkiniyan/14-what-i-am-doing-tamil-brahmins-forum-2.html

http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/blogs/nacchinarkiniyan/20-what-am-i-doing-tamil-brahmins-forum-3.html

http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/blogs/nacchinarkiniyan/23-what-am-i-doing-tamil-brahmins-forum-4.html

Two years on things have not changed much.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

What is the Brahmin way of life?

The question is What is the Brahmin way of life? Kunjuppu's post raises this question and provides some answers. Now it is for the members to state What is the Brahmin way of life. This is a very contentious issue. So Please no personal attacks.

I will not post since my views are already known.

 

[sangom]

this is the result of a request from sangom. on second thoughts, this is also my salvo to vivek's last query in the 'glimpses' thread.

the way i see it, maybe we should endeavour to keep the perspectives of the post, to be set in future, starting now.

i think we have hashed out the past, and have solidified in our rigidity, as to how much effect of today, the attitutdes and practices of yesterdays, caused.

but, here i see a chance, for us to come together, in analysing our current ways and thoughts, and how based on this trend, we will (1) see ourselves evolving (2) what is the desired ends & (3) how much this easing of traditions (YES we all 100% agree it is easing) will enable to achieve our ends.

there may be also two aspects of discussion re the title of this thread, 'the relevance of the brahmin way of life in the 21st century'.

one is our private self. this is more of an academic interest - say, the practise of daily sandhyavandhanam, which has moved on to the realms of optional from the erstwhile mandatory status. my gut feeling is this will be more a competitive guestimating on the rate of dropout from our aacharam and madi way of life. again i may be proved wrong, as 'religious revivals' have no rhyme or reason for occurring.

i think the more important one ithe'public face' of the community. it is not of individual gadflies of the likes of nara, sangom, myself that i am talking about. or of the high profile reformers. i am talking about the rank and file of our community - whose uncompromising attitudes on quota in education, governmet jobs, tamil vs sanskrit, tamil songs in carnatic music, and above all looking towards the mythical 'true north' of the vindhyas for intellectual salvation. for even when the likes of saidevo or vivek poiint out our reformers like bharathiar, the vast bulk of our community is more entrenched in the mores of kanchi mutt than the revolutionary poet.

hope this preamble atleast makes an effort to satisfy sangom's expectations

thank you sir.

Dear Shri Kunjuppu,

First please accept my thanks for your immediately implementing my request.

I feel that despite whatever fierce views are being expressed by saying "we cannot shed our identity", "puppets of missionary trying to snatch away brahmans first so that NBs will follow them in droves and convert to another religion". etc., in this forum, it is a plain fact that the "brahman way of living" is becoming less and less relevant to the contemporary society. The purohits (not the temple priests, pl. note) and perhaps some of the mutts may be the only entities benefitting from the "brahman way of living" (Bwol). Even among these the purohits don't care how you live but want only their income in hard cash without haggling from your side. Then they are happy and will not be unduly worried if you are unable to repeat even a word of the mantras they utter.

In the home front it is no longer the old "vaideekee" way of life, but a predominantly bhakti-oriented, guru-oriented life style that is fast spreading. Women are taking the lead in this and so I am sure that this style will become entrenched very soon in brahman homes. Then what remains to make the Bwol as a distinct item is the various samskaras and more importantly poonal, marriage and funeral. These still continue to occupy special places in our Bwol, but the emphasis is getting shifted more and more to the secular aspects connected (may be unconnected also) like video, photographer, dress, beautician for bride and groom (in marriage), reception for the newly initiated brahman boy where all office colleagues/ business friends and all come and give costly gifts, etc. In funerals also the religious aspect is not very important now either for the karta or the purohit; its main role is to establish one's brahman-allegiance in a superficial and notional manner.

Though we see some members expressing their eagerness and resolve to do sandhyavandan without fail, it is to be seen how many are able to do it without break. In sum, an average Tabra in the street today has only nominal connection with a Bwol which might have existed say, 60 or 70 years ago. And I am sure that the future will take our community farther and farther from that old Bwol till we merge with the rest of the hindu society in a seamless fashion. Actually this integration can be seen in many religious congregations even today.

Hence, my submission is that we need not unnecessarily cling on to some "notional" idealistic Bwol and expend our time and energy in trying to preserve that. Let the community find its own equilibrium in the changing world.

 

[sangom]

I post below an e-mail msg (after necessary editing to remove all personal references since he has requested for anonymity) sent to me by a well-wisher of this forum. Hope this will find enough supporters:

"It will be difficult to remain as a separate, exclusive community without integrating ourselves with other communities of Hinduism. It is high time that the Brahmin community creates two broad subdivisions, one purely devoted to study of vedas, enrichment of religious, scriptural and related knowledge for the society as a whole, will continue to remain on the support of all other communities for their sustenance without having any independent income source. This group can follow their own code of conduct (which will get unanimous support of all other communities following HINDU FAITH) with the provisos that (1) any Hindu community member can be admitted to this group if he is prepared follow the prescribed code of conduct and (2) that a member of this group who cannot strictly follow the code of conduct will have the freedom to opt out and become a member of the larger (Hindu) community. All other Brahmins can merge with other communities and they are free to retain, nourish and develop their rich traditions like festivities,cultural activities, etc., without much of rituals.

The top priority of all communities among Hindus should be to retain the large population of Dalits within the Hindu Fold. For this all communities including Brahmin communities should volunteer to share knowledge, opportunities, etc., to that community and they should feel that they are respected as equals by other communities of Hindus. I have had the opportunity of moving closely with Dalit community people, and what I have seen is that they do not want monetary assistance, but "RESPECT AND treating them as EQUALS" when we move with them. The methods presently followed by BJP, SHIVSENA, VHP, BAJRANG DAL, leads to CONFRONTATION and more hostilities among different religious groups which is not desirable. It defeats the very purpose. Recently I happened to see a website"www.breakindia.com" where some well known NRI, Mr.RAJIV MALHOTRA is directly involved. If you read the contents,it is depicting a worrying scenerio for all Indians. It is high time we Brahmins see the ground realities and reform of ourselves.

I learn from reliable sources that the present strategy of the Christian Missions is to convert brahmins as 'Christians' allowing freedom to them to live like a brahmin for outside world but worship 'Jesus Christ' in their houses without attending Church. In return, they are promised admission in minority instituitions for their wards for higher education."

 

[kunjuppu]

dear sangom,

i do not know much about missionary ploy to convert Brahmins for the sake of college admissions. If it would be so, I see nothing wrong in it, for to seek knowledge is a noble act by itself. we have had our servants who converted to Christianity for the very same purpose – access to free higher education.

Having said the above, I am very much in line with your note and also the tone of your note.personally I think we will destroy ourselves, not as much external conversions, but by our lack of interests. Most hindus will just fade and stop practising the faith. Very much like the white Christians of the west. In the short span of 30+ years, I have seen Christianity wither away from daily practice. I am yet to meet a practising white Christian – they are much more in a minority that even hindus in north America. Atleast that is my perception.

Ofcourse, we will still be proud of our culture, art, music and literature. But not with religiosity but more of a secular interest. One can gauge the future of any religion, by the number of youngsters attending the functions. Not forced by their parents, but of their own accord.

Unfortunately, even in this forum, where I imagine the level of education and awareness to be high, folks like you and me and suchlike thinking folks, have not made much headway in convincing the rest of the folks, of the need to change. People are still lamenting the loss of privileges. How in the world can these ever be convinced of the need for reform. Bleak future indeed.

 

[sangom]

dear sangom,

i do not know much about missionary ploy to convert Brahmins for the sake of college admissions. If it would be so, I see nothing wrong in it, for to seek knowledge is a noble act by itself. we have had our servants who converted to Christianity for the very same purpose – access to free higher education.

Having said the above, I am very much in line with your note and also the tone of your note.personally I think we will destroy ourselves, not as much external conversions, but by our lack of interests. Most hindus will just fade and stop practising the faith. Very much like the white Christians of the west. In the short span of 30+ years, I have seen Christianity wither away from daily practice. I am yet to meet a practising white Christian – they are much more in a minority that even hindus in north America. Atleast that is my perception.

Ofcourse, we will still be proud of our culture, art, music and literature. But not with religiosity but more of a secular interest. One can gauge the future of any religion, by the number of youngsters attending the functions. Not forced by their parents, but of their own accord.

Unfortunately, even in this forum, where I imagine the level of education and awareness to be high, folks like you and me and suchlike thinking folks, have not made much headway in convincing the rest of the folks, of the need to change. People are still lamenting the loss of privileges. How in the world can these ever be convinced of the need for reform. Bleak future indeed.

Dear Kunjuppu,

It is not "my" write-up, honestly. One of our very valued TBF members desired that I post it probably because he feels shy to openly articulate such forward-looking ideas which may or may not be welcome here.

Though I have posted it, I think the idea of creating a sub-class of people who will devote their lives to learning our scriptures, live the lives of a "true" Brahman (Has it not been changing continuously with passage of time; so which reference point in time do we take? I am confused!) and will not yearn for material acquisitions (except the bare minimum), seems an unworkable proposition. IMO Brahmans have always been after material advancement and economically unproductive (even destructive - wanton sacrifices of animals in the ancient days to silk saree and volumes of ghee being wasted in fire today) lives on the labour of other sections of the society.

With the choice to "opt-back" to secular life, it is more than a possibility that the proposed "vedic group" will meet with a natural end even before it starts off.

Regarding admission of all hindus irrespective of castes to this vedic group today, I feel there will be hardly any takers when the whole world knows how the brahmins have made a real mockery of vedic studies.

To sum up, the future of Tabras (and other Brahmans) is not very promising except that the label of "Brahman caste" will stick to them for decades more to come. The much glorified "identity" etc., will be lost by dissolving in the vast ocean of humanity. Brahmans will be a forgotten group eventually.

 

[T R RAMAMURTHY]

For long I have not joined in the discussions though I had some time to go through many of the posts. I wish that this topic is discussed in the light of the scenario that is going to be prevalent say 20 years hence. Let us take the example of Parsis. They are closely knit but I think they are facing extinction. Whether we would also see the same fate as them 0-70though numbers favour our tribe. Next point is if reforms are not attempted honestly, the genx would have its own way of behaving as they would deem fit. The Bwol which existed some 60-70 years or even 50 years back is not going to exist any more with the degeneration of the villages and the global geographical spread of the community. Unless the reformers come from the strata which is truly representative of the Bwol, if time is to find its way, can we afford to lose an identity. Btw, I do not see any significant difference between the revolutionary thinking of Bharathiyar and the only witnessed and perceived God of our lives and times - the paramacharyal. A symbiosis has to come into being.
What our children would do staying alone in a far off metropolis, disjoined from the society.
Namaskarams
T R Ramamurthy

 

[sangom]

For long I have not joined in the discussions though I had some time to go through many of the posts. I wish that this topic is discussed in the light of the scenario that is going to be prevalent say 20 years hence. Let us take the example of Parsis. They are closely knit but I think they are facing extinction. Whether we would also see the same fate as them 0-70though numbers favour our tribe. Next point is if reforms are not attempted honestly, the genx would have its own way of behaving as they would deem fit. The Bwol which existed some 60-70 years or even 50 years back is not going to exist any more with the degeneration of the villages and the global geographical spread of the community. Unless the reformers come from the strata which is truly representative of the Bwol, if time is to find its way, can we afford to lose an identity. Btw, I do not see any significant difference between the revolutionary thinking of Bharathiyar and the only witnessed and perceived God of our lives and times - the paramacharyal. A symbiosis has to come into being.
What our children would do staying alone in a far off metropolis, disjoined from the society.
Namaskarams
T R Ramamurthy

Shri Ramamurthy,

It is not clear, to me at least, what you intend to convey by the term Bwol (Brahmin way of life). This has been undergoing continuous change and particularly during the last 200 or 300 years, more due to Tabras (here I am mentioning them only because the rest of the Brahmans of India had differing historical developments which impinged on their lifestyles, IMO.) becoming increasingly materialistic and abandoning their old principles, customs, values, education, etc. At present too the Tabras are more concerned with their material well-being and amassing wealth as much as possible by hard and honest work may be, but that has made them identical to the ancient Sudras without the limitation on acquisition of wealth which was strictly imposed on the Sudras and ensured almost throughout history.

Thus the vast majority (may be cent percent also) of tabras are sailing with one leg each in two boats - one that of Sudra and the other, that of an imagined Brahman ideal which, again, is crafted very much to suit the whims and fancies of each individual/family today. This rather hypocritical existence is, IMHO, the root cause of our present crisis and this will most probably lead out genxt to leave this hypocrisy and mould their lives as they find best. Parsees as well as Jews (though they are both not a "caste" like tabras) have been undergoing such transformations and slow obliteration also perhaps will befall.

Now the billion $ question is how to reform the Tabra caste without losing its "identity" — a term which some of our members use but have not made clear? Since you have also used that word, kindly come out with what your ideas are regarding the identity and what reforms are feasible at this stage.

 

[kunjuppu]

... Btw, I do not see any significant difference between the revolutionary thinking of Bharathiyar and the only witnessed and perceived God of our lives and times - the paramacharyal. A symbiosis has to come into being.
...T R Ramamurthy

hi ramamurthy,

sorry to pick this one sentence, but it did stick out.

my understanding of bharathiar, is he in his ultimate synthesis, stood for abolition of casteism, castigated the aloof brahmin and promoted tamil above all other languages.

the kanch mutt has stood for hereditary brahminical values, (indirectly) promoted segregation of the brahmins through concepts such as madi, and above all stood for sanskrit over tamil. atleast this is the way i understand it.

so, in this context, i do not understand how these two could be viewed as fundamentally 'no difference in thinking'.

before i go further, i would like to understand your reasons. thank you.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Unfortunately we typecast people.

1. All people who are religious and observe religious rituals are casteist and backward looking.

This is a big fallacy. Swami Sivananda did not believe in Varna Dharma. Most of his disciples were not Brahmin. He wrote more than 200 books on Hinduism in English so that the English educated Hindus would benefit. He taught not only in theory but also by living that you can be religious and also modern in thinking.

We have had many great men like that in our community.

2. There is a big group everywhere who think that the only way to be modern is to give up all our old practices which are part of our culture. Belief in GOD, mantra etc. are superstitions.

This is again a big fallacy.

I had written against the caste system often. Then when I wrote about the Vedas the first question was "Are you the one who wrote against the caste system?" My Acharya never asked me whether I believe in the caste system before teaching me how to recite the Vedas? He knows that I do not believe in it.

I am religious. I have brought by my children to be religious. We believe in GOD AND HIS GRACE. I do not believe in sakunam, rahu kalam, Astrology, horoscope matching and a host of other things which many of the Brahmins believe in.

My firm opinion is that Hinduism believes that all paths are valid. Hinduism accepts all religions. Not tolerate but accepts. As Sri Ramakrishna said "There are as many ways as there are Men."

I am a Tamil Brahmin and proud to be one. You do not have to believe in caste, sakunam, rahu kalam, Astrology, horoscope matching and a host of other things to be a Tamil Brahmin.

Ar the same time you do not have to be a rationalist and a non-believer in GOD to be a modern Tamil Brahmin.

Both these are extreme views.

The truth is somewhere between the two extremes.

 

[Nara]

... You do not have to believe in caste, ..... to be a Tamil Brahmin..

Pardon me, but how can one be a Brahmin if he/she does not believe in caste?

Ar the same time you do not have to be a rationalist and a non-believer in GOD to be a modern Tamil Brahmin. -- (emphasis mine)

In fact one cannot be a rationalist if one thinks of himself/herself a Brahmin, modern or otherwise. To be a Brahmin, observant or not, one has to subscribe to the religious dogma of Varna system. That is superstition, beyond the pale of rationality. So, one can be a Brahmin, or can be a rationalist, but one can't be both.

Brahmin way of life is and has been an anachronism in the 20th century itself, let alone the 21st. For majority brahmins, it is an "ideal" they rejected when it was possible to adopt it and would like to desperately embrace in their comfortable retirement, motivated by nostalgia for an imaginary brahmnical Shangri La.

For the minority Brahmins who do follow this Brahmin-way-of-life, in the most part, it was only because they could not escape it for various reasons. If there were any who chose to live the brahmin-way and was happy with their lot, well, "sa atmaa sudurlabha:" amounting to very little relevance.

So, 21st century is no different from any other century, the B way-of-life has as much relevance, or not, as NB way-of-life.

Cheers!

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Pardon me, but how can one be a Brahmin if he/she does not believe in caste?

Brahmins are a community. A community which share some common values. Belief in the caste system is not a pre-requisite. No doubt the origin of the community is based on the caste system. We have been hashing and rehashing that in this forum.

In human communities, intent, belief, resources, preferences, needs, risks, and a number of other conditions may be present and common, affecting the identity of the participants and their degree of cohesiveness.

In sociology, the concept of community has led to significant debate, and sociologists are yet to reach agreement on a definition of the term. There were ninety-four discrete definitions of the term by the mid-1950s.

Community - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This discussion is to find out and discuss the common beliefs, culture etc. and see their relevance to modern times.

In fact one cannot be a rationalist if one thinks of himself/herself a Brahmin, modern or otherwise. To be a Brahmin, observant or not, one has to subscribe to the religious dogma of Varna system. That is superstition, beyond the pale of rationality. So, one can be a Brahmin, or can be a rationalist, but one can't be both.

Your definition of a Brahmin is exactly the same as the definition from the other extreme. People who call themselves orthodox Brahmins. I am not surprised. As some one said "extremists certainly tend to think alike."

Whether one thinks of himself as a Brahmin or not, he/she can not escape being classified as one.
P. Ramamurthy the great Communist leader was a Brahmin. He never thought of himself as a Brahmin, but for others he was a Brahmin. Your religious/political beliefs has nothing to do with being a part of a community.

Your other statements are a derivation of your definition.

This discussion is about the Brahmin way of life is for the people who think of Brahmins as a community with common values.

There is nothing called a Non-Brahmin value. The values of the Chettiar community is different from those of the Saiva Vellala community. Every one swears by them. I remember the time when I was working with the community who worked as class four employees in the local hospitals. They have their own culture and beliefs.

Communities can work together peacefully when one understands and appreciates the beliefs and value system of the other communities. You may not agree. But understand.

I would appreciate if you would stop calling all our beliefs as superstitions and all the values of the Tamil Brahmin community as Anachronistic.

Thank you.

 

[sangom]

Shri Nachinarkiniyan,

On the one hand you say that "Brahman" is a community, and not a caste sub-division within Hinduism while, when it suits the purpose, you fall back upon Hinduism, its greatness, etc., in order to find some plus points to qualify Brahmans. This reveals not only apparent (or deliberate?) confusion but also that it is not possible to find anything worthwhile in being "Brahman" alone except when it is reckoned as an integral part of Hinduism. Now, for Hinduism the Brahmans are either a varna (Ancient, supposed, glorious, imagined, scenario, wherein people were classified as per the occupation they took up as they attained adulthood — naturally, they ought to have been considered as belonging to the varna of the parents and hence there ought to have been the "seed" of caste-by-birth principle which cannot just be removed from even the so-called varna system.), or a caste bound by the later strict caste-by-birth rule and reinforced by the Karma theory, rebirth, etc.

By treating Brahmans as a separate community and not as a caste sub-division within Hindus but simultaneously borrowing only the greatnesses from Hinduism, the impression that your views create is that you support the notion of an exclusive group and that an effort, however subtle it may be, is being made to distance from the rest of the Hindu people.

So, how do you validate your "community" notion?

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Shri Nachinarkiniyan,

On the one hand you say that "Brahman" is a community, and not a caste sub-division within Hinduism while, when it suits the purpose, you fall back upon Hinduism, its greatness, etc., in order to find some plus points to qualify Brahmans. This reveals not only apparent (or deliberate?) confusion but also that it is not possible to find anything worthwhile in being "Brahman" alone except when it is reckoned as an integral part of Hinduism. Now, for Hinduism the Brahmans are either a varna (Ancient, supposed, glorious, imagined, scenario, wherein people were classified as per the occupation they took up as they attained adulthood — naturally, they ought to have been considered as belonging to the varna of the parents and hence there ought to have been the "seed" of caste-by-birth principle which cannot just be removed from even the so-called varna system.), or a caste bound by the later strict caste-by-birth rule and reinforced by the Karma theory, rebirth, etc.

By treating Brahmans as a separate community and not as a caste sub-division within Hindus but simultaneously borrowing only the greatnesses from Hinduism, the impression that your views create is that you support the notion of an exclusive group and that an effort, however subtle it may be, is being made to distance from the rest of the Hindu people.

So, how do you validate your "community" notion?

Hinduism is not Dharmasasthra alone. Hinduism is Yoga,Tantras, Agamas, Nath/Siddha tradition, Bhakthi movement et. al. None of the above except Dharmasasthra is based on the caste system. In fact most of them are against the caste system.

I am a Hindu and believe that Hinduism is the greatest religion of all time.

When I extoll Hinduism I am extolling the ideas and concepts of Hinduism.

You seem to identify Hinduism only with Brahmins. This is a fallacy. You define Hinduism as Varnashrama Dharma like many of the so called orthodox Brahmins do. This definition is wrong.

Tamil Brahmins being a community is an accepted fact. I did not invent it. We are in the community forum.

The top of the web page says it clearly

Tamil Brahmins

Brahmin Community spread across the entire globe.

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Orthopraxy

I have used the words "The so called orthodox Brahmins" in my posts.

Why?

There is a term which is being used frequently in acdemic circles now about Brahmins especially Smarta Brahmins.

It is Orthopraxy. I have seen it being spelt Orthoproxy also.

Orthopraxy means "correct action/activity", and applies to a religion that places emphasis on conduct, both ethical and liturgical, as opposed to faith, or grace etc. This contrasts with orthodoxy, emphasizing a correct belief, and ritualism, the use of rituals.

Someone said Orthopraxy is concealed as Orthodoxy.

Orthopraxy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[sangom]

Hinduism is not Dharmasasthra alone. Hinduism is Yoga,Tantras, Agamas, Nath/Siddha tradition, Bhakthi movement et. al. None of the above except Dharmasasthra is based on the caste system. In fact most of them are against the caste system.

I consider that caste system is based on the Dharmasastras and that has its source in the purusha sukta. It is not the other way around, "Dharmasasthra is based on the caste system".

And, were Yoga, Agamas, Bhakthi movement (after Vaishnavam) et. al., available to all Hindus irrespective of their caste?

I am a Hindu and believe that Hinduism is the greatest religion of all time.

IMO this is not relevant to the points raised by me.

When I extoll Hinduism I am extolling the ideas and concepts of Hinduism.

This is very empty boast; any one can extoll hinduism.

You seem to identify Hinduism only with Brahmins. This is a fallacy. You define Hinduism as Varnashrama Dharma like many of the so called orthodox Brahmins do. This definition is wrong.

Tamil Brahmins being a community is an accepted fact. I did not invent it. We are in the community forum.

The top of the web page says it clearly

Tamil Brahmins

Brahmin Community spread across the entire globe.

These are all statements to side-track the crucial point viz., "On the one hand you say that "Brahman" is a community, and not a caste sub-division within Hinduism while, when it suits the purpose, you fall back upon Hinduism, its greatness, etc., in order to find some plus points to qualify Brahmans. This reveals not only apparent (or deliberate?) confusion but also that it is not possible to find anything worthwhile in being "Brahman" alone except when it is reckoned as an integral part of Hinduism. Now, for Hinduism the Brahmans are either a varna (Ancient, supposed, glorious, imagined, scenario, wherein people were classified as per the occupation they took up as they attained adulthood — naturally, they ought to have been considered as belonging to the varna of the parents and hence there ought to have been the "seed" of caste-by-birth principle which cannot just be removed from even the so-called varna system.), or a caste bound by the later strict caste-by-birth rule and reinforced by the Karma theory, rebirth, etc.

By treating Brahmans as a separate community and not as a caste sub-division within Hindus but simultaneously borrowing only the greatnesses from Hinduism, the impression that your views create is that you support the notion of an exclusive group and that an effort, however subtle it may be, is being made to distance from the rest of the Hindu people." The issue is can you extoll Brahman community alone without borrowing any of the greatnesses of Hinduism? If not, is it not clear that whatever greatness you attribute to Brahmans owes its existence to the fact that Brahmans are a section of that Hindu population? Since the Hindu religion considers Brahmans as only a caste sub-division, how can that be repudiated unless it is agreed that Brahmans are not a caste within the Hindu fold?

The naming of a web forum as Tamil Brahmins etc., cannot be taken to indicate anything morethan that the members here form an internet community. FYI we allow NBs or even non-Hindus here as members.

 

[sangom]

I have used the words "The so called orthodox Brahmins" in my posts.

Why?

There is a term which is being used frequently in acdemic circles now about Brahmins especially Smarta Brahmins.

It is Orthopraxy. I have seen it being spelt Orthoproxy also.

Orthopraxy means "correct action/activity", and applies to a religion that places emphasis on conduct, both ethical and liturgical, as opposed to faith, or grace etc. This contrasts with orthodoxy, emphasizing a correct belief, and ritualism, the use of rituals.

Someone said Orthopraxy is concealed as Orthodoxy.

Orthopraxy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All that is found in wikipedia cannot be accepted as authority. The page you cited has this caveat at the top:


This article needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2008)

Further the Discussion page has these remarks:

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.

Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by Theology work group (marked as Mid-importance).

Hence this word has as it is little relevance to Hinduism. The dictionary meaning shows it as more of a medical term:

வலித்து இழுத்து ஊனம்சீர் செய்தல்.

1. The treatment of deformities in the human body by mechanical appliances.[Websters].

Date "Orthopraxy" was first used in popular English literature: sometime before 1914.

Etymology:Orthopraxy \Or"tho*prax`y\, noun. [from Greek expression 'orqo`s straight doing.].

correct, just, true, proper, straight
2 1.1093 orthopraxy propriety correctness, decency, adjustment, punishment, proof reading
3 1.1092 orthopraxy accuracy precision, exactitude, exactness, nicety, correctness
4 1.1091 orthopraxy regularity orderliness, uniformity, evenness, method, arrangement
5 1.1091 orthopraxy purity cleanliness, chastity, clarity, innocence, pureness
6 1.1090 orthopraxy validity legitimacy, force, availability, legality, authenticity
7 1.1090 orthopraxy fidelity loyalty, faithfulness, allegiance, accuracy, faith
8 1.1090 orthopraxy equity justice, fairness, impartiality, right, stock
9 1.1090 orthopraxy equality parity, par, evenness, equalities, equivalence
10 1.1089 orthopraxy impartiality fairness, equity, justice, objectivity, neutrality
11 1.0090 orthopraxy truthfulness veracity, truth, verity, reality, genuineness
12 1.0090 orthopraxy correctness propriety, accuracy, trim, correction, castigation
13 1.0089 orthopraxy soundness solidity, strength, firmness, toughness, stoutness
14 1.0089 orthopraxy justness justice, right, rightness, righteousness, fairness
15 1.0088 orthopraxy appropriateness suitability, propriety, fitness, adequacy, expediency

Remedy


Orthopraxy, dentistry, gynecology, midwifery, obstetrics, orthopedics, orthopedy, pediatrics, sarcology, tocology.

Dictionary - Definition of orthopraxy

Hence trying to import unwanted meanings to the term to fit in one's perceived right conduct in religious matters does not help.

And, after all, how does one decide what is "correct action/activity", and whether emphasis on conduct, both ethical and liturgical, as opposed to faith, or grace etc., is the correct activity? Note again that it is only "emphasis" and that there is no mention of faith, grace, etc., being ruled out completely; is this not a grand confusion?

 

[Nacchinarkiniyan]

Sri Sangom.

When I joined this forum I had stated that I do not believe in the caste system. But I belong to the Tamil Brahmin community.

I am not able to locate the post.

So You believe that Tamil brahmins are only a caste. I believe that Tamil Brahmins are a community.

Both of us are entitled to our views and opinions.

The discussion about this is closed as far as I am concerned.

When I came back, I had decided that I will not get into any discussion about caste in this forum.

Thank you.

 

[happyhindu]

Swami Sivananda did not believe in Varna Dharma. Most of his disciples were not Brahmin. He wrote more than 200 books on Hinduism in English so that the English educated Hindus would benefit. He taught not only in theory but also by living that you can be religious and also modern in thinking.

We have had many great men like that in our community.

Dear Sir,
AFAIK, Swami Shivananda never called himself a brahmin in the sense of one who was born a brahmin.

When Swami Shivananda himself has not called himself "brahmin by caste", when he himself did not seek an identity as someone belonging to a particular "community", would it be fair on our part to classify him?

In works authored by Swami Shivananda, i find only one definition of a brahmin, that is, one who has burned his vasanas through kundalini yoga and becomes "born again". It is so obvious his definition of what made a man a brahmin is different from the stand taken by so-called 'orthodox brahmins'.

Also Shivananda spoke of having Smrithis relevant to the times - again his stand was an exact opposite to the 'orthodox brahmins' who claim smrithis are derived from vedas, equal to vedas, unchangable and relevant for all times.

Despite such differences, yet, orthodox brahmins claim Shivananda to be one of them. IMO, that's sad for Shivananda.

Sir, you may be aware that in the Purvamimansa text (1.3.3.4) there is a clause that if there is a contradiction between two Smriti texts, then the one supported by Shruti is to be rejected (!!) if traced to an unworthy motive. And ofcourse Jaimini found everything from everywhere unworthy motives if it opposed birth-based caste rigidity.

Jaimini's stand is an exact opposite to Badrayana's Brahmasutra which allows caste-blurring by allowing vedas for all. And afaik, Shivananda supported the Brahmasutra stand.

I feel its not really fair to classify a man who himself did not seek a caste identity; esp when his views were so different from the so-called traditionalists. Perhaps an other example would have been better.

Regards.

 

[sangom]

Dear Sir,
AFAIK, Swami Shivananda never called himself a brahmin in the sense of one who was born a brahmin.

When Swami Shivananda himself has not called himself "brahmin by caste", when he himself did not seek an identity as someone belonging to a particular "community", would it be fair on our part to classify him?

Smt. HH,

Some of the so-called "Swamis" have a not-so- satisfactory past. Yet they take to religion (and saffron or white robes) as the last resort and successfully eraze their past and come to be regarded as holy avatars! Sivananda, IMO, is one such. And it suited him well to let everyone know that he hailed from Pathamadai in Tirunelveli Dt., and also that he was a Brahman, which gave him sizeable following among the Brahmans. May be he has consciously avoided writing about his caste in his poorvasrama; after all, a sanyasi is supposed to be even beyond temptations to "spread his message" which is as bad as any other desire. A real sanyasi, if there is one today, should wait for a disciple to come to him and, if that person is found fit, impart whatever sacred and secret knowledge the sanyasi has obtained. Viewed by this test most of the publicity-oriented gurus and swamis come under the description given in bhajagovindam: "udaranimittam bahukrita veshah", means of livelihood.

 

[kunjuppu]

Sri Sangom.

When I joined this forum I had stated that I do not believe in the caste system. But I belong to the Tamil Brahmin community.

I am not able to locate the post.

So You believe that Tamil brahmins are only a caste. I believe that Tamil Brahmins are a community.

,

Thank you.

nacchi, i like the word 'community'. i had been using the term 'tribes' till now, but will switch to this, what i think, is a better definition.

i think tambrams are one of the tamil tribes, same as nadars, gounders or mudaliars. eventually i hope the caste factor just 'fades' within india, as it is already happening to hindus outside of india.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Sangom Ji,

Tamil Brahmins are a community. Some in it still practice caste based lives but more and more do not. But the beauty is that TODAY, anyone who wants to follow our religion suited to one's own temperament and spiritual development can follow his/her own path within our religion.

We are a community that has common cultural/social practices that are different from practicing casteism. These are much more common in binding us, than not.

This Forum is for promoting the interests of our community. Anything can be discussed here as long as it does serve the interests of our community. So we need to be careful when we discuss our religion which is followed by almost a billion people.

I have previously said that discussing about our holy men that are followed by a lot in our community is to be avoided. 'Matha, Pitha, Guru Deivam' is a part and parcel of our cultural belief. Just because one does not like Godmen, let us not make unprovable theories to throw mud on them. Many who think that these are walking divine as per our religion will be hurt in their sentiments. One has to be careful when making statements about Godmen here. While one may think that a particular Godman or all of them may be fake or not, I would request you to not go in to making unproven allegations against them.

In my opinion just calling everyone who calls himself/herself a Brahmin as a casteist is not valid. Brahmin carries a very broad definition today and to apply it to a very narrow sense of yesterday's casteistic color to me serves no purpose. Progressiveness should not be applied to places where the reason for it does not exist.

Regards,
KRS

 

[T R RAMAMURTHY]

Dear Kunjuppu Sir and Sangom Sir,
You both are learned and respected for the knowledge levels that you exhibit in the course of your posts(Kunjuppu sir, for his word power and worldly wisdom and Sangom Sir, for his erudition in Sanskrit and knowedge of the Vedas). In my small and humble way, let me explain. When I meant a symbiosis of Kanchi Mutt and Bharathiar's thoughts, I never intended that the identification terms need to come together. Bharathiar, yes, he stood for abolition of castes. H.H. Paramacharyal on many occasions, without mentioning, walked into the Cheris or HarijanBastis and donated various things like clothings, food and money etc. amongst the poor. We just can not straightaway try to match one with the other, or juxtapose each other but the deeds which identify the mutt and glorified it as well deeds and thoughts that Bharathi cherished (Sivasakthi song ..... vallamai tharayo, indha manilam payanura vazhvatharku) are to be combined. No doubt Kanchi Mutt promoted Sanskrit but it was not at the cost of ignoring Tamil as H.H. himself gave various interpretations of Thirumular and other Nayanmars. Whatever might be the reason for a reform, we can not avoid the reform as we are afraid of it or some of the fastidious persons would not like it. The reforms might come like a Tsunami one day and may shake everyone. The Bwol could be practised within four corners but when we are outside, we can conduct ourselves in a way that does not upset the ones who are not brahmins. In the northern part of India, the brahmins and other caste hindus (I am not mentioning the Dalits/Sudhras) have maintained an identity which has remained congruent. Unfortunately, for whatever reasons it may be, in ******* case we have maintained differing identifies in matters of what we wear and how we wear, the dialect etc. Whether rightly or wrongly, we thought others as non brahmins, but we should have thought of other castes as hindus only. Today we are geographically dispersed across the world and have to put up with local climate too. The local dress habits too have been adopted. Like the opinions of Ramakrishna mutt and sayings of Vivekananda, we must take all positives into our fold and we need to collectively have a conscience to maintain what is practicable. The reform in thinking will precede the reform in practice and if we say no we are not going to reform, then a stage may come for the GenX to throw away everything.
To answer Shri Sangom, what reforms are feasible:
1. In a way, we have forgotten the original role intended for brahmins. Some say we are Vaishyas and in the opinion of others whatever we are doing is anything but brahminical. Let us think of a role where we try to do something for the society by some acts e.g. Annadhanam for all as we can do that.
2. It is not my desire to say that we should stop following religious rites. But certainly whatever could be done should be done in a dovetailed fashion. I think in the past too there have been many changes in the procedures and practices followed. Change is the only constant.
3. We must try to do marriages and upanayanams etc. in a simple way without making those occasions as a show of prosperity. Let us at least perform marriages and upanayanams in a closed family affair but if required we can have one reception etc. where the people outside the closely knit family could be invited. Economising by way of raising savings in expenses in ostentatious marriages is required and a part of that money could go for a common cause like a choultry. All north Indian communities have dharamshalas but we brahmins do not have dharamshalas even in major cities.
4. As a devotee of Shirdi Sai Baba who practised affection to all human beings as fundamental aim, I say that we should perform all religious rites. He advised his devotees to perform religious cermonies like Upanayanam etc.
There is a need to reform the way our marriage ceremonies are performed. When I got married, I thought of doing away with Jaanvasam and after that all my youngerbrothers decided against Jaanvasam. Let us give priority to religious rites where required and where it is not mandatory, let us change the practices.
There is a need to throw open this discussion to the community at large and I am sure that more suggestions and instances would come.
Kunjuppu Sir, Sangom Sir and seniors, these are all my own opinions.
Namaskarams

 

[Nara]

Dear Shri Nacchinarkiniyan: I have summarized your points as numbered. I have provided my responses to each of your points also as a numbered list.

1. Brahmins are a community. A community which share some common values. Belief in the caste system is not a pre-requisite.
2. No doubt the origin of the community is based on the caste system. We have been hashing and rehashing that in this forum.
3. This discussion is to find out and discuss the common beliefs, culture etc. and see their relevance to modern times.
4. Your definition of a Brahmin is exactly the same as the definition from the other extreme. People who call themselves orthodox Brahmins.
5. I am not surprised. As some one said "extremists certainly tend to think alike."
6. P. Ramamurthy the great Communist leader was a Brahmin. He never thought of himself as a Brahmin, but for others he was a Brahmin.
7. Your religious/political beliefs has nothing to do with being a part of a community.
8. This discussion is about the Brahmin way of life is for the people who think of Brahmins as a community with common values.
9. There is nothing called a Non-Brahmin value. The values of the Chettiar community is different from those of the Saiva Vellala community.
10. I would appreciate if you would stop calling all our beliefs as superstitions and all the values of the Tamil Brahmin community as Anachronistic.

1. Community may mean many things to many people. When people talk about Brahmin "community" what is meant and understood is Brahmin caste. Borrowing and paraphrasing a bard from middle England, call rose by any name it smells just as sweet, or call SO2 by any name it will still smell bad. Call it community, call it caste, it is a case of difference without distinction.
2. To say that only the origin of Brahmin "community" is from Varna/caste system is to confuse. It is not as though anyone can simply opt to follow the Brahminical practices and culture and he/she will become part of this "community". To be a Brahmin, you have to be born to brahmin parents. That makes Brahmin "community" a caste-based "community", not simply something that originated from caste-system and is now independent of it. You may think that way, but that does not make it so. Yes, this has been hashed and rehashed, and yet attempts are regularly made to conflate the term and make claims that are utterly false. If such claims cease, the hashing and rehashing will also cease.
3. When a culture is identified as Brahmin culture, it becomes the culture of a caste. If you think such a caste culture has relevance now or in the future, that is fine, but I don't, and I think I am allowed to express that opinion.
4. The orthodox Brahmins have the sincerity to acknowledge what Brahmin is, it is a caste. Such a view is the correct view, whether extremist or not.
5. A regrettable comment, more about this below.
6. The point was whether one can be rationalist and be a brahmin. For this, how the rest of the society sees one is irrelevant. It is strictly about how one sees himself/herself. If Ramamurthy thought of himself as Brahmin then he cannot be a rationalist. If he didn't, then how others viewed him does not matter.
7. What you are saying is true for such communities as community of engineers, scientists, artists, etc. But, to belong to a community of Brahmins, one has to be born into a Brahmin family. To be a Brahmin is to believe in the Varna/caste system which is part of Brahminism which is a religious system. Political view is not important to belong to caste based "community", but is important if the community is based on political views.
8. Alright, are you saying I cannot comment?
9. If there is no uniform NB value, then, I submit to you there is no uniform B value. The SV Brahmin culture is similar and different compared to Smarthas and Madhwas in the same way Mudaliyar and Chettiyar cultures are different and alike. Why, there are differences even between Vadakalai and Thenkalai Iyengars. The implicit claim that there is a uniform B culture, but not a uniform NB culture is invalid.
10. Please explain why I should stop calling religious dogma/beliefs as superstitions? When superstitions are presented as facts I would like to reserve the right to challenge such assertions. It is not I who thinks Tamil Brahmin community is an anachronism, the TBs themselves are acting as though it is. Once again, please do not ask me to self-censure, please present your case and let us discuss.

Finally, Shri Nacchinarkiniyan, I am really disappointed with your statement, "I am not surprised. As some one said "extremists certainly tend to think alike." This is the second time you are making unnecessary personal observation. The last time, you accused me of twisting your words when I did no such thing and I pointed it out to you also. Is it really necessary to say I am an extremist? What kind of an extremist do you think I am? How I think is something only I know best. If my thinking is different from yours, that is alright, but that does not make it extremist, does it?

Please sir, refrain from making observations about me as a person.

Cheers!