Who is Brahmanan

[Nara]

Share:

Facebook Twitter WhatsApp Email Share Link

Glad to be back. Thanks for allowing me the time.

Hello Raghy, good to see you back. Hope your assignment went well.

So, andhanan respect can not be claimed by birth.

I agree, because, that term, originally, had nothing to do with any caste. However, in due course of time things changed. We can tell for sure that by the time of மணிமேகலை, written by கூலவாணிகன் சீத்தலை சாத்தனார், the word அந்தணர் had become a synonym for Brahmin. Please read the section on மணிமேகலை from my post #7.

Also, Thondaradippodi Azhvar in verse #43 of திருமாலை, uses the phrase சாதி அந்தணர் to mean Brahmin. I have already posted details about this verse in post #10, and many other posts, from the எங்கே
Sri Vaishnavam thread.

While I agree with you that the term anthaNan did not mean Brahmin originally, but the word and the intended respect became synonymous with Brahmin a very long time ago. This, I think, did not happen just by accident or because Brahmins in general exhibited the superior qualities of an andhaNan.

===================

I do not recall Krishna teaching anything in Chapter 1.

I have a lot of respect for Srimat BG. I think it contains many useful lessons for how to lead one's life. But it is also a flawed text in some ways, just like the great Thirukkural, which is inspiring in many ways, is also flawed in the way the role of women is described. So, don't think I am condemning BG outright.

With this disclaimer, here is what I have on BG and caste/varna. Please read the original text and you will see that what I am saying is quite faithful.

In Shloka 41 of Chapter 1, Arjuna declares that Varna Sankraha, i.e. mixing of Varna, will result if the women of the clan become blemished.

अधर्म अभिभवात् कृष्ण प्रदुष्यन्ति कुल स्त्रियः ।
स्त्रीषु दुष्टासु वार्ष्णेय जायते वर्ण सङ्क्ररः ॥

(adarma abhi bhavAt krushna, pradushyanti kula sthriya:
strIshu dushtAsu vAshNeya, jAyate varNa sangkra: )

If mixing of varnas will result from the rape of women, why then varna is not birth based?

In the next Shloka, Arjuna says that what follows from this mixing of Varna, is the destruction of of Jati and Kula virtue that have existed from beginningless time. Then, the dead fathers will lose their pinda etc..

सङ्करो नरकाय एव कुल घ्नानां कुलस्य च ।
पतान्ति पितरः हि एषाम् लुप्त पिण्ड उदक क्रियाः ॥

(sankaro narakAya eva, kula ghnAnAm kulasya cha
patanti pitara: hi eShAm lupta piNda udaka kriyA: )

If varna is not birth based and only based on gunas, what is the connection between destroying kula and pitru shrardham?

In shloka #43, Arjuna says mixing of Varnas will destroy jAti darma and kula darma.

दोषैः एतै कुल घ्नानां वर्ण सङ्कर कारकैः ।
उद् साद्यन्ते जाति दर्माः कुल दर्माः च शाश्वताः ॥

(doShai: etai kula ghnAnAm varNa sangkArakai:
ud sAntyante jAti darmA: kula darmA: cha shAshvatA: )

If varna is not birth based why should its mixing result in the destruction if jAti darma and kula darma?

Finally, in Shloka #44
Arjuna cites the authority of tradition for what he had stated.

उत्सन्न कुल धर्माणाम् मनुष्याणाम् जनार्दन ।
नरके नियतम् वासः भवति इति अनुशुश्रुम ॥

(utsanna kula darmANAm manushyANAm janArdana
narake nityam vAso bhavati iti anu shushruma )

Arjuna says he is only stating what he had heard from elders and that these are not just his delusions.

Now, I know what you are going to say. These were Arjuna's questions from a disturbed mind. These are not the words of Sri Krishna. But this objection raises two questions in my mind.

[1] Since Arjuna cites the authority of elders and tradition in shloka #44, why should this not be taken as the common practice and view at that time?

[2]If Arjuna's words on Varna/Jathi are erroneous, why then Lord Sri Krishna never once disputes Arjuna on this issue anywhere? The Lord speaks of Varna several times in BG, yet, never once does he correct Arjuna on mixing Varna due to women loosing their chastity.

I also fail to recall Krishna connecting varna and birth in chapter 9.

We discussed this earlier in this forum. I am not going to give you interpretations from one scholar or another. I am specifically referring to shlokas 32 and 33 of Chapter 9.

Let me first set the stage. In this portion of the chapter the lord is trying to give confidence to Arjuna that he too can achieve moksham. So to buck up Arjuna lord says even women, vaishya and shudra, who are pApa yOnayaha, can attain moksha. So, kshathriyas and brahmanas, who are of noble birth, need not worry, they can surely get release through surrender to the lord.

Now, I will give you the actual shlokas without any interpretation.

मां हि पार्थ व्यापाश्रित्य येपि स्युः पाप योनयः ।
स्त्रियो वैसयास्तथा शूद्रास्तॅ अपि यानि परं गतिं ॥ 32

(mAm hi pArtha vyAp Asritya yE api syu: pApa yOnaya:
striya: vaishya: tathA shUdra: te api yAnti parAm gatim)

किं पुन ब्राह्मणाः पुण्या भक्ता राजर्षयस्तथा ।
आनित्यं असुखं लॉकं इमं पप्राप्य भजस्व मां ॥ 33

(kim puna: brAhmaNA: puNyA bhaktA rAjarShya tathA
anityam asukham lOkam imam prApya bhajasva mAm)

With the literal meaning of the word yOni being uterus or female reproductive organ, anyone who says the lord was not making a connection between varna and birth in the same way gender is, is the one who is doing some fanciful interpretation.

Finally, over to you....

(I apologize for the length, I am constrained by having to give copious references.)

 

[Raghy]

Aim of this thread

When I was young, I did not understand the reason for legally sanctioned discriminations against me in the name of caste. I was very busy trying to find a way to survive and to beat the discriminations. This thread is not focused on discriminations and the effects of discriminations. This thread is not even about any realities.

If we are to fix a problem, then we ought to know the ideal situation as a bench mark. Then only we can analyse the amount of deviation from an ideal situation. This thread is meant to talk about the ideal situation with respect to Varna system and how it could have helped every individual for a spiritual betterment.

As I mentioned earlier, each individual follow different varna at different occasions. For example, I had one harijan gentleman who was working in our farm. I used to be his apprentice. Whenever he taught me about different cultivation techniques, he belonged to brhma varna. When he negotiated wages for different tasks with different other people to be performed in our farm on our behalf, he indeed belonged to viyasya varna. Stealing water was a regular occurrence in farming. I have noticed him so many times arguing, threatening and chasing away the water thieves, protecting our small farm. At those times he exhibited kshatriya varna. I have not known him ever to be dishonest. If he were to be dishonest, he would have displayed ‘sudhra’ varna. In such a situation, if the action were to be serious enough, the village would have shunned him. In other words, if someone accepted to perform certain duties and deliberately failed to perform, then only such a person may become a sudhra.

We have three gunas namely sathva, rajo and thamasa. We display all these gunas at various times. Sathva guna leads to honesty; when under this guna, we may perform brahma, kshtriya and viysya actions. All thre actions are honourable. When under the influence of rajo and thamasa gunas, we expose ourselves to the possibility of risking sudhra actions.
The aim of this thread is to bring the awareness to the reader so that, the reader would be aware of his/her actions. Once we are to stop and consider any action, we are likely to perform that action as decently as possible.

I am aware that this posting and this thread may seem ridiculous. But, I have been following this for a very long time. I have no regrets. This thread is not for a social reform or anything like that. This is just for a personal development only.

 

[renuka]

but i feel " the varna being a birth right " practice has been there even in Dwapara Yuga.
Remember the episode after the Mahabharat war where Yudhisthira did not want to preform funeral rites for the slain Karna when Kunti asks him to do so.
Yudhishtira says "why should i do for a Sutaputra"(by product of a Kshatriya father and Brahmana mother)
only after Kunti reveals the truth of Karna, Yudhistira preforms the funeral.
If caste was practised based by Gunas alone and not by birth right then why was Karna never considered a kshatriya even though crowned king of Anga by Duryodhana.
but the irony is both Pandu and Dhrtarashtra were considered Kshatriyas even though fathered by sage Vysa( a Brahmana).
shouldnt the Kauravas be considered Brahmanas by birth.
i dont know about the Pandavas which Varna they come under since they were fathered by Devas and Varna does not apply to Devas

weird isnt it

 

[Raghy]

Sri Nara,

Thanks for the welcoming message. Yes, my assignment went well.

I did not respond to your message in post #10 because, I am writing from a different platform, as you can see from my post ‘Aim of this thread’. But that need not stop you from debating. The more you write, the more will be the knowledge for everyone.

In response to Srimat BG, chapter 1, slokas 41 through to 44 :-
Yes, discrimination in the name of varna and jati was prevalent even in those days. Jati system by birth was so ancient! What was the period of Mahabharata? Was it 3 to 5 thousand years before? It was so prevalent and despicable; Vyasa had to write in Mahabharat in detail about that. Of course, we see that in Ramayana too. (was Gukan an untouchable? I am not sure…)

But, Srimat BG does not preach it; Sri Vyasa did not tolerate it. That was my point. Krishna was surprised to see Arjuna harbouring such thoughts. Essentially, Krishna did not approve such thoughts. In reply to Arjuna, Sri Krishna says,
Kutas tva kasmalam idam visame samupasthitam
Amarya justam asvargyam akirti karam Arjuna! – Ch-2. slokam -2.

Krishna basically wonders how this ‘garbage’ (kasmalam) came into you? Krishna condemns such thoughts as ‘garbage’. Krishna preached Gita after this; subsequently said to him the slokam ‘ chatur varnyam…. (4:13). My point is, Vyasa rejected varna or jati by birth although it prevalent in that period.

(mAm hi pArtha vyAp Asritya yE api syu: pApa yOnaya:
striya: vaishya: tathA shUdra: te api yAnti parAm gatim) – 9:32.

Sri Nara, I anticipated you to quote this slokam. ( My wife was reciting BG at one time. After reading this slokam she got offended and became very angry. As a result of that, we went through the whole BG, discussing each slokam!)
Papa yOnaya – one who passed through a sinful Yoni. In other words, one who was born through illicit relationship, born to a prostitute etc. Come to think of it, mother’s less than agreeable behaviour should not affect the child though.( Along with such person, even a woman, a vaishya and sudhra can attain parama ghathi). Here, Krishna is talking about the people who attained or would attain paramaghati. I took that as an emphasising slokam for Arjuna. In my opinion that slokam was a pep talk. That slokam did not isolate any such a person for discriminations or for harsh treatment. Importantly, that slokam does not preach such person to be discriminated, but the opposite.

(kim puna: brAhmaNA: puNyA bhaktA rAjarShya tathA
anityam asukham lOkam imam prApya bhajasva mAm) – 9:33

Krishna groups brahmana, punya bhakta (Raja rshya) righteous or dharmatma kings as equals. He did not speak anything by birth here. Punya bhakta could very well be a lower caste or anyone from slokam 33. Just a bhakta who committed saranaghati. Such person would become equal to brahmana or raja rshya. I don’t see this as an unfair deal! Don’t you think so?
Over to you, please.

 

[Raghy]

but i feel " the varna being a birth right " practice has been there even in Dwapara Yuga.
Remember the episode after the Mahabharat war where Yudhisthira did not want to preform funeral rites for the slain Karna when Kunti asks him to do so.
Yudhishtira says "why should i do for a Sutaputra"(by product of a Kshatriya father and Brahmana mother)
only after Kunti reveals the truth of Karna, Yudhistira preforms the funeral.
If caste was practised based by Gunas alone and not by birth right then why was Karna never considered a kshatriya even though crowned king of Anga by Duryodhana.
but the irony is both Pandu and Dhrtarashtra were considered Kshatriyas even though fathered by sage Vysa( a Brahmana).
shouldnt the Kauravas be considered Brahmanas by birth.
i dont know about the Pandavas which Varna they come under since they were fathered by Devas and Varna does not apply to Devas

weird isnt it

Sow. Sri. RenukaKarthikeyan,

The whole Mahabharatham was weired. In that period, as we can see from Srimat Baghavat Gita, caste descriminations were prevalent. I have heard from scholars that Mahabharatha is story that one should know; but one should never follow!
Sage Vysa was not considered a brahmana by many other brahmanas because his mother was a fisher woman, 'macha ghanti'. His father was Parasura Muni. from that time, caste or varna were not practised by 'guna and karma'; they were essentially by birth. I think Vysa wanted to wanted to change that; but, I don't think he got too far.

 

[DURGADASAN]

If so, how can pandavas and gauravas were considered as Kshatriyas??? Sage vyasa was the father of Dhrudharashtra, pandu and vidhura (Though mothers differ). So, I agree with Raghy. The casteism shown in mahabharatha is very weird. Also, many husbands and wives live together just for name sake and their offsprings were due to some other. Macchagandhi(a) Sathyavadhi gave birth to vyasa through parasara and then married santhanu. This santhanu married ganga as first wife and then Sathyavadhi. Ambika, amba and ambalika were married to vichitraveerya but got their child from vyasa. Kundhi and matri married pandu and got their children from devas. (Nowhere smart reasons like "Payasam" or by eye-sight have been said in this whole epic I think).

So, if consider Varna of anyone in the whole Mahabharatha, it will be in vain only...

Pranams

 

[Brahma Rishi]

Sri Pvraman :-

"For all other ex-varna (apart from Brahmana), they have a clear target to hate, ie brahmana. But for the present brahmin, we dont know whom to hate, we must hate only our ancestors who did not educate properly the other varnas so much so that they have left us with so much hatred. We are stunned, we don't know why it is happening to us. Fortunately, we convince ourselves saying that its all Murpiravi karma."

Sir,

I concur with you about the plight of caste brahmin today. Unfortunately, in my opinion, this misery may increase more. When one community can be bullied and discriminted legally, I do not see an end to it. All the caste brahmins will be systematically crushed. It has already happened in most villages. Unless caste brahmins mainly the youth find a way to get out of this rut, it may never abate. Personally I never kiss the feet of someone who discriminate me. I struggled while I was in India. But, I read the writing on the wall. I never deluded myself in any illusions of getting a fair deal in my life.

Sri Pvraman said:-

"And we have a greater responsibility as a Brahmin, to have a Ara Vazhi and guide others along with us."

No sir. I humbly beg to differ with you. If you mean caste brahmins by the word 'We', then we have no responsibility to guide anybody. In today's condition, in my opinion, the caste brahmins have the responsibility to survive. Sir, we do not have any superiority over others.

The present plight of the Brahmins was brought upon Brahmins by their own selves. It is the Superiority Complex and Arrogance, based on no sensible logic or reasoning, which has brought this state of affairs on themselves. Brahmins are solely responsible for this, their excellence notwithstanding. The so-called brahmins must wake up to the reality. Brahmins cannot afford to continue in their illusionary self-esteem. So-called brahmins must introspect and break out of self consciousness, out of a conditioned and programmed mindset and mentality. No offense meant. I was born in a Brahmin household too, an orthodox one in that.

 

[pvraman]

Dear Sri Brahma Rishi,

The present plight of the Brahmins was brought upon Brahmins by their own selves. It is the Superiority Complex and Arrogance, based on no sensible logic or reasoning, which has brought this state of affairs on themselves. Brahmins are solely responsible for this, their excellence notwithstanding. The so-called brahmins must wake up to the reality. Brahmins cannot afford to continue in their illusionary self-esteem. So-called brahmins must introspect and break out of self consciousness, out of a conditioned and programmed mindset and mentality. No offense meant. I was born in a Brahmin household too, an orthodox one in that.

What type of conditioned programmed mindset. I am a village person, and some of my B friends till date don't know how to do sandhya vandanam. We were not upper class too. Yet, we realized the discrimination after the 12th standard. We did not mind. We took our further studies & technical courses whatever available. We have lot of NB friends We are still friends and great friends at that, who could visit our home, and we could visit their home as a family friends. They got into good position. We too got into a respectable position. All are settled well. In my office, with my clients, i am the only B caste person. But no offense. Nobody, anytime, hurt me. In our village we were about 10 or so B boys, who were all down to earth. When we have a gathering there are B who sports all the symbol and many of them dont sport the symbols, yet, nobody abused us and we never abused anybody by caste.

I never saw any NB talking bad about B friends. They still have good opinion on us. Very few DK people talk bad about us. Only their parents have reservation about us (they are 60 years old now- which may be clue). Even if you shed all (some of my known B friends dont even sport punool - they are too NB than a actual NB person) symbols, dialect and loose your identity, the DK people still curse you. So, how do you think you can equalize and become to their level to become socially EQUAL?. Do you believe in our model of Brahmin?



Pranams..

PVR

 

[RVR]

Dear Sri PV Raman,

Let us concentrate on the development of our community and probably ignore all other things. There is no point in talking about others attitude towards us since it is not going to change for obvious reason.

Personally I am recollecting my experience when Sri Jayendra Saraswathi swamigal was arrested. My friends who doesn't normally exhibit anti-brahmin stand were trying to convince me that HH Swamigal has committed the crime. Today when the actual trial is going on in the court, no body opens their mouth stating that what police has fabricated is totally false.

We are living in a place where we are being targeted at every possible opportunity. Let us not talk about them and concentrate on our community development.

All the best

 

[Nara]

Hello Raghy, Greetings!

...basically wonders how this ‘garbage’ (kasmalam) came into you? Krishna condemns such thoughts as ‘garbage’. Krishna preached Gita after this;

How can you tell that Krishna's condemnation was a blanket one covering everything Arjuna said? Krishna was only condemning his decision to not fight. The kasmalam is simply Arjuna's despondency to fight, not the words he spoke. In fact Krishna says you speak the words of wise men (Ch 2 .11). So, Krishna considers Arjuna's words as wise, but condemns only his action of refusing to fight.

Papa yOnaya – one who passed through a sinful Yoni. In other words, one who was born through illicit relationship, born to a prostitute etc. Come to think of it, mother’s less than agreeable behaviour should not affect the child though.

It looks like you have your own interpretation and you are trying to come up with an argument to make it fit with the text. But that is putting the cart before the horse.

Further, you have recognized the problem with your interpretation yourself. First of all, I do not agree with a blanket condemnation of all prostitutes. It is the men who take advantage of women in this way who are to be condemned. In any case, as you rightly observe, why must the child bear this tag?

When it comes to interpretations, there is unanimity among the three mainstream commentators, namely, Shankara, Ramanuja, and Madhwa. They all say this is about birth.

That slokam did not isolate any such a person for discriminations or for harsh treatment.

Agreed! But this is about whether BG says Varna is birth based, not about discrimination. That is a different topic. We can talk about that elsewhere, may be.

Cheers!

 

[StudentofVihe]

Q) What makes one a Brahmin – birth, study, or wisdom? Ans: Neither birth nor study nor wisdom. It is character alone that makes him a Brahmin (Yudhishtira elder brother of Pandavas - answers to Yaksha in Mahabharata)

 

[Brahma Rishi]

Dear Sri Brahma Rishi,



What type of conditioned programmed mindset. I am a village person, and some of my B friends till date don't know how to do sandhya vandanam. We were not upper class too. Yet, we realized the discrimination after the 12th standard. We did not mind. We took our further studies & technical courses whatever available. We have lot of NB friends We are still friends and great friends at that, who could visit our home, and we could visit their home as a family friends. They got into good position. We too got into a respectable position. All are settled well. In my office, with my clients, i am the only B caste person. But no offense. Nobody, anytime, hurt me. In our village we were about 10 or so B boys, who were all down to earth. When we have a gathering there are B who sports all the symbol and many of them dont sport the symbols, yet, nobody abused us and we never abused anybody by caste.

I never saw any NB talking bad about B friends. They still have good opinion on us. Very few DK people talk bad about us. Only their parents have reservation about us (they are 60 years old now- which may be clue). Even if you shed all (some of my known B friends dont even sport punool - they are too NB than a actual NB person) symbols, dialect and loose your identity, the DK people still curse you. So, how do you think you can equalize and become to their level to become socially EQUAL?. Do you believe in our model of Brahmin?



Pranams..

PVR

Dear PVRaman,
Thanks for your response. It is good to note that you mingle with people of all groups indiscriminately. I appreciate your broadmindedness. It is heartening to note that you and your friends of different social groups mutually visit each other's houses, and that too as family friends. It is good to learn that there were n caste discriminations among you, for that matter there were no discriminations of any kind. I am very happy to learn that you all are in good position, in respectable and noble professions and all are settled well. It is good to note that no one hurt or abused anyone by caste. This is a sign that we are progressing in civilization.
In the midst of such a set up sporting symbols fade into insignificance. It should not cause any sensation at all. In many so called brahmin families, the boys don't perform sandhyavandhan. Many so-called brahmin guys don't wear the sacred (or so it is considered) thread at all in spite of brahmopadesam performed on them. I wonder in the generations to come if the so-called brahmins will ever perform brahmopadesam at all. Especially since brahmin boys are marrying women from so-called other castes and their offsprings are not considered brahmins. Even otherwise, in many so-called brahmin families they don't bother to honor traditions, rituals etc.
As regards the parents of DK people having reservations, you need to understand that they lived in such times when they were oppressed by brahmins and hence brahmin hatred was fuelled. You may please enlighten them and educate them, dispel all darkness in them and dispel the prejudices in them. Please ignore the criticisms hurled by the so called DK. They claim themselves to be rational. But it is not rational to perceive someone as belonging to some people group and concentrate their assault on that group. It is hypocrisy. That is what the DKs are. They are hypocrites. They have some other sinister agenda. They are adopting brahmin hatred as a means to desperately achieve their goals. In the process they are deceiving and fooling the gullible public, using sensational rhetoric, eloquence and cliches.
In such a scenario you need to perceive everyone as human beings like you are. Everyone feels hungry and hence need food. Everyone is sensitive to weather and hence need clothing. Everyone needs shelter and hence needs a house. These three basic needs are common across all people groups in the entire world, cutting across religions, color, ethnicity, race etc.
What sounds paradoxical to me about you is, while you are so broadminded in practice, you use such terms as B and NB to identify yourselves and others respectively. You need to introspect and ask yourselves what your true identity is. I think you need to change your perception. As long as you apply the term Brahmin to identify yourself, there will exist an invisible, undiscernible gulf between you and others.
You also need to realize that intelligence and excellence is not a property and belonging of brahmins. These are individual attributes and traits. Although certain elements are in the DNA and passed on through the genes, you cannot generalize and conclude that certain qualities are genetic. Caste identities are an anachronism and in future they will cease to exist. The globe is becoming a village. No man is an island. Brahmins are no exception.
Can I be more clearer?
Regards,
Brahma Rishi

 

[happyhindu]

but i feel " the varna being a birth right " practice has been there even in Dwapara Yuga.
Remember the episode after the Mahabharat war where Yudhisthira did not want to preform funeral rites for the slain Karna when Kunti asks him to do so.
Yudhishtira says "why should i do for a Sutaputra"(by product of a Kshatriya father and Brahmana mother)
only after Kunti reveals the truth of Karna, Yudhistira preforms the funeral.
If caste was practised based by Gunas alone and not by birth right then why was Karna never considered a kshatriya even though crowned king of Anga by Duryodhana.
but the irony is both Pandu and Dhrtarashtra were considered Kshatriyas even though fathered by sage Vysa( a Brahmana).
shouldnt the Kauravas be considered Brahmanas by birth.
i dont know about the Pandavas which Varna they come under since they were fathered by Devas and Varna does not apply to Devas

weird isnt it

Probs with the mahabharat:

1) Dating of mahabharat is quite controversial.

2) Itihaasas as written varied by author and region (eg: differences b/w kamba ramayana and valmiki ramayana).

3) We don't know if the mahabharat we have in sanskrit currently is exactly the one written by Vyasa. Obviously the original kept getting copied on to new palm leaves as the leaves wore off. Our indian writers are generally very imaginative

4) No one knows if interpolations did or did not take place - there are arguments both ways.

5) Mahabharat supposedly took place before the Atharvaveda was compiled. So the idea that varna dharma was present in 'vedic time' does have a basis. However, the concept of it, and as it was applied socially, seems to have varied from kingdom to kingdom.

6) Kunti was Vasudeva's sister and Krishna's atthai. Kunti's son Arjuna married Vasudeva's daughter Subhadra (Krishna's sister). Meaning, Arjuna married his mother's brother's daughter. Though manusmrithi was written ages later, it is possible the pandavas were from the cultures were such unions were permitted.

7) Reg various births, the pandavas were born of diff fathers (devas, or possibly kings of the east). Satyavati was the daughter of the chieftain of fishermen. Arjuna, born from Indra, was dark skinned with curly hair (Krishna too was dark with curly hair) (no idea what this 'aryan looks' is all about?). The mahabharat is loaded with all sorts of illegitimate births. Yet it talks of varnas.....

 

[renuka]

Dear Happy Hindu,

i would not want to call the births in the Mahabharat illegitimate because the Pandavas were divine in origin.

Invoking the Devas done by Madri and Kunti need not have been sexual in origin.

Just like in the case of cloning, sexual union does not take place yet life is created.

All you need is the DNA of a cell,implanted into an Ovum, jump started and a "seat" most condusive for cellular development is created inviting a soul with the compatible Karmic Genetic pattern and celullar division takes place--embryogenesis---birth takes place.

Divinity can work in many ways.

Their birth was legitimate because consent was given by Pandu.

I was only talking about Varnas nothing more.

It would make me a very unhappy hindu to consider them illegitimate.

 

[happyhindu]

Dear Renuka,

Generally i find it hard to accept that a birth can happen without sexual union...esp if there is no such reference to it in the texts..
It has also been claimed that the 100 kauravas were clones of one another. No one knows if it is true. If substantial evidence of such a procedural aspect is refered to in any of the old texts, we might infer that such a possibility cud have existed then. But as of now, it is impossible to say.

Regards.

 

[renuka]

Dear Happy Hindu,

Text could have been written for the understanding of the common man. Even today if I tell a lesser informed person about cloning and partenogenesis he/she would certainly say "WHAT! I Dont Understand a word you are saying"

Arent all our Avatars eg Parashuraama, Raama, Krishna immaculate conceptions?
Even Jesus was an immaculate conception.
Draupadi and her brother came out from fire. No biological father or mother.
Lord Kartikeya was born from Lord Shiva without the need of Parvathi.
Lord Ganesha was produced by Parvathi herself without the need for Shiva.

You know the process of cloning does not even need males.
If there we no males, babies can be still produced by cloning but all would be females only. Because it would be the DNA of another female eg DNA from a ear cell or any other cell implanted into the ovum of another female.

Its a proven fact that you do not need physical sexual union for procreation.

Procreation can take place with non physical union.

You only need the "Purusha Factor" and the "Prakriti Factor" to procreate.

In Cloning the implanted DNA plays the "Purusha Factor" (the origin of the DNA used need not be from a male, that is why i have used the terminology "Factor" here) and the Ovum plays the "Prakriti Factor".

In Cloning the Ovum does not provide any DNA, it only plays the role of the nourisher before the placenta comes into picture and the uterus of the female used in cloning is just a surrogate and not the biological mother at all.


So i guess cloning could have taken place long long ago even better as Divine powers were freely available then.

 

[happyhindu]

Dear Renuka,

Human cloning is not a simple procedure. We are talking of times when people were almost like tribes or tribe-like clans or groups, very very far from the present day caste-hood.

There are no sanskrit equivalents for plasmids, restriction enzymes, dna, incubators, etc..If there are such terms in Sanskrit, please do let me know of them. Or if they were alluding to a different sort of procedure, i wud glad for the references of the texts.

Dunno if we can connect present day discoveries with stories from the past and claim that they existed then.

If there are no sanskrit texts that explain the procedure or atleast touch upon the the subject using any (other) term(s), it is not possible to believe it existed at that time.

Dunno if even the concept of cleanliness or aseptic conditions existed then as it does now.

Am sorry but going by scientific basis alone, the concept of immaculate conception has no validity.

Regards.

 

[RVR]

I think the following article of Dr.A.V.Srinivasan answers lot of questions regarding who is a brahmin.

Dr. A. V. Srinivasan: Who is a Brahmin?

All the best

 

[pvraman]

Dear Sri Brahma Rishi,

Dear PVRaman,


What sounds paradoxical to me about you is, while you are so broadminded in practice, you use such terms as B and NB to identify yourselves and others respectively. You need to introspect and ask yourselves what your true identity is. I think you need to change your perception. As long as you apply the term Brahmin to identify yourself, there will exist an invisible, undiscernible gulf between you and others.
You also need to realize that intelligence and excellence is not a property and belonging of brahmins. These are individual attributes and traits. Although certain elements are in the DNA and passed on through the genes, you cannot generalize and conclude that certain qualities are genetic. Caste identities are an anachronism and in future they will cease to exist. The globe is becoming a village. No man is an island. Brahmins are no exception.
Can I be more clearer?
Regards,
Brahma Rishi

I am little confused about the reply. Among our friends circle you can say I am in the lower half as for as intelligence is concerned, some of my NB friends are well above me. I have nothing to boast or feel arrogant about, because we are from lower middle class family with avg intelligence at a time struggling to come-up in life. In 1980s my NB friends mother often scold my NB friends for moving with us (don t play with பார்ப்பான் பசங்க.). The same mummies changed during 1990s, after all are settled and welcomed with smile and trusted us.(not all of us though )

In our house we did not have anytime, reservation in admitting them. (I am talking about 1980s). Not only in my house, I have seen many of B friends house for that matter. I am narrating a practical example. You can read many things in that. They are not having any problems with us being brahmins or following rituals. If i say, i am not a brahmin anymore to them, asking them not to be x,y,z... they just may laugh it off. They are deep into their community (சங்கங்கள்) for their own safety. (Please tell me in TN any Jathi without sangams!)

So, why people want to erase all the identities and dissolve when you have something better to give to the world. Earlier it was guarded and the knowledge was not passed to even some of the brahmins. Now we can learn and propagate to all. It can be strengthened more. People will like that. You need to adjust little here and there.

As for as changing oneS identity, I remember when Indians in abroad, after living for 15 years and thinking and behaving like other country person, they will be Indians only and even if they live for 1000 years, they will be indian origin only.

In TN, It will be fair if everybody looses their identity and say we are tamilians or Indians which is not going to happen in the visible future.

The need for the hour is, instead of remaining in isolation we need to do lot of social work to have our image changed (i dont have any issue on that). Thats what i am trying to put forward right from the day one here. If we want to be treated as a inseparable partner in the society we do things which will command respect automatically. Our concern, if at all, should be unity and help the needy, help each other, and help the society where the real broad mindedness matters.
(sorry my thinkpadS quote key is not working suddenly:tea
Please comment

Thanks
PVR

 

[pvraman]

Dear Sri Raghi

Sri Pvraman said:-

Sir,

'Aravaazhi' is aram + aazhi. 'an ocaen of aram'. The one who has aram like an ocean; one who is perfect; all the arams come from him..... The one is the God Almighty. Valluvar talks about 'saranagathy' in this kural. He reckons that only by joining the feet of the God Almighty one can swim the piravaazhi ( Piravi + aazhi = ocean of birth; piravi perunkadal).

others.

"அறவாழி அந்தணன் தாள்சேர்ந்தார்க் கல்லால்
பிறவாழி நீத்தல் அரிது"

இத் திருக்குறளில் கூறப்பட்ட அறவாழி அந்தணன் என்பவர் யாவர்?. அவர்
எந்தக் கடவுள் என்பதை ஆராய்வோம்.
உரையாசிரியர் பரிமேலழகர், அறவாழி என்பதற்கு அறக்கடவுள் என்று பொருள்
கூறினார். பிறகு மற்றொரு பொருளையும் குறிக்கிறார். அது: அறவாழி
என்பதனைத் தரும "சக்கரமாக்கி அதனுடைய அந்தணன் என்று உரைப்பாருமுளர்"
என்பது. அறக் கடலாகிய அந்தணன் என்று பொருள் கொள்வதை விட, தருமச்
சக்கரத்தை உடைய அந்தணன் என்று பொருள் கொள்வது சிறப்புடையதாகத்
தோன்றுகிறது. நூல்களிலே ஜைனருடைய அருகக் கடவுள்(பெளத்தருடைய புத்தப்
பெருமானும் கூட) அறவாழியை உடையவர் என்று கூறப்படுகிறார். ஆகவே,
அறவாழி அந்தணன் என்று குறிக்கப்பட்டவர் ஜைனருடைய அருகக் கடவுள் எனக்
கொள்ளத்தகும்.

”ஆழிப்படையையுடைய திருமால் அறவாழி அந்தணன் அல்லரோ எனின், அல்லர்.
அவர் மறவாழியை யுடையவராகலின் அறவாழி அந்தணன் ஆகார். என்னை?
திருமாலின் திருத்தொண்டர்களான ஆழ்வார்கள் எல்லோரும், அவரை அறவழி
அந்தணன் என்று கூறாமல் மறவாழிப் படையான் என்றே கூறியுள்ளனர்.
"அடலாழி ஏந்தி அசுரர் வன்குலம் வேர் மறுங்கறுத்தாய்" என்றும்,
"அமர்கொள் ஆழி" என்றும்
"காய்சின ஆழி" என்றும்
"கொலை ஆழி" என்றும்
"கூர் ஆழி" என்றும்
"கனலாழிப் படையுடையவன்" என்றும்
"பேராழி கொண்ட பிரான்" என்றும்,
"ஊன் திகழ் நேமி" என்றும்,
"ஈர்க்கின்ற சக்கரத் தெம்மான்" என்றும் திருமாலின் ஆழி(சக்கரம்)
மறவாழி என்றே ஆழ்வார்கள் கூறியிருப்பதை அவர்கள் பாடல்களிலே நெடுகக்
கானலாம். ஆகவே, அறவாழி அந்தணன் என்னும் பெயர் திருமாலுக்கும்
பொருந்தாது. ”
http://www.treasurehouseofagathiyar.net/27800/27809.htm

Idhu eppadi irukku?

Can we take as the அந்தணன் is not a Brahmana?

Regards

PVR