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

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

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

Who is Brahmanan

Status
Not open for further replies.

RVR

Well-known member
I am not a brahmana by birth but i am always amazed why everyone is always trying to define "Who is a Brahmana"?
Why isnt anyone trying to define Who is a Kshatriya, Who is a Vaisya etc?




No body here asked you whether you are a brahmin or not. Even if you are not a brahmin by birth, there is no harm, you can continue to participate in the discussions here.

Since this site has the tag name `brahmin', naturally most of the brahmin community members are getting attracted to this website. Each and every such member is trying to find out whether he is a `true brahmin' or not. If he is not, then the next question arises `what to make him a true brahmin'. Personally I feel there is nothing harm in discussing it in this forum and in this thread.

Probably a forum like `Kshatriya.com' or `vysya.com' will discuss whether a person is true kshatriya and vysya.

All the best
 
Last edited:

happyhindu

Well-known member
everybody is a brahmin, kshatriya, vaishya and shudra.

every person, by nature, has qualities of every varna in him/her.

attaining brahman happens to be the ultimate goal in hinduism.

and in the old days, people went to vanaprastha in search of it towards the later part of their life.

irrespective of whether we are mindful or not of that ultimate goal in our lives, our focus today is money, respect, social standing, etc.

so in the present times, we only talk and we claim, we do not follow or we hardly follow....(if some do, my apologies, am not including such ppl in this scenario).
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
R

Raghy

Well-known member
Sri Nara asked:- (post #31)
“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.”

Sri Nara,
Greetings to you. (My wife saw our discussion and gave me the Tamizh BG to refer! Here we go again).
If Arjuna started delivering the arrows at Kurukshetra left, right and middle on command on the day one, as you rightly said, Krishna would have spared the huge lecture to Arjuna and focused on driving the chariot. But Arjuna was just a normal everyday human being. He could not do that. (Why Arjuna was the recipient of BG? I read a nice reason for that. But that would be different discussion altogether).
Krishna’s condemnation was not just for his hesitation to fight. I request the readers to refer post #22, posted by Sri Nara, for the following message here.
In BG, chapter 1, from slokam 41 to 46, Arjuna indeed was worried about mixing of varna, pitru srartam, fighting kith and kin and the need for fight altogether. Krishna addressed every single concern in the chapters followed in BG. Krishna did not limit his advice to Arjuna just to get him to fight; he preached him long and in detail about various materialistic and spiritualistic matters. Arjuna decided to fight at the end. Had Krishna not addressed every single concern raised by Arjuna, then you would have been right. Since all the concerns were addressed, ‘kasmalam’ included all the concerns.

Sri Nara said:- (post # 31)
“In fact Krishna says you speak the words of wise men (Ch 2 .11).” (in this quote, ‘you’ denotes Arjuna).

Sri Nara, you must be playing games with me!
Asocyan anvasocas tvam prajna-vadams ca bhasase
Gatasun agatasums ca nanusocanti panditah (BG 2:11)

Krishna criticises Arjuna in this slokam. Krishna says, ‘Arjuna, you lament for unworthy persons; at the same time, you speak like a learned person’. In other words, Krishna criticises Arjuna’s wavering mind. Is that a compliment? I don’t think so.

Sri Nara said:- (with reference to BG 4:32). (post #31).
“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?”


Whether it is my cooked up interpretation or the meaning I found from the dictionary; irrespective to that, I concur with you about the degraded situation women found themselves in those days. (Trust me, I had to eat patched up food for 4 days and lost other perks because of this one slokam!). Attaining mukthi was a big deal in those days (in these days too!). By reiterating to Arjuna that the underprivileged in the society (of those days) would also attain mukthi, Krishna actually promoted respect for the under privileged. (Debating on this slokam is a piece of cake for me! I debated with the undebatable on this slokam! This slokam will be used to my advantage in the future debates too).

Sri Nara said:- (post #31).
“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.”

With humble due respects to all the acharyas mentioned by you, sir, why should I not think differently? In fact, if you refer to my message in post #23, in this same thread, none of the acharyas commented in the way I understand. Acharyas were restricted to society sastras and sampradyams. I have no such restriction. Shall we say that I think differently? When I can not logically defend my thoughts, I am more than happy to change my opinions.

Sri Nara said:- 9post #31).
“But this (debate) is about whether BG says Varna is birth based,” (the word ‘debate’ in parenthesis is added by me without changing the meaning of the quote).

Sir, of course BG says about the birth based varna followed by the society at that time only to condemn such ill conceived thoughts. That was why it was stressed in 4:13, the basis for the varna classification. BG does not promote or condones varna based by birth.

Over to you, please…
 
OP
OP
R

Raghy

Well-known member
I am not a brahmana by birth but i am always amazed why everyone is always trying to define "Who is a Brahmana"?
Why isnt anyone trying to define Who is a Kshatriya, Who is a Vaisya etc?

Sow. Sri. renukakarthikayan,

Caste Brahmins were kept in an exalted position in India for thousands of years. Some caste brahmins deserved such respect. Since the 'Brahmana' tag comes with a lot of respect, naturally such a tag undergoes scrutiny too. I started this thread to present my views to this honourable forum as can be seen in post #23.
When one varna 'Brahmana' gets defined, the other varnas 'kshatriya and Vaisya' gets defined too.
 
OP
OP
R

Raghy

Well-known member
Happy Hindu said:-

"Am sorry Raghy. Will follow suit. Have clarified above and will not post anymore stuff non-relevant to this thread topic."

Sow. Sri. Happy Hindu,

your discussion with Sow.Sri. Renuka is very interesting. I am following that conversation with professional interest too (I am a Nurse). I humbly request you to open a thread on topics related to medicine, healthcare, preventive health care, healthy diet practices etc. You guys will be promoting health and the messages will be really useful to the society. I request you to ask the moderators to seperate those posts under a suitable name where more health information can be posted. In my opinion, those rare messages found in the discussion between yourself and Sri. Renuka will be buried in this controvertial thread. (Who knows, this thread may even get deleted!). Just a thought.
 

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
Dear Raghy,
Thank you for your reply.
Actually i asked this question because a lot of people i know from various non brahmin varnas always think that being Brahmana is not a birth right but the irony is they stick to their own non brahmana varna and never question whether its their birth right or not.
Thank you once again for your reply.

***
Dear all,
I hope i am not misunderstood as trying to cause arguments on the grounds of Brahmana Vs Non Brahmana.
Neither am I questioning the position of a Brahmana nor putting down a Non Brahmana.
My question is purely for an intellectual discussion.
 
Last edited:
Dear Brahma Rishi,
i find it hard to believe that The Mahabharat is just fiction?
Does that make the Bhagavad Geeta fiction too?
Aryan just means noble one.
Its just a word not a race.
I would never want to even imagine that Sage Veda Vyasa who restructured the Vedas for easy understanding for mankind would want to just "make up a story" to win approval.
My question is win approval from whom?
I dont think he needed to impress anyone.

these are purely my own views.
Dear Renukakarthikayan,

I am not declaring that Mahabharat is a fiction. There are views among some section of Hindu community that it could be a fiction. We cannot take anything for granted. We have to give consideration for all views and investigate into its truth.

Bagwad Gita is a philosophy. There is no question of whether it is fiction or non-fiction. It is for intellectuals to study, ponder and apply in their lives.

If Veda Vyasa had sketched a fiction there is absolutely no crime in that. That is an effective strategy of promoting thoughts and virtues. He has committed a noble deed.

Perhaps these legends and epics could have been authored with an aim to instill fear of God among people. It is synonymous with the current day strategy of expressing and generating public opinion through the feature films and dramas.

Incidentally, there are numerous versions of the Ramayana viz Valmiki's, Tulsidas's, Kambar's and each version differ from the other on some elements. If Ramayana were a fact, the sages cannot take liberty at that and present it as per their own whim and fancy. Fact, when presented by different sources must be concordant, must agree with each other. There must exist an accord, harmony and synchrony among them. Sadly in the different versions of Ramayana, there does not exist these elements. That gives rise to a reckoning that perhaps it could be a fiction.


I was not expressing my subjective view either. I just mentioned it could be a possibility that the legends are fictitious. It is open for investigation and discussion.

Regards,
Brahma Rishi
 
Last edited:
I am not a brahmana by birth but i am always amazed why everyone is always trying to define "Who is a Brahmana"?
Why isnt anyone trying to define Who is a Kshatriya, Who is a Vaisya etc?

That's because others have realized the Truth, they have realized their true identity. Brahmins have lost their identity and they are making desperate attempts to find their identity. If possible, could you please help them find their true identity? You would have done a great favour, a noble deed.
 
OP
OP
R

Raghy

Well-known member
Brahma Rishi said:-

"Perhaps these legends and epics could have been authored with an aim to instill fear of God among people."

Sri Brahma Rishi,

Sorry to interrupt your nice conversation with Sow.Sri. Renuka. You are voicing your opinions quite nicely. In my humble opinion, Ramayana and Mahabharata are not instilling fear of God amoung people. They are promoting love of God. Hinduism is based on those principles in promoting love for God and love for others. Just a thought to ponder, please.
 
OP
OP
R

Raghy

Well-known member
That's because others have realized the Truth, they have realized their true identity. Brahmins have lost their identity and they are making desperate attempts to find their identity. If possible, could you please help them find their true identity? You would have done a great favour, a noble deed.

I could not help laughing after reading Sri. Brahma Rishi's message. Half of Sri. Brahma Rishi's message is quite true delivered with a nice sense of humor!
 

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
dear Brahma Rishi,
I cant help anyone find their true identity.I need to realize my own true identity through self realization.I am still very far from that state.
i am just a mere mortal like anyone else.
I am no Guru.
Thats why I joined this Forum to gain knowledge for which I am very thankful for all the inputs and replies I have got so far.

regards
 
Last edited:
I

Iyer@Infosys

Guest
dear Brahma Rishi,
I cant help anyone find their true identity.I need to realize my own true identity through self realization.I am still very far from that state.
i am just a mere mortal like anyone else.
I am no Guru.
Thats why I joined this Forum to gain knowledge for which I am very thankful for all the inputs and replies I have got so far.

regards

Indeed you have helped Brahmins a great deal by this impartation of yours. "..through self realization" is a great statement by itself. One step above is through God realization. You are not at all far from that state. You are very near to that state. I think we brahmins have to gain a lot of knowledge from you.

We have all along imagined ourselves as and acted as custodians of the Hindu religion. We claimed authority in all matters pertaining to Hinduism. We make changes and we audit changes. Others had to depend on us (rather linger on us) to fulfill their obligations as hindus. We alone can perform religous rites for them. We were bloated with ego, self-righteousness, arrogance, contempt for others, conceit etc which we considered as noble virtues. We imagined we were from Mars. We looked down upon others. We treated others with a condescending attitude. Time is teaching us lessons and we are learning. We are still learning.
 
OP
OP
R

Raghy

Well-known member
Indeed you have helped Brahmins a great deal by this impartation of yours. "..through self realization" is a great statement by itself. One step above is through God realization. You are not at all far from that state. You are very near to that state. I think we brahmins have to gain a lot of knowledge from you.

We have all along imagined ourselves as and acted as custodians of the Hindu religion. We claimed authority in all matters pertaining to Hinduism. We make changes and we audit changes. Others had to depend on us (rather linger on us) to fulfill their obligations as hindus. We alone can perform religous rites for them. We were bloated with ego, self-righteousness, arrogance, contempt for others, conceit etc which we considered as noble virtues. We imagined we were from Mars. We looked down upon others. We treated others with a condescending attitude. Time is teaching us lessons and we are learning. We are still learning.


Sri. Iyer,

Sir, Kindly allow me to present my humble respects to you. Your message is a gem. I am previleged to have read your message. Thank you.
 

RVR

Well-known member
I think every body can attempt Baghavan Ramana Maharishi's path to self realisation - Just a simple question `who am I'. (Naan Yaar -நான் யார்) He advices repeatedly asking the simple self enquiry.

The above question is not the property of any religion, caste, language or race. Everybody can do it. Try to get the answer yourself. Don't try to get answers for the question from others. If you have any doubts, please read Maharishi's books yourself and try to understand.

I don't think there is any parallel to the above.

All the best
 
I

Iyer@Infosys

Guest
".......... They are promoting love of God. Hinduism is based on those principles in promoting love for God and love for others. Just a thought to ponder, please....."

How sincere and authentic is this statement? Could you please substantiate your view with evidences from scriptures? Is there any hindu scripture where any hindu God or sage or rishi has explicitly commanded the subjects to love God and to love fellow human beings as one's own self? If yes, I humbly request you to quote the scripture, mentioning the source, the author, the location in the text.

Is love for fellow human beings practised diligently by hindus? If so how does that explain the existence of caste system, the atrocities perpetrated on the so-called low castes, the oppression and suppression suffered by the so-called low castes in the hands of the so-called high caste? Does the world realize hinduism as synonymous with Love?

True love exists where everyone are treated as equals. Where there exists hierarchy, there cannot exist true love.

If something is preached but not practised, I think it is termed hypocrisy.
 
Last edited:
I think every body can attempt Baghavan Ramana Maharishi's path to self realisation - Just a simple question `who am I'. (Naan Yaar -நான் யார்) He advices repeatedly asking the simple self enquiry.

The above question is not the property of any religion, caste, language or race. Everybody can do it. Try to get the answer yourself. Don't try to get answers for the question from others. If you have any doubts, please read Maharishi's books yourself and try to understand.

I don't think there is any parallel to the above.

All the best

You have rightly said it sir. It is not a property of any religion. So also, sir , God is not a property of any religion sir. There is one who is greater than Ramana Maharishi sir. God realization is greater than Self realization sir. Through religion you cannot realize God sir. You will have to shed all religions to realize God sir (""Sarva Dharman Parithyajya .... "" Gita 18.66). Any realization other than God is a waste in my humble opinion sir.
 

RVR

Well-known member
You have rightly said it sir. It is not a property of any religion. So also, sir , God is not a property of any religion sir. There is one who is greater than Ramana Maharishi sir. God realization is greater than Self realization sir. Through religion you cannot realize God sir. You will have to shed all religions to realize God sir (""Sarva Dharman Parithyajya .... "" Gita 18.66). Any realization other than God is a waste in my humble opinion sir.

As per Advaitha philosophy, Jeevathma and Paramathma are one and the same. But we cannot be saying the about statement without realising it. For realising it, Ramana Maharishi's self enquiry is a path. That is my understanding of Ramana Maharishi's philosophy.

Once we go in to self enquiry, probably we may realise that we are not this body and something else. What is that some thing? Is it paramathma itself? It has to be realised by each one of us by our own experience.

Reading any amount of books will not get answer to the above question and it is my humble opinion, it has to be self realised by each one of us.

I always believe Mahathma Gandhi's famous statement `God has no religion'

All the best
 

happyhindu

Well-known member
I always believe Mahathma Gandhi's famous statement `God has no religion'

did not know gandhi ji had said such a thing.....perhaps he understood that the whole concept of 'religion' is just crap.

whenever ppl approach me convert, i have asked them "what is god's religion?"

hinduism is not a religion.

its really sad if one were to merely link just the caste system with native indian spiritual beliefs...
 

RVR

Well-known member
did not know gandhi ji had said such a thing.....perhaps he understood that the whole concept of 'religion' is just crap.

whenever ppl approach me convert, i have asked them "what is god's religion?"

hinduism is not a religion.

its really sad if one were to merely link just the caste system with native indian spiritual beliefs...

I read the statement else where but I could get the following weblink immediately

StumbleUpon.com: SU Agnostics: "God has no Religion" - Gandhi

All the best
 

Nara

Well-known member
Krishna actually promoted respect for the under privileged. (Debating on this slokam is a piece of cake for me! I debated with the undebatable on this slokam! This slokam will be used to my advantage in the future debates too).


Hello dear Raghy, let me ask you a question, if you want to pep somebody up would you do that by putting somebody else down?

For example, let us suppose that your daughter who graduated from Ivy league school is worried about getting into say medical school. When giving her a pep talk, would you say to her that look at these x, y, z who graduated from a tiny state school with open admission -- they have gotten into medical school, so you, having graduated from an Ivy league school, why do you have any doubt, you will definitely get in?

This is what these shlokas mean. In order to boost Arjuna's morale, Krishna says to him, look at these women, vaishya and shudra, born to papayonayaha, even they can get moksham by doing saranagathi to me, that brahmanas and kshatriyas of noble and punya birth goes without saying.

This is downright abhorrent to me.

Just think about it one more time and whatever you conclude I wish you peace on this subject.

Cheers!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Follow us on Social Media

Top
Thank you for visiting TamilBrahmins.com

You seem to have an Ad Blocker on.

We depend on advertising to keep our content free for you. Please consider whitelisting us in your ad blocker so that we can continue to provide the content you have come here to enjoy.

Alternatively, consider upgrading your account to enjoy an ad-free experience along with numerous other benefits. To upgrade your account, please visit the account upgrades page

You can also donate financially if you can. Please Click Here on how you can do that.

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks