• 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.
Sri Nara,

Kindly allow me to make my stand very clear when I say I wanted to debate with you. My stand is, I am not trying to debate as a smart alec; I sincerely want to learn from you. I am presenting my point of views as I see them. Most of my point of views may be flawed. I humbly request you to point out the flaws so that; I may achieve abetter understanding, please. I am not wishing to score any points or trying to prove any points. I am thinking of a suitable reply for you. I will get back with a reply tomorrow. Thank you.
Regars, Raghy.
 
While the boy was truthful, an admirable quality, what did Gauthama infer from that? He concluded that the boy must be brahmana by birth, for only a brahmana by birth will speak the truth. Why else would he have enquired about the boy's male ancestors in the first place?

The moral of the story seems to be that the reason the boy spoke the ugly truth is because he was a brahmana by birth. If he was of low birth he would have concealed the truth.

This story, IMHO, in the scale of offensiveness, is up there with the worst of them.

Cheers!

Gautama had an obligation to teach; to teach anyone and everyone. When chose to selectively fulfill his obligations, he miserably failed from his obligations. A teacher should have known better.
 
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.


Dear happy Hindu,

I will list down a few interesting medical facts in the ancient days:

Embryology
An embryo has 4 components derived from
· Father
· Mother
· Food
· Developed by itself
(Charaka Samhita--- Sharirasthanam 2.26)

Ischemic Heart Disease(IHD)
Pathologhy of IHD involves a transient spasm or thickening & narrowing of arteries with the physical deposition of Kapha-Pitta factors leading to acute pain in the chest producing breathing difficulty.
To preserve Ojas(energy) and maintain the heart and vessels in good condition,one should avoid worrying, take diet condusive to heart and channels of circulation and maintain mental poise
(Susrutasamhita-sutrastanam30.13-500BC)

Plastic Surgery of Nose
· Take nose-sized leaf of a tree supported (on the forehead)
· Cut the skin from cheeks to the size of the leaf
· Trace on the leaf the profile of the nose
· Immediately join that skin carefully with the appropriate bandage
(Sushruta-Samhita-Sutrasthanam16.27,28)

Kidney Stone Removal
Then employ the needle on the left side leaving out only a grain of space.

<FONT face="Times New Roman">
 
Last edited:
Andhanars may have been the priestly class among the Tamil Speaking Tamilians. Discernibly, there may have existed God Beliefs and Faith systems, indegenous to Tamilians, uncorrupted by the Sanskrit speaking Aryans. There may have been Tamil Scriptures and Tamil Religous works during ancient times. The existing divisions viz Andhanar, Chettiar, Nadar, Mudaliar, Koundar, Vanniar etc would have evolved during ancient times, totally independant from the Varna system in the Bagwad Gita, among the Tamil Speaking population. The basis on which the Tamil Social groups were divided differs entirely from the criterios expressed in Bagwad Gita. In the BG only 4 varna systems exist. Perhaps in the days of Veda Vyasa, in the society to which he belonged, in the environs in which he lived, there existed only 4 varnas. This need not be extended to Tamilians.

The Tamil Texts and beliefs may have been destroyed due to the Aryan invasion.

Veda Vyasa no doubt is a very intelligent and holy man. A saint, a sage by all standards. The Bagwad Gita may have been his brain child. In order to win approval, to present it in an interesting and acceptable form, he may have concocted Mahabharatam. Till this day a section of the Hindu population, especially the Hindus from North East India, the Bengali Hindus to be precise, believe that Mahabharata is a work of fiction and not a fact. Even Vivekananda endorses this view.
 
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 happy Hindu,

I will list down a few interesting medical facts in the ancient days:

Embryology
An embryo has 4 components derived from
· Father
· Mother
· Food
· Developed by itself
(Charaka Samhita--- Sharirasthanam 2.26)

Ischemic Heart Disease(IHD)
Pathologhy of IHD involves a transient spasm or thickening & narrowing of arteries with the physical deposition of Kapha-Pitta factors leading to acute pain in the chest producing breathing difficulty.
To preserve Ojas(energy) and maintain the heart and vessels in good condition,one should avoid worrying, take diet condusive to heart and channels of circulation and maintain mental poise
(Susrutasamhita-sutrastanam30.13-500BC)

Plastic Surgery of Nose
· Take nose-sized leaf of a tree supported (on the forehead)
· Cut the skin from cheeks to the size of the leaf
· Trace on the leaf the profile of the nose
· Immediately join that skin carefully with the appropriate bandage
(Sushruta-Samhita-Sutrasthanam16.27,28)

Kidney Stone Removal
Then employ the needle on the left side leaving out only a grain of space.

Thankyou Renuka. Yes am aware of Sushrutha Samhita as well as other stuff in Vedic literature related to present day science. However, whatever i have come across in what can be called as 'genetics' is very primitive.

If you know of specifically of human cloning in any hindu literature please let me know of it.

Regards.

PS: just bcoz something is ancient, it does not always have to be right. My guess is that parts of hindu literature allude to what can be called as the homunculus theory - that is why they thot the woman contributed nothing to an embryo. Ofcourse, they were wrong.
 
Last edited:
As a doctor myself i dont find anything so far in our ancient text or any ancient western medical practice as "primitive".
I would prefer to call the practices "Pioneers"
Improvement on ancient practices paved the "advancement" we have today.
We ourselves are improving today for the benefit of mankind tommorow.
Right today might be wrong tommorrow.
Unknown side effects of a medication today might be known tommorow.
We might feel we are "advanced" now but in 100-200 years time people of the future would find us "primitive."
Primitive is only relatively speaking.

I admire the "original thought" of the ancient ones without which advancement in any field today would not be possible.
Most of us are only regurgitating what has been written by others.
 
Dear members,

I humbly request the honourable members to kindly limit the discussion about 'who is brahmanan', in this thread please. Thank you.
 
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?



 
As a doctor myself i dont find anything so far in our ancient text or any ancient western medical practice as "primitive".
I would prefer to call the practices "Pioneers"
Improvement on ancient practices paved the "advancement" we have today.
We ourselves are improving today for the benefit of mankind tommorow.
Right today might be wrong tommorrow.
Unknown side effects of a medication today might be known tommorow.
We might feel we are "advanced" now but in 100-200 years time people of the future would find us "primitive."
Primitive is only relatively speaking.

I admire the "original thought" of the ancient ones without which advancement in any field today would not be possible.
Most of us are only regurgitating what has been written by others.

Dear Renuka,

When i used the word 'primitive' - and more so in the context of whether or not human cloning was present in the ancient times - i was referring to आन्दुवंशिकी or genetics, not to other parts of science stuff in vedic literature.

Am sorry but i wud call pioneering efforts as those that turned out as atleast somewhat accurate in the probabilistic set of trial and error methods of exploration, experimentation, meaning, provable as atleast 'probably right' in a wet lab today..

...does not mean that i wud look down upon what turned out to be "errors" in that trial-error probablisitic set...there is no life, no learning, without errors...

So, people of the Vedic times (to me) were pioneers in surgical practices, herbal medicine, astronomy, dyes, textiles, etc....unless i know of something substantial in genetics, i prefer to reserve my comments on it.

But as of now, based on what i have come across so far, yes, i do think the science of genetics in vedic literature is primitive. Its just a personal point of view...

Regards.

Dear members,

I humbly request the honourable members to kindly limit the discussion about 'who is brahmanan', in this thread please. Thank you.

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

Regards.
 
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?




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:
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:
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…
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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!
 
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:
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.
 
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.
 
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
 
".......... 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:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top