Why South Indian Brahmins are intelligent?

[renuka]

Share:

Facebook Twitter WhatsApp Email Share Link

Ok nice. If they are really so intelligent, can they please opt to see the political posts, and check out my posts in that section? No point patting each others' back here. I have a lot to say and show...actually, there is a lot i want to say to Brahmins and non-tamils. I want to test out the responses.

Neraya pappan...verum summa garvam illa...thala enga kaal enga nu puriyadha alavu garvathla aaduraan. this is very very wrong. their next gen kids will be unbearable for other people. and nowadays those other people are coming up too. they might plan for sweet revenge. pls have your feet on the ground.

Thanks.

Dear cm12,

Can you paste the link to the political thread..I cant seem to find it.

 

[cm124534]

Sir I would like to point out that your language does not uphold right decorum. If you would like to engage in a healthy debate you need to do it in a respectful way

lol why is it always about decorum....nothing functional? verum perumaya mattum kaapathikanum. i want to disrupt, not debate.

 

[sravna]

Sir it is also about being functional. That does not mean decency can be thrown to the winds. What do you want to disrupt Sir?

 

[sravna]

By functional if it be meant something useful in day to day problems, technology has done a terrible job. Indeed it has increased comfort but to a much greater extent it has diminished people's mind. The net effect is it has only amplified the problems faced by mankind. The crux of this problem is our mind itself.

If our mind is functioning properly right science would be pursued and right use of science would be happening too. Mind is the real monster. It has to be set right first and that was the main focus of the ancient Indian knowledge.

Compared to the monstrosity of the mind problem, the technological developments is a dwarf. Please science and technology enthusiasts nothing much to really boast about them and it is worse till when you are trying to pull down our own knowledge. It is truly ludicrous when people do that.

If spirituality is all of space and time, our science is just planet earth and barely 500 years in time.

 

[cm124534]

By functional if it be meant something useful in day to day problems, technology has done a terrible job. Indeed it has increased comfort but to a much greater extent it has diminished people's mind. The net effect is it has only amplified the problems faced by mankind. The crux of this problem is our mind itself.

If our mind is functioning properly right science would be pursued and right use of science would be happening too. Mind is the real monster. It has to be set right first and that was the main focus of the ancient Indian knowledge.

Compared to the monstrosity of the mind problem, the technological developments is a dwarf. Please science and technology enthusiasts nothing much to really boast about them and it is worse till when you are trying to pull down our own knowledge. It is truly ludicrous when people do that.

If spirituality is all of space and time, our science is just planet earth and barely 500 years in time.

vala vala vala vala vala vala...i meant one hundred years of brahmin hate in tamil country. and how it is playing out till today. check out my thread.

 

[renuka]

I am going to do a sort of diversion here but I think some of it may be pertinent in the larger context.

No denying that Brahmins are intelligent especially when it comes to grasping of the big picture. It may be in part to their genes and in part to their training. This big picture thinking is not as valued among others.

Even when it comes to scientists the type of big picture thinking that dominated ancient Indians is missing. It has to do partly with the philosophy of science but philosophy itself is created by people.

Easterners especially the Brahmins of India have given a great wealth of knowledge. The modern knowledge developed largely by the Westerners is borne out if a limited perspective of reality but is what currently rules.

The current direction of knowledge is totally towards the western thinking of reality. The influence of West so deeply entrenched in every aspect of life this seems impossible to change.

But I strongly believe with the beliefs that there is only physical realm, focus on only the tangible and what satisfy the senses happen. The result is practice of utter materialism to the detriment of subtler aspects of life.

But whom are these materialists kidding? Do not love, compassion, fairness and so on have real effects on people? Materialism tries to totally take away those from our experience and makes it hollow. If the above finer values have real effects should we not spend time on them especially because their effects are positive and constructive.

If they have real effects their real existence cannrot be denied. We need to reorient our thinking so that we grant real existence to even the intangibles and unseen.

In the context of the current times it is essential because we now only believe in something that exists. If love or compassion are thought of as real existant energies the current thinking towards them will change.

We will understand that nature has a real place for them and a real and positive role to play in the lives of humans. If instruments cannot measure them we should accept our self does indeed detect and measure them because through its own instrument of mind.

The fact that we are able to feel the love or compassion or other higher values itself indicates that there is something higher in us than the physical body.

The current limited perspective of reality needs to expand. I desperately hope it will. At any rate scientists cannot remain adamant for long as they will be forced to truth by the need to resolve deep contradictions.

Dear Sravna,

Kindly dont get me wrong.
I do understand Brahmins are intellectually inclined.

If we make a comparison with Chinese in my country.
They are very knowledge oriented.
Their Chinese medium schools are known to train students to think at every angle, result based and they are very good at maths.
At the same time they learn their own language and culture.

Many grow up to become succesful bussiness men, accountants and professionals.

Those who are Buddhist never fail to practice their daily prayers and they attend Dharma school on Sundays and also learn Vipasana meditation once a little older.

Then they learn musical instruments especially the piano( out here indians and chinese love their kids to play the piano, i myself play the piano, straight flute and harmonica)

Outwardly all these life style by Chinese is also similar to Brahmins.
Some who are strict Buddhist are vegan, no milk, no yogurt, no onion and garlic.

So my point is..why do you feel intellectual capacity is only the crest jewel of Brahmins as an added advantage?
You are right to say Brahmins are mostly intelligent..but as humans none of us can generalize and be attached to the idea that some by virtue of birth can see the bigger picture and others not so much able to see it or value it?

Isnt this a bit biased? Why this attachment to bodily functions?
Thinking and intellect is but a bodily function.
Analytical perception and intellectually inclined in many aspects is also seen in me( note..i am not bragging)..so how would feel about my intellect?
Would you feel i dont have the capability to " see" the " bigger picture"?

Honestly for me i dont even think there is any bigger picture or smaller picture..the intellect can be a boon and also a bane.

A boon as in it can help analysis and be helpful to society( like all those scientists who made Covid vaccine)..and at the same time the intellect can be a bane where one falls in love with its capabilities and rigid ideas and be totally divorced from gnosis( the art of knowing)

What say you?
I am open to constructive criticism, so you can give me a truly honest answer.

 

[Nemmara Pattar]

My sincere thanks to Srimathi Renuka and to Sri "Savna" for their swift responses.

Have tried to read some past posts for enlightenment.

Srimathi Renuka wrote:-

"(We were talking about) change at an intellect level and at the level of perception."

and

"We have been (wrongly?) calling intelligence as only cerebral intelligence.

"There are many types of intelligence. Intelligence finally is a skill. So skill can range from cerebral to non cerebral intelligence. We make a big blunder by limiting intelligence to the brain and intellect. Our entire body has its specialized intelligence. Cardiac cells, renal cells differ in function yet have their inherent intelligence encoded as bio memory. Even a stone has universal consciousness pervading it."

Once one labels intelligence as a mere skill, one comes up against the situation where additional skills can be acquired, such as a carpenter learning brick-laying, a typist learning automobile repairing, a barber learning how to drive a truck, a policeman learning jewellery-making, a doctor becoming a lawyer, and so on.

Intelligence in humans, on the other hand might well be something innate and unique, perhaps divinely bestowed and not confined "to the brain and intellect" nor to mere "perception". The flashes of inspiration experienced by our rishis (and sometimes even by ourselves) can perhaps be attributed to a "super-intelligence" resident within, and part of the jeevaathma?

Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a motivational theory in psychology comprising a five-tier model of human needs, often depicted as hierarchical levels within a pyramid.

From the bottom of the hierarchy upwards, the needs are: physiological (food, sex and clothing), safety (from predators and vagaries of nature), love and belonging needs (friendship, marriage, family), esteem, and self-actualization (jnyaanam).

As to cardiac and renal cells having intelligence "as bio-memory" and stones having "universal consciousness", these require closer examination.

In between humans and stones, we have trees, plants, grasses. Do occurences of heliotropism and of photosynthesis constitute demonstration of intelligence? Or of bio-memory?

Excuse me for being rather sceptical.

Are we in danger of interpreting sensory perception and instinctive response to injury by spontaneous repair attempts as intelligence, inherent, normal or specialised? Is cell-division within a foetus due to intelligence?

Extending this analogy to trees and plants, do re-growth of damaged bark, re-sprouting of trimmed branches and lawns, emergence of seedlings and saplings from seeds, constitute intelligence in some form? Or even instinct?

Turning now to stones, we know that, depending on the metallic content, stones do change colour. Do chemkical reactions constitute existence of consciousness, universal or specific, much less a type of (non-cerebral?) intelligence?

The sea waves foam, so does soap in my hands and on my body when washing and bathing -- evidence of consciousness, of non-cerebral intelligence?

I shall not go on to discuss and analyse vulcanism; earthquakes; germination of seeds; nest-building; predator-prey relationship; planetary movements; tides and gravitation; thunder and lightning; feminine instincts; joeys and kangaroos/marsupials.

Srimathi Renuka wrote:-

'I said " Change is the only constant", with that understanding there isnt scope for any rigid declaration of any kind.'

Unless I am mistaken, it was the pre-Socrates Greek philospher Heraclitus who said:-

"All things flow, nothing abides. You cannot step into the same river twice, for the waters are continually flowing on. Nothing is permanent except change."

Why, if so, make the declarations that "There are many types of intelligence. Intelligence finally is a skill. So skill can range from cerebral to non cerebral intelligence. We make a big blunder by limiting intelligence to the brain and intellect."?

My sincere thanks again to Srimathi Renuka and to Sri "Savna".

 

[sravna]

Dear Renuka

If you really want an honest answer there is no denying the fact that people are different. I classify them broadly as one inclined towards materialism and the other who are not. We have to accept this.

The honest opinion again is I do not think one is superior to the other. As I said in an earlier post people are different by design in the physical reality so they co-operate and learn from one another because none of us know everything. The final outcome will be a harmonious union of both the fundamental types of thinking.

So it is ok to be different but one is not superior to the other.

 

[Mani_Chennai]

Sir I would like to point out that your language does not uphold right decorum. If you would like to engage in a healthy debate you need to do it in a respectful way

Sorry. Semantics and syntax do not match, but the underlying truth(logically) remains valid. This is not a father- son talk, rather to express what one perceives. Expressing precisely so that every one can understand and are on the same plane is almost impossible. Let the ideas flow, let us take what is good or make sense to re-calibrate our experiences. When you get upset, that means mental maturity is far away. After all, when you insult GOD" do you have yes, did I not pray etc.," He/She never responds back and silently allow the emotion to go down.
There is another way to state, only those can express that uphold right decorum should write here. No more than 5 people will be left.

 

[Mani_Chennai]

Dear Sravna,

Kindly dont get me wrong.
I do understand Brahmins are intellectually inclined.

If we make a comparison with Chinese in my country.
They are very knowledge oriented.
Their Chinese medium schools are known to train students to think at every angle, result based and they are very good at maths.
At the same time they learn their own language and culture.

Many grow up to become succesful bussiness men, accountants and professionals.

Those who are Buddhist never fail to practice their daily prayers and they attend Dharma school on Sundays and also learn Vipasana meditation once a little older.

Then they learn musical instruments especially the piano( out here indians and chinese love their kids to play the piano, i myself play the piano, straight flute and harmonica)

Outwardly all these life style by Chinese is also similar to Brahmins.
Some who are strict Buddhist are vegan, no milk, no yogurt, no onion and garlic.

So my point is..why do you feel intellectual capacity is only the crest jewel of Brahmins as an added advantage?
You are right to say Brahmins are mostly intelligent..but as humans none of us can generalize and be attached to the idea that some by virtue of birth can see the bigger picture and others not so much able to see it or value it?

Isnt this a bit biased? Why this attachment to bodily functions?
Thinking and intellect is but a bodily function.
Analytical perception and intellectually inclined in many aspects is also seen in me( note..i am not bragging)..so how would feel about my intellect?
Would you feel i dont have the capability to " see" the " bigger picture"?

Honestly for me i dont even think there is any bigger picture or smaller picture..the intellect can be a boon and also a bane.

A boon as in it can help analysis and be helpful to society( like all those scientists who made Covid vaccine)..and at the same time the intellect can be a bane where one falls in love with its capabilities and rigid ideas and be totally divorced from gnosis( the art of knowing)

What say you?
I am open to constructive criticism, so you can give me a truly honest answer.

"So my point is..why do you feel intellectual capacity is only the crest jewel of Brahmins as an added advantage?". (1)It is because for the first time, people who vowed poverty, agreed to beg only in five houses (and if they get any thing) to eat, but teach others- real Brahman Dharma is dead. When they begged, they did not say that"we will beg only in 5 Brahman houses". So, due to British and later local goonda rulers, the first step is to find way to survive. Thus, all the intellectual wealth is spent to be financially secure. (2) When our ancestors married their cousins because of their small group in villages (without today's' transport system - I had walked 12 miles once), have now moved away to cities (about 75+%) have to find mates outside the clan. Those who borrowed to make their sons to go to college by borrowing money, had demanded dowry from the girl's parent (to pay of the debts and also money to get their daughters married). I am not suggesting it is right, but my survey of about 200 random Brahman families shared this view. (3) The old generation, clinked to some part of the system – horoscope for marriage but not realized that 'dowry” is not part of our Sastras. A friend of mine's grand mother told me a few years back that “Tattta (her husband) paid Rs 250/- as dowry. So she insisted not to get dowry when she got her 4 sons married. Can we find such people now. Dowry is a social and status history now!. (4). We never had mental medical help for our women. If you read ( I am not sure about the authenticity) Rish's wife were treated nicely excepting Gauthamar badly dealt with Akalya. But, rest treated them as life partner -Arthangini. Do we do it now? Do we get mental counseling to our women? Do we find out why they are stressed out?

(5) When a Brahmin woman becomes widow, now we pounce on her properties but not worry about her or her children ? Historical times, the family took care of them. Due smaller society, they forced widowhood as a GOD given punishment and refused remarriage. Is Sastras says that cruelty be part of Brahmins' life? Anyway, I am just listing all these intricate, slow moving societal changes have entered in typical Brahmins and none of that could be controlled by any one even Shankaracharya, as Hindu religion is not an organized top-down system.

Whether we agree or not, all the complex changes have forced the current generation to gravitate towards materialistic world, since there is no living Brahmin community exits as a typical Brahminical society. True, there are a few families, extremely minority that exists but are not significant to change things. Western studies have shown, to be successful, 3.5% of the total population should participate in meaningful changes. Only three such events in the world had done that and rest have failed.

I am not asking you to agree or disagree, but the answers are complex. This is not an attack on you!

 

[renuka]

Dear Renuka

If you really want an honest answer there is no denying the fact that people are different. I classify them broadly as one inclined towards materialism and the other who are not. We have to accept this.

The honest opinion again is I do not think one is superior to the other. As I said in an earlier post people are different by design in the physical reality so they co-operate and learn from one another because none of us know everything. The final outcome will be a harmonious union of both the fundamental types of thinking.

So it is ok to be different but one is not superior to the other.

Dear Sravna,
If you note my earlier reply, there isnt indication or usage of the word superiority anywhere.

The word which was used was biased and attachment and bodily functions of thinking.

People may differ but they are in constant flux too as with entire existence.

So broad classification is indeed not too accurate.

It might just give us a sense of achievment by thinking some are materialistic and some are spiritually inclined through a receptive intellect.

These classifications of human beings is best not done by us humans because this is where none of us know reality.

Even in the Varna ashrama system any Varna does his Karma and only if the Karma is not done for fruits of action it is rendered pure.

All other forms of wishing for some phala shruti itself is considered materialism.

Materialism isnt just limited to money or status or power, the idea of thinking that some humans are the " seers of the big picture" itself is materialism because one exerts ownership over the prized jewel of his intellect.

The question is always " Who am I?"

So it calls for introspection..if you feel you have the capacity to be spiritual and able to perceive the " bigger picture" , well and good and work on it for that is your Dharma BUT that does not mean all others who share the same Varna as you are similar to you.

You can see that in society where some Brahmins have taken a different life style which is in accordance to their current demands.

I hope you get what I mean..that is anything is individualized and not generalized.

Take an example in India itself,
Dara Shikoh and Aurangzeb were brothers.
Dara was learned and translated upanishads to Persian.
He wrote a master piece called Majmal Bahrain( meeting of the two seas) as a comparison between spiritual dimensions of Islam and Advaita philosophy.

He was the actual heir to the throne as he was older but Aurangzeb beheaded him.

So how do you explain their difference..Dara the saintly and Aurangzeb the ruthless.

 

[Mani_Chennai]

Dear Sravna,
If you note my earlier reply, there isnt indication or usage of the word superiority anywhere.

The word which was used was biased and attachment and bodily functions of thinking.

People may differ but they are in constant flux too as with entire existence.

So broad classification is indeed not too accurate.

It might just give us a sense of achievment by thinking some are materialistic and some are spiritually inclined through a receptive intellect.

These classifications of human beings is best not done by us humans because this is where none of us know reality.

Even in the Varna ashrama system any Varna does his Karma and only if the Karma is not done for fruits of action it is rendered pure.

All other forms of wishing for some phala shruti itself is considered materialism.

Materialism isnt just limited to money or status or power, the idea of thinking that some humans are the " seers of the big picture" itself is materialism because one exerts ownership over the prized jewel of his intellect.

The question is always " Who am I?"

So it calls for introspection..if you feel you have the capacity to be spiritual and able to perceive the " bigger picture" , well and good and work on it for that is your Dharma BUT that does not mean all others who share the same Varna as you are similar to you.

You can see that in society where some Brahmins have taken a different life style which is in accordance to their current demands.

I hope you get what I mean..that is anything is individualized and not generalized.

Take an example in India itself,
Dara Shikoh and Aurangzeb were brothers.
Dara was learned and translated upanishads to Persian.
He wrote a master piece called Majmal Bahrain( meeting of the two seas) as a comparison between spiritual dimensions of Islam and Advaita philosophy.

He was the actual heir to the throne as he was older but Aurangzeb beheaded him.

So how do you explain their difference..Dara the saintly and Aurangzeb the ruthless.

Nice. What you have indicated is the Psychological image of each one is different due to genetic, envornmental, proverty, curelty, strees when was in mother's womb... . So, standard can be established and if done, it is an ideal mathematical model that can not be implemented because without errors in the system, with on error the entire system will die. So, we have a robust system but the perceived error rate may be little bit higher than what we expect.

 

[sravna]

Dear Renuka,

Only in a purely spiritual reality differences don't exist. At the physical reality differences exist at all levels not just at the individual level. A family is similar because one is like his father or mother atleast broadly and generally and this can be extended to a group though in a less tighter way. This can be further extended to even larger groups but it gets less and less tight. It goes on such as difference between species, differences between living and non living beings and so on

This is how it is supposed to be. In the case of differences between humans they exist because we should learn higher principles and truths through cooperation. Learning to cooperate and working together is not easy because of prejudices but we will eventually progress towards that and in the process learn precious truths and gain precious
.

So it is necessary to understand the nature and purpose of physical reality to understand and cope up with differences.

 

[renuka]

Dear Renuka,

Only in a purely spiritual reality differences don't exist. At the physical reality differences exist at all levels not just at the individual level. A family is similar because one is like his father or mother atleast broadly and generally and this can be extended to a group though in a less tighter way. This can be further extended to even larger groups but it gets less and less tight. It goes on such as difference between species, differences between living and non living beings and so on

This is how it is supposed to be. In the case of differences between humans they exist because we should learn higher principles and truths through cooperation. Learning to cooperate and working together is not easy because of prejudices but we will eventually progress towards that and in the process learn precious truths and gain precious
.

So it is necessary to understand the nature and purpose of physical reality to understand and cope up with differences.

Dear Sravna,
I guess the difference here is I just do what I have to do as in job, duty,obligation and focus on myself as in introspect and try to find my flaws and work on them..in this personal space differences in with other individual from my own family or relatives or society doesn't exists.

If all humans work on themselves by looking at the man in the mirror and make the change, the world would cyclically be a better place for you and me and the entire human race, that is how we " heal" the world..by " healing" ourselves.

Perceive not the difference with others,rather perceive the difference your self and Reality.

 

[sravna]

Yes Renuka introspection is a very important part of the process. The real world interactions will help refine that process and make you a better person. But I think pressure and challenges will be there at all levels. We just have to resolve to take up those challenges and make ourselves better and the society a better place.

 

[Mani_Chennai]

Yes Renuka introspection is a very important part of the process. The real world interactions will help refine that process and make you a better person. But I think pressure and challenges will be there at all levels. We just have to resolve to take up those challenges and make ourselves better and the society a better place.

Where is the time for introspection? How will one realize - through arguments? through talking to really honest friends? Studying books ? If one has not that before, how will one start there? What will be the catalyst? Just saying without given various methods to go into introspection is just assumptive in nature. Only a very few go though introspection. If we see the discourse here, most have opinionated and with closed mind. Change is fearful and we have not learned to coop with new situations. So, once age, personal experience, intellectual development, travel, meeting people who think intuitively with inductive reasoning and so on. I have had met only about four such people in my life after traveling throughout India. So, the point is, these discussions are just to start a process which without any one realizing make them to move towards rational thinking. Arguments, who is right etc., a just useless. Solutions are extremely difficult because we do not know all the inter-twined circumstances and one method will not help every one. Old age introspection die with the person involved . Sorry this is not to argue with you, but is the result of my own introspection only.

 

[sravna]

Sorry. Semantics and syntax do not match, but the underlying truth(logically) remains valid. This is not a father- son talk, rather to express what one perceives. Expressing precisely so that every one can understand and are on the same plane is almost impossible. Let the ideas flow, let us take what is good or make sense to re-calibrate our experiences. When you get upset, that means mental maturity is far away. After all, when you insult GOD" do you have yes, did I not pray etc.," He/She never responds back and silently allow the emotion to go down.
There is another way to state, only those can express that uphold right decorum should write here. No more than 5 people will be left.

Sir

Ideas are free to flow but vulgar expressions are not. Kindly reread what that gentleman wrote. I don't understand the need for indecent language if you are able to articulate your points logically. Mental maturity is more in not misusing the freedom of expression than in taking objection to it.

 

[sravna]

Where is the time for introspection? How will one realize - through arguments? through talking to really honest friends? Studying books ? If one has not that before, how will one start there? What will be the catalyst? Just saying without given various methods to go into introspection is just assumptive in nature. Only a very few go though introspection. If we see the discourse here, most have opinionated and with closed mind. Change is fearful and we have not learned to coop with new situations. So, once age, personal experience, intellectual development, travel, meeting people who think intuitively with inductive reasoning and so on. I have had met only about four such people in my life after traveling throughout India. So, the point is, these discussions are just to start a process which without any one realizing make them to move towards rational thinking. Arguments, who is right etc., a just useless. Solutions are extremely difficult because we do not know all the inter-twined circumstances and one method will not help every one. Old age introspection die with the person involved . Sorry this is not to argue with you, but is the result of my own introspection only.

Sir
The problem is indeed complex. People here are just trying to interact and share their sense of what's wrong and what could be done with s problem. They are not blueprints of solutions. But as long as they are trying to be constructive let them engage with their views.

 

[sravna]

Dear Shri Nemmara Pattar,

As westerners have figured out well the ability to survive is a strong hallmark of intelligence. But that yardstick still falls short in my view. It is not only surviving but are you able to sustain your survival? For that coexistence becomes an important requirement.

Now I would like to restrict intelligence to one that has consciousness in the classical meaning of the word consciousness. So essentially I would not include non living beings.

Humans would be rated highest among the intelligent beings as they survive well and have the potential to sustain it. But as I said there is a constraint . They possess a double edged sword which is the mind. If the mind is malfunctioning or not functioning and they are antagonistic towards coexistence they have the potential to obliterate themselves the fastest.

Now what is responsible for intelligence? I would say brain primarily and others support it. But I would prefer to use the word intelligence as a holistic higher level thing that emerges out of the whole system.

 

[Mani_Chennai]

Sir
The problem is indeed complex. People here are just trying to interact and share their sense of what's wrong and what could be done with s problem. They are not blueprints of solutions. But as long as they are trying to be constructive let them engage with their views.

I am more interested learning and not parreting ideas which the writers themselves may not be practicing in their life or only partially. A friend of mine's grand father use to read Sundarakahandam daily, yet he was stealing from his own widowed daughter because he wanted to mentally retire. But he will lecture about the Brahmin ideals. So, I am trying to find a modern Shanakara or Ramanuja and not repeat something they have only heard and not practiced. Anyway, it looks useless to write an inquisitive question here because of the age strata based groups and not a homogenous Brahmin groups. No one said that we should try to remove the subcastes of Brahmin as a first step. It does happen on its own if the boys and girls take the matters on their own hand. No Sankarachariya or any authority can force this, as Hinduism does not have a Brahmin Pope.