<!--QuoteBegin-kartiksri+Dec 14 2006, 08:54 PM-->QUOTE(kartiksri @ Dec 14 2006, 08:54 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Myth 1: You got to know martial arts to be courageous <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Rephrase it. If you know martial arts, you won't be a coward because you know that you can take care of yourself. If you are not a coward, people won't dare to attack you. Simple.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Myth 2: Brahmins, specifically Tam Brams dont know martial arts, therefore they are chicken hearted. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Second part is true to a very large extend. Otherwise, others would not have kicked them out from their home state of TN. Recent incidents show that even today they will be attacked at the places where they were majority that also when people were present there for a puja. What did brahmin do after that? Nothing! They showed they will do nothing to stop it from occuring again. What are their brave counterparts in army and police doing for it? As usual, Nothing!
If the brahmin crowd had few trained young guys who could immediately counter the attack and capture couple of those attackers, the situation would have been totally different. The DK would think twice before attacking brahmins again. What you saw here was that they running like chicken for cover. And there isn't anybody to protect them.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Myth 3: One of my cousin's husband was an Army officer who was kidnapped by terrorists in J&K in lieu of getting some other terrorists in Indian prisons freed. The govt of course didnt relent and the terrorists killed him in captivity. And just if you want to imagine that my cousin's husband was from some martial race, you can imagine whatever to your liking but no sir he was one of your ridiculed Tam Bram. My grandfather ran away from home when he was not even eighteen to join the defence. Since he was not a major and <b>his father wont allow him to go (why?)</b>, he got guardian's signature from one of his school teachers. He joined the lowest ranks and retired after full service as a Squadron leader. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The rigourous physical training that army and police imparts on its recruites is just another form of martial arts training. Why aren't these brave people coming out to defend when their community was attacked, just because they belonged to that community? Did they get de-brahminized? or do they care only about themselves? Why are those type of brave people not getting attacked by DK goondas?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I dont care if Brahmins are martial or not, learn self defence or not, they just got to be courageous and stand up for their principles. And that applies not just to Brahmins but to all communities. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How do you make them courageous? Training in martial arts is one way to do it. A person capable of defending himself becomes more self confident. Nobody said martial arts is the <b>only</b> way(that was your creatiion as in myth 1 & 2), it is one of the steps handle the problem.
Now please tell us other practical methods to achieve this, if there are any.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Brahmins are not made to fight physically, they are adhere to Dharma and encourage Kshatriyas to do their Dharma.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Good point.
But the problem is a good chunk of Brahmanas don't even care about Dharma.
Majority of my own cousins eat beef, drink beer, smoke marijuana and are atheists.
They will give big lectures on secularism.
However the majority of people will still identify them as Brahmanas.
And if a mob acts them, the cowards will run like a hare.
Is a Brahamana clerk in a government office more honest than a non-Brahmana clerk?
No. The scoundrel will still take a bribe.
Did anyone put a gun to his head to take a bribe?
A Brahmana should be 100% honest.
He should not tell a single lie nor steal one penny.
Why is the modern Brahmana not doing that?
What is preventing him from upholding Dharma?
Is he such a greedy pig that he can't even hold on to some basic principles?
If a Brahmana cannot fight on the battlefield he should at least fight for the principles in the Vedas.
Only then he can regain the respect of the population.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I dont understand how such nonsencial illogical stereotyping gets tolerated in this forum and nobody bothers to break such myths.
I dont care if Brahmins are martial or not, learn self defence or not, they just got to be courageous and stand up for their principles. And that applies not just to Brahmins but to all communities.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Very good. I went through your long post. Impressed by what your family has done.
We need more people like you.
On a more serious note, I am looking for a Tam Bram girl for someone I know who is in the military. She should have a staunch faith in Hinduism.
If you know someone send me a personal message.
Thanks.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Hindu Munnani leader hacked to death </b>
Dec, 18, 2006
Agencies | Madurai
<b>A Hindu Munnani leader was hacked to death by unidentified persons at Tenkasi in Tirunelveli district of Tamil Nadu, triggering tension in the communally sensitive town.</b>
According to the police Kumarapandian (38), president of Hindu Munnani Tenkasi unit, was attacked by the gang late last night while he was returning home at Tenkasi, about 90 km from here. He was critically injured and died on the way to a hospital.
<b>Kumarapandian was instrumental in organising several religious functions, including the 'Vinayakar Chathurthi' procession in the town.<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'> He had taken the lead to observe "Hindu Awakening Day" in Tenkasi </span></b>.
Tirunelveli Superintent of Police Senthamarai Kannan visited the site of the crime to conduct an on-the-spot inquiry. A large contingent of police has been deployed in sensitive town. A Special Team had been formed to nab the culprits, police said.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is a conspiracy against Hindu Dharma. Congress under Mrs Sonia Gandhi is promoting communalism, by allowing a free hand to missionnaries and pressing for reservations for Christian Dalits and Muslims in a nation of 850 million Hindus.
<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Dec 18 2006, 11:14 PM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Dec 18 2006, 11:14 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Hindu Munnani leader hacked to death </b>
Dec, 18, 2006
Agencies | Madurai
<b>A Hindu Munnani leader was hacked to death by unidentified persons at Tenkasi in Tirunelveli district of Tamil Nadu, triggering tension in the communally sensitive town.</b>
According to the police Kumarapandian (38), president of Hindu Munnani Tenkasi unit, was attacked by the gang late last night while he was returning home at Tenkasi, about 90 km from here. He was critically injured and died on the way to a hospital.
<b>Kumarapandian was instrumental in organising several religious functions, including the 'Vinayakar Chathurthi' procession in the town.<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'> He had taken the lead to observe "Hindu Awakening Day" in Tenkasi </span></b>.
Tirunelveli Superintent of Police Senthamarai Kannan visited the site of the crime to conduct an on-the-spot inquiry. A large contingent of police has been deployed in sensitive town. A Special Team had been formed to nab the culprits, police said.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[right][snapback]62239[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with your observations. It is an attack on Hindu Dharma launched by christian missionaries supported by anti-Hindu forces within Indian society. Brahmins ae being targeted because they are percieved to be keepers of Hindu Dharma and its sriptures.
<!--QuoteBegin-Sunder+Dec 15 2006, 09:31 AM-->QUOTE(Sunder @ Dec 15 2006, 09:31 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Bharatvarsh+Dec 15 2006, 09:25 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Bharatvarsh @ Dec 15 2006, 09:25 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Brahmins we are talking about the one's classified as Brahmin on their certificates and the one's who are targeted because they are preceived to be Brahmins, we are talking about a socially identifiable group which is not confined to the scriptural defintion for our purposes.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And why exactly are we concerned about a set of people who have a particular term printed on a certificate? What special sympathy do these people demand? What would be the loss if a set of people identified by their certificate cease to be? Is the definition of these particular group based on sources other than scriptures? Is there something more than the people that you are concerned about?
Isn't all these talk only on definitions based on certain books deemed to be scriptures?
[right][snapback]62138[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here is an example of protest against Brahminism... in a different way. All that the so-called "dalits" asked was to see the Lord, and now they started converting because they were denied their birthright to see Jagannatha (The lord of all Jagat and not just of the upper-castes.) Was this alienation the root cause of Anti Brahmnism all over the country today?
Kendrapada (Orissa), Dec 20 (IANS) Hundreds of Dalits in Orissa will embrace Buddhism protesting against the alleged government failure to protect their right of entry into a temple despite a court order, a Dalit leader said Wednesday.
A division bench of the Orissa High Court had on Dec 14 ruled that all Hindus had the right to enter any temple, irrespective of caste.
However, Dalits are unable to enter Jagannath temple at Keradagarh in the coastal district of Kendrapada, Bhajamana Behera, a Dalit leader and former union minister told IANS.
<b>Dalits were earlier allowed to worship the deity through the nine holes on the outer wall of the temple</b>, said Behera, who is also the president of Orissa Mukti Morcha, an organisation fighting for the cause of Dalits.
After the court's direction the administration should have come forward to help Dalits, he said.
<b>However, the local administration will now build an iron grill after closing the holes so that both Dalits and upper caste villagers see the deity from a common platform that would be built.</b>
"It is an insult to all Dalits and violates the court's order," Behera alleged.
"At least 3,000 Dalits of the district will file affidavits before the district collector on Jan 3, 2007 to embrace Buddhism," said Ashok Mallick, president of Republican Youth and Students Front (RPSF).
"I am not aware about the plan of Dalits to embrace Buddhism," District Collector Kashinath Sahoo said.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Here is an example of protest against Brahminism... in a different way. All that the so-called "dalits" asked was to see the Lord, and now they started converting because they were denied their birthright to see Jagannatha (The lord of all Jagat and not just of the upper-castes.) Was this alienation the root cause of Anti Brahmnism all over the country today?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Question is who are not allowing them to enter temple? Are they brahmins or OBC?
Majority of cases OBCs are involved and its more related to class/status.
Anyway after court order, dalit were able to enter temple. Now why these political parties are enetring now. Don't you think its all related to Kanpur incidence. 20-25 Dalit parties are trying to be messiah of every Dalit. Looks like related to power struggle between Dalit Party.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Karnataka 4 months ago.
<b>Idols removed from temples, thrown into the Bhima </b>
The Dalit youths removed the idols from the Margamma Temple, considered the biggest in the village, and installed the portraits of Buddha, Basaveshwara and B.R. Ambedkar at the temple entrance. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Dec 20 2006, 09:36 PM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Dec 20 2006, 09:36 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Question is who are not allowing them to enter temple? Are they brahmins or OBC?
Majority of cases OBCs are involved and its more related to class/status.
Anyway after court order, dalit were able to enter temple. Now why these political parties are enetring now. Don't you think its all related to Kanpur incidence. 20-25 Dalit parties are trying to be messiah of every Dalit. Looks like related to power struggle between Dalit Party.
[right][snapback]62290[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Very true. The reality is that the politicians are deepening the divide. The perception however remains that it is the upper castes (aka Brahmins) who are the oppressors. What will it take to change this perception? In case of Hindus vs non-hindus, the minority is united and the majority is divided. In case of upper castes vs dalits, the majority is united the minority is divided. We are only discussing the symptoms here without addressing the cause of this division. How far-reaching can a solution be without analyzing the cause?
Do the people who want to enter temples want to do so with devotion/love/bhakti in their hearts or to score political statements?
If former, there should be absolutely no issue, I've yet to come across a temple where one's ID is checked. If someone has political agenda, some political party or state legistlature rather than temple should be his destination.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In Chauriberhampur village, on the outskirts of Kendrapada town,
Dalits built their own Shiva temple in April after being denied entry
into the local temple.
They appointed a Brahmin as priest at their temple and allow people
from upper castes to enter and worship.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think this is how Hinduism acts, slowly and over a span of generations. As a community becomes more Hinduized, it builds its own temples, and as its own status rises with respect to other communities, they patronize its temples, and in return, it is allowed to enter their temples.
Hinduism today is having to deal with different kinds of forces:
1. A very intrusive legal code, which forces existing communities to allow everyone into temples, who calls himself a Hindu.
2. A very impatient westernized non-local Hindu population, which seeks to mobilize Hindus without accounting for their differences.
We simply aren't willing to allow the processes to Hinduism to work their logic. They are too slow for our tastes and our idealism.
<!--QuoteBegin-vishwas+Dec 21 2006, 12:44 AM-->QUOTE(vishwas @ Dec 21 2006, 12:44 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In Chauriberhampur village, on the outskirts of Kendrapada town,
Dalits built their own Shiva temple in April after being denied entry
into the local temple.
They appointed a Brahmin as priest at their temple and allow people
from upper castes to enter and worship.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think this is how Hinduism acts, slowly and over a span of generations. As a community becomes more Hinduized, it builds its own temples, and as its own status rises with respect to other communities, they patronize its temples, and in return, it is allowed to enter their temples.
Hinduism today is having to deal with different kinds of forces:
1. A very intrusive legal code, which forces existing communities to allow everyone into temples, who calls himself a Hindu.
2. A very impatient westernized non-local Hindu population, which seeks to mobilize Hindus without accounting for their differences.
We simply aren't willing to allow the processes to Hinduism to work their logic. They are too slow for our tastes and our idealism.
[right][snapback]62299[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Who is a Hindu is a very difficult question to answer more so than who is a Christian or a Muslim. But even without any set rules (unlike in Islam where you have to offer namaz five times a day), Hindus are very religious. A day at Tirupati, Sabari Mala or Vaishno Devi will easily prove the point. In Hindu temples there is aarti twice a day, daily and everyday there is some attendance.
Who is a Hindu. Philosophically speaking they are those who
1. Belive in the Vedas
2. Believe in birth-rebirth cycle
3. Believe the ultimate aim is moksha by getting out of this birth-rebirth cycle
The way to moksha are many and Hinduism is very inclusive to a variety of ways. As they say the end or truth is one, the ways to reach are many - Ekam sat vipra bahuda vadanti. So you can go to temples or you can stay at home or in forest or go to work, if you realise the Self, as mentioned in Gita or Upanishads, you then have realised the Ultimate. So its not necessary or particular to go to temples. Though going to temples is a strong way of being religious, which is something within the grasp of the masses. I myself am struggling to understand and realise this Self, so bcos I can say all the above things doesn't make me a gyani. So I'm not trying to sermonise, I'm also thinking and strugling like most people. I'm not able to let go my ego. I think I am part of the mass. When I do my work or anything else, I'm not able to shake of my ego. Going to temple makes me think on the spiritual side.
So basically in Hindusim each person will have his own way of reaching towards moksha and each will be in various stages of it. Some may not even know about things like moksha, they are just born Hindu, some try to understand Hinduism thru stories in Mahabharata, Ramayana and the Puranas, some try to delve deeper on a more conceptual basis and discover terms like moksha, Vedanta, Advaita etc and ideas therein, some go further and understand the wisdom behind it, others practice it. As they say some real gyanis just understand on basis of one word, others require to read all the commentaries to understand it, still others dont even grasp that there is something to be understood. But what is common in Hindu religion is that we let each person reach It in his or her own way, while giving the broad guidleines, which is not what is there in Islam and Christianity which say there is one way and one way only and it is their way.
Most of us look at Hinduism like the proverbial story of blind men understanding the elephant. The danger in todays times is the moral fibre of the nation is getting destroyed. Anti-Brahminism is only a facet of this. Our politicians are the first and foremost people who don't have any idea about Hinduism, whether they are right wingers or others. Such people are making policies to that is shaping India today while what they are doing is destroying our moral fibre. What all of them require presently is an introduction to Upanishads.
Are the Brahmanas of today truly Brahmanas. We have to understand that the society has to be guided forward by us. Most of us including myself are only born Brahmanas, maybe we can do Sandhyavandanam, change our thread once an year but thats it. What we require today is the likes of a Shankaracharya or Vivekananda or Buddha a morally great figure to shape the society and reguide us, rejuvenate us. Are people going to temples only out of ritualistic belief or to pass in an exam or to get a job or to get something or the other or is there a higher end. Somebody who can make us realise there is a higher end and guide us towards it.
12-22-2006, 10:06 AM (This post was last modified: 12-24-2006, 08:54 AM by Bodhi.)
I have been following this discussion, with interest. We have dwelt into the plight of Brahmins in general, and Tamil Brahmins in particular, and seen suggestions about what are the ways out. Some have suggested their plight is due to their being meek, cowardly etc, and need physical training or martial arts for self-defense. Some have shared their thoughts about what is Brahmanism and who is a Brahmin.
If we just say, as some have on the thread, that Brahmin is a community as the modern India "officially" identifies, and thatâs about it, then I would say it would be very mechanical and very artificial definition, even shallow. If thatâs the case, then Brahmins are just one of the several communities which are being persecuted for what they are.
No, I think the definition of a 'Brahman' that deserves protection, should be much stricter, because the whole context and significance of impact on larger Hindu soceity is much deeper.
So, who is a Brahmin?
One who was born to the parents who were thought to be Brahmins, who in turn were born to their parents who thought of themselves as Brahmins? Practically, in todayâs sociological terms, yes. But that is a very shallow definition, because it number one, closes its doors to those who were born to non-brahmin parents but display the traits of a Brahmin. And number two, the opposite of it, it brands those as Brahmins, who have no single sign of being a Brahmin.
So, who then, is supposed to be, or let us say intended to be a Brahmin (or Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra)?
Bhagwan Sri Krishna explains this, in no ambiguous terms.
[Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya or Sudra - these are the divisions of Karmas, and are effected by or resulted from one's basic tendencies (swabhAv) and qualities (guNaih)]
And he goes on to explain, what are the karma and dharma of a person to be called a Brahmin (and later those of Kshatriya, Vaishya, and Shudra).
Samo damastapaH Saucham ChhantirArjvamev ca
gyAnam vigyAnamastikyam bramhakarma swabhAvajam (BG 18.42)
[he is committed to realizing his inner existance, controlling his senses, bears pains for sustaining Dharma, is clean from inside and out, is compassionate in forgiving others, is dedicated to the learning of Ghyan and Vigyan, and "Bramha Karma" is whose basic nature]
Let us add one more important attribute. nIti says that these 3 hathas (insistence) that are famous of all - Raj Hath, Baal Hath and Bramha Hath, and the Bramha-Hath (The insistance of Brahmin) is the toughest of all. Recall Chanakya. A Brahmin can give his life but will stick to his goal, which is his Dharma. Else he is not a Brahmin.
Below words of Swami Vivekananda explain true Brahmins in very clear terms. Below is from his writing "Mere Gurudev" or "My Master".
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The life of a really orthodox Brahmin is one of continuous renunciation. Very few things can he do; ... You may imagine how rigorous that life becomes. You have heard of the Brahmins and their priestcraft many times, but very few of you have ever stopped to ask what makes this wonderful band of men the rulers of their fellows.
They are the poorest of all the classes in the country; and the secret of their power lies in their renunciation. They never covet wealth. Theirs is the poorest priesthood in the world, and therefore the most powerful. Even in this poverty, a Brahmin's wife will never allow a poor man to pass through the village without giving him something to eat. That is considered the highest duty of the mother in India; and because she is the mother it is her duty to be served last; she must see that everyone is served before her turn comes. That is why the mother is regarded as God in India. This particular woman, the mother of our subject, was the very type of a Hindu mother.
The higher the caste, the greater the restrictions. The lowest caste people can eat and drink anything they like. But as men rise in the social scale, more and more restrictions come; and when they reach the highest caste, the Brahmin, the hereditary priesthood of India, their lives, as I have said, are very much circumscribed. Compared to Western manners, their lives are of continuous asceticism.
Their lives are laid down in our old books in every little detail, and the least detail is grasped with almost adamantine firmness by them. They would starve rather than eat a meal cooked by the hands of a man not belonging to their own small section of caste. But withal, they have intensity and tremendous earnestness. That force of intense faith and religious life occurs often among the orthodox Hindus, because their very orthodoxy comes from a tremendous conviction that it is right.
We may not all think that what they hold on to with such perseverance is right; but to them it is. Now, it is written in our books that a man should always be charitable even to the extreme. If a man starves himself to death to help another man, to save that man's life, it is all right; it is even held that a man ought to do that. And it is expected of a Brahmin to carry this idea out to the very extreme.
Those who are acquainted with the literature of India will remember a beautiful old story about this extreme charity, how a whole family, as related in the Mahâbhârata, starved themselves to death and gave their last meal to a beggar. This is not an exaggeration, for such things still happen.
The character of the father and the mother of my Master was very much like that. Very poor they were, and yet many a time the mother would starve herself a whole day to help a poor man.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So what is it that has happened? Where are those Brahmins? Most of those who call themselves Brahmins today, in my personal opinion are not even the shadow of the idea that we called a "Brahmin". Many that are supposed to be Brahmins, that I come across, have no qualms about eating meat, even beef, drinking, no sense of greatness their lineage is supposed to have carried, and no attitude for self-realization. Others do the same too, but then Brahmin is not allowed by his Dharma to fall to that! Although it may just be me who finds such observations, and I would not generalize, but for such cases at least, why should one stop to care for such so-called un-real name-sake Brahmins? Can one be unjustified if the respect that is privileged to a Brahmin is not present anymore?
Maharshi Dayanand (who was not born a "Brahmin" in that sense of definition), attaches the fall of our soceity to two things - the fall of Brahmin, and curse of the Sudra, and both are interrelated. If Sudra suffered, even if it was not because of the Brahmin, it was Brahmin's responsibility to uplift him, like a mother does her befallen child, he said. But Brahmin himself fell. In character, in quest, in compassion, in his perseverance to preserve Dharma.
So what is the cause of the present sorry state of Brahmins? I feel, it is their lack of sense of Dharma. Brahmins can reclaim their place and respect, as soon as they regain their Dharma. And they would not really need to learn martial arts to defend themselves.
[It is better to follow one's own Dharma (decided by ones nature) even if it (apparently) lacks qualities, rather than taking up (apparently) better Dharma suitable to someone else; since if one performs the Karmas according to his own natural Dharma, one would not get into Kilvisham (roughly=sins). Therefore, O Arjun, one must never let go of, one's natural Karma, even if it appears faulty. In all the beginnings, nothing is free from faults - Is not even fire itself (whose Dharma is to purify) surrounded by the smoke (in beginning)?]
And this very beutiful pearl we find in Manu Smriti - "Dharmo Rakshati, RakshitaH". Your Dharma will come to your protection, if you have protected your Dharma. (Next line says, 'your dead Dharma itself will also come to kill you, if you have allowed it to die")
That is what I feel.
[right][snapback]62335[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Very true, your post puts the things in right perspective, at least I think so.
My teacher from whom learnt some basic stuff of Indian philosophy told me that the logic of having these classes of Brahmana, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra by birth is so that its easier for people to determine what Dharma they have to follow rather than having confusion and following none. And as per our logic our present birth is determined by the karmas of our past births. So if a person is born in a Brahmana household he would have done the karmas required for that and hence he would be suitable for a Brahmana family. But how do we deal with present day contradictions in the same. Lets say somebody is born in a Brahmana family, but which is Brahmana only in name, but as far as its habits are concerned is totally un-Brahmana. Frankly being brought up with an education based on Western rational thinking I find myself struggling to believe this.
I think we will have to go back to the spirit of these distinctions, go back to our own roots. A Shudra who displays qualities of a Brahmana is actually a Brahmana. Problem today is we are looking at this Brahmana-Dalit or upper caste- lower caste definitions in sociological terms which is inherited from West. Actually in todays times the proportion of the real Brahmanas in society would be very less for so few off us really believe in sacrifice and austerity. Thats why I feel we require a few morally great personalites who can have a big say on our spiritual landscape as Gandhi had on the political landscape in the last century.
The real Brahmanas have to come forward and guide the society ahead. They will have to combine spirituality with the modern ethos.
Bodhiji, great post and a wonderful perspective. The society will have to provide protection to brahmins and OTOH brahmins will have to make themselves worthy of being protected.
---
Another thing that probably needs a little clarification are the 2 concepts
<!--QuoteBegin-rajesh_g+Dec 22 2006, 11:05 PM-->QUOTE(rajesh_g @ Dec 22 2006, 11:05 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Bodhiji, great post and a wonderful perspective. The society will have to provide protection to brahmins and OTOH brahmins will have to make themselves worthy of being protected.
---
Another thing that probably needs a little clarification are the 2 concepts
1. anti (brahminism)
2. (anti-brahmin) ism.
[right][snapback]62346[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Seems like Brahminic Algebra <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->. Can't make out the difference.
Not sure if you are familiar with the humanities types in the US but the assumption here is that a brahmin follows a 'religion' called brahminism. So #1 is an ideology that is anti (brahminism) ideology. Then there are others who are just plain opposite brahmins as a community which is #2 -> the ideology that is anti-brahmins. For the two items to be the same we will have to accept the claim that brahmins follow and propagate a religion called brahminism.
12-23-2006, 08:13 PM (This post was last modified: 12-23-2006, 08:40 PM by Bodhi.)
<!--QuoteBegin-rajesh_g+Dec 22 2006, 01:35 PM-->QUOTE(rajesh_g @ Dec 22 2006, 01:35 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Bodhiji, great post and a wonderful perspective. The society will have to provide protection to brahmins and OTOH brahmins will have to make themselves worthy of being protected.
[right][snapback]62346[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dhanyawad Rajeshji. Here is one saddening example.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Mumbai, Dec 18: Day three of the first Test match between India and South Africa had many high points but the one that attracted instant and widespread attention was Ravi Shastri's act of tasting beef during the lunch break.
Shastri ate beef live on TV saying, "Sorry dad, <span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>I know I am a Brahmin. But I am going to dig into this." So saying, Shastri ate the Biltong (dried beef).</span>
What you eat remains your business only till you keep it your business. Was it so needed to show it off with such comment "in your face" on internationally telecasted TV?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What you eat remains your business only till you keep it your business. Was it so needed to show it off with such comment "in your face" on internationally telecasted TV? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well if you to want to be certified as progressive then you have to, haven't you heard of Mani Shankar Aiyar's rantings in a public speech about him eating beef despite being a Brahmin, that proved his secularism and progressiveness.
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->. Can't make out the difference.