-
If asserting one's religious identity for its inherent positive "meaning" and a plethora of wonderfully meaningful practices & rituals, without succumbing to divisive tendencies and needless, harmful discrimination...and if using the knowledge imparted by my (ancient, not more recent) forefathers who practised the system to see(k) meaning in life and learn more about the Self is being casteist, then I confess I am a jaadhi-veri pudichavan and a casteist of the first order.
-
I am not here to claim the superiority of Brahmins (that we are definitely NOT, especially Brahmins of today), neither the superiority of the (non-divisive) practices of Brahminism. I am not here to even try to explain them (ala "Enge Brahmnan"). I don't think I would be misguided/horrendously wrong if I say that a lot of the habits/rituals/customs that Brahmins are supposed to practice, do have a lot of meaning contained in them. I'm talking about habits like - eating, performance of the Sandhyavandanam, meditation and these are, in turn, supposed to lead to a thought process of helping others, intellectual exploration, improving the life & living of the lesser privileged, contributing to nation-building, etc.
-
However, I am intrigued by those who call themselves Brahmins, today. The Brahmin of today no longer is remotely similar to the Brahmin of yore. However, the ideals that Brahmins strived to attain in the earlier days are very relevant even today, as they will be, eternally, like the tenets of Sanatana Dharma. Again, I don't want to go on and rant about those practices.
And I don't even have the authority to explicitly mention how a Brahmin should be today, and how best he can assimmilate his old habits for contemporary existence. But some traits are so distinctly hypocritical and obvious that they have pseudo-ness written all over them. These are not people who have renounced Brahminism totally. I would really respect such people, but this category sends shivers down my spine. These are the people who claim to be Brahmins but live far away from Brahminism, and try to defend their actions as being "in-synch" with the times. Here are a few of my jobless observations -
- Ver'oda Pudungifying the Kadavul - These are the kind of people who frequent the Bay Area Livermore, Chicago Aurora and West Mambalam Satyanarayana temples and do big-big puja's like the Sudarshana Homam, Ganapathi Homam, etc. but don't care to do a simple 10-minute Sandhyavandanam everyday.
- Purappaadu/Ezhala Sevai, etc. - Vakkanaiya veshti kattindu these folks will somandhufy Utsavar on their shoulders and chant the Divya Prabhandam while being part of the Purappaadu. Fast forward 10 hours, and they will also say - "Dei b***u....", "O***i" and other sacred chants.
- Defending Hindutva - There's a large number of this group - staunch supporters of Hindutva who cry hoarse at the Congis for being pseudo-seculars, but hardly practice the art of sacrifice, helping others and nation-building. They don't know what the origins of the RSS are, yet staunchly support the BJP while bashing the RSS for being "communal".
- Inter-Caste Marriages - An interesting sub-group this. Note that I am not supporting or opposing inter-caste marriages here. But such folks have been "Brahmins" all their life and supposedly (claim to) like the culture and tradition and what not......and end up marrying some God-forsaken soul totally not on the lines of Brahminism (It's another story that most Brahmins today themselves are on the other side :P).
- Egg-eatarian - People, please understand. You can live a totally bindass life in the US or India without eating egg or egg-containing products. You have more than your supply of protein in "pure" vegetarian food, if you are willing to take the minute effort that is required. The US has never been more vegetarian-friendly in all its history (though there is some more way to go). The normal intolerable trash is that of not having enough protein intake. Punch those buggers in their face, will you?
- Eating outside - *US alert* There aren't enough vegetarian restaurants yet, agreed. But even a little imagination and thinking should be enough to show how much the vegetarian food that we eat outside is, actually vegetarian. It might be my personal opinion, but eating a piece of bread coated with beef/bacon/sausage is the same as eating proper non-vegetarian food. It's like the difference between spitting at Manmohan Singh and bashing him up with a club and a cricket bat. Ok...bad analogy, but get the point? Again, I am not saying you should not eat at Subway. But after eating there knowing how high the chance of mixing knives/spoons with non-vegetarian food is...don't call yourself a pure vegetarian. Especially when you go on that once-in-two-years trip to India, meet your onnu-vitta-periyamma and tell her, "Cha...naan US'ukku poiyum adhe chamathu payyana dhan irukken...non-veg pakkame poga maatten.\n"
- Thanni - It helps us mingle better machan...just social drinking. Puke in their glasses.
- Smoking - Cinema'la kaatra maadhiri Vaayila Deepavali Atom Bomb vechudanum.
- Vaadhiyaar Mama's - These guys are to Brahmins what Paper Masala Rava Dosai is to Dosai. They are supposed to mean the shlokas they chant and educate us (the lesser Brahmins), and they don't even know the meaning. Yes, this is the kind that blows the 'oodhubathi' with his mouth to turn off the fire. This is the mama who will commit the Sanskrit equivalent of singing "Jalasita ranga" for "Jaladhi taranga" (in case you don't know, in the Jana Gana Mana that is the Indian national anthem). Not to forget their amazing financial abilities.
- Eating
- Smoking/Drinking
- Practising the Sandhyavandanam/Chanting the Gayatri Japam
- Marrying within non-pseudo-Brahmins
Will practising any/all of these habits then help then on the path of righteousness and goodness? Or self-realization or realization of the Supreme. Again, sadly, I cannot reply in the affirmative. But trust me, it goes a long way in improving your mental make-up and thought process. Really.
Sadly, I don't really know many of the duties that female Brahmins are supposed to perform, otherwise I would have happily bashed them too, as much as I did, my brethren. :(
-
So then, since I have talked like an uruppadi m****u myself, am I this proper Brahmin? No. In fact, I have no idea how a proper Brahmin of today should be. But I know enough to know when someone is nowhere close to being even a partial Brahmin. And that is what prompted me to write this post.
-
I know I'm going to be fried by you folks anyway -
If
- I claim not to be a pseudo, then I am this egoistic, self-opinionated, arrogant, pompous prat who thinks what he says (and follows) is true.
- I am a filthy bloody hypocrite.
However, I just hope the characteristics of a Brahmin don't change much more. Like, say, for eg., egg-eaters will slowly come to be accepted as the norm for Brahmins. As mentioned earlier, I hope at least these practices remain strictly (thus, indirectly hoping for the more important identity to remain). Else, I really hope Brahminism is totally wiped out from the earth. No pseudo, no quasi, no proper. Nobody should know that anything called Brahminism existed. Apparently, this won't happen too, I am told. One pseudo-Brahmin once told me that when the world is about to end, i.e., just before the Maha-Pralayam, there will be exactly one Sad-Brahmanan (Sad as in Sanskrit, meaning Good) in the World who will do something, I don't know what.
Thankfully, I am not Him. I cannot imagine being Him. I just wont be able to bear it. I am also a Sad-Brahmanan, albeit of the English kind.
Update: A detailed comment on this topic is posted here.
38 comments :
Post a Comment
wrt ur bullet on drinking: 'indra' consumed large quantities of a drink called 'soma'...it was basically opium!
i am for brahms marrying brahms...mainly coz we are a diminishing community and are discriminated against badly in india...and this is the least we MUST do to hold on to ourselves...
i guess it wouldn't be too wrong an assumption to say that brahmins of 100 yrs back would have felt similar comparing themselves to brahmins of 150 yrs back...
Performing Sandhyavandhanam once a day takes 15 minutes...25 minutes if you don't know the mantras by heart. Leave 3 times a day alone, once a day is "edharshtam".
>> we let all the other castes do all the work and basically didn't have much to do
So horrendously wrong da, I don't know where you got this from. But it's scary to think you have this in mind.
>> material pleasures...
Which is why I didn't touch upon this. This is one of the higher things which is more difficult and unfathomable in today's scenario. However, I think it's ridiculous to compare performing Sandhyavandanam to abstaining from material pleasures.
>> 'indra' consumed large quantities of a drink called 'soma'...
All through the post, I have been referring to ordinary mortals. I did not bring the name of a single God. Indra is a bad enough example to be considered as a "Deva", let alone an example for a Brahmin. The comparison is totally out of place.
>> mainly coz we are a diminishing community and are discriminated against
Again, you miss the point. Just because we are diminishing and are discriminated against, we don't need to multiply or exist. Osama Bin Laden and his folks are supposedly on the decline and we discriminate against him. We must hold on to ourselves if and only if we believe in our system and follow it sincerely, otherwise, we don't need to exist for the sake of existing.
>> brahmins of 100 yrs back would have felt similar...
I don't think so. First, there would have been a lot on their minds (Independence, partition, etc.). But, mainly, the degree of change that has occurred to Brahmins in these past 20-30 years is overwhelmingly huge and much more horrifying compared to any change that occurred to us at any other point of time in our existence.
You say you do not know how a brahmin should live. Neither does any other brahmin in India. The purohits as you pointed out... who technically, MUST be the upholders of Brahminism, eat cake... and demand 500 for a 5 minute Ammavasai Tharpanam. Unfair... cheats... such practices are not written in the rule book. I get the same feeling I get when talking to an auto driver, when I speak with a vaathiyaar.
I have a feeling Brahminism goes beond the rule book. Unless we find and replace significant "Do Not"s into "Minimize" in the rule book, and add a liberal dose of "wantonly", it basically becomes impossible to live a normal life.
The biggest crib that I have though, is that most brahmins adopt copious amounts self righteousness just to cover their numerous flaws. This, as you pointed out is truly pathetic and un-brahminical.
>> 'Brahminism' goes beyond a few habits
That's what I meant when I said "I agree these are totally superficial features and a lot more is important". And yes, for all my opinions on meat-coated-bread, I might be doing the same thing just by eating vegetables/drinking milk here, in the USA. But again, if we had to go so deep, then we might as well totally discard this concept of Brahminism. I repeatedly referred to these practices because I think (again, *my opinion*) following these practices is the bare minimum to call oneself a decent Brahmin.
Brahminism goes beyond the rule book.
Couldn't have been put better. If it was just rules, we'd be no better than the-other-secular-religion-in-India'ists. However, souls like me need to follow the rule book for starters, beyond which, it is how well we choose to understand and correctly interpret the "higher" things.
But my main qualm is with those people who flaunt their self-anointed "righteous" tag wherever they go, and andha nenappula vaazharava. There is no limit to their ignorance and hypocrisy.
I would also say live and let live.
It's pretty awesome living life in a purple haze if you know what I mean ;)
Just my 2 cents.
From what I know, a Brahmin is not only one who does all the things that u have said, but also a person who is
1) Supposed to beg for his food (ok..it is not 'begging' but , I am unable to find a satisfactory replacement word)
2) Who lives by the day/minute and never accumulates anything for himself
3) Pray for the well being of others/nation etc
In this regard, none of the brahmins of today are REALLY brahmins (of course, there are exceptions)
All these were varnas were based on the work that people did, and they do not correspond to any of the jobs being performed today.
Should the caste system exist ? I dont think so, because that is inequality. Somewhere along the line, it got totally corrupted and instead of a work-based division, it became hereditary.(Would God want it this way ?)
Is the caste system formulated thousands of years ago relevant today ? NO IDEA, because none of it correlates with the work we do.
Anyone in the army is a Kshatriya.
Anyone who has a business is a Vaishya right ?
I think we should take steps towards a new caste system.
1) Doctors
2) Engineers / MBAs
3) CA's / Lawyers
4) Arts and Science
We should have an SMS poll to decide which caste is superior.
(I have a hunch we engineers will win hands down.)
http://cowmaaa.blogspot.com/2009/07/pseudo-brahmin-syndrome-comments.html
who the F are you to talk abt realising the Supreme??!! do u think that following some steps makes u closer.. fat chance dumbo
not that I am degrading snadhyavandhanum and the likes but its because of jackasses like you who think that just that is enough. So tell me sir, do you think you are closer to Him cos you preach anti inter caste marriages, pro-veggi and all that? Tell me this.. if you see a poor person on the road, does your heart go out to him? Will you help them.. if someone ask you for food/money will you try to help them or llok away? NOw that will take you closer.. I will tell you this once. Lets say a man, eats NV, drinks sometimes maybe smokes too (all that kills him only) and lets say he doesnt practise anything you said and marry someone who is not a brahmin( throw that in for good measure so that you think he is the skum). But lets say he thinks good, has a pure heart helps people, young and old, poor or rich, hindu or jew, brahmin or a leper filled begger, When he dies he will be more cherished and remembered than you and closer to Him that you will ever be. Realise that. your preachings and all your practises will take you no where if some fundamental good isnt there. Just chanting the Gyatri and refraiing from eating in Subway will not help you. Do His deeds in this world, that wil help you. Sorry for the outburst initially.
Jai Hind. Om Namo Narayana.
I'm sorry if the post was so offensive so as to bring out such a spectacular outburst from you.
Anyway, before I reply, I'd like to know if you went through the last comment (before yours) and my reply to the same, which I had written as a separate post here - http://cowmaaa.blogspot.com/2009/07/pseudo-brahmin-syndrome-comments.html. Please read through it, I know it's quite long. Especially the 4th paragraph of my reply.
Let me know if you still feel the same about my original post, and I will reply to your comment. And if you have anything to say about the comment, feel free to comment, I'd be happy to reply.
and I felt (also in your reply to my post) that you have walked over the main issue and are not addressing it. So tell me? I want to see a post on this. Expressing what you feel clearly. And a response to my questions.
First of all, I have not walked over the main issue because I did not reply to any of your questions at all. I wanted to wait and know if you had read the comment-post which contains some relevant elements to your comment, before replying.
Since you seem to have your questions even after having read my comment, I elaborate.
-
1. *Most Important* The whole post is meant to be a satire ONLY on people who go around flaunting themselves as Brahmins when their habits are quite contradictory to their self-proclaimed righteous beliefs, and NOT on anyone & everyone who doesnt follow what I listed out.
.
2. The post does not claim anywhere that a person who does the Sandhyavandanam or chants the Gayatri Mantra or does not eat at Subway is a *good person*. I say people who dont follow it are *not good-enough Brahmins*. Please read carefully and understand the difference between the two.
.
3. Quoting from my reply to Arvind - "one doesn't have to be a good Brahmin to be a good human being. But one will have to be a good human being to be a good Brahmin". I believe that, even in your understanding, goodness of a human being does definitely include aspects like helping the poor & needy, having a good heart, etc. (all of which, incidentally, I include as more important must-haves to be a good Brahmin).
Quoting my main article again, I lay emphasis on these *lesser* habits because they are supposed to "lead to a thought process of helping others, intellectual exploration, improving the life & living of the lesser privileged, contributing to nation-building, etc.". If someone can do all that without following the habits I mentioned, great, nothing like it.
.
4. Even when I mentioned that these habits lead to goodness, I did not mention that these were the *ONLY* ways to be good or do good.
.
5. "you preach anti inter caste marriages"
It is especially for people like you that I specifically chose to include this - "Note that I am not supporting or opposing inter-caste marriages here."
Nowhere did I denounce inter-caste marriage or preach anti-inter-caste marriage. My statement was specifically wrt people who, while crying out about being a Brahmin and professing their love for its characteristics, marry inter-caste. Of course, marrying within the same caste doesnt make one a good human being, neither does it make one a good Brahmin. But if someone was to say he/she believes in being a Brahmin and all that gas and then marries someone not so, that's what irks me.
.
6. Refer to comment 5 above, addressing Ramana - "I agree these are totally superficial features and a lot more is important". In case you didn't understand, the "lot more" is obviously supposed to imply "doing His deeds" (in your own words).
-
And just so you know, Tejas himself deleted the comment he wrote and rewrote it more elaborately below.
.
Extra - In case you think I have any anti-Brahmin feelings or think Brahmins are superior, NO NO NO.
-
It seems to me that, despite your well-meaning ideals, your impatience to put across the same makes you lose the essence of what you read (esp. in my case). The article, above all, denounced a single attribute - Hypocrisy. It's another matter that there was quite a dose of satire, but if you weren't able to understand the obvious denouncement of hypocrisy, I doubt if you would have been able to infer an ounce of satire in this article.
Sincere suggestions -
(*) Please don't use God's name in the same breath as abuses.
(*) Please don't abuse someone without knowing what they stand for. Abusing, incidentally, isn't a virtue.
I dont really understand as to why you'd even dignify a moron with a response!
i accept Tejaswi in one point , Good quality of any brahmin is he should not think about next day food... he should believe in god..
For your varnas concept,
Dronacharya was a brahmin , best example for an army man...
Ravana was born to vishravas sage , ruler of a country
I dont think so, Brahmin is based on caste , born or work-based ... A brahmin in sanskrit who has the qualities of 'Brahmam' (God)... Well!! qualities of God ?? - No answer to that question .. Even God's qualities differ... Lord Shiva quality is to Show anger to bad people , Lord Vishnu's quality is to approach in a soft way (General opinion) but Narasimhar !!!... Overall hinduism describes the treasure (idle life)... brahminism is the direction to get that treasure ... how much you are deviating, results will be the deviation from the idle life .
interesting.
i agree with this jithendrians thoughts, nice. Thats how it should be dumbo..
Alrite, so Sir again I think taht you have lain more emphasis on quoting from your article saying where you have said what and how I did not understand satire. Though you might have suggested that you have talked only about those people who call themselves 'brahmins' and do... but your article in toto does not convey it. Again, thats not the issue.
Brahmin is not by virtue of being born (I think) its by virtue of character and based on your learning and knowledge of the vedas. You ( I infer you are a brahmin) and most of the other people following this were lucky to be born in a brahmin but are busy pursuing money in US (can see that you are there from other posts). Its not wrong you do what you have to do. BUt while to profess that you are ina higher place because you dont eat at Subway. ( I know you did not explicitly state this).
So tell em SIr, again I am asking you. Your answer to this will tell me more than what you have written. have you ever helped a poor brahmin ever? Have you given food to the needy? Infact do you even feel sad for them and hope and pray that you or someone can alleviate them? Have you helped someone study? I am sure you have the means to do any one of the above. Remember whatever your status there are always people who need and ahve lesser. Have you? That is the mark of a man. a man with divine qualities. A Brahmin.
Jai Hind.
Kaushik please post your income and spending statements here da...though we know its very very personal, 'why' needs to see them right away...
Epdi da enge vandhaalum yenna directly or indirectly asinga paduthi enakku damage vaangi thare? Unmaiyaana nanban da nee. :D
why,
I quoted from my article repeatedly to emphasize and explain what I have written. If I told you something new, you would immediately pounce on me and say that I didn't say it in my post, and that I was deviating from my initial statements. :P
|
"its by virtue of character" - Shabba! Finally you realize that is one of the things I've been saying through the article.
|
"in a higher place because you dont eat at Subway" - As far as vegetarianism is concerned, a vegetarian who doesn't eat outside in places where meat is freely mixed (like Subway, McD's, etc) is definitely superior to a vegetarian who eats in those places. Pleeeezzeee Understand that this statement is STRICTLY wrt Vegetarianism AND vegetarians. I am NOT, here, saying that Vegetarians are superior to Non-vegetarians or that Veggies are better human beings. Not at all. I cannot prove to you if Vegetarianism is superior, because I myself dont know. But I believe in it, and think it makes sense, to some extent, and hence, follow it. That's all. And I also know Brahmins are supposed to be Vegetarians (irrespective of what some people might say that Brahmins also used to eat meat in pre-Historic times) and what little I have read, of the Vedas, corroborates with the same.
|
"So tell em SIr" - why(,) are you like this always? Do you require proof of each and every statement I make or an ideal I profess on my blog? Interesting...
Anyway, if I tell you that I do help the poor & needy and that my heart goes out to each & every person suffering in this world (be it the Somalis or the Tamils in Lanka or the Brahmins in Tamil Nadu or the Hindus in India or the Muslim man who lost his right eye in the Gujarat riots or the young girl who lost both her parents in the Mumbai terrorist attacks in November or the Tibetans or the Uighurs, how can you believe that I am saying the truth? You, in all probability, dont even know me. If you can be so caustic in understanding my words, why would you need to believe in mere words I say?
Nevertheless, let me endeavour to kid myself some more -
Of all the forms of hypocrisy in the world, the Ultimate Hypocrite is one who professes hatred against Hypocrisy, denounces Hypocrisy & Hypocrites, yet, is a classic Hypocrite himself.
I can assure you that I am not that Ultimate Hypocrite.
PS: I'm really curious, how did you chance upon my blog?
Since you are steadily deviating from the topic i.e. brahminism but are continuously harping on morals and are taking a rather emotional standpoint on this issue, let me ask you this. Is not morally superior to be a vegetarian? If you want to feed the poor brahmin ( I wonder why you would not want to feed a poor non brahmin), would you not want to save the neck of a poor chicken from going under the ruthless hash of a knife? If brahmin supremacy resonates with the humane (AND SUPERIOR) quality of staying away from meat, so be it. How can your moral standpoint have two sides to it, one that thinks it is ok to murder animals, and the other that wants to feed poor people?
it may not be a politically correct to say that eating meat is detestable but since why's comments have trespassed the boundaries of parliamentary language way too much, I think I can categorically make this statement.
That's another thing I forgot to mention in my reply - if you noticed in my reply, my heart goes out to anybody in distress, and I am ready to help a person (or an animal, for that matter) irrespective of his caste, creed, nationality, etc., as long as the person is not evil or the help is not bad. If you will look at this earlier post of mine, I have not made one reference to the origins/background of a person needing help, apart from the doubt if the person is good or bad. It is you who mentions about helping a poor Brahmin. Not sure if you wanted me to react on this, just replying in any case, to further cleanse your mind of the scum that I supposedly have taken form as inside.
please dont talk non-sense. no where did I (or anybody) profess about eating meat. pleaseeeee...
I understand the effects of eating meat over a period of time Vs being veggie. and the crulty to animals too...
kaushik,
please tell me how a 'pure veggi' person like you is "superior" to a person who eats in Subway? I really need to know the reason. Will the "non-Subway eating pure veggi" achieve Moksha, attain blissful happiness compared to thei regular veggie tam-bram who also eats in Subway?? Come on...
Basic human virtues first then embracing your cultture will make you a better, happy person closer to God. Just one (particluarly) the latter (saying this is superior(though you did not explicitly mention)) will not take you anywhere. Realise this.
From Kaushik:
I have not said a pure veggie is superior to a subway eating veggie. Just that he is not a perfect brahmin.
From Why:
Common'. Just tell me this. "please tell me how a 'pure veggi' person like you is "superior" to a person who eats in Subway?". blah blah (blah blah = copy paste from his previous comments".
REALIZE THIS.
Quoting you : "Lets say a man, eats NV, drinks sometimes maybe smokes too (all that kills him only) and lets say he doesnt practise anything you said and marry someone who is not a brahmin( throw that in for good measure so that you think he is the skum). But lets say he thinks good, has a pure heart helps people, young and old, poor or rich, hindu or jew, brahmin or a leper filled begger, When he dies he will be more cherished and remembered than you and closer to Him that you will ever be. Realise that"
You needn't 'profess' about eating meat but you have taken a moral stance where you have pitted a meat eating murderer against a vegetarian who doesn't do deeds of charity.
And who is saying anything about eating i "over a period of time". Whether you eat it once or for eternity it is a cruel act.
God knows what the reason for all your spite is.
"how a 'pure veggi' person like you is "superior" to a person who eats in Subway?"
My statement, as mentioned, "is STRICTLY wrt Vegetarianism ". By vegetarian, I mean a person who consciously follows vegetarianism. In that sense, a vegetarian who doesn't eat at Subway is a better vegetarian than one who eats at Subway, simply because he avoids any molecule of meat even accidentally entering his body because of the food cooking-handling practices in these restaurants. I am purely talking of vegetarianism, forget Moksha. Where I bring this wrt my article is that Brahmins are supposed to be conscious vegetarians. Hence, a Brahmin who doesn't eat in NV-restaurants is a more conscious vegetarian than one who eats there. Don't we all know how there is such a high chance of mixing veg/non-veg food in these places?
-
"how all these qualities mentioned helps one acheive The Supreme if basic qualities are not important."
Ridicule me as much as you like, but as long as you read my article out of context, I have no choice but to refute your unjust and meaningless accusations. I am tired of doing this - I have NOT mentioned in my article that basic qualities are not important. It is precisely because the basic qualities are important that I think a person who considers himself a Brahmin must follow these qualities like vegetarianism, doing Sandhyavandanam, etc., with a view at attaining the more Supreme qualities.
The very purpose of all these "trivial" qualities in Brahmin culture was to achieve the higher basic human virtues that you refer to. Again, these are not the only ways to achieve human virtues. But being born a Brahmin, one has, at his/her disposal, these methods to achieve higher virtues. It is more important to be a good human being than a Brahmin. But if you call yourself a Brahmin, you need to behave like one.
"gives you a lot of shit."
From the outset, your writing has been filled with expletives than good, kind words. If you want to convey goodness and importance of virtue, the same can be done using decent language, as opposed to all that you have said. And after having said this, it doesn't make sense to ask one not to take offense.
-
"Anyway, interesting coversations."
The conversations would have been much more interesting and enjoyable if there was much less bitterness and hatred in you, for me/my writing. And that would probably have also helped you convey yourself in a more amenable manner so people could interact with you more directly.
-
Please, please reduce your hatred and spite. The world has enough of it already.
yeah awesome comparison! meat eating do-gooder Vs useless veggie guy!! yup, we know whose the nicest kid on the block. Next...
@kaushik
:) no spite brother.. first reading led to an 'spectacular outburst' but after that dunno just went on. And one more thing.. been reading posts dont think you can say m***u and put * and say its not an expletive.. puhleeez
anyways, peace.
Not sure if this is needed, still...
The "useless veggie-bugger" was a character solely of your creation. Everyone else here (including the "nonsensical" Haritha, Arvind and Anand) has been saying that we need to do good, irrespective of whether we eat meat or not, in case you didn't realize it.
.
"dont think you can say m***u and put * and say its not an expletive"
Again, woefully out of context. My usage was not an abuse directed at anybody, though it was an expletive alright. Your abuses are directed at me or my blog, without you even knowing me, as also the fact that you have made a totally wrong assumption of me/what I am saying.
.
Anyway, as long as you realize that we have, all along, been saying the same thing in different words (being good, doing good), the post and these endless tirades have served their purpose. Condemnation of hypocrisy is the extra I have in my post, which you haven't said, that is all.
.
Om Tat Sat.
**/
Its like saying that a loafer and womaniser, could be pure at heart..
Mr. Why.. Every action has its own reaction.. and every action in this world doesnt happen discretely.. rather, each action is a continuation of another..
So, those who smoke, drink lose their eligibility to be pure at heart.. Just helping others, or feeling for the suffering doesnt mean, one is pure at heart..
Even the most crooked and hardcore killer, would have some kind of pitiness atleast for some persons in his life..
Purity of mind is something which we should follow as life dharma..
Just a womaniser, or a loafer could not say he is respecting women, and just a prostitute could not say she is chaste, a person who involves in lust, flirt, smoke, drink loses his eligibility to claim himself as pure for his life.. The only think he can do is that he can be good for the rest of his life..
So, dont think, that you can have the cake and eat it too..
Ofcourse, a committed and determined brahmin can do sandyavandana.. However, we have to note that, the traiditional large family has broken down, and now became nuclear one.. that everyone has to manage everything themselves.
We have lost the temple centric life, and we have lost the power to design our society as per our customs.. What we have is that we are often slaves to the work we do, and more importantly, the brahmins lost their endowment, and patronage.. Without money, they could not survive in this world, and hence they should always be obsessed with money..
Similarly the farmers on those days was not dependant on money.. They survived with their harvest in the fields..
But see now.. they are the ones who commit suicide the most.. because, of the collapse in agriculture..
WHen everything has become money oriented, we cannot stem the degradation and collapse..
I dont say, we have accept these as fates... Rather, we need to shift our thinking from individual perspective to systemic and macro level..
Let's fight for regaining control over our temples and once we got that, we could have the freedom to refine our mode of worship and the way in which brahmins live..
Thanks for your comments. It is true when you say the breaking down of the large family system has, in more than one sense, contributed to loss/deterioration of Dharma.
-
Again, as you say, the system has become flawed, but it has become so because of some perverted/corrupt individuals (chiefly Brahmins) from yesteryear. But individuals of today have enough resources at their disposal to perform their Dharmic duties, which does not seem to be happening.
-
The saddest thing, which is depressing to think of, is that though the deterioration was started by a few individuals (which eventually crept into all of society), I don't see the reverse happening. How much ever steadfast and committed a few individuals might be today, to their Dharma, I really don't see it being adopted by the masses because there is simply too much division in the world today.
Esp wrt Hinduism, every Tom, Dick and Harry can start a breakaway sect and he/she will always have a sizable following - testimony to this is the abundance of the ISKCON's, the Swami Narayan's, the Mata Amritanandamayi's, etc. Yes, each sect might be doing its bit to preserve Hindu culture & heritage in its own path still, but that doesn't deny the fact that it does create more division in Hindu society. I have interacted with some ISKCONites closely, and I have to say the contempt they have for us Saivaites (Mayaavaadis, in other words) rivals the disgust/contempt the Taliban has for America. It all returns to the same issue - the amount of hatred prevalent in the world today (the comments preceding yours are testimony to that :D). Add to this self-styled individuals who will refuse to believe in anyone, but claim to have their own path to the Almighty, and give weird justifications for their beliefs/actions.
-
However, we can just hope and move on. If there are a few of us who understand, somewhat, and try to follow our Dharmic duties, even to some extent, it will be fine.
-
Dharmo Rakshathi Rakshithah.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agastya#Vathapi_legend
I'm waiting for kaushik's rebuttal.. :D
And oh yea, I'm so dumbwitted, that It me more than a week/10 days to think about this! :D
Read the below article..
http://www.sandeepweb.com/2009/08/04/hindu-fundamentals-are-under-attack-in-a-different-way/
On the same vein albeit on a much larger issue..
Well..You sympathize with your concern..but you know what..Brahmins have historically never been a Homogenous entity with 100% identical practices throughout the country...Your arti is centered on the South Indian bram community..Well guess your moanings are fine there..but What about Bengalis, Chitpavans or even Balinese brahmins..dont forget that Angkor wat(World's largest Hindu temple) is in Cambodia and there were meat munching brahmins there...Cuisine i believe is a result of supply-demand(economic reasons) and nothing else..and all the positive attributes are appendages added later...
Mudhalvan'la Arjun solra maadhiri - Kadaiseela unnaiyum arasiyalvaadhiya aakkittaangale da. :P
I see "Why" seems to have influenced you a bit more than what you'd have asked for, anyway...
>> Your comment is exactly what Anand says in the 1st comment abt Indra. Though I have greater regard for Agastya Muni than Indra and he was a Rishi, I think my answer to Anand is relevant here too. It is not valid to compare our actions to that of a Rishi, even though he may have been a Brahmin.
>> Another point - if you are raising this question to me, it implies you are making a more generic point about Brahmins being Vegetarians. I think you're a vegetarian (as also a Brahmin) because your parents are. I'm not sure if you asked your dad why a Brahmin should be a vegetarian. I am still not sure though it seems quite likely Brahmins in preshistoric times might've eaten non-veg. But, from what I can infer, being a vegetarian kind of seems in synch with what Brahminism is intended to bestow in us (physically, mentally, spiritually). Wrt me, though I started off as a vegetarian because I was a Brahmin, I am now a vegetarian because I consciously believe in it. It so happens that I feel (not sure if right or wrong) this helps me realize the Brahman better. In any case, even if it is now proven that Brahmins of yore were pucca non-vegetarians, I will continue to be a vegetarian. And if someone proves that to call yourself a Brahmin, I have to be a non-vegetarian, then I would, without any hesitation, refrain from calling myself a Brahmin (but definitely practise the other meaningful practices associated with Brahminism).
I sometimes wonder how educated, sensible, rational guys like you and Anand can ask such questions. Of course, we must encourage questions, which is when we can practise/follow with conviction, but these questions, I feel, cannot be used as justifications for us not to follow practices.
Lastly, I am not sure why you use the word "rebuttal". I hope it was in jest. If not, it makes me feel more and more like a joker and an idiot for having patiently tried to answer all "meaningful" doubts/posers posted as comments here (it's a different issue that I might, after all, be a joker and an idiot, in reality).
You are wrong on a lot of assumptions here. "educated, sensible, rational" and a couple of other things. no with a capital N. I might be "educated" in other ways, but definitely not in the brahminism/the hindu religion etc.. To put it in a better words, everything that I know about our religion is half baked/ramanand Sagar version. so, by asking questions/highlighting the exceptions, i was hoping to get some insight/other versions that you are aware of, that I hadnt heard before.
And the reason I bought up this Agasthya Rishi story was that he was one of great sages. The foremost of the saptha rishis and the author of the vedas eating meat and no question had been raised anywhere. And I was wondering if "Ends justify the means".
Also, I just realized, we were talking about the south indian brahmins because I know for a fact a lot of North Indians eat meat and are still brahmins eg bengalis. And I'm pretty sure they are more staunch believers of brahminism than anyone else.
And lastly, I take exception to ur comments (lol). "Why" influencing me? Good GOD!! this is probably the ultimate insult any one could get.
"no with a capital N" apdinu sollittu yenda "no"nu ezhudhine? Seri seri, couldn't help it. :D
I'm not sure if I addressed your query aptly enough. Besides, I too am not much more educated on these issues than you (if I am, in the first case), the very reason for me to attempt such foolhardy things as posting on these controversial topics is for me to encounter people with different perspectives (ranging from known people like you, Anand, Haritha, Tejaswi, etc. to unknown people like why and Senthil. It helps build stronger perspectives, besides encouraging conviction and knowledge.
-
I am quite intrigued by people citing exceptions such as these, conerning people we really cannot relate ourselves to...a different era, different kind of being, etc. Yes, I "preeshiyet" the fact that you are willing to think, still, I really dont know if this was valid, that's all. Again, I might be wrong - for us to learn from, people more relevant might be people like Sir CP Ramaswamy, Vanchinathan, Srinivasa Ramanujan, etc. Their "exceptions" are worth doing, because we can relate to the purpose. I'm just shooting random names that came to my mind, so don't really bother asking me too much on them. :D
-
Yes, I've always been disturbed by Bengali Brahmins eating fish, doesn't fit in well with what we perceive, but I have no idea about it. So I really cant comment on it.
-
And not sure if you know this, but Agastyar is not an undisputed Saptarishi - the Saptarishis that we refer to in our daily Sandhyavandanam are - Atri, Bhrigu, Kutsa, Vasishta, Gautama, Kashyapa and Angirasa. But yes, it'd help if someone could give us an additional perspective on why Agastyar ate meat. From what I know, Agastyar was the only person capable of finishing off Ilvapi and Vaataapi, I dont know if he generally ate non-veg. *Somebody help please*.
-
Lastly, no comments. Didn't mean it as an insult to either of you, incidentally. :D
Post a Comment