Are We Jealous of Brahmins??
Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam
>
> The intensity of everyone's tirade against the Brahmin community
>(not caste) is appalling. The "Brahmin haters" seem to want to finish of
>the community, for mistakes commited by the ancestors.
> For arguments sake, let us assume that the present generation of
>brahmins should be held responsible for their ancestors faults.
> But will changing their last name or asking them not to wear their
>thread, in any way make up for what has hapened in the past.
> No, it's going to make no difference, because no one cares a damn.
>Even if we care, no one can force a brahmin to stop being a brahmin.
>
>comments welcome.
>
>chitti
I agree, especially in Tamil Nadu, where brahmin bashing is so fashionable and is the norm, thanks to the Dravidian parties. The funny thing is the Dravidian
parties and other Brahmin haters in TN are so deafiningly silent when it comes
to the caste system practised by Christians or Muslims.
In fact the place where I come from, in Tiruchy, the Christian graveyard has a
wall separating the burial area of the upper caste and the lower caste communities
, and note the upper caste communities are not-brahmin converts either. Tiruchy
is also a hot bed of the DK party activities, and the party members who often
exhibit their chivalry by either cutting off the threads or the tufts of the
brahmins don't even mention this graveyard disgrace practised by the Christian
communities in the town. Also there are quite a few villages around Tiruchy
with significant Christian population, where casteism is well and alive, with
separate streets for Harijans etc. But no DK/DMK/ADMK member dare talk about it.
All I hear in Tamil Nadu, is that Brahmins alone are responsible for the
practice of casteism in the state, whereas my experience has been that significant
number of other communities in the state do the same. To me holding Brahmins
alone responsible for the caste system in TN, and fanning hatred towards them,
is just a good sign of somebody being absolutely dishonest about caste system.
daniel
--
Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam Phone: (609) 386-5995
Matsushita Applied Research Labs. Fax : (609) 386-4999
95D Conneticut Drive e-mail: dan...@marl.panasonic.com
Burlington, NJ 08016
S. Sankarapandi
In article <CA7u5...@ptimtc.tadw.panasonic.com> dan...@marl12.marl.panasonic.
com (Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam) writes:
>
> In fact the place where I come from, in Tiruchy, the Christian graveyard has
a
>wall separating the burial area of the upper caste and the lower caste communi
ties
>, and note the upper caste communities are not-brahmin converts either. Tiruc
hy
>is also a hot bed of the DK party activities, and the party members who often
>exhibit their chivalry by either cutting off the threads or the tufts of the
>brahmins don't even mention this graveyard disgrace practised by the Christian
>communities in the town. Also there are quite a few villages around Tiruchy
> with significant Christian population, where casteism is well and alive, with
>separate streets for Harijans etc. But no DK/DMK/ADMK member dare talk about
it.
>
>All I hear in Tamil Nadu, is that Brahmins alone are responsible for the
>practice of casteism in the state, whereas my experience has been that signifi
cant
>number of other communities in the state do the same. To me holding Brahmins
>alone responsible for the caste system in TN, and fanning hatred towards them,
>is just a good sign of somebody being absolutely dishonest about caste system.
Vere true !
Sudalai Madan mentioned about this in his series of postings about TN castes.
The people who converted to Christianity during the British took the caste
labels with them. Though the lower castes went to Christianity to gain dignity
whereas the Vellala community converts went to Christianity to capture a new
religious power without Brahmin superiority. These vellala communities
occupied the key postions like bishop, aayar, peraayar etc and started
controlling Christian organizations. Even now, Christian Pillai occupy many
of these positions and they have been openly biased against the lower caste
christians (during the british rule, they had to make a show that all are
equal). The lower caste christians also started believing in their own caste
and the caste system and hierarchy in christianity is the same as Hindu
religion. The marry across religion to find out the partners of the same caste
but they never marry a different caste person within christianity.
A few years back (1988-89), there was a big rally held by Dalit christians
asking for reservations analogous to their Hindu counter parts. The upper
caste christians wanted to silence them but there were serious discussions
about "caste first; Jesus next" etc.
In the villages also, caste is more important than chrsitianity. We lived in
one village called Kailasa puram in Nellai Dt. Majority of the village was
christian but all of them were of same caste. The village barber was not
allowed to cut hair for any other caste. So we had to walk four miles to
another village or go to Tuticorin travelling in a train. Once the
neighboring village barber was seriously ill and we (my father and four
brothers) could not afford to go to Tuticorin for a hair-cut. My father did
the hair-cut for me and it turned out very funny. Since he did not want other
people to know about it and laugh at us, he beated me up to make me stay at
home. (Does it look funny...May be we can write books on the contrast in the
life-styles of the villages and urban-sides).
Regarding the castes in Muslim communities one should read Poet Inquilab's
(Inquilaab was born in a Muslim family and later was ex-communicated for
criticizing the Muslim society) books like `yukaakkini' `thuppakkikaL
poovaaLikaL' etc. One can feel that how the rich Muslims use caste as a
weapon to discriminate the lower caste Muslims and women.
As Mr.Daniel mentioned, DK-DMK (ADMK is a joke !) were always using caste
and language as a political weapon (excepting Periyar) and they only served
(have been serving) the interests of the non-brahmin upper and middle castes.
All their idea of separate Tamil Nadu etc were all just to establish the
vellala rule as opposed to the pseudo-Indian nationalism of the Brahministic
parties like Congress, BJP etc.
S. Sankarapandi
Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam
>
> [Stuff deleted ]
>
> As Mr.Daniel mentioned, DK-DMK (ADMK is a joke !) were always using caste
>and language as a political weapon (excepting Periyar) and they only served
>(have been serving) the interests of the non-brahmin upper and middle castes.
>All their idea of separate Tamil Nadu etc were all just to establish the
>vellala rule as opposed to the pseudo-Indian nationalism of the Brahministic
>parties like Congress, BJP etc.
>
>
>S. Sankarapandi
I agree with you here on the motives of Dravidian parties, but I don't absolve
Mr.Periyar though of his wrongdoings.
He has been the primary architect of
the brahmin hate mongering tactics in TN. His oft quoted words,
"If you see a Brahmin and a snake, hit the Brahmin", has been the war cry
of all the Dravidian parties in the state. I don't personally know for a fact
that Mr. Periyar uttered these words, but has been quoted widely by all his
followers. I don't understand how Mr. Periyar didn't get so upset with the
rest of the upper and middle class communities in TN who have been also very
violent towards the lower caste communities, in addition to discriminating
them. His impact on the caste practices of TN, as time has proved has not been
very significant either. Casteism is well, alive and kicking in TN, with
the forward and middle class communities of all relgion practising in all its
ancient glory.
More than that, Mr. Periyar's atheist philosophies were just mere anti-Hindu
literature. He used to mock the religous practices of the Hindus and that of
Brahmin practices in particular, being irrational and primitive at regular
intervals, but dare not say anything about the religous practices
of either the Christians or the Muslims in the state. He and his followers
often retorted to antics like garlanding the statue of Hindu gods with
footwears, plainly to just offend the Hindus. I wonder what would have
happened if the DK brigade had ventured out to break the segregating wall
in the Christian cemetry at Tiruchy, or tried garlanding with footwear either
Jesus Christ or any Islamic icon.
SRINIVASAN,K
>>
>> As Mr.Daniel mentioned, DK-DMK (ADMK is a joke !) were always using caste
>>and language as a political weapon (excepting Periyar) and they only served
>>(have been serving) the interests of the non-brahmin upper and middle castes.
>>All their idea of separate Tamil Nadu etc were all just to establish the
>>vellala rule as opposed to the pseudo-Indian nationalism of the Brahministic
>>parties like Congress, BJP etc.
>>
>>S. Sankarapandi
I wonder when Brahmins were of any significance in the Congress
party after independence in Tamil Nadu. Wasn't Congress again
a veLLALA dominated party? (IMO, the only difference was
Congress was dominated by already rich veLLALAs (with the exception
of Kamaraj) while the other parties were dominated by aspiring
to be rich veLLALAs.
--
SRINIVASAN,K
School of Textile Engineering Georgia Tech.
uucp: ...!{allegra,amd,hplabs,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!prism!gt4084c
ARPA: gt4...@prism.gatech.edu
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
>In article <224is7$4...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (S. Sankarapandi) writes:
>>
>> [Stuff deleted ]
>>
>> As Mr.Daniel mentioned, DK-DMK (ADMK is a joke !) were always using caste
>>and language as a political weapon (excepting Periyar) and they only served
>>(have been serving) the interests of the non-brahmin upper and middle castes.
>>All their idea of separate Tamil Nadu etc were all just to establish the
>>vellala rule as opposed to the pseudo-Indian nationalism of the Brahministic
>>parties like Congress, BJP etc.
>>
>>
>>S. Sankarapandi
>I agree with you here on the motives of Dravidian parties, but I don't absolve
>Mr.Periyar though of his wrongdoings.
You can now say anything from here. Everything
has two sides. While the DMK/DK leaders other than
periyaar have made use of thamizh for power
just like the Congress/BJP psedo nationalistic,
hindi-chest beating attitude.
Also please note if you really look
at the history. thamizh was almost wiped
out of TN. People, a generation ago wear
learning Urdu, Telugu, Sanskrit.
Some zealots even invented a synthetic
language called maNipravaLam. They
had devious attitudes against
a live tongue and culture. [Our
house paththiram in kaangEyam is
written in maNipravaLa. I
cannot figure a single thing
out of it]
DMK did make thamizh a language of
common man. Very few thamizhs can
disagree. Rajaji, a personal friend [political
foe] of periyaar
and proponent of Hindi as a common
Indian language did regret for his stand
later in life. Periyaar did not beat
his chest for thamizh. He stood only
only for self respect and stood against
only
the slavery attitude of his people.
The mooda nambikkai, aasaarams,
sadangkukaL in Indian culture is
deep rooted in vEdic Brahmanism.
The veLLala christian we talked
about earlier [rather ssp] adopted
brahmanism in Christianity.
Brahmanism was not just practised
by Brahmins. Although
introduced by vEdic Brahmins into
thamizh land it was favored by the
ruling class which in thamizh land
were veLLaalars. Even thamizh
kings married veLLaalars if you look
into history.
The shift of power from veLLaalars
to Brahmins went only during British
rule. Brahmins got English education,
worked for the British, went higher
up in Bureacracy [In fact British
learnt about hierarchy/divisions in Indian society
very well ]. The veLLaalars
desperately needing power, education
converted into Christianity but did
not adopt Christian values of equality.
PLEASE DO NOTE THAT CHRISTIANITY OR ISLAM
DOES NOT TALK CASTE CRAP LIKE BRAHMANISM.
Periyaar did not go into temples [Please
know that sir] to garland chapals.
He wanted to show the Hindu people
that by garlanding with chappals
nothing is going to happen to your
life as the Brahmin priest frightens.
The idols were not taken from temples
[Please note] No temple in TN
was tampered for his campaign. They brought
their own idols. He wanted to drive the
fear of stupidity and false belief
amoung the enslaved indian masses.
periyaar fought the pan indian religion,
Brahmanism and not Brahmins. The Brahmin media
tried its best to tarnish his image.
Do know that he is only a few people
in the world who identified the problem
and fought selflessly.
>"If you see a Brahmin and a snake, hit the Brahmin", has been the war cry
>of all the Dravidian parties in the state. I don't personally know for a fact
>that Mr. Periyar uttered these words, but has been quoted widely by all his
>followers. I don't understand how Mr. Periyar didn't get so upset with the
>rest of the upper and middle class communities in TN who have been also very
>violent towards the lower caste communities, in addition to discriminating
>them. His impact on the caste practices of TN, as time has proved has not been
Later when some DMK people and many others did not follow
his principles and were after money he did not
like that. He openly cticized his men. He did
not spare DMK. His party DK openly supported
kaamaraaj-the congressman.
>very significant either. Casteism is well, alive and kicking in TN, with
>the forward and middle class communities of all relgion practising in all its
>ancient glory.
As I said Brahmanism is practiced by everybody
and that has to be clearly distinguished from
Christianity and Islam that have their own`
problems different from the caste system of
MANU notoriety.
>More than that, Mr. Periyar's atheist philosophies were just mere anti-Hindu
>literature. He used to mock the religous practices of the Hindus and that of
>Brahmin practices in particular, being irrational and primitive at regular
>intervals, but dare not say anything about the religous practices
>of either the Christians or the Muslims in the state. He and his followers
> often retorted to antics like garlanding the statue of Hindu gods with
>footwears, plainly to just offend the Hindus. I wonder what would have
>happened if the DK brigade had ventured out to break the segregating wall
>in the Christian cemetry at Tiruchy, or tried garlanding with footwear either
>Jesus Christ or any Islamic icon.
No releveance to periyaar at all.
Please do not accuse noble people.
>daniel
I only wish you were better informed about
periyaar and his selfless service to his
people.
Somebody does not become a periyaar follower
by showing his picture, wearing black, or
speaking adukku mozhi
Lastly, even DMK is not all bad as you are
saying. As far as corruption
and dishonesty and gaining power
they might equal congress.
But they do not destroy temples,
mosques and churches.
They have members from all religions.
DMK is SECULAR unlike BJP/RSS/SS?HINDU
munnani. Congress and Brahmanism
go hand in hand. They unlawfully
dismiss dravidian govts when they do
not like them. remeber that the governor
was against dismissal of DMK govt in
'89, but Congress was hell bent so changed
the governor and dismissed the govt.
The Brahmin lobby that was behind
dismissing duly elected DMK is nowhere
close to dismissing Jaya beacsue she
serves her interests. Jaya has very bad
record of corruption amounting to 100's
of crores from Jeya publication. According
to the law you cannot be an owner of
something like that when you are in office.
The state govt contarcts were given to JP
and they found that.
Caste is very alive. The Brahmins
try their best to hold on to from
the center. In DMK if elected to
power and have positions it is
the higher caste hindoos who
will dominate.
As I have said and poinetd look
at our history and language and do realize
that they made thamizh a common man language.
anban
kathir
Meenan Vishnu
>I agree with you here on the motives of Dravidian parties, but I don't absolve
>Mr.Periyar though of his wrongdoings.
>
>He has been the primary architect of
>the brahmin hate mongering tactics in TN.
You may interpret his acts as "hate mongering" but I do not. During
his time almost every learned person knew there was something wrong in
India -- an ancient civilization paralyzed and occupied by foreigners
for a long time. Periyaar was one of the very few geniuses who realized
the source of these problems. Verily, the source of the problem is
BRAHMANISM -- a religion which classifies its adherents as inferior
vs. superior solely on the basis of their birth and which promotes a
fatalistic outlook to its "lower caste" adherents so as to prevent any
rebellion.
Having identified the source of the problems, I think it is the duty of
any social reformer to make people aware of the source and work towards
its eventual destruction. Anyone who is under the impression
that periyaar's action was motivated by hatred -- as the bramin
controlled TN media would like us to believe -- is sadly mistaken.
He had many close friends from the bramin community and he never
said anything hateful against the bramin community per se. He
only identified and attacked the the oppressive symbols of braminhood.
>His oft quoted words,
>"If you see a Brahmin and a snake, hit the Brahmin", has been the war cry
I can neither confirm nor deny whether he said exactly what you wrote.
But the statement is true in the following sense: snake kills a
person. But brahmanism kills the human spirit by classifying this
unique being as inferior by birth. Hence brahmanism is more
dangerous than a snake. It should be identified and destroyed.
That is a correct advice. Here by the term "brahmin", is meant the
one who is practicing the oppressive brahmanical religion and not
anyone simply born in that community.
I too echo "Kill anyone who say or whose 'sastras' say that you are inferior!!!"
>of all the Dravidian parties in the state. I don't personally know for a fact
>that Mr. Periyar uttered these words, but has been quoted widely by all his
>followers. I don't understand how Mr. Periyar didn't get so upset with the
>rest of the upper and middle class communities in TN who have been also very
>violent towards the lower caste communities, in addition to discriminating
>them. His impact on the caste practices of TN, as time has proved has not been
>very significant either. Casteism is well, alive and kicking in TN, with
>the forward and middle class communities of all relgion practising in all its
>ancient glory.
The situation is analogous to the following. In almost every western
country there is racism, white supremacy etc. However, the
international community attacks only South Africa. This is because
South Africa is the ONLY country that has racism in its law books.
Similarly even though all religions are irrational, we especially
condemn brahmanism because it is the only religion in the whole world
that has birth based discrimination in its core scriptures (ie vedas) !!!!
So periyaar attacked the core of the problem -- ie the religion that
justifies segregation in using "spiritual" explanations -- rather than
going after every casteist and oppressors. It is very true that the
semi-happy people from the middle (eg veLaaLa) oppressed the ones
below them often in a violent mannar. But the justification for their
acts came from Brahmanical Manu. So the first task is to identify
that Manu & Co. are the (source of the) problems.
>More than that, Mr. Periyar's atheist philosophies were just mere anti-Hindu
>literature. He used to mock the religous practices of the Hindus and that of
>Brahmin practices in particular, being irrational and primitive at regular
>intervals, but dare not say anything about the religous practices
This is not true at all. He denouced every religion. He denouced the
very believe in God. He only had a soft corner for Buddha because
Buddha taught rationalism (however Periyaar said that present day
versions of Buddhism are almost completely different bags of beans).
However as I said Brahmanism is the epitome of irrationalism, childish
and exploitive ritualism and oppression.
>of either the Christians or the Muslims in the state. He and his followers
> often retorted to antics like garlanding the statue of Hindu gods with
>footwears, plainly to just offend the Hindus. I wonder what would have
>happened if the DK brigade had ventured out to break the segregating wall
>in the Christian cemetry at Tiruchy, or tried garlanding with footwear either
>Jesus Christ or any Islamic icon.
Gods like Rama are a symbol of Aryan (ie Brahmanical) domination of
the Dravidans and hence have to be identified so in a rather forceful
way. Tell me one good reason why one should worship Rama ! Is it
because he rescued his wife. Even a weakling would attempt to do that?
I do not have to write about his unethical behaviours. (In fact
Periyaar had written a very long article on this. He researched on
Ramayanaa for almost 8 years before deciding on regularly burning the
effulgy of Rama -- the most evil person ever walked on this earth.
(Our Hindi friends made Ramayana big and cannot thing in any other
terms other than Ramayanic -- eg. Ram rajya -- simply because for a
long time that was the only serious work available in Hindi
(ie. Tulsidas' Hindi translation of Ramayana)!!!
Another reason that Periyaar did not preoccupy himself with other
religions (Ingersol whose writings are popular with the DK attacked
Christianity) because they were irrelevent (due to their small
numbers and due to their book's (ie new testament and quran) rather
socialist outlook (equality of human beings, concept of free will
etc)
>daniel
Meenan Vishnu
PS: I posted a series of articles on EVR to SCT earlier and if there
is enuf interest, I will post them again.
P. N. Sankarshanan
>footwears, plainly to just offend the Hindus. I wonder what would have
>happened if the DK brigade had ventured out to break the segregating wall
>in the Christian cemetry at Tiruchy, or tried garlanding with footwear either
>Jesus Christ or any Islamic icon.
^^^^^^^ ^^^^^
Islam religion doesn't have icons. Infact, icon worship is banned.
-sankarsh
Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam
>
>DMK did make thamizh a language of
>common man. Very few thamizhs can
>disagree. Rajaji, a personal friend [political
>foe] of periyaar
>and proponent of Hindi as a common
>Indian language did regret for his stand
>later in life. Periyaar did not beat
>his chest for thamizh. He stood only
>only for self respect and stood against
>only
>the slavery attitude of his people.
I don't have any problems with this, but I do not see the relation of this
goal to Mr. Periyar's practice of exhibiting vitriolic hatred towards
the Brahmins.
>
> The mooda nambikkai, aasaarams,
>sadangkukaL in Indian culture is
>deep rooted in vEdic Brahmanism.
>The veLLala christian we talked
>about earlier [rather ssp] adopted
>brahmanism in Christianity.
>Brahmanism was not just practised
>by Brahmins. Although
>introduced by vEdic Brahmins into
>thamizh land it was favored by the
>ruling class which in thamizh land
>were veLLaalars. Even thamizh
>kings married veLLaalars if you look
>into history.
If Brahminism is the cause of all this, and as you have pointed out
that other communities in TN indeed practised it, why this special
hatred reserved towards the Brahmin community alone.
>
> The shift of power from veLLaalars
>to Brahmins went only during British
>rule. Brahmins got English education,
>worked for the British, went higher
>up in Bureacracy [In fact British
>learnt about hierarchy/divisions in Indian society
>very well ]. The veLLaalars
>desperately needing power, education
>converted into Christianity but did
>not adopt Christian values of equality.
I assume here you are implying that veLLaalars converted to
Christianity during the British period. But the fact is
that Christianity in TN goes back to the period of St. Thomas,
long before Britishers came to India. Also I don't believe that
only Brahmins were in hands with Britishers, I personally know
of veLLaalars in Tiruchy areas, who did the same thing what
Brahmins did at that time. Not only that the people I'm talking
about, were Hindus.
ePLEASE DO NOTE THAT CHRISTIANITY OR ISLAM
>DOES NOT TALK CASTE CRAP LIKE BRAHMANISM.
>Periyaar did not go into temples [Please
>know that sir] to garland chapals.
>He wanted to show the Hindu people
>that by garlanding with chappals
>nothing is going to happen to your
>life as the Brahmin priest frightens.
>The idols were not taken from temples
>[Please note] No temple in TN
>was tampered for his campaign. They brought
>their own idols. He wanted to drive the
>fear of stupidity and false belief
>amoung the enslaved indian masses.
> periyaar fought the pan indian religion,
>Brahmanism and not Brahmins. The Brahmin media
>tried its best to tarnish his image.
>
The same argument you give for Christianity applies to Hindiusm as
well, I don't believe that the religion Hinduism advocates
casteism. Followers of it yes. If you want to equate the two,
do so for Christians and Muslims as well.
Why is that blind assumption on your part, that source of my information
is some Brahmin media. Lot of what I wrote in my article were my
personal observance of things that happened and still happen in Tiruchy.
Nor did I post in my article that Mr. Periyar went rampaging thru temples.
The source of my information about events in other parts of Tamil Nadu
are the following newspapers:
Thina Thanthi ( The Tamil Daily Telegraph )
Thina Malar, Murasoli, ( Tamil Newspapers )
Thuglak ( Tamil Political Magazine ) and The Hindu ( The English daily ).
Of the above only Thuglak and The Hindu have Brahmin owners or editors.
The others I don't believe are controlled or operrated by the Brahmin
community, and definitely not Murasoli a well known DMK paper.
Of course we did not buy all of them at home, we used to get Thina
Thanthi and The Hindu, and the rest I used to read at our neigbhorhood
laundry shop.
The Christianity practised by tamilians, is very much the pan Indian
Brahminism, and I pointed out in my article that Mr. Periyar did not
bother even to address it. If he was so much against only the
symbolism of the pan Indian Brahminism and not against the Hindu gods, there
was this great wall in the Christian cemetry segrating the castes, why
didn't Mr. Periyar and his followers break this wall. It did even
require insulting any Christian gods either. And also remember Tiruchy
and its surroundings have lots of Christians, and the DK party at that
time was based at Tiruchy.
> Do know that he is only a few people
>in the world who identified the problem
>and fought selflessly.
>>"If you see a Brahmin and a snake, hit the Brahmin", has been the war cry
>>of all the Dravidian parties in the state. I don't personally know for a fact
>>that Mr. Periyar uttered these words, but has been quoted widely by all his
>>followers. I don't understand how Mr. Periyar didn't get so upset with the
>>rest of the upper and middle class communities in TN who have been also very
>>violent towards the lower caste communities, in addition to discriminating
>>them. His impact on the caste practices of TN, as time has proved has not been
>
> Later when some DMK people and many others did not follow
>his principles and were after money he did not
>like that. He openly cticized his men. He did
>not spare DMK. His party DK openly supported
>kaamaraaj-the congressman.
Does this mean he did not utter the above attributed words. I apologize
if I have misquoted Mr. Periyar.
In terms of disciplining his party cadres, there has been no DK member
in Tiruchy has ever been dismissed for physically assaulting a
Brahmin person or for harassing the Brahmin women
>
>>very significant either. Casteism is well, alive and kicking in TN, with
>>the forward and middle class communities of all relgion practising in all its
>>ancient glory.
>
> As I said Brahmanism is practiced by everybody
>and that has to be clearly distinguished from
>Christianity and Islam that have their own`
>problems different from the caste system of
>MANU notoriety.
>>More than that, Mr. Periyar's atheist philosophies were just mere anti-Hindu
>>literature. He used to mock the religous practices of the Hindus and that of
>>Brahmin practices in particular, being irrational and primitive at regular
>>intervals, but dare not say anything about the religous practices
>>of either the Christians or the Muslims in the state. He and his followers
>> often retorted to antics like garlanding the statue of Hindu gods with
>>footwears, plainly to just offend the Hindus. I wonder what would have
>>happened if the DK brigade had ventured out to break the segregating wall
>>in the Christian cemetry at Tiruchy, or tried garlanding with footwear either
>>Jesus Christ or any Islamic icon.
>
> No releveance to periyaar at all.
> Please do not accuse noble people.
>
>
I don't understand why it is not relevant. Mr Periyar in his writings and
speeches did make it very clear that he was an atheist. I was pointing
that it was highly hypocritical of him to mock only the Hindu practices
alone, and not utter a single thing against either the Christians or
Muslims. By Mr. Periyar's standards Christianity and Islam have as
many irrational practices as well.
Your are entitled to your opinion about the nobility of Mr. Periyar or
other individuals in his party.
I am sorry I don't attribute hate mongering towards any community as an
attribute of nobility, and that's my opinion of course
>
> I only wish you were better informed about
>periyaar and his selfless service to his
>people.
>
> Somebody does not become a periyaar follower
>by showing his picture, wearing black, or
>speaking adukku mozhi
>
I definetly am well informed, things I have quoted are actual incidents.
Granted his motives were well meant, but I disgree very much with his methods
of selectively blaming everything on the Brahmins.
> Lastly, even DMK is not all bad as you are
>saying. As far as corruption
>and dishonesty and gaining power
>they might equal congress.
>But they do not destroy temples,
>mosques and churches.
>They have members from all religions.
>DMK is SECULAR unlike BJP/RSS/SS?HINDU
>munnani.
I don't think I discussed anything in my article about
DMK being evil or anything. I was only commenting
on their brahmin hating practices.
>Congress and Brahmanism
>go hand in hand. They unlawfully
>dismiss dravidian govts when they do
>not like them. remeber that the governor
>was against dismissal of DMK govt in
>'89, but Congress was hell bent so changed
>the governor and dismissed the govt.
>The Brahmin lobby that was behind
>dismissing duly elected DMK is nowhere
>close to dismissing Jaya beacsue she
>serves her interests. Jaya has very bad
>record of corruption amounting to 100's
>of crores from Jeya publication. According
>to the law you cannot be an owner of
>something like that when you are in office.
>The state govt contarcts were given to JP
>and they found that.
>
If I remember it right, it was Mr. Chandrasekhar
who dismissed the duly elected goverment of
Mr. Karunanidhi the last time around. The DMK
party for its part courted the Congress when it
suited them. Remember the 'latchiya uravu' ( sorry
I don't know the english equivalent) which Mr M.K
had with Congress(I) on and off. TN politics that's
a whole different story.
> Caste is very alive. The Brahmins
>try their best to hold on to from
>the center. In DMK if elected to
>power and have positions it is
>the higher caste hindoos who
>
>
> As I have said and poinetd look
>at our history and language and do realize
>that they made thamizh a common man language.
>
> anban
> kathir
I am not questioning their contributions to Tamil at all, and it
does not justify promoting hatred towards any particular community
while the fact very well remains, that signficant members of
other communities practise casteism.
Regards,
daniel
S. Sankarapandi
In article <CA9sH...@ptimtc.tadw.panasonic.com> dan...@marl12.marl.panasonic.
com (Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam) writes:
>>
e
>>and language as a political weapon (excepting Periyar) and they only served
>>(have been serving) the interests of the non-brahmin upper and middle castes.
>>All their idea of separate Tamil Nadu etc were all just to establish the
>>vellala rule as opposed to the pseudo-Indian nationalism of the Brahministic
>>parties like Congress, BJP etc.
>>
>
>Mr.Periyar though of his wrongdoings.
>
>He has been the primary architect of
>"If you see a Brahmin and a snake, hit the Brahmin", has been the war cry
>of all the Dravidian parties in the state. I don't personally know for a fact
>that Mr. Periyar uttered these words, but has been quoted widely by all his
>followers. I don't understand how Mr. Periyar didn't get so upset with the
>rest of the upper and middle class communities in TN who have been also very
>violent towards the lower caste communities, in addition to discriminating
>them. His impact on the caste practices of TN, as time has proved has not been
>very significant either. Casteism is well, alive and kicking in TN, with
>the forward and middle class communities of all relgion practising in all its
>ancient glory.
(I will address the questions raised by Mr.Daniel in different postings.
It may take 2 or three days. I also kindly request him to read Sudalai
Madan's series of articles posted in SCT 2 months ago. I or Damu can send
him the articles through e-mail)
Kind request to all netters:
---------------------------
We are discussing the sensitive issue again and I request netters to
control their emotions and try to discuss each other's point of view.
Mr.Daniel has raised some genuine quesitions which might come to anybody who
might have watched the TN politics last 2 decades through newspapers. It is
better to share how we perceive the problem with whatever we have read which
did not have a chance to appear in the popular media.
Warning: very long posting, read only if you have time;
------------------------------------------------------
I did not absolve Periyar for the brahmin-hatred nor I come as an attorney to
defend all what Periyar talked/did. I excempted periyar in my above sentence
because, imo, Periyar has not used the caste or language issue for his
political upcoming. As I will quote him at the end, he was very open and he
had no hidden agenda unlike many other political parties or non-political
movements. If he had been interested in achieving political power, he could
have utilized the chance very easily becuase the situation was very ripe to
show hatred towards Brahmin domination. He did not have to take an unpopular
athiest stand in such a process and moreover he could have used Tamil
fanaticism as a weapon. In stead, he spent his personal money and time till
his death just to carry his message without expecting any personal benefits out
of it, which, imo, is not all that simple.
My humble request to anyone who criticizes Periyar is
to read his writings alongwith the one-sided accuasation coming from the
Brahministic media becuase one can easily find out his flaws as well as views.
Before going through excerpts of what he wrote, let be briefly tell what I
think of Periyar as I read from his books and his critics.
1. He had very good goals but his method was very crude and sometimes
irrational too.
2. He viewed the whole issue only as a caste-issue rather than a class-issue
(later he have had confusions which we will see here) which, imo, is
responsible for some of his failures (he has partially succeeded too) which we
visualize today. On the other hand, mainstream communist parties like CPI,
CPM ignored the `caste' factor and hence they also failed in some aspects.
3. He was totally against the varNashrama dharma and wanted to destroy it
completely and that is the reason, he took an athiestic stand and totally
opposed Hindu religion.
4. He was against the oppression of Dalits in the hands of the non-brahmin
Hindus (I will present the examples) but he did not pursue it as much as he did
with Brahmins (he is not denying it and has openly given the reasons for them
as we shall see from his writings/speeches). Two main reasons, (i) he wanted
to take the issue one by one and (ii) he was apprehensive of the fact that he
was not a Dalit and hence may no be able to organize them better.
IMO, this is a very sad mistake by Periyar. However, he has never
supported any violence against Dalits and he time and again condemned such
violences, no matter, which caste did it. IMO, he should have equally carried
the Dalit struggle along with the anti-brahminism struggle.
5. He is an `ideological' dictator, believed in dictatorship and honestly
admitted this many times. This is an important reason why his party went to a
bunch of selfish leaders who have everything `self' except `self-respect' !
Periyar was very inconsisent on certain issues at different times. His
political ideologies were not well-defined and he alone decided them depending
upon the issue. Sometimes, his views changed positively over time but
other times they were confusing.
6. In his fight against Brahminism (which was supported by the Congress party
and the establishment), he wanted to utilize the facilities provided by the
Vellala movements like Justic party. The vellala leadersip has exploited his
struggle to their favour. I am confused whether Periyar did not realize this
danger or not.
6. I have never read the above statement of `brahmin-snake' in any of his
speeches and writings though I have also heard of it from others. If he had
made such a statement, he is indeed a `racist' and irrational. But if it is
something like what Meenan said (Brahminism and snake), then I have no problems
with such a statement. If he had said so, there would have been more bloodshed
because some his present followers (in DMK and ADMK) were ready for thuggery.
In stead, whatever achieved by him was just due to his hard-work and speeches
(not an incident of killing happened throughout his period which is a good
record for non-violence in such a sensitive struggle.)
But I dont conclude either way until I read his
`supposedly' made statement. I dont give a damn for the DK platforms because
they can distort anything as they want.
* * * * * *
Now let me go into excerpts of his speeches from which you can compare yourself
with my conclusions:
(Though I have read many of his writings through volumes compiled by
vE.aanaimuthu and self-respect publishers, I dont have any originals. But I am
quoting the excerpts from the following references.)
V.Geetha and S.V.Rajadurai, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. XXVIII,
(Nos 3 and 4) pp. 129-136, EPW, Vol.XXVIII (Nos 12 & 13), pp 500 (1993).
Ko.Kesavan, "Periyarum pothuvudaimaiyum", Saravana Balu Publishers,
Vizhuppuram (1990).
A few 1991-92 issues of puthiya jananayagam and Kedayam.
* * * * * *
1. South Indian social-reformers conference, 26-11-1928:
(seen in his book on "social reforms" p. 25, 39 )
It is insensible to believe that propaganda canbring reforsms...It is
ignorant to say that complete reforms can be achieved through public
meetings..A complete and true reform has to be achieved only through benevolent
dictatorship.
Untouchablity... How long one can expect an oppressed society to be
patient and passive... Does anybody still believe that they should live like
that instead of getting ready to die against untouchability. THE ATROCITIES
COMITTED BY NON-BRAHMINS ARE HIGHER THAN THAT OF BRAHMINS.. But we blame
the brahmins more because they only made the fire and it has caught us too..
(My comment: Though he admits the atrocities done by the non-brahmin, he took a
less harder stand against them becuase he wanted to fight brahminism first.
This has been exploited by the Vellala movement.)
2. Tiruchi Public meeting (21-2-1943)
Democracy is nothing but a hoax. To me it looks foolish too. If you
believe me and are ready to serve the movement, you stay with me. I dont
believe in party democracy etc. No party is really democratic, they are just
fooling you.
3. Tuticorin Conference (from Kudi Arasu, 29-5-1948)
As far as I am concerned, there is no need for my followers to be
intelligent. As long as they are in this party, they have to keep their
self-rationality away.. conscience away..Some people may think that this is
dictatorship. I dont deny that. I am using my dictatorship for our ideals and
for the public welfare...
4. Ilangai lectures (kudi arasu, 30-10-1932)
(i) Since majority of the people are not able to fulfil their fundamental
needs because of their faith in caste, god, religion, nationality, patriotism
etc. The upper class utilize this to stablize their position and these shields
have to be broken.
(ii) The king or the government are not meant for the people, they are just
to protect the wealth of the riches.
(iii)Nationality and patriotism are just cunning tools for the capitalists to
expand their wealth and they are against world unity.
(iv) All inequalities have to be destroyed and a new world of humanity and
equality have to be built without nation, caste and religion etc..
(My opinions: this was due to the influence of his visit to the Soviet Union
but he has diluted the view when he selects the priorities in his struggle).
He expressed similar opinions whenever he addressed the trade-union
meetings.
Addressing the Dalits (Kudi arasu, 7-5-1933)
--------------------------------------------
You have to realize that you are being exploited economically and your
liberation has to be based on this fact. It is not sufficient to remove labels
like `paraiyan' etc or just entering into temples but fight against the
economical exploitation.
(My opinion: He did not really care about this aspect in the case of fight
against brahminism)
We have to abolish the rule of the Maharajas, Jameendhars and capitalists
whoever they are. It is our duty to destroy such rule (kudi arasu, 1-1-33).
More about revolution through non-violence (kudi arasu, 18-12-1932)
------------------------------------------
1. Revolution is not a term to be afraid of.
2. king, caste, god, religion etc were all created to protect brahmins and rich
people. We should change these things only through self-respect. Reforms are
not just sufficient. It can be achieved only through revolution but violence
should be avoided.
His open admittance (Thiruthuraippoondi Conference, 1936)
---------------------------------------------------------
So far, the conferences have been helped by rich Justice party leaders. What
is the point in abusing them. I have lost lot of my money but we need more
money in the future too.
I have sent to jail for many times and whenever I was in Jail, nothing could be
done because of money.
I believe in socialism and spoke about it. But the government bans communism
and hence all the rich people have left me. How can I pursue the struggle for
equality without money. Should I spend in prison by talking socialism or shall
I stop talking socialism inteligently to continue my struggle.
The Brahmins, the riches and the government are the three enemies. It is
impossible to fight all the three and hence we will try one by one.
Continued in next postings...
S. Sankarapandi
In article <CAA8s...@vu-vlsi.ee.vill.edu> dan...@vu-vlsi.ee.vill.edu (Daniel
C. Gnanaprakasam) writes:
>In article <kat.742848442@yar> k...@doe.carleton.ca (Kathiravan Krishnamurthi)
Mr. Daniel:
Can you provide a single example where Periyar supported the nonsense
practised by christians/Muslims or the nonsense presented in the bible/quaran ?
Atleast from any of the `good' sources you have referred above.
It is true he criticized the Hinduism very vehemently than any other
religion for few well-known reasons. One thing is that he himself was once a
Hindu and he learnt more about Hindu texts and scriptures. Hinduism is the
majority religion and many of the Hindu texts justify caste oppression and
women emancipation. If you have not read abnout them dont say that they are
not there in the Hindu texts (CHO Ramasamy, for his own convenience, will only
write about the good part of Hinduism and many of us believed them for years).
To my knowledge, Periyar was a confirmed atheist and he criticized any
religious belief. That is the reason, he did not want to join Buddhism though
he found Buddhism more sensible in principle and when Dr.Ambedkar requested him
to do so.
Why is that you expect him to fight everything ?? (remember he has
criticized any religious crap but he has not decided to fight the Christianity
because he wanted to concentrate his fight against Hinduism for the above
reasons) ?
Why not someother fight against. If you know more about Christianity, why
not organize a fight against it ?? I assume that you are a Christian and you
must be a better person to struggle against the caste system in Christianity !
Why should Periyar come from his grave to fight the graveyard-caste problem.
Why dont you moblize support among all the Christians who feel the same lie
you. I know that it is very difficult and just because you are not able to do
it, can I assume that you are also supporting it ?? Just think it over.
S. Sankarapandi
Sarath Krishnaswamy
|> In article <CA9sH...@ptimtc.tadw.panasonic.com> dan...@marl12.marl.panasonic.com (Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam) writes:
|> >I agree with you here on the motives of Dravidian parties, but I don't absolve
|> >Mr.Periyar though of his wrongdoings.
|> >
|> >He has been the primary architect of
|> >the brahmin hate mongering tactics in TN.
|>
Now _here's_ a great quote to take out of context.
A tad bloodthirsty, wouldn't you say?
|> >of either the Christians or the Muslims in the state. He and his followers
|> > often retorted to antics like garlanding the statue of Hindu gods with
|> >footwears, plainly to just offend the Hindus. I wonder what would have
|> >happened if the DK brigade had ventured out to break the segregating wall
|> >in the Christian cemetry at Tiruchy, or tried garlanding with footwear either
|> >Jesus Christ or any Islamic icon.
|>
|> Gods like Rama are a symbol of Aryan (ie Brahmanical) domination of
|> the Dravidans and hence have to be identified so in a rather forceful
|> way. Tell me one good reason why one should worship Rama ! Is it
Because one believes in him, I imagine. It's kind of
silly to ask people to justify private faith.
|> because he rescued his wife. Even a weakling would attempt to do that?
Assumptions, assumptions :-) To be honest, I'd respect
_anyone_ that had the courage to go to the rescue of a
loved one. But if you're going to go about the task
of trying to prove the worthiness of various gods based on
literal interpretation of stories rather than on the symbolism
therein, I'm looking forward to weeks of entertainment.
|> I do not have to write about his unethical behaviours. (In fact
But you do, if you're basing your argument on them...
|> Periyaar had written a very long article on this. He researched on
|> Ramayanaa for almost 8 years before deciding on regularly burning the
|> effulgy of Rama -- the most evil person ever walked on this earth.
... especially if you're going to make loaded statements like
that one... It's at the least impolite and potentially disrespectful
of others' beliefs to do so, I'd think.
|> >daniel
|>
|> Meenan Vishnu
|>
Sigh. Everybody wants to save the world. Be sure to warn me when
the pogroms start. I'd hate to miss out on the New Order.
Sarath.
--
*********************************************************
* Sarath Krishnaswamy *
* MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory *
* 545 Technology Square room 828 *
* Cambridge, MA 02139 (617) 253-1513 *
* skri...@ai.mit.edu *
*********************************************************
Balaji Kannan
skri...@cocoa-pebbles.ai.mit.edu (Sarath Krishnaswamy) writes:
>In article <CA9yt...@watserv2.uwaterloo.ca>, mvi...@bcr5.uwaterloo.ca (Meenan Vishnu) writes:
>|> I too echo "Kill anyone who say or whose 'sastras' say that you are
>|>inferior !!"
> Now _here's_ a great quote to take out of context.
> A tad bloodthirsty, wouldn't you say?
Nah... He is trying self-righteousness.. Seriously :-)
[You just have to go back in time to see this guy's remarks [ok
quoted remarks] about a race...]
>|> Gods like Rama are a symbol of Aryan (ie Brahmanical) domination of
>|> the Dravidans and hence have to be identified so in a rather forceful
>|> way. Tell me one good reason why one should worship Rama ! Is it
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Because one believes in him, I imagine. It's kind of
^^^^^^^^^^^^
>silly to ask people to justify private faith.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Not! if you believe in "double standards" too :-)
>|> I do not have to write about his unethical behaviours. (In fact
>But you do, if you're basing your argument on them...
Oh sure, he can: Call Rama a "dodo", and *then* define what *you*
mean by "dodo"... Try it :-) If you are not successful in convincing
someone, then repeatedly [mind you, * repeatedly *] abuse, so that
some mud sticks anyways ...
>|> Periyaar had written a very long article on this. He researched on
>|> Ramayanaa for almost 8 years before deciding on regularly burning the
>|> effulgy of Rama -- the most evil person ever walked on this earth.
>... especially if you're going to make loaded statements like
>that one... It's at the least impolite and potentially disrespectful
>of others' beliefs to do so, I'd think.
Impolite ?? Nah... The best way to absolve someone of a charge
is to fling back mud at someone else and deflect the topic of
discussion :-) Believe me, it works :-)
cheers,
bk
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Most people would sooner die than think; infact, they do so"
---- Bertrand Russel
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Bala SWAMINATHAN
>>In article <CA9yt...@watserv2.uwaterloo.ca>, mvi...@bcr5.uwaterloo.ca (Meenan Vishnu) writes:
>
>>|> Gods like Rama are a symbol of Aryan (ie Brahmanical) domination of
>>|> the Dravidans and hence have to be identified so in a rather forceful
>>|> way. Tell me one good reason why one should worship Rama ! Is it
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>Because one believes in him, I imagine. It's kind of
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>silly to ask people to justify private faith.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Not! if you believe in "double standards" too :-)
This has nothing to do with the original subject ``Are we...?''
Puthumaippiththan's one of the greatest works, "saaba vimOsanam"
(I guess an English translation was posted in the net earlier; can
somebody, please, repost it?) discusses the throes of Agalya, including
how her life style changes after she had been `freed' from her curse. In the
the end, Seetha and Agalya deliberate on the ``double standards'' of Rama.
natpudan
S_Bala
// Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
// Dr. Martin Luther King.
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
>Mr. Daniel:
Mr Daniel:
It is easy to criticize. Our lives
have been improved because of periyaar's noble struggle.
Who has spent his own money in India [may be other than
Gandhi] waging a life long struggle against caste
system.
I am not a Chirstian, Muslim but only feel
that I am a thamizh becasue the Hinduism practised
is Brahmanism. They are gOd agents. Special people.
But for us "sun does not rise
in South" We had to face reality. My father
was one of the five people who passed in
'50 something in high school examination
in kaangayam. He had to come to
kaangayam from his village in bullock cart.
My grandmaa stayed with all the five kids
and cooked food for a week or so , so that
they could eat some food.
He thought he achieved a lot. He
wants to get admisson in College, PUC.
But only Christians and Brahmins are controlling
colleges. We were out sir! No way. Those
guys who went in were converts and Brahmins.
My friend "meiyappan aiyaah [he is in
his late 60's]" got admisson
in St Joesephs as he converted from thEvar
to Christian. Even some Brahmins converted.
Father raajam [MODERN PHYSICS BOOK AUTHOR]
got into the top in ST Joe's . They even sent
him to work with Nobel Laureate Fermi.
In mid '40 s my there was drought in TN.
He used to say that "the cattle died because there
was no food for humans. The White man [english]
rationed food. First preference for whom?
Christians. That is reality. My father
wanted to change religion. My grandpaa
told him "we will die. But I do not
want you to change". You can still
find very less almost 0% in our community
[largest after vanniars in TN. we make
more than 20% of TN] who are Christians
wheraeas in the south they converted
for various purposes [even as early
as THOMAS's time].
Even now all our aththai's are kai naattu.
Their Children did not do well. Even grand children
are struggling. i
Periyaar's movement has brought a lot of
Justice in the society. Most of the workers [lower
caste] are no longer in villages. They have
gone to cities. They are getting aware.
Please do remeber that Periyaar did not support
DMK but Kaamaraaj aiyaah who died without earning
any penny.
He was a man of principle. Some Christians
might have practised caste system of brahmanical manu
but Christianity I found is based on love for mankind.
They never really intend to destroy local cultures
. thamizh flourished. Even to day their marriages
are conducted in thamizh. Prayers are in thamizh.
One spanish friend who is a christian visited
thamizh church in toronto. Songs are composed
, set to classical thamizh raahams and sung.
He brought me a plaque [I have it in my room
in front here] written in thamizh.
"iyEsu kirishthu sollukiRaar:
naan ulahaththiRkku oLiyaakiREn,
ennaip pin paRRukiRavan
**************************"
yOwaan 8:12.
They patronize thamizh.
inthu matham appadi alla. saathi solli,
manu tharmaththai padiththup paarum.
Punishments are specified for inter marrying.
They use sanskrit [invented by brahmins]
. They use it for worship in thamizh
temples here. They sacre people who are
not willing to question the authority
of Brahmin whom most of the people refer
as saami.
thamizh has a lot of hymns composed
for god. The sheer number and poetrys set
to music is overwhelming. But our
temples are run by Brahmanical people.
who do sadangku and earn money.
There is a list of sadangku in
Toronto temple.
It is overwhelming. For giving name : $100.00
Marriage officiation $1000-3000
depending on the brahmin
[after all he says that statement including one that
conveys your wife marries you after marrying
indiran, varunan and mithran or some crap.
we do not understand the crap uttered].
Death anniversary $xx
Initation $y
meenan's brother's marriage was conducted
in thamizh tradition. he invited a old
father to do it free of cost. the couple
were blessed by elders.
My brothers marriage was done in thamizh.
TN Farmers assoc Prez. Mr Sinnasaamy [he took
the mantle after Mr Naarayana saami naaidu]
gave the thaali to iLangkO.
It was a great struggle to convince people.
There were people in the crowd wunderin
where is the poonool for the Othuvar.
There are more than 100' s of these pudungkals.
. They
sell ganga water for $ z.
In short Brahmanisn is more poisonous than
snake. It needs a lot of effort on the
part of everybody, including Brahmins to
kill it.
We are plagued by corrupt practices.
I do not want to still convert. Want
to fight within the sytem. see that
thamizh is brought into forefront
in our own temples and our religion
becomes less ritualistic[ they are poring
milk on stones whiole people are dying
hungry]
anban
kathir
V. Nagarajan
.
.
>
>My humble request to anyone who criticizes Periyar is
>to read his writings alongwith the one-sided accuasation coming from the
>Brahministic media becuase one can easily find out his flaws as well as views.
.
.
>6. In his fight against Brahminism (which was supported by the Congress party
>and the establishment), he wanted to utilize the facilities provided by the
>Vellala movements like Justic party. The vellala leadersip has exploited his
>struggle to their favour. I am confused whether Periyar did not realize this
>danger or not.
.
>6. I have never read the above statement of `brahmin-snake' in any of his
>speeches and writings though I have also heard of it from others. If he had
>made such a statement, he is indeed a `racist' and irrational. But if it is
>something like what Meenan said (Brahminism and snake), then I have no problems
>with such a statement. If he had said so, there would have been more bloodshed
>because some his present followers (in DMK and ADMK) were ready for thuggery.
>In stead, whatever achieved by him was just due to his hard-work and speeches
>(not an incident of killing happened throughout his period which is a good
>record for non-violence in such a sensitive struggle.)
brahmins and brahminism. I say obfuscatory because there usually is
a disclaimer made in the beginning in these types of analysis to the
effect that the two are not the same nor that they are totally
related, but then as the analysis proceeds the distinction invariably
disappears. I have observed this far too many times to believe that
the sleight of hand is unintentional. I could be wrong - the analyst
may simply be confused. My question is, why bother at all?
.
.
>Now let me go into excerpts of his speeches from which you can compare yourself
>with my conclusions:
.
> Untouchablity... How long one can expect an oppressed society to be
>patient and passive... Does anybody still believe that they should live like
>that instead of getting ready to die against untouchability. THE ATROCITIES
>COMITTED BY NON-BRAHMINS ARE HIGHER THAN THAT OF BRAHMINS.. But we blame
>the brahmins more because they only made the fire and it has caught us too..
>
>(My comment: Though he admits the atrocities done by the non-brahmin, he took a
>less harder stand against them becuase he wanted to fight brahminism first.
>This has been exploited by the Vellala movement.)
This here is what i mean. Even the able Sankarapandi appears to be
confused.
[My answer to Daniel is that it is a lot easier to fight your own
"kind". EVR, as he was born a hindu would have been ineffective in
dealing with the christians. He would have come up against the wall
of religious difference. Had he been a brahmin, the reaction against
him among the brahmins would have been orders of magnitude less
strong. By the same token, since he belonged to a nonbrahmin "upper"
caste, he would have made some real differnce by taking on the powerful
non-brahmin upper castes.]
>
>The Brahmins, the riches and the government are the three enemies. It is
>impossible to fight all the three and hence we will try one by one.
>
So it is really the brahmins, not brahminism! At least EVR was forth-
right on this point.
- Nagarajan
Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam
Dear Mr. Kathiravan
Never in my article I disputed the goals of Mr. Periyar,
or of that his party. Sure they were well meant, all I was
trying to point out was the Brahmins were held primarily
responsible for the caste practices in TN. And somebody pointed
out that Mr. Peryiar was against Brahminism, and not against
Brahmins. Fine with me, but the reality of the situation was that the
line was very thin.
Furthermore the issue I raised about Christians, Muslims, the other upper
caste communities and the DK movement, is the fact, that some members
of the DK party often were involved in physical violence against only the
members of the Brahmin community, which I find very appalling. I do not
believe, that cutting of threads and tufts of brahmins is anyway
necessary for the social changes that Mr. Periyar sought to achieve.
The party members never had the courage or the political will to
intimidate any other community or religion. That's been the only focus
of the article. The bottomline, de-humanizing people does not
achieve anything, and I firmly believe that DK party did their best
to de-humanize the brahmins, knowing very well, that they are not going
to be in any danger by doing so.
>
> He was a man of principle. Some Christians
>might have practised caste system of brahmanical manu
>but Christianity I found is based on love for mankind.
>They never really intend to destroy local cultures
>. thamizh flourished. Even to day their marriages
>are conducted in thamizh. Prayers are in thamizh.
>
>
> One spanish friend who is a christian visited
>thamizh church in toronto. Songs are composed
>, set to classical thamizh raahams and sung.
>He brought me a plaque [I have it in my room
>in front here] written in thamizh.
>
> "iyEsu kirishthu sollukiRaar:
> naan ulahaththiRkku oLiyaakiREn,
> ennaip pin paRRukiRavan
> **************************"
>
> yOwaan 8:12.
>
> They patronize thamizh.
>
> inthu matham appadi alla. saathi solli,
>manu tharmaththai padiththup paarum.
>Punishments are specified for inter marrying.
>
The practice of using Tamil in services in Catholic
churches, is relatively very new. During my parents
days, people were forced to learn Latin to recite prayers
in Church.
Abou the Protestant churches I don't know.
> They use sanskrit [invented by brahmins]
>. They use it for worship in thamizh
>temples here. They sacre people who are
>not willing to question the authority
>of Brahmin whom most of the people refer
>as saami.
Try questioning the authority of the Church, anyone is trouble.
The well known singer K.J Yesudas was denied Baptism for his son,
since K.J visits Hindus temples, especially Sabarimali.
>
> thamizh has a lot of hymns composed
>for god. The sheer number and poetrys set
>to music is overwhelming. But our
>temples are run by Brahmanical people.
>who do sadangku and earn money.
Agree with you here 100%, I think prayers in any religious place
should be recited in the language which the people know.
>
> There is a list of sadangku in
>Toronto temple.
>
> It is overwhelming. For giving name : $100.00
> Marriage officiation $1000-3000
> depending on the brahmin
>[after all he says that statement including one that
>conveys your wife marries you after marrying
>indiran, varunan and mithran or some crap.
>we do not understand the crap uttered].
> Death anniversary $xx
> Initation $y
The Catholic church in TN charges money for marriages as well.
I don't know the rates.
Such things abound in all relgions, and I don't have problems with
anybody trying to change it without resorting to violence against
practioners of such customes.
>
>
> anban
> kathir
>
>> To my knowledge, Periyar was a confirmed atheist and he criticized any
>>religious belief. That is the reason, he did not want to join Buddhism though
>>he found Buddhism more sensible in principle and when Dr.Ambedkar requested him
>>to do so.
>
>> Why is that you expect him to fight everything ?? (remember he has
>>criticized any religious crap but he has not decided to fight the Christianity
>>because he wanted to concentrate his fight against Hinduism for the above
>>reasons) ?
>
>> Why not someother fight against. If you know more about Christianity, why
>>not organize a fight against it ?? I assume that you are a Christian and you
>>must be a better person to struggle against the caste system in Christianity !
>>Why should Periyar come from his grave to fight the graveyard-caste problem.
>>Why dont you moblize support among all the Christians who feel the same lie
>>you. I know that it is very difficult and just because you are not able to do
>>it, can I assume that you are also supporting it ?? Just think it over.
>
Agreed , I am not expecting Mr. Periyar to change everything. Also I did
not make any assumptions that Mr. Periyar supported the practices of the
Church or that of Islam. All I was trying to point out, was their
silence ( Mr. Periyar and that of DK members later) more out of political
reasons. The last statement is my judgeent and I could be wrong.
Sure I have did within my circles, about the issues with respect to
Christianity, and in fact in the grave yard the parish priest who
were conviced by the people to do something about, were promptly
trasnferred by the Bisop. My article never had the expectaction
of Mr. Periyar to do something from his grave, I was posing a question
to his followers.
Regards,
daniel
>
>
>>S. Sankarapandi
Raghavan Jayaraman
----------------
Untouchablity... How long one can expect an oppressed society to be
>patient and passive... Does anybody still believe that they should live
like
>that instead of getting ready to die against untouchability. THE
ATROCITIES
>COMITTED BY NON-BRAHMINS ARE HIGHER THAN THAT OF BRAHMINS.. But we blame
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>the brahmins more because they only made the fire and it has caught us
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
too..
>
>(My comment: Though he admits the atrocities done by the non-brahmin, he
took a
>less harder stand against them becuase he wanted to fight brahminism
first.
>This has been exploited by the Vellala movement.)
--------------
What a logic? [both from Periyar and Sankarapandi]. As Nagarajan pointed
out, the distinction between Brahminism and brahmins has totally vanished.
I wouldn't say Sankarapandi is confused. He knows what he has written. So
much for balanced opinions.
raghavan
Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam
>
>
>Mr. Daniel:
>
> Can you provide a single example where Periyar supported the nonsense
>practised by christians/Muslims or the nonsense presented in the bible/quaran ?
>Atleast from any of the `good' sources you have referred above.
>
I did not make any statement to th fact that Mr. Periyar supported the
irrational practices of Christians or Muslims. The mentioned papers were the
ones I used to read, and these often reported the inimiditatory tactics of
the DK party in other parts of the state.
The usual DK rhetoric, than any kind of critical look at their practices is
some kind of Brahminic media consipiracy is kind of getting stale. It is
as hollow as the Jewish media control myth propogated by some people in US.
> It is true he criticized the Hinduism very vehemently than any other
>religion for few well-known reasons. One thing is that he himself was once a
>Hindu and he learnt more about Hindu texts and scriptures. Hinduism is the
>majority religion and many of the Hindu texts justify caste oppression and
>women emancipation. If you have not read abnout them dont say that they are
>not there in the Hindu texts (CHO Ramasamy, for his own convenience, will only
>write about the good part of Hinduism and many of us believed them for years).
>
> To my knowledge, Periyar was a confirmed atheist and he criticized any
>religious belief. That is the reason, he did not want to join Buddhism though
>he found Buddhism more sensible in principle and when Dr.Ambedkar requested him
>to do so.
Fine no problems here. One correction though, where did I say in my article
anything about Hindu texts and the assumptions you are alluding to.
Again I am saying for the nth time, my article was primarily about the
tactics used in the fight against casteism, and the technique of holding
Brahmins alone responsible.
The issue of other relgions was raised to point out that their
practices were never crticised or mocked at. You have given me some
reasons for Mr. Periyar focussing his efforts on Hinduism and I don't
have any problems with that either.
> Why is that you expect him to fight everything ?? (remember he has
>criticized any religious crap but he has not decided to fight the Christianity
>because he wanted to concentrate his fight against Hinduism for the above
>reasons) ?
>
> Why not someother fight against. If you know more about Christianity, why
>not organize a fight against it ?? I assume that you are a Christian and you
>must be a better person to struggle against the caste system in Christianity !
>Why should Periyar come from his grave to fight the graveyard-caste problem.
>Why dont you moblize support among all the Christians who feel the same lie
>you. I know that it is very difficult and just because you are not able to do
>it, can I assume that you are also supporting it ?? Just think it over.
>
>
>
>S. Sankarapandi
The answers to the above are written in some other response article of mine.
Samuel Ponraj
I would like to say what I know about daniel's arguments
It is very much true about the facts about christianity but only in thiruchi.
In fact a article came in junior vikatan about this.
In the south there is no separate burial ground as he mentioned though there
is separate one for catholics. People sit together in the churches in the
south. ( I had been to 15 and odd churches in south tamil nadu). But it is
true they marry within their community mostly(95%). They do see nall,
natchathirum from astrologer. Even their thali (mangalasoothra) are similar
to their hindu counter parts ( that is in south, old people can say to which
caste the family belongs by looking casually at their thali. Power in the
diocese (church governing body) is within the large community (by # of votes).
Overall christians of the tamilnadu are a bit confused lot. They follow the
customs what their hindu relatives follow to a little less rigour and borrowed
a few from britishers. The worst thing which I had is widows are treated badly
that they are not allowed to attend even their brothers marriage ( it happened
to one of my cousin). Major difference between my hindu and christian relatives
is women can go to burial ground and they are not allowed in burning grounds.
That is the major difference I noticed.
To the point whether we are joulous of brahmins the answer depends on which
virtue ?. I certainly envy the way their women folk made progress in the
society. They were the most oppressed lot probably 50 years ago. They deserve
appreciation.
What irritates me among them is when some ass coming with a theory
to support the claim that intelligence is inherited and it is the whole and
sole ancestral property of ours. The whole community then absorbs the impact.
But I hate the person from the oppressed community person after
growing high by hardwork as well as reservation seeking recognition
among the upper communities outrightly disowning his/her community. He looks
down at the very people who feel proud of him and who saw his growth
graciously. Because today he is wearing pant and shirt and speaks a bit broken
english and the other side is wearing a little thing around their hip just to
cover and look transparent at his english. ( this is a global phenomena though
you can see indians seeking recognition among american caucasians (only)).
So that's it for today
sam
Arun C. Surendran
Dear Friends,
Correct me if I am wrong, but this argument/flame war about
BRAHMINISM or ANTI-BRAHMINISM has been going on EVER since
SCT was started. We have seen the same ideas recycled over and
over again. Some articles have lead to serious name calling
and flames.
Let me, as I see it, point out things that HAVE BEEN AGREED
UPON and things that haven't been : and perhaps suggest, a
possible solution to it.
Things we have agreed upon:
----------------------------
1. "Brahmins" dominated the Indian society for a long
time. Some of their despicable actions include (a). Distorting
Hindu Philosophy (b). Start superstitions to bring people
under their control (c) suppress others from becoming literate
and stop their/the country's progress.
2. Anybody who supports discrimination against any
other group of people is to be condemned - irrespective of
which family he was born into, which social section, which
religion and which economic class he was born into. So
condemn EVERYBODY who practices discrimnation. If someone
says "I'm going to oppose discrimination among Hindus only. I
really don't care about discriminations among other religion"
is not being truthful to his/her own cause.
Does everybody agree? So, is there much point in repeating
these over and over again - I'm sure that new and good ideas
get lost when it is packed in a pile of old ones.
Things we have not agreed upon:
------------------------------
1. What the word "BRAHMINS" and "BRAHMINISM" refers
to. I have heard many people say that it is "brahmin bashing"
and present day brahmins (very specifically - people born into
families that are traditionally called "Brahmins") should not
be punished for what their ancestors did. People like Meenan
and Kathir keep clarifying that what they are attacking is
"BRAHMINISM" - i.e. the philosophy behind the actions and when
they refer to "BRAHMINS" they refer to the people who follow
these philosophies. But people misunderstand time and again.
Am I right?
So, with a little cooperation from you, my friends, we
can solve this problem : We see clearly that the problem seems
to be the use of the word "brahminism" or "brahmin" which each
person interprets in a different context, right? (Hope I haven't
lost you here).
So, why don't we just find a new name for this philosophy
this ideology? I suggest "Indo-Nazism". I have a feeling that
perhaps some people will argue that "Brahminism" is the ONLY
appropriate word .. For those of you, I say: If you really want
this forum to be free of slur and flames, and be a forum to
discuss issues, this will give you more time to do so. But if
you enjoy flaming, go ahead.
-----------------------------------------------------
Finally, what I wanted to say on this issue: Yes, we must
fight wrong ideologies and people who follow them. I see a
person who says that a section of people must be punished for
what their ancestors did are ideologically no different from
VHP which says that the mosque must be destroyed because
invaders destroyed a temple 500 years ago.
There is little time or resources for hate. Hate is
worse than murder. Time and again we have said that we must
take the good in anything and discard what is bad. So Kathir's
statement which says "Sankaracharya supports caste system. So
the people who follow him support caste system" is evidently
out of logic... It is not as simple as that. You can like many
things about somebody and not like many things about him. You
might only try to imbibe his good qualities, not the bad ones.
And finally, as Meenan once righly pointed out, (and
there was a quotation by Vivekananda), "Brahmin"
means "one who has realized the absolute/truth" i.e. is wise
and great. Not one person in this world is a Brahmin by that
definition...by the same token, no one is BORN a brahmin...
and everybody has the right to be one.
I'm sure there is more to be added to my earlier list.
Feel free to do so.........
AC Surendran
S. Sankarapandi
In article <22cgut$5...@news.u.washington.edu> ng...@carson.u.washington.edu (V.
Nagarajan) writes:
>In article <227qav$6...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> ssan...@magnus.acs.oh
You are probably mixing my views and Periyar's writings/speeaches together.
For me, they are quite distinct and different. The only relation between
Brahminism and brahmins can be that some brahmins can be brahminists. But
that cannot be taken as a relation between the two because some non-brahmins
can also be brahminists. May be let us rename the brahminism as Indo_nazism as
Arun Surendran has suggested. I hope you would probably exclude me !
About Periyar's writings and speeches: One can easily see that he mixed both
brahmins and brahminism at different times and as I said earlier, he cannot be
absolved for the hate-monger against the brahmins due to this.
Now, I only mentioned that if he talked about brahminism as a snake, then I
have no problems with that. So I am very clear about what I think and how I
should separate the two.
Hope that clears your misunderstanding !
>.
>.
>>Now let me go into excerpts of his speeches from which you can compare yourse
lf
>>with my conclusions:
>.
>.
>> Untouchablity... How long one can expect an oppressed society to be
>>patient and passive... Does anybody still believe that they should live like
>>that instead of getting ready to die against untouchability. THE ATROCITIES
>>COMITTED BY NON-BRAHMINS ARE HIGHER THAN THAT OF BRAHMINS.. But we blame
>>the brahmins more because they only made the fire and it has caught us too..
>>
>>(My comment: Though he admits the atrocities done by the non-brahmin, he took
a
>>less harder stand against them becuase he wanted to fight brahminism first.
>>This has been exploited by the Vellala movement.)
>
> This here is what i mean. Even the able Sankarapandi appears to be
> confused.
>
Nagarajan,
I honestly dont understand how you say that I am confused. I can correct
myself if you can point out more clearly.
> [My answer to Daniel is that it is a lot easier to fight your own
> "kind". EVR, as he was born a hindu would have been ineffective in
> dealing with the christians. He would have come up against the wall
> of religious difference. Had he been a brahmin, the reaction against
> him among the brahmins would have been orders of magnitude less
> strong. By the same token, since he belonged to a nonbrahmin "upper"
> caste, he would have made some real differnce by taking on the powerful
> non-brahmin upper castes.]
This is the same thing I also replied to Daniel regarding other religions. You
have made it more crisper and clear.
>>
>>The Brahmins, the riches and the government are the three enemies. It is
>>impossible to fight all the three and hence we will try one by one.
>>
> So it is really the brahmins, not brahminism! At least EVR was forth-
> right on this point.
See above, Periyar mixed both of them invariably. I dont know why, whether it
was sleight of the hand or intentionally. It is again very subjective who
reads this and what if Periyar was a Brahmin etc. So I have no answers for
this.
But I dont go by this. Probably it is better to rename brahminism and
Indo-nazism for the sake of our discussions (Thanks Arun, for suggesting a nice
alternative). I am sure atleast Nagarajan can understand me if I use this
name.
Thanks, for pointing out the subtle mistake in my stand.
S. Sankarapandi
ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
>
>
> - Nagarajan
>
S. Sankarapandi
In article <22e6fk$p...@news.acns.nwu.edu> ra...@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Raghavan Ja
yaraman) writes:
>Excerpts from Sankarapandi's post on Periyar and his comments:-
>----------------
>
>>patient and passive... Does anybody still believe that they should live
>like
>>that instead of getting ready to die against untouchability. THE
>ATROCITIES
>>COMITTED BY NON-BRAHMINS ARE HIGHER THAN THAT OF BRAHMINS.. But we blame
>
>>the brahmins more because they only made the fire and it has caught us
>too..
>>
>>(My comment: Though he admits the atrocities done by the non-brahmin, he
>took a
>>less harder stand against them becuase he wanted to fight brahminism
>first.
>>This has been exploited by the Vellala movement.)
>
>What a logic? [both from Periyar and Sankarapandi]. As Nagarajan pointed
>out, the distinction between Brahminism and brahmins has totally vanished.
>I wouldn't say Sankarapandi is confused. He knows what he has written. So
>much for balanced opinions.
>
>
>raghavan
>
Nagarajan raised a valid point and I have answered it in my-follow up to his
posting. I have also admitted that it was my mistake due to mixing up of the
two terms. In the context of `brahminism' as Indo-nazism (thanks to Arun
Surendran), it must have been cleared.
Now, I will answer you and the likes of CHO Ramasamy who can hide behind others
and carry-out with your hidden agenda. Atleast Periyar was a open-book though
he had been communal with respect to the brahmin_non-brahmin issue. But you
and your mentor CHO Ramasamy whose sensiblities would get activated only when
Brahminism is criticized have to answer the following question, if I have to
even consider thinking what you say about me.
What do yo think about the caste itself ?. Do you think, it is an evil ?
Do you think this should continue ? What solution you would suggest if you say
it is an evil and has to disappear ? Will you agree that Brahmins and the
non-Brahmin upper and middle castes (broadly let me put them under Vellala
castes) have the responsibility to listen to the misery of the Dalits
seriously and immediately come to a solution which should convince the Dalits,
which may cause great displeaure among the Brahmins and Vellalas ? Will you
agree throwing all the caste-ridden garbage from the religious texts ?
First answer these questions, then I would even consider thinking whether I am
a racist or an equivalent of Hitler !
oru inthiyak kanavu
-------------------
"inthiyanukku neeNda kaalamaaga aasai;
saathi ozhiya vENdumenRu -
than saathiyaith thavira !"
(Indian has a long-lasting dream,
that castes should be damned..
except his own caste !)
S. Sankarapandi
ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
"Unfortunately there is no mirror to reflect the mind"
Krishna Sivaramapuram
>You are probably mixing my views and Periyar's writings/speeaches together.
>For me, they are quite distinct and different. The only relation between
>Brahminism and brahmins can be that some brahmins can be brahminists. But
>that cannot be taken as a relation between the two because some non-brahmins
>can also be brahminists. May be let us rename the brahminism as Indo_nazism as
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Arun Surendran has suggested. I hope you would probably exclude me !
Why brahminism.... I don't think the principles of brahminism were bad. The
people who interpreted it had a wrong idea. That doesn't mean that the
principle is bad. These days people involve in PEACEFUL hunger strike, which
finally spoils production. Many of these hunger strikes are just conducted
for political reasons. These guys then show gandhi as their example. Does this
mean that gandhi's principle non-cooperation is wrong. NO!
principle is not the one to be blamed, it is the interpretation which is
wrong.
And even if you are going to blame the principle why ONLY brahminism. Blame
all the "ism's" quoting which people have committed oppression. Then every
"ism" in this world is wrong... Will you accept to this... Even "Atheism"
my dear friend....
>S. Sankarapandi
>ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
krish
--
S S Krishna
Deptt. of Computer Science
Oregon State Univ, Corvallis, OR 97331
Affable
> Correct me if I am wrong, but this argument/flame war about
> BRAHMINISM or ANTI-BRAHMINISM has been going on EVER since
> SCT was started. We have seen the same ideas recycled over and
> over again. Some articles have lead to serious name calling
> and flames.
No, you are not wrong, AC. This and reservation policy have been
recycled to the maximum extent. Now, we've to consult with recycling experts
whether they can be recycled further without any harmful net pollution.
Every caste must have oppressed some other castes in some way. So,
instead of talking brahminism always, why not talk about chettiarism,
vanniarism, naadarism...etc under the title indo-nazism as suggested
by AC with the disclaimer chettiarism is not the one practised by chettiars
..etc. [In case, anybody wants to know, neither I'm a brahmin nor I got
any benefits from the TN reservation policy.]
[The article was well written. AC, I didn't know that you can put your ideas
so well. Keep writing.]
Cheers,
Venkat
Satish_D...@transarc.com
This is a typical Tamil fanatical Hindi-dumping attitude fostered by
DMK and DK.
>
> The mooda nambikkai, aasaarams,
> sadangkukaL in Indian culture is
> deep rooted in vEdic Brahmanism.
> The veLLala christian we talked
> about earlier [rather ssp] adopted
> brahmanism in Christianity.
> Brahmanism was not just practised
> by Brahmins. Although
> introduced by vEdic Brahmins into
> thamizh land it was favored by the
> ruling class which in thamizh land
> were veLLaalars. Even thamizh
> kings married veLLaalars if you look
> into history.
> The shift of power from veLLaalars
> to Brahmins went only during British
> rule. Brahmins got English education,
> worked for the British, went higher
> up in Bureacracy [In fact British
> learnt about hierarchy/divisions in Indian society
> very well ]. The veLLaalars
> desperately needing power, education
> converted into Christianity but did
> not adopt Christian values of equality.
> PLEASE DO NOTE THAT CHRISTIANITY OR ISLAM
> DOES NOT TALK CASTE CRAP LIKE BRAHMANISM.
A bunch of BS here. Clearly this is beyond naivete. Casteism is
followed not only by Brahmins but by all morons all over India.
Wonder when the grey-matterly challenged (Was
that PC enough) be reasonable enough to drive out all
forms of casteism. All of them deserve a cast. :-)
> Periyaar did not go into temples [Please
> know that sir] to garland chapals.
> He wanted to show the Hindu people
> that by garlanding with chappals
> nothing is going to happen to your
> life as the Brahmin priest frightens.
He wanted to be an iconoclastic racist. It worked.
Being a heretic works you know! Though he did expose
a lot of racism espoused by the brahmins and one has to
credit him for that but on the other hand he also innundated the
Tamilians with racist attitudes, paradoxically inculcating
what he was trying to eliminate.
> The idols were not taken from temples
> [Please note] No temple in TN
> was tampered for his campaign. They brought
> their own idols. He wanted to drive the
> fear of stupidity and false belief
> amoung the enslaved indian masses.
> periyaar fought the pan indian religion,
> Brahmanism and not Brahmins. The Brahmin media
> tried its best to tarnish his image.
I am against religion and everything that comes with it as well that
does not mean I am allowed to be insensitive and offend other peoples
beliefs, like the AFU (AFU from snafu) Hindutva movement did to the
mosque in Ayodhya.
> Please do not accuse noble people.
>
Please, racists of any kind, far from being noble,
IMHO are Mutant Flies (MFs in short). Ofcourse you would be
right in pointing out that this includes everyone (Brahmins or otherwise)
who beleives one caste or the other is superior or inferior.
> I only wish you were better informed about
> periyaar and his selfless service to his
> people.
> Lastly, even DMK is not all bad as you are
> saying. As far as corruption
> and dishonesty and gaining power
> they might equal congress.
> But they do not destroy temples,
> mosques and churches.
> They have members from all religions.
> DMK is SECULAR unlike BJP/RSS/SS?HINDU
> munnani. Congress and Brahmanism
> go hand in hand. They unlawfully
> dismiss dravidian govts when they do
> not like them. remeber that the governor
> was against dismissal of DMK govt in
> '89, but Congress was hell bent so changed
> the governor and dismissed the govt.
> The Brahmin lobby that was behind
> dismissing duly elected DMK is nowhere
> close to dismissing Jaya beacsue she
> serves her interests. Jaya has very bad
> record of corruption amounting to 100's
> of crores from Jeya publication. According
> to the law you cannot be an owner of
> something like that when you are in office.
> The state govt contarcts were given to JP
> and they found that.
Machchi, DMK thondarro?
> the center. In DMK if elected to
> power and have positions it is
> the higher caste hindoos who
> will dominate.
Kanavu kaanum vazhkai aanaal ( annal?)
>
> As I have said and poinetd look
> at our history and language and do realize
> that they made thamizh a common man language.
>
Oh yes. Tamil lives only beacause of DMK and periyaar. I also have a
bridge to sell - any takers :-)
> anban
> kathir
> >--
6 lives nanban
Satish
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
>Machchi, DMK thondarro?
thaaNGkaL RSS thondar pOlum. poi mithavaatham
pEsukireer.
>> the center. In DMK if elected to
>> power and have positions it is
>> the higher caste hindoos who
>> will dominate.
>Kanavu kaanum vazhkai aanaal ( annal?)
neer RSS thondarE :-))))))))
illai jeyavin kaikkooliyO!
>>
>> As I have said and poinetd look
>> at our history and language and do realize
>> that they made thamizh a common man language.
>>
>Oh yes. Tamil lives only beacause of DMK and periyaar. I also have a
>bridge to sell - any takers :-)
Yes. DMK made thamizh a common man's language.
unless you might want to change history.
We know history will forget those who forget history.
anban
kathir
Subramanian Kalyanasundaram
>.. thamizh flourished. Even to day their marriages
>are conducted in thamizh. Prayers are in thamizh.
>
>
> One spanish friend who is a christian visited
>thamizh church in toronto. Songs are composed
>, set to classical thamizh raahams and sung.
>He brought me a plaque [I have it in my room
>in front here] written in thamizh.
>
> "iyEsu kirishthu sollukiRaar:
> naan ulahaththiRkku oLiyaakiREn,
> ennaip pin paRRukiRavan
> **************************"
>
> yOwaan 8:12.
>
> They patronize thamizh.
>
> inthu matham appadi alla. saathi solli,
>manu tharmaththai padiththup paarum.
>Punishments are specified for inter marrying.
>
> They use sanskrit [invented by brahmins]
>.. They use it for worship in thamizh
>.. They
>sell ganga water for $ z.
> In short Brahmanisn is more poisonous than
>snake. It needs a lot of effort on the
>part of everybody, including Brahmins to
>kill it.
> We are plagued by corrupt practices.
>I do not want to still convert. Want
>to fight within the sytem. see that
>thamizh is brought into forefront
>in our own temples and our religion
>becomes less ritualistic[ they are poring
>milk on stones whiole people are dying
>hungry]
>
>
> anban
> kathir
Mr. Kathiravan,
You have been lamenting for quite a long time in the net that
some people are being considered special and they dominate
others.
You are quoting IAS posts and other jobs also. You have done a good
job. Now why don't you concentrate on ending the domination of
another group called MALES. That group forms around 50% of humanity
but occupies more than 90% of the Heads of government posts, Parlia
ment member posts and also in ALMOST all the fields of life.
Come out strongly against this EVIL of MALE domination.
If there is one discrimination that is without parallel, that
is the discrimination suffered by WOMEN.
The world will not and SHOULD not prosper unless and until
the SECOND CLASS status of women is eradicated.
Religion has always played its devious part in ensuring this continued EVIL of male domination. GOD has always chosen only males like Prophet Mohammed, Jesus and Krishna as his messengers.
Or is masculinity a prerequisite to be satisfied before you are
chosen?
Prophet Mohammed, Jesus and Krishna have done many miracles.
But their miracles will pale into insignificance compared to the
miracle of the world which is able to continually drown and
suppress the voice of HALF of it.
Anita Hill has correctly noted "Whenever a woman accuses, the system
abuses". I categorically reject the nonsensical argument that male is
innately superior to female.
K. Subramanian.
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
Mr K. Subramanian:
You have been lamenting about "NEECH ZAAT"
that people are against you. Yes. women are discriminated;
peN adimai has a connection with religion of
Brahmanism not the mainstream Indian religion.
All inthiran, mithran, ruthran male. Please read
aadi sangkarars' book
"He talk about GREATNESS OF BRAHMIN MALEHOOD"
and inferiority of women. He is considered The
Saint of India [beacsue India is controlled by
the zealots and their stupid followers]
remember dravidians worshipped
kaaLi and sakthi etc.
But thamizh saints always tried to
strike a balance. maaNikkavaasagar
talks about "aaNaai, peNNai, aliyumaai...."
in vaasagam. I forgot the exact lines.
Dravidians even evolved half-male,
half-female concept of god and siva-sakthi
concept. refer to adi sk you will
certainly find male chauvinism.
Good luck;
anban
kathir
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
>Religion has always played its devious part in ensuring this continued EVIL of male domination. GOD has always chosen only males like Prophet Mohammed, Jesus and Krishna as his messengers.
>Or is masculinity a prerequisite to be satisfied before you are
>chosen?
>Prophet Mohammed, Jesus and Krishna have done many miracles.
>But their miracles will pale into insignificance compared to the
>miracle of the world which is able to continually drown and
>suppress the voice of HALF of it.
Good luck! Start your campaign.
Well I do not buy the male chauvinism
of BG-MANU-SKC-RAMAYANAM as well as even silambu
[in a subtle fashion]
Read maaNikkavaasagars thiruvaasaham.
You will get clear.
anban
kathir
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
[..]
>
> Yes. DMK made thamizh a common man's language.
No, I don't think so. It is true that they gave importance to
Tamil in many spheres, more than earlier governments.
Congress Govt. in fact initiated many 'thamizh vazhik kalvi'
efforts
but only in DMK's regime tamil got a greater prominence and
tamil became 'respectable' in things like 'mEdaip pEchchu'
.... In short the contribution to the tamil by DMK's measure
is not in doubt, but it is an exaggeration to say that they
'made taml a common man's language'. I should also say that
many dishonourable behavior of prominent DMK partymen and
their sympathizers brought greater disgrace to tamil than
the significant contribution they made in promoting tamil,
imo.
> unless you might want to change history.
>
>We know history will forget those who forget history.
>
> anban
> kathir
>
anbudan
-Selvaa
Satish_D...@transarc.com
k...@doe.carleton.ca (Kathiravan Krishnamurthi) writes:
> In <sgGnyf6SM...@transarc.com> Satish_D...@transarc.com writes:
> >Machchi, DMK thondarro?
>
> thaaNGkaL RSS thondar pOlum. poi mithavaatham
> pEsukireer.
Just to set the record straight, I had also said:
>> beliefs, like the AFU (AFU from snafu) Hindutva movement did to the
>>mosque in Ayodhya.
I doubt if an RSS sympathiser would espouse these attitudes.
> neer RSS thondarE :-))))))))
> illai jeyavin kaikkooliyO!
>
I do not subscribe to any racist groups and I definitely think that
the RSS and the BJP are racists of the first order and are despicable
at best. Please do not disgrace me by doubting whether I subscribe to
thier screwed up philosophies.
Now Jayalalitha is a different story. I have to admit I am turned on
by her :-) Only kidding :-)
OK man timeout! I could care less anymore. Let the Brahmins and the
others ( It is so silly to event classify like this) fight it out.
I am out of here!
Satish
sund...@me.uta.edu
> dan...@marl12.marl.panasonic.com (Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam) writes:
>
> >footwears, plainly to just offend the Hindus. I wonder what would have
> >happened if the DK brigade had ventured out to break the segregating wall
> >in the Christian cemetry at Tiruchy, or tried garlanding with footwear either
> >Jesus Christ or any Islamic icon.
> ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^
>
> Islam religion doesn't have icons. Infact, icon worship is banned.
>
The point Daniel was making was that Mr Periyar made sure he
did not offend muslims. Icon is just a wrong choice of word.
But there are other symbols of veneration for Tamil muslims.
Like the pictures of mosque in Mecca, or even the written name
of the prophet.
A juice shop owner had written the name of his shop as a mirror
image to stand out from the crowd. Among other things the name
"muhamadhu" written in tamil was also displayed laterally inverted.
The area muslims claimed this offends them and had the shop owner
repaint the board. (This news appeared in either Tuglak or Junior Vikatan
1989-90.)
Would Mr Periyar or any of his true followers dare write the name
of the prophet as mirror image? But they conduct "patti manRam"
with the title "kaamarasaththil vinjiyathu raamaayaNamaa
baarathamaa?" and the teams describe all the hindu goddesses as
whores. Some rationalism.
Ravi Sundaram
UTA
Aero
_____________________________________________________________________
V. Nagarajan
>
>>
>> brahmins and brahminism. I say obfuscatory because there usually is
>> a disclaimer made in the beginning in these types of analysis to the
>> effect that the two are not the same nor that they are totally
>> related, but then as the analysis proceeds the distinction invariably
>> disappears. I have observed this far too many times to believe that
>> the sleight of hand is unintentional. I could be wrong - the analyst
>> may simply be confused. My question is, why bother at all?
>
>
>You are probably mixing my views and Periyar's writings/speeaches together.
>For me, they are quite distinct and different. The only relation between
>Brahminism and brahmins can be that some brahmins can be brahminists. But
>that cannot be taken as a relation between the two because some non-brahmins
>can also be brahminists.
.
Sankarapandi, i don't know how else to read your comment, "though he..
admits...", other than to say that i see the equivalence nonbrahmins =
nonbrahminism (subscribers). You seem to have used them interchangeably
tho i believe you when you say that was not your intention. Any socio-
logical analysis that invokes this slippery concept called brahminism,
very quickly slides into an amorphous mass of confusion. I see the
choice of this name as deliberate - that it insinuates brahmins in
our highly caste-conscious society and scape-goats them for every ill.
As i see it, the problem is oppression and bigotry, not caste. We all
seem capable of hating others and caste is to blame mainly to the
extent that it provides a reason for association. (Note how quickly
many of the attackers of "brahminism" slip into a language that is
indistinguishable from that of the RSS, VHP bigots.) Caste has given
us stability but at the very high price of stagnation. But that's
another matter. It is inconceivable to me that EVR who broke off
from the Congree Party over the issue of temple entry for the dalits
would not fight for their HUMAN RIGHTS if he was so concerned about
that. I cannot believe that he left it up to the dalits to fight for
it while having no reservation whatsoever in siding with a class of
people who shared at least as much blame if not more in the oppression
of the dalits. I find it mildly amusing that you would make such a
big ruckus over the Ambedkar - Gandhi disagreements and yet would
be gracious and charitable in explaining away EVR's apparent
unwillingness to side with the dalits. I too can make grandiose
statements about a lot of things but if i am unwilling to act on them,
my statements amount to diddlysquat.
Finally, here's an excerpt from Ajay Divakaran's insightful post in
SCI:
<begin quote>
Various ideologies are trying to get a free ride on the anti-Hindutva
bandwagon. Sofiane Sahroui's pan-Islamism is a very good example. I loathe
and detest the way some non-Indian Muslims choose to lecture us on how to
treat our own countrymen. Being anti-Hindutva does not by itself make anyone
my friend. I am of course staunchly anti-Hindutva, but I am not anti-Hindu,
because I am a Hindu myself. Hindutva adherents do not have a monopoly on
Hinduism, and as a Hindu I deeply resent their habit of questioning the Hinduness of all Hindus who oppose them.
Back to the free riders. The pan-Islamists, depending on how subtle
or charitable they are, are at worst intolerant of non-Muslims and at best
adopt a very patronizing "Okay, we will graciously let you live," attitude
towards non-Muslims. Nothing could be more abhorrent to the secular creed.
Another category of free riders consists of those whose chief complaint
against caste oppression seems to be that they did not get to be the
oppressors and not against the oppression per se. I am quite appalled by the way
"secular" people have eagerly embraced Lallu Prasad Yadav and deified him
as an apostle of secularism. I can only recommend that they go beyond their
India Today perceptions, and observe backward caste electoral politics
first hand. Visit Nagore in Rajasthan or Baghpat in UP during the elections
or for that matter any other "backward caste" stronghold. You will then see
the "sotay say vote layngay" (we will get votes by wielding our sticks)
philosophy at work, and you will see a new interpretation of universal
adult franchise. Entire Dalit villages are either wiped off the rolls or the
Dalits are asked to not set foot outside their homes or "persuaded" to vote
for the appropriate party if they actually make it to the voting booth. The entire electoral
approach is very blatantly and cynically caste-oriented. I have mentioned
the "Boat (Vote) aur Beti" principle on the net earlier. The lumpenness
(Aha! I got to use that word!) of backward caste electoral politics shows
that its leaders seek to replace one kind of oppression with another. Their
opposition to Hindutva does not stem from any innate secularism but from
its threat to their caste oriented politics. I do share their opinion that
Hindutva has a very upper-caste bias. But backward castes with medium
land holdings have been as brutal towards the Dalits as the upper castes
have been (and still are). Even now in Rajasthan,
a Dalit bridegroom has to alight from
his horse on his wedding day when the procession passes through a non-Dalit
neighbourhood, irrespective of whether it is an "upper-caste" neighbourhood
or a "middle caste" neighbourhood. This is just a "mild" example.
<end quote>
- Nagarajan
Gayathri Krishnamurthy
> Mr K. Subramanian:
>
> You have been lamenting about "NEECH ZAAT"
> that people are against you. Yes. women are discriminated;
> peN adimai has a connection with religion of
> Brahmanism not the mainstream Indian religion.
Good joke.
> All inthiran, mithran, ruthran male. Please read
> aadi sangkarars' book
Isn't ruthran = sivan ? I thought Sivan was a dravidian god....
> "He talk about GREATNESS OF BRAHMIN MALEHOOD"
> and inferiority of women. He is considered The
> Saint of India [beacsue India is controlled by
> the zealots and their stupid followers]
>
> remember dravidians worshipped
> kaaLi and sakthi etc.
> But thamizh saints always tried to
And Aryans worshipped Parvati, Lakshmi, Saraswathi - so ? Dravidian gods
like Murugan were polygamists - any goddesses with multiple husbands who
were just as tolerant to polyandry ? And the different definitions of 'Karpu'
- is that an Aryo-Brahminical conspiracy too ? And not to sound offensive,
there is a theory that salvation can be attained by looking on God as
one's lover/husband ( a la Meera, vaLLi) - can the same be said for men
too - that they can look on a goddess as a lover/wife ? The common
reaction to such a statement would be shock. This double standard
is again a product of our conditioning - that polygamy is OK while
polyandry isn't - what works for the god doesn't for the goddess.
Even gods are allowed their indulgences, which may even be praised
- while goddesses are always good, loyal etc and transgressions
will absolutely not be tolerated - being women they *have* to behave
at all times.
Indian tendency towards women has been one of seeing black and white.
Either they deify women as 'goddess', 'sakthi' etc or treat her like a
second class citizen who is inferior to the male race. A woman is either
all good or all bad. This is *universal*.
If you want to talk about "Dravidians being different - look at Auwai"
etc - one can quote Gargi too on the Aryan side. This is IMO, *not*
an Aryan-Brahminical (sic) conspiracy and cannot be made into a
Dravidian-Aryan argument. Race is irrelevant as far as discrimination
towards women goes. It has been going on for ages.
Even the Bible has passages discriminatory to women - is that an Aryan
or Brahmin conspiracy too ? What about the treatment of women who
are Muslims ? If you bring in race for each and every argument and go on
saying race X is better than race Y etc etc can I call you a zealot as
well ?
> strike a balance. maaNikkavaasagar
> talks about "aaNaai, peNNai, aliyumaai...."
> in vaasagam. I forgot the exact lines.
As for striking a balance, there was a discussion on ThiruvaLLuvar
(Luv :-) to borrow vijay's term for him) and a kuraL which was
discriminatory - the one on "deivam thozhAL etc" (Selva, I don't
agree with your interpretation :-) so please don't 'attack' :-) me).
It is better IMO, not to make this argument into a race argument.
> Dravidians even evolved half-male,
> half-female concept of god and siva-sakthi
> concept.
But did not practise it. So, the *concept* itself made no difference.
BTW, this ardhanAri concept is also found in Adi Sankara's 'Sowndaryalahari'.
Is Adi Sankara Dravidian or Aryan (I guess I should revert to the questionnaire
posted once by Guntur Balaji as to who is Dravidian and who isn't. I'm
terribly confused....) ?
> refer to adi sk you will
> certainly find male chauvinism.
>
You find male chauvinism everywhere. See above on adi sk - he talks of
ardhanari and yet is male chauvinistic. This is the universal hypocrisy being
practised in India through the ages. Diefy on one hand, treat unequally on
the other. Race by itself is irrelevant here as all races have done it at
one time or the other.
Gayathri.
"Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic
walls......into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake !"
- Rabindranath Tagore.
Krishna Sivaramapuram
>> Mr K. Subramanian:
>>
>> You have been lamenting about "NEECH ZAAT"
>> that people are against you. Yes. women are discriminated;
>> peN adimai has a connection with religion of
>> Brahmanism not the mainstream Indian religion.
>
>Good joke.
>
Really a very interesting article..... Way to go gayathri...
It clearly sent a message to people who confuse race and women discrimination.
>Gayathri.
>
>"Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic
> walls......into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake !"
> - Rabindranath Tagore.
krish
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
>In article <kat.743137115@ro>, k...@doe.carleton.ca (Kathiravan Krishnamurthi) writes:
>> Mr K. Subramanian:
>>
>Good joke.
>
>> All inthiran, mithran, ruthran male. Please read
>> aadi sangkarars' book
>Isn't ruthran = sivan ? I thought Sivan was a dravidian god....
Good joke here.
>like Murugan were polygamists - any goddesses with multiple husbands who
>were just as tolerant to polyandry ? And the different definitions of 'Karpu'
paaNdiya kingdom was founded by a women.
vaLLi was murugan's consort
>- is that an Aryo-Brahminical conspiracy too ? And not to sound offensive,
>there is a theory that salvation can be attained by looking on God as
>one's lover/husband ( a la Meera, vaLLi) - can the same be said for men
>too - that they can look on a goddess as a lover/wife ? The common
aaNdaaL and meera took that path of love in 8 th and 15 th
century respectively.
Yes. It is easy to write that after someone has really
said that first. Where do you find that concept. In vEdaas;
No. Adi sankara was influenced by dravida aachaaryaas
and maaNikkavaasagar [could be a brahmin or not]. So your
assumption of aryan-brahmin is as wrong as one of
surEsh.
who interpreted sivan as aariyan -race in
"paasamaam paRRu aRuththu paarikkum aariyanE"
I do not believe in paarpaars as a race
after all. It is when somebody comes up with
the concept of superiority based on the birth.
maaNikkavaasagar has kept up thamizh tradition
and does not talk about male-brahmin superiority.
adi wrote whatever struck his mind. he
wanted to defend brahmanism. he took
southern dravidian thoughts for the convenience
of spirituality.
>But did not practise it. So, the *concept* itself made no difference.
>BTW, this ardhanAri concept is also found in Adi Sankara's 'Sowndaryalahari'.
>Is Adi Sankara Dravidian or Aryan (I guess I should revert to the questionnaire
>posted once by Guntur Balaji as to who is Dravidian and who isn't. I'm
>terribly confused....) ?
Thanks for accepting your confusion. I am only
against projecting a 5 % culture as pan-indian
culture and not acknowleding the southern-dravidian
thoughts, metaphysics and philosophies that has contributed
so much to Indian Hindu philosophy..
I quote for your convenience an earlier post
of selvaa.
that appeared in SCT an year ago.
kurams says vEdhanthic tradition in Hinduism
scored victory
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
selva:
You are SEROIOUSLY WRONG in your conclusion. Brahminical
vedanthic tradition scored a victory ? Where and when ?!
Who concluded so ?! If you are genuinely interested in knowing
the truth READ the Tamil works mentioned earlier ! Sri Adi
Sankara, Sri Madhvacharya and Sri Ramanujaacharya all come
from Tamil lands and they were guided by Dravidacharyas !
( probably except Madhvaacharya, I'm not sure; but the
Vaishnavite tradition is deeply rooted in Tamil/dravidian
philosophy and metaphysics, although much effort was spent
trying to relate to sanskrit works, which i understand were
not very successful or useful for gaining greater understanding).
The wisdom and culture of dravidianoids were remarkable
and there is no point in dismissing them, the vast majority,
as 'dissipate aborginal races'. I hope a better understanding
prevails ! Many many saints and siddhas WERE and ARE
dravidianoids and much of TRUE metaphysics comes from them
and not by manipulating and playing with words. Tamil is
very fortunate to have an impressive collection of TRUE
philosophy couched in soulful devotional songs in addition to
pure Sastras.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
In short you might have some points on feminism but spare
aaNdaaL and meerabhai. They chose their own path of love
to attain gOd.
>
>> refer to adi sk you will
>> certainly find male chauvinism.
>>
>You find male chauvinism everywhere. See above on adi sk - he talks of
>ardhanari and yet is male chauvinistic. This is the universal hypocrisy being
>practised in India through the ages. Diefy on one hand, treat unequally on
>the other. Race by itself is irrelevant here as all races have done it at
>one time or the other.
I am not talkin of race here. It is the thamizh scriptures
, most of the old ones, especially sangkam lit. and times
is very balanced. I do accept kaimpeN was a problem. Women
had right to decide their spouse and education was accessible.
It is the religion of Brahmanism
that puts men and especially brahmin men next
to god even today.
Yes. Race is not relevant now but the
cultural distinctions and sentiments expressed
in most ancient thamizh lit., education and saanROrs
amoung all sections of society will point
you the difference.
>Gayathri.
>"Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic
> walls......into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake !"
anban
kathir
Balaji Kannan
gaya...@baboon.ecn.purdue.edu (Gayathri Krishnamurthy) writes:
[..]
>too - that they can look on a goddess as a lover/wife ? The common
>reaction to such a statement would be shock. This double standard
>is again a product of our conditioning - that polygamy is OK while
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>polyandry isn't - what works for the god doesn't for the goddess.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Polyandry is also Polygamy. The word u were looking for
shd be Polygyny.
With that nitpicking aside :-) let us move to the statement
that "this double standard is a product of...."
Here are some stats: Only 16% of the cultures in the world
encourage monogamy [Western especially]
The majority of the rest allow for
polygyny.
Only 0.5% of the world cultures practice
polyandry.
Looks like double standards right ? But, only 5-10 % of the men
in the polygynous cultures have more than one wife at a time.
So, monogamy wins out anyways :-)
As for conditioning being the reason, that is just one side of
the story ! REPEAT: That is just one side of the story !
Polygyny has genetic payoffs for men, whereas polyandry for men
spells genetic suicide. Men neither go thru pregnancy nor lactate.
It doesn't make much "sense" for a man to join a harem of 12 women
when he can have 1000's of children in his lifetime [provided he
can manage to get many partners and is not sexually exhausted too]
A woman can at the most have only 25 children !! [except for those
in the guiness book, thru multiple births]
Polygyny - under right conditions - has reproductive benefits
for the womenfolk. Ofcourse this will not be cited as the reason
when a woman joins a harem. The reasons usually are different.
Anyways, the human reproductive strategy - BY AND LARGE - is serial
monogamy with clandestine adultery. I am talking of TODAY.
So, that is the other side of the story :-)
>Even gods are allowed their indulgences, which may even be praised
>- while goddesses are always good, loyal etc and transgressions
>will absolutely not be tolerated - being women they *have* to behave
>at all times.
[other stuff in general agreement with deleted]
cheers,
bk
Trivia: Only 3% of mammals are monogamous. Roughly 90% of all birds
are monogmaous.
Raghavan Jayaraman
"Now, I will answer you and the likes of CHO Ramasamy who can hide behind
others
and carry-out with your hidden agenda. Atleast Periyar was a open-book
though
he had been communal with respect to the brahmin_non-brahmin issue. But
you
and your mentor CHO Ramasamy whose sensiblities would get activated only
when
Brahminism is criticized have to answer the following question, if I have
to
even consider thinking what you say about me.
----------------
I can't help but laugh at your irascibility. Probably we can argue later
once U cool down.
raghavan
Affable
(Gayathri Krishnamurthy) writes:
[deleted]
> is again a product of our conditioning - that polygamy is OK while
> polyandry isn't - what works for the god doesn't for the goddess.
Hey GK, how about Draupadhi? I think she's considered as goddess by some
people. [correct me if i'm wrong]
> Even gods are allowed their indulgences, which may even be praised
> - while goddesses are always good, loyal etc and transgressions
> will absolutely not be tolerated - being women they *have* to behave
> at all times.
Yep, this attitude is to be condemned. But I'd prefer, instead of changing
women to behave like men, why not change men's attitude like women's
in the case of loyalty?
> Indian tendency towards women has been one of seeing black and white.
> Either they deify women as 'goddess', 'sakthi' etc or treat her like a
> second class citizen who is inferior to the male race. A woman is either
> all good or all bad. This is *universal*.
Deja vu! :-) "peNNukku peNNE ethiri". If some female wants to change
some bad social habit that's being done to women for quite a long time,
who is first preventing her to do so? Another woman with her stinging
statments like "avaLukkenna, sampaathikkirOm enkira thimir" or "purushan
solrathaik kEkkaadha adankaappidaari" etc. Particularly in the case of
widow remarriage, "purushan seththu aaRu maatham kooda aakalai, athukkuLLe
udal sukam kEkkuthu pOlirukku". Lots of males are very progressive minded.
We can change our society slowly. See, compared to fifties and all,
there are lots of changes in the case of women's equality. Present day
young females should not follow the footstep of their mom/grandma and then
we can see the difference.
[deleted as I don't have anything to say]
> You find male chauvinism everywhere. See above on adi sk - he talks of
> ardhanari and yet is male chauvinistic. This is the universal hypocrisy being
> practised in India through the ages. Diefy on one hand, treat unequally on
> the other. Race by itself is irrelevant here as all races have done it at
> one time or the other.
Yes, male chauvinism everywhere but flared by females themselves. Lack
of financial security and fear of social ostracism may be the reasons.
Cheers,
Venkat
--
internet : ar...@uh.edu | If you love something,set it free.
ar...@tree.egr.uh.edu(NeXT mails OK)| If it comes back, it is yours.
BITNET : aruna@UHOU | If it does not, it never was.
THEnet, DECnet : UHOU::aruna |
Bellnet:(713)225-6426(h)/(713)743-4250(w)|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
swaminathan,kashi r
>
>
>gaya...@baboon.ecn.purdue.edu (Gayathri Krishnamurthy) writes:
>
>[..]
>
>>too - that they can look on a goddess as a lover/wife ? The common
>>reaction to such a statement would be shock. This double standard
>>is again a product of our conditioning - that polygamy is OK while
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>polyandry isn't - what works for the god doesn't for the goddess.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Polyandry is also Polygamy. The word u were looking for
> shd be Polygyny.
>
> With that nitpicking aside :-) let us move to the statement
> that "this double standard is a product of...."
>
Your nitpicking was wrong.
Gayathri's point was correct.
Polygamy is a man with multiple wives.
Polyandry is a woman with multiple husbands (Like panjali marrying
all the Pandavas).
Polygamy is accepted.
Polyandry is not.
This is a double standard aginst the women.
That was precisely Gayathri's point. By your nitpicking you have
changed her question.
Polygyny is same as polygamy except the man need not be married to
all the female he fertilizes.
This is irrelevant to her question about double standards.
> Here are some stats: Only 16% of the cultures in the world
> encourage monogamy [Western especially]
> The majority of the rest allow for
> polygyny.
>
> Only 0.5% of the world cultures practice
> polyandry.
>
> Looks like double standards right ? But, only 5-10 % of the men
> in the polygynous cultures have more than one wife at a time.
> So, monogamy wins out anyways :-)
>
> As for conditioning being the reason, that is just one side of
> the story ! REPEAT: That is just one side of the story !
>
> Polygyny has genetic payoffs for men, whereas polyandry for men
> spells genetic suicide. Men neither go thru pregnancy nor lactate.
You probably should look into a dictionary and understand the terms
before nitpicking on Gayathri.
(rest of the discussion comparing polygamy and polygyny deleted)
> Anyways, the human reproductive strategy - BY AND LARGE - is serial
> monogamy with clandestine adultery. I am talking of TODAY.
>
> So, that is the other side of the story :-)
>
>>Even gods are allowed their indulgences, which may even be praised
>>- while goddesses are always good, loyal etc and transgressions
>>will absolutely not be tolerated - being women they *have* to behave
>>at all times.
>
>
>[other stuff in general agreement with deleted]
>
>cheers,
>bk
>
>Trivia: Only 3% of mammals are monogamous. Roughly 90% of all birds
> are monogmaous.
Yes, trivia,
Meenan Vishnu
[stuff deleted]
>Agreed , I am not expecting Mr. Periyar to change everything. Also I did
>not make any assumptions that Mr. Periyar supported the practices of the
>Church or that of Islam. All I was trying to point out, was their
>silence ( Mr. Periyar and that of DK members later) more out of political
>reasons. The last statement is my judgeent and I could be wrong.
I have not been reading this thread. So I may be making a point
already made. Your claim of "silence" is not true.
Here is a excerpt from the book "E. V. Ramaswami Naicker-Periyar,
A study of the Influence of a Persolaity in Contemporary South India"
published by Department of History, University of Lund, Sweden.
-begin quote-
"In Kanchipuram tha rationalistic Buddhism was once at home, but the
Brahmins killed the Buddhists and pulled down their monasteries".
In an interview in November 1971 Periyaar, however, stated:
"Now I have found that Buddhism is no longer good for this age. It
has become a religion with rites and rituals".
About Christianity he says: "It will be more difficult of abolish
Islam and Christianity from society." ..."What was said 2000 years ago
cannot be relevent today"... "Heaven in all religion is a way of
collecting money"... "Can you accept Christ according reason?"
Modern Rationalist (a DK publication) has a column ridiculing the
Bible and Christian concepts concentrating mainly on the problem of
combining God's love and justification with the evils of this world
['Modern Rationalist', October 1971, pp.15-16]. "The Bible is a
dangerous moral guide" is the heading of the article in the same
publication, October 1972. When quoting the Bible there are obvious
mistakes which indicates a lack of familiarity with the source. A
remark of Western religion, Christianity, may also be quoted from
'Viduthalai': "In the West people cling to God and religion but this
'foolishness' has not prevented them from all sorts of progress ...
the Westerner takes religion just as a ceremony| [Viduthalai 3/6/1972]
Periyar's criticism of Islam, Buddhism and Christianity comes out as
oppotune when serving his ideological propaganda but contains little
deeper analysis. He can speak appreciatively of them when finding
their ethics principles of equality and justice, thud advocating them
if they can prove an alternative to Brahmanic Hinduism ['Uyar
eNNanggaL II p. 33]. As religions, however, thery are hit by
accusation of superstition, exploitation and irrationalism. These
religiosn, in spite of their comparatively long presence in India,
seem ti have little part in forming, or breaking, the traditionally
dominant Hindu Brahmin society so that Periyar is obviously less
concerned with them
-end quote-
>
>
>daniel
Meenan Vishnu
Balaji Kannan
swa...@troy.cc.bellcore.com (swaminathan,kashi r) writes:
>Your nitpicking was wrong.
>Gayathri's point was correct.
So sez swaminathan ?!
You have honed "putting the foot in the big mouth" into
a fine art form on newsgroops, haven't ya ?? :-)
Ok, here is what I said and what GK said.
***********************************************
GK>>too - that they can look on a goddess as a lover/wife ? The common
GK>>reaction to such a statement would be shock. This double standard
GK>>is again a product of our conditioning - that polygamy is OK while
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
GK>>polyandry isn't - what works for the god doesn't for the goddess.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
BK> Polyandry is also Polygamy. The word u were looking for
BK> shd be Polygyny.
BK>
BK> With that nitpicking aside :-) let us move to the statement
BK> that "this double standard is a product of...."
************************************************
And you said:
>Polygamy is a man with multiple wives.
>Polyandry is a woman with multiple husbands (Like panjali marrying
>all the Pandavas).
Let us see. Here is an ethologist-anthropologist's viewpoint first:
*************************************
A man can mate with a single woman at a time (from the Greek mono, "one"
and gyny "female"), or he can have several mates simultaneously, polygyny
(many women). Women have two similar options: monandry (one man) or
polyandry (many men). These terms are used to describe common marriage
types. Thus the dictionary defines "monogyny" as "the state or custom
of having one wife at a time," "monandry" as "one husband," polygyny as
"many wives," and polyandry as "many husbands". Monogamy means "one spouse";
"polygamy" connotes "many spouses" without designating gender.
**************************************
Read last line carefully !
Here webster's dictionary corroborates:
******************
polygamy: 1 the state or practice of having two or more spouses at the
same time; plural marriage.
2 Zool. the practice of mating with more than one of the opposite
sex.
polygyny: 1. the state or practice of having 2 or more wives at the same
time.
2. Bot. ---
3. Zool. the mating of a male animal with more than one female.
polyandry: 1 the state or practice of having two or more husbands at the
same time.
2. Bot. ----
3.Zool. the mating one female animal with more than one male
*************
**************
monogamy: 1. the practice or state of being married to only one person at a
time.
2. Zool. the practice of having only one mate.
monogyny: the practice or state of being married to only one woman at a time.
monandry: the state or practice of having only one male sex partner over a
period of time.
************
>Polygamy is accepted.
>Polyandry is not.
>This is a double standard aginst the women.
Huh ? Go read my post. I said there is another side to the story
[genetic] than just "culture inscribing personality" !!
Double standards can be both cultural and "nature's" too :-) Get it ?
>That was precisely Gayathri's point. By your nitpicking you have
>changed her question.
>Polygyny is same as polygamy except the man need not be married to
>all the female he fertilizes.
But, I was being precise ! gyny - women
andry - men
>This is irrelevant to her question about double standards.
So you think ? Had a bad day ? I gave anudder side of the story.
If you think it is irrelevant, then so be it. But don't bullshit
before you know :-)
>You probably should look into a dictionary and understand the terms
>before nitpicking on Gayathri.
Hope I don't have to give meanings of the common word that appear in here :-)
Now, will you please start reading posts before shooting off your hips ??
>Yes, trivia,
If you wanna be a nitpicker' nitpicker, you gotto try something other than
feigned erudition :-). Trivia is better, believe me !
Next time before you come hunting, pick up a dictionary or browse thru books
.... Deal ?
cheers,
bk
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
>In article <CADup...@vu-vlsi.ee.vill.edu> dan...@vu-vlsi.ee.vill.edu (Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam) writes:
>
>
>Here is a excerpt from the book "E. V. Ramaswami Naicker-Periyar,
>A study of the Influence of a Persolaity in Contemporary South India"
>published by Department of History, University of Lund, Sweden.
>
>
>-begin quote-
>
>"In Kanchipuram tha rationalistic Buddhism was once at home, but the
>Brahmins killed the Buddhists and pulled down their monasteries".
>
>In an interview in November 1971 Periyaar, however, stated:
>"Now I have found that Buddhism is no longer good for this age. It
>has become a religion with rites and rituals".
>
>About Christianity he says: "It will be more difficult of abolish
>Islam and Christianity from society." ..."What was said 2000 years ago
>cannot be relevent today"... "Heaven in all religion is a way of
Is this an assumption or an inference based on some
principle ? I can agree- some might lose relevance..
Is "Pythagorus" theorem irrelevant today ( I believe
it is at least as old as 2000 years). Several things
said by vaLLuvar are valid today .. [ i guess Periyaar
might have meant exclusively about religious matters,
but even then it is not valid ! ]
[..]
>-end quote-
>>
>>daniel
>
>Meenan Vishnu
anbudan
-Selvaa
"epporuL yaar yaar vaayk kEtpinum.."
Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam
Agreed, and thanks for providing the accurate details of Mr. Periyar's
stance about other relgions.
Just one clarification about what I have posted about the 'silence' factor.
I guess what I really meant was the other religions were not subjected
to the same kind of mockery to which Hinduism was often subjected.
Morever the practioners of these relgions indulged in as much in casteism
as the upper caste Hindus, but again there were not taken to task like
the Brahmins were. I guess that if one is from some other relgion, he or
she could practice casteism in TN.
This is my last posting on this thread. Thanks for everyone who posted
informative articles related to this topic.
daniel
--
Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam Phone: (609) 386-5995
Matsushita Applied Research Labs. Fax : (609) 386-4999
95D Conneticut Drive e-mail: dan...@marl.panasonic.com
Burlington, NJ 08016
Ramesh Srinivasan
>> Mr K. Subramanian:
>>
>> You have been lamenting about "NEECH ZAAT"
>> that people are against you. Yes. women are discriminated;
>> peN adimai has a connection with religion of
>
>Good joke.
>
>> All inthiran, mithran, ruthran male. Please read
>> aadi sangkarars' book
>
>Isn't ruthran = sivan ? I thought Sivan was a dravidian god....
>
[lots of good stuff deleted]
>> "He talk about GREATNESS OF BRAHMIN MALEHOOD"
>> and inferiority of women. He is considered The
>> Saint of India [beacsue India is controlled by
>> the zealots and their stupid followers]
>>
>>
>
>You find male chauvinism everywhere. See above on adi sk - he talks of
>ardhanari and yet is male chauvinistic. This is the universal hypocrisy being
>practised in India through the ages. Diefy on one hand, treat unequally on
>the other. Race by itself is irrelevant here as all races have done it at
>one time or the other.
>
>Gayathri.
>
>"Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic
> walls......into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake !"
> - Rabindranath Tagore.
Good work, Gayatri.. Keep them coming..
I can see what "anban Kathir's" (what a misnomer!) response is
going to be. You guessed it.. 'Gayathri', being an Aryan(sic!)
name, that article of yours was the latest in a long list of
brahmin conspiracies against the native (mainstream,
sons-of-the-soil..:)) inhabitants of [fill in your favorite
town here]!
But seriously, I wonder if its worth keeping up this senseless
debate any longer. It is apparent that it has now degenerated
into thinly disguised name-calling. By "anban Kathir's"
definition, pretty much everything aryan was BAD! and everything
dravidian was GOOD! With all contemporary research in
archaeology indicating that the concept of Aryan entry into
India might very well have been nothing more than a figment of
European imagination, is'nt is time to discard all the mental
baggage and get on with what is required in today's world..
(For all those anal-retentives: please dont ask me for references,
just go out into the world and catch up with what's going on!)
Classifying an ancient and complex society such as ours in
terms of black and white will hinder our own attempts at
understanding it. And we would be poorer for it. What is
happening here is that people who are passionately decrying the
irrationality of ancient Indian society are committing the
same errors in judgement, TODAY!
So please bear with me, while I try to put out what I think is
missing from this much touted seminar on 'Lets find the cure
to all of India's many problems - Kill them Brahmins!'. This
thing is going to be a little long, and you're going to get it
all for under 2 cents...-:)
In case you're unaware of this, by the standards of other
civilizations, India was historically one of the most liberal
and open-minded places when it came to interactions among different
classes of society. I'm not saying that atrocities were not
committed. Far from it. All I'm saying is that they should be
viewed in the perspective of the times, and happenings in other
contemporary civilizations. Looking for Utopia, and whining
when you fail to find it in your searches is not the most
pragmatic way to go about your life! There was nothing like the
massacres which were very much a feature of daily existence
in most ancient european and middle eastern societies. There
was nothing in India to compare with the slaughters of the
Mongols.. Women were burnt as witches in Britain, just
four hundred years ago, with no justification whatsoever.
There were witch-hunts in Boston, (in this great and new
World). Ancient China was awash with the bloodshed that
accompanied the rise and fall of its various empires, every three
hundred years or so. Any culture, be it Christian, Islamic,
Buddhist or Hindu has had its share of atrocities. On the positive
side of the ledger, ancient Indian kings were alone in not
taking slaves from the lands they conquered.. Slavery was
pretty much a standard part of almost every other ancient
empire. Rajendra Cholzha's empire stretched all the way to
Indonesia and Bali. All that resulted was a fusion of
cultures, without the attendant savagery. There was no pogrom
of any community like what happened in the 'enlightened' west,
just 50 years ago (12 million people died in gas chambers)..
And, mind you, it was a mere 50 years ago, in the last
generation.. And look at Yugoslavia, again a part of the
larger Europe, a place where rationalists supposedly abound.
I am saddened when I see Indians mirroring the Western view
that our society was one of the worst ever. It seems that
nobody in the world hates India as much as Indians themselves
do. Most of these perceptions of ourselves must have been
ingrained in us during the periods of western rule, when, as a
civilization we were emasculated, concepts in our native
philosophy were discredited, and alien ideas were force fed
into our starved minds. Its not for me to judge the results of
that encounter, we did learn a lot of useful things, but by
the same token we also lost of a lot of what identified us as
a people. One valuable trait we seem to have lost was our own
self-respect. We have now become better at parroting out these
borrowed 'truths' than the Masters who taught us.
I would call for some thought before bandying with all these
buzz-words - Aryan, Dravidian and so on...In the mahabaratha, an
Aryan is defined as a person who is 'noble, upright, steadfast
and keeps his word'. Krishna enjoins Arjuna to rise up and fight, to
overcome his cowardice, his an-aryan tendencies.
The ganges valley is called Aryavarta, the land of the noble.
(Again, I'm only giving the meaning of the word.. I'm in no
way implying that other river valleys were not peopled by
equally noble denizens -:)). Pretty much similar to the way Thamizh
is considered a divine language in ancient tamizh literature.
(Im not sure of the origins of the term Dravida, but I would
expect that it had nothing to do with matters of race).
European Indologists in the 18th century were the first people
to associate the term 'Aryan' with a race, or a family of
tribes, and thereby giving it a meaning that it never had in
its parent languages - Sanskrit and Persian. And now it is a
much maligned term, with every tinpot from Hitler to David
Duke using it as a racial definition of themselves.. So,
before you bring up exotic concepts like Aryans,
race, brahminism, 'mainstream-indian-religion', rationalism, I
would appreciate it if you could leave out the mental baggage
and the connotations that have stuck to these terms in the
process of making their way through millions of earlier
pointless debates, much like this one.
Ramesh
--
_____________________________________________________________________________
Ramesh Srinivasan std_disclaimer.h:
Deutsche Bank Capital Corp.,
New York, NY 10019 Who, me?
Affable
> >Indian tendency towards women has been one of seeing black and white.
> >Either they deify women as 'goddess', 'sakthi' etc or treat her like a
> >second class citizen who is inferior to the male race. A woman is either
> >all good or all bad. This is *universal*.
>
> women as goddess / someone divine..like saying 'peN dheivam'..etc etc..
> Well, we need to understand that looking in things in this way in no
[deleted]
[disclaimer: nothing to do with original thread]
Hmm, Gayathri following up Chitra, Chitra following up Gayathri....
do I see a female bonding first time in SCT? Good for the females and bad
for us, males.:-) Hey men, be prepared to see some male bashing :-)
I encouarge other females to join you two in the contribution of sharing
their opinions.
When my dad was a warden for a men's hostel, one of his friend, a ladies
hostel warden came to meet my dad and they were generally talking about
the problems they were facing in their hostels. My dad's friend had also
served as men hostel's warden in the previous term and he told the problems
he faced in the ladies hostel were very silly and most of them arose from
jeolousy and he gave lots of examples. So, I think jealousness among females
is more prevalent when compared to males. Am I correct? Sincere query.
Cheers,
Venkat
M. Sundaramoorthy
>
>
>Just one clarification about what I have posted about the 'silence' factor.
>I guess what I really meant was the other religions were not subjected
>to the same kind of mockery to which Hinduism was often subjected.
>
I don't how DK people were in Trichi. But I have seen graffities in
Vellore Church compounds by 'vEloor paguththaRivaLar kazhagam', like,
'thattungaL thiRakkappadum'
'thiRkkaadha kadhavugaL udaikkappadum'
'parisuththa aaviyaal idli vEgumaa?.
>daniel
>
No offence meant to anyone. Just wanted to clarify.
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
Meenan Vishnu
>
>Just one clarification about what I have posted about the 'silence' factor.
>I guess what I really meant was the other religions were not subjected
>to the same kind of mockery to which Hinduism was often subjected.
That is to be expected since Periyaar was working in India, a country
with 80+% Hindus. On the other hand Rationalists like Robert Ingersol
who was workin in USA attacked the Church and did not mention anything
about Hinduism (as far as I know).
>Morever the practioners of these relgions indulged in as much in casteism
>as the upper caste Hindus, but again there were not taken to task like
>the Brahmins were. I guess that if one is from some other relgion, he or
>she could practice casteism in TN.
For sometimes I thought the conversions to a non-Hindu religion by the
oppressed class should solve the some of our major problems that Hindu
religion gave us (lack of self esteem among the oppressed etc). But
this seems to be not working. Most converts seemed to retain the caste
system. This is a sad state of affairs which shows that no religion can
solve this problem. Only the spread of rationalistic ideas will change
the situation.
>This is my last posting on this thread. Thanks for everyone who posted
>informative articles related to this topic.
>daniel
Meenan Vishnu
Gayathri Krishnamurthy
> In <CAHKA...@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> gaya...@baboon.ecn.purdue.edu (Gayathri Krishnamurthy) writes:
*portions deleted *
> >like Murugan were polygamists - any goddesses with multiple husbands who
> >were just as tolerant to polyandry ? And the different definitions of 'Karpu'
> paaNdiya kingdom was founded by a women.
Maybe. But what relevance has this point to the above points I made ? Or were
you just making a statement ? If so, how many Pandiya women rulers were there ?
>
> vaLLi was murugan's consort
> >- is that an Aryo-Brahminical conspiracy too ? And not to sound offensive,
> >there is a theory that salvation can be attained by looking on God as
> >one's lover/husband ( a la Meera, vaLLi) - can the same be said for men
> >too - that they can look on a goddess as a lover/wife ? The common
>
> aaNdaaL and meera took that path of love in 8 th and 15 th
> century respectively.
>
>
> >reaction to such a statement would be shock. This double standard
> >is again a product of our conditioning - that polygamy is OK while
> >polyandry isn't - what works for the god doesn't for the goddess.
> >Even gods are allowed their indulgences, which may even be praised
> >- while goddesses are always good, loyal etc and transgressions
> >will absolutely not be tolerated - being women they *have* to behave
> >at all times.
[...]
> In short you might have some points on feminism but spare
> aaNdaaL and meerabhai. They chose their own path of love
> to attain gOd.
I noticed this 'feminism' in another post as well when you referred to me.
I do not subscribe to any 'ism' not do I want to classify myself under any
'ism'. What I write are my own thoughts and beliefs about what is fair and
what isn't. If you see the above passages of mine, I didn't mean anything
derogatory about aNdAL, Meera etc. I was just talking about the *mindset* of
people in general and the attributes they give their gods. For all we know,
these gods may just be legends created by people to give a form to the
qualities they think reside in the Supreme Being. It is my belief that these
forms were just for ease of worship, concentration etc. I personally do
not believe these. I find a lot of wrongs in these legends : For instance,
Rama (you may differ here) who was otherwise honest and for the most part good
(IMO here) had to make an exemplary woman like Sita *repeatedly* prove her
virtuousness. So that scores Rama out. Krishna - well....he is controversial
too and though he may have good qualities, I do not consider him a divine
being. For all I know he may never have existed. Each age seems to have given
its own attributes to the gods in vogue at that time based on the society
and value systems at that time. I had referred to Vivekananda's theory of
'The evolution of God' in another post of mine long ago - he talks about how
Gods and their legends might have evolved over the ages - this made a lot of
sense to me. You can read his speech if you find time - it is interesting.
The point I was trying to make was that the path of Bhakthi allowed for
considering a God as a lover/husband but this was implicitly/explicitly
not extended to the goddesses, period. As for mindsets, if some guy had
sung 'kaRpooram nARumO' etc about a goddess (*no* rpt *no* derogatory reference
here) he would have been stoned to death however strong his love and
devotion for the goddess might have been. Once again, no derogatory reference
to Meera etc - I was just trying to make a point here.
> >
>
> >> refer to adi sk you will
> >> certainly find male chauvinism.
> >>
>
> >You find male chauvinism everywhere. See above on adi sk - he talks of
> >ardhanari and yet is male chauvinistic. This is the universal hypocrisy being
> >practised in India through the ages. Diefy on one hand, treat unequally on
> >the other. Race by itself is irrelevant here as all races have done it at
> >one time or the other.
>
> I am not talkin of race here. It is the thamizh scriptures
> , most of the old ones, especially sangkam lit. and times
> is very balanced. I do accept kaimpeN was a problem. Women
> had right to decide their spouse and education was accessible.
Well, there were times when societies themselves were more liberal.
But changed for the worse later. Even if ancient scripts (Vedic or
Tamil or Telugu or whatever) contain worshipful references to women, it
doesn't mean that women were treated equally by such-and-such a society etc.
So, your point in the preceding post that only Brahminical elements in Indian
relegion demean women was IMO, wrong. The mistreatment has been and still is
going on in a majority of present-day societies.
> It is the religion of Brahmanism
> that puts men and especially brahmin men next
> to god even today.
May be true. But any thinking man (Brahmin or otherwise) would laugh at this.
I dare say there are more brahmins who laugh at the latter part 'especially...'
and say 'relegion may say so, but we don't believe it !'.
Gayathri.
"Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic
walls......into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake !"
- Rabindranath Tagore.
Krishna Sivaramapuram
>Rama (you may differ here) who was otherwise honest and for the most part good
>(IMO here) had to make an exemplary woman like Sita *repeatedly* prove her
>virtuousness. So that scores Rama out. Krishna - well....he is controversial
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>too and though he may have good qualities, I do not consider him a divine
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>being. For all I know he may never have existed. Each age seems to have given
^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Gayathri.
aiyaiao!!! unga rendu per sandaila en thalai yen uruLaradhu!!! ;-) Why am I
controversial? Thanks for saying that I have some good qualities too... ;-))
You need not consider me divine, but I do exist for sure and am doing
my MS in CS at OSU... ;-))
KRISHNA
Bala SWAMINATHAN
>In article <CAHKA...@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> gaya...@baboon.ecn.purdue.edu
>(Gayathri Krishnamurthy) writes:
>[deleted]
>
>> is again a product of our conditioning - that polygamy is OK while
>> polyandry isn't - what works for the god doesn't for the goddess.
>
> Hey GK, how about Draupadhi? I think she's considered as goddess by some
>people. [correct me if i'm wrong]
PAnjAli - a goddess? I don't know. But I have not heard of any woman
bearing a name PAnjAli or Traupathi (not Tripathi!!).
BTW: she was one of the most abused women in Hindu mythologies.
She married Arjuna, and, probably without her will, all others were
forced upon her. She was used as a bet by a guy who in the first
place did not marry her properly, again without her will.
Here you should not, Dharman's arrogance in assuming that his wife
will do anything he wants. Dharman knows DuryOthan well, so my
guess is he must have expected his (Arjunaa's) wife to be abused that
way or worse. Nevertheless, he went on to play her as a bet.
But, not *many* people blame this guy.
>> Indian tendency towards women has been one of seeing black and white.
>> Either they deify women as 'goddess', 'sakthi' etc or treat her like a
>> second class citizen who is inferior to the male race. A woman is either
>> all good or all bad. This is *universal*.
>
> Deja vu! :-) "peNNukku peNNE ethiri". If some female wants to change
>some bad social habit that's being done to women for quite a long time,
>who is first preventing her to do so? Another woman with her stinging
>statments like
[... lots of stuff deleted...]
In 1989 when dmk came to power, Karunanithi proposed reservation for
women in educational institutions and state government employment. The
current cm was vehemently opposed to it, despite being a woman. I don't
remember things exactly, someone with more info can post. (I guess it
was something like 30% reservation for women....)
natpudan
S_Bala
--
____________________________________________________________________
| Time looks like an innocent thing; but verily it is a saw that |
| is continually sawing away the life of a man. -- Valluvar |
|__________________________________________________________________|
S. Sankarapandi
In article <22hq7r$h...@news.u.washington.edu> ng...@carson.u.washington.edu (V.
Nagarajan) writes:
>In article <22f870$a...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> ssan...@magnus.acs.oh
io-state.edu (S. Sankarapandi) writes:
>>>>(My comment: Though he admits the atrocities done by the non-brahmin, he to
ok
>> a
>>>>less harder stand against them becuase he wanted to fight brahminism first.
>>>>This has been exploited by the Vellala movement.)
>>>
>>> This here is what i mean. Even the able Sankarapandi appears to be
>>> confused.
>>>
>>
>>
>>Nagarajan,
>>
>>I honestly dont understand how you say that I am confused. I can correct
>>myself if you can point out more clearly.
>
> Sankarapandi, i don't know how else to read your comment, "though he..
> admits...", other than to say that i see the equivalence nonbrahmins =
> nonbrahminism (subscribers). You seem to have used them interchangeably
> tho i believe you when you say that was not your intention. Any socio-
> logical analysis that invokes this slippery concept called brahminism,
> very quickly slides into an amorphous mass of confusion. I see the
> choice of this name as deliberate - that it insinuates brahmins in
> our highly caste-conscious society and scape-goats them for every ill.
O.k, I agree that Periyar's mixing of the terminologies are confusing me
too. I think it is better to rename `Brahminism' as Indo-nazism as Arun
Surendran suggested or with some other name. And my apparent confusion was
purely unintentional and I regret for it.
On the other hand, I beg to differ from you strongly on the following two
opinions of yours.
(1)
> As i see it, the problem is oppression and bigotry, not caste. We all
> seem capable of hating others and caste is to blame mainly to the
> extent that it provides a reason for association.
I think you have a very poor understanding about the caste oppression. I dont
know how to explain this to you because it needs several pages of discussion
with all examples of caste oppressions.
> (Note how quickly
> many of the attackers of "brahminism" slip into a language that is
> indistinguishable from that of the RSS, VHP bigots.)
I agree with this but this certainly cannot explain the above
simplication of caste oppression.
(2)
> Caste has given
> us stability but at the very high price of stagnation. But that's
> another matter.
I will say a strong NO for this because this is one of the philosophical
justifications given for the establishment of caste divisions which I cannot
stand. When you find us using the name `brahminism' objectionable, I am also
finding this type of interpretations for caste system simply offensive. This
is a way to rewrite the past and exactly being done by the RSS - VHP bigots
today.
> It is inconceivable to me that EVR who broke off
> from the Congree Party over the issue of temple entry for the dalits
> would not fight for their HUMAN RIGHTS if he was so concerned about
> that. I cannot believe that he left it up to the dalits to fight for
> it while having no reservation whatsoever in siding with a class of
> people who shared at least as much blame if not more in the oppression
> of the dalits.
Did I approve this in my long postings about Periyar. I clearly staed that it
was a big mistake. Do you want me to reproduce my postings. I merely
presented what explanation Periyar gave for such a stand.
Again, why not consider him just as a leader of a Vellala movement which
wanted to fight the superiority of brahmins and brahminism (now I am accepting
that Periyar used both). Let us say, he did not care much for the Dalits. But
he never opposed the Dalit movements, never opposed the Dalit militancy (I dont
mean non-violence here, but the extremism of blaming all the upper caste people
and fighting them). He was against the violence on Dalits etc. Can you
provide a single evidence against this. Otherwise, he might not have been
> I find it mildly amusing that you would make such a
> big ruckus over the Ambedkar - Gandhi disagreements and yet would
> be gracious and charitable in explaining away EVR's apparent
> unwillingness to side with the dalits. I too can make grandiose
> statements about a lot of things but if i am unwilling to act on them,
> my statements amount to diddlysquat.
>
Now, you are giving me a good point. I will ask you the same question to you at
the end of my comparison of Gandhi and Periyar.
Gandhi led a political struggle of the nation and led the liberation of India
from the British rule. He was supposed to understand the problems of the
majority of the people of India. But he never tried to understand the Dalit
oppression seriously and almost all the Dalit leaders and movements had/have
this concern. In stead, time and again, he supported the nonsense of Hinduism
and Brahminism (aka Indo-nazism) and given the same rosy interpretations as the
present day RSS and VHP bigots are giving. He discouraged the militant (I dont
mean non-violence again) struggle of the Dalits and requested the Dalits to
be patient. He almost blackmailed Ambedkar not to insist for the separate
electorate for the Dalits whereas he could do nothing about Congress
leaders/landlords' crimes of untouchability. His Ramarajya concepts are the
first example of mixing religion and politics and those concepts intellectually
reinforced the hold of Hindu and Manu laws in India. Dalits (Ambedkar) and
Muslims (Jinna, Azad) were very critical of Gandhi for this.
Periyar, on the other hand did not bother about political struggle. His
struggle was almost like an indiviual spending his money and time to
concentrate on the fight for the equality of the vellala communities with the
brahmins. He did not steal any political struggle or movement. You can simply
consider it as a reformist movement with a limited set of goals. In that
struggle, he was not vigorous about the Dalits' equality (which, imo, is a
great mistake) but he did encourage them to fight either under his movement or
separately. More than that, he wanted to destroy the so-called Manu Dharma by
destroying the hold of Hindu religion which, imo, is very essential for the
liberation of all Indians, whether Brahmins, Vellalas, Dalits or women.
Ambedkar and Periyar supported each other and they did not have any rapport on
this issue unlike Ambedkar and Gandhi. I hope you will consider Ambedkar as
one of the representatives of the Dalits.
Now, I will ask you the same question to you. You came to defend Gandhi when I
wrote about Gandhi-Ambedkar tussle but you would want to call Periyar only as a
racist without giving a second thought for some of his rational principles.
> Finally, here's an excerpt from Ajay Divakaran's insightful post in
> SCI:
(contents deleted to save bw)
Ajay Divakaran's post was really very balanced and I agree with his
opinions 100 %.
Thanks,
S. Sankarapandi
ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
S. Sankarapandi
In article <1993Jul22....@wuecl.wustl.edu> b...@wucs1.wustl.edu (Bala SWA
>>(Gayathri Krishnamurthy) writes:
>>[deleted]
>>
>>> is again a product of our conditioning - that polygamy is OK while
>>> polyandry isn't - what works for the god doesn't for the goddess.
>>
>> Hey GK, how about Draupadhi? I think she's considered as goddess by some
>>people. [correct me if i'm wrong]
>
>bearing a name PAnjAli or Traupathi (not Tripathi!!).
>
Nothing to do with the original thread.. just a piece of information.
Yes, Thraubathai is considered as Goddess in some places. In Tirunel Veli town
there is a temple called `thraubathai amman' temple. Every year during the
summer, there was a big festival called `thee mithi' (walking on fire) festival
and I have attended the festival with so much of emotions (not walked on
the fire though :-)) two times. Later, Tirunel Veli D.K. conducted similar
`thee mithi' and proved that one need not be religious to do such things.
After that, that festival was not very impressive (atleast to me :-)). I
appreciate this type of activities of any movement to bring rationalism among
people.
S. Sankarapandi
ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Meenan Vishnu
>
>In article <1993Jul22....@wuecl.wustl.edu> b...@wucs1.wustl.edu (Bala SWA
>MINATHAN) writes:
>>PAnjAli - a goddess? I don't know. But I have not heard of any woman
>>bearing a name PAnjAli or Traupathi (not Tripathi!!).
>
>Yes, Thraubathai is considered as Goddess in some places. In Tirunel Veli town
>there is a temple called `thraubathai amman' temple. Every year during the
>summer, there was a big festival called `thee mithi' (walking on fire) festival
>and I have attended the festival with so much of emotions (not walked on
>the fire though :-)) two times. Later, Tirunel Veli D.K. conducted similar
>`thee mithi' and proved that one need not be religious to do such things.
>After that, that festival was not very impressive (atleast to me :-)). I
>appreciate this type of activities of any movement to bring rationalism among
>people.
>
>S. Sankarapandi
Yes Sankarapandi is correct. Although I have not witnessed the
worship of thirOvathai amman in TN, I read in the following book that
She is worshipped along with Kunthi amman and Subaththirai amman.
The book has pictures too. Check it out :-)
AUTHOR, ETC.: Hiltebeitel, Alf.
TITLE: The cult of Draupadi / Alf Hiltebeitel. -
SUBJECT(S): Mahabharata - Criticism, interpretation, etc. * Draupadi
(Hindu mythology) * Draupadi (Hindu mythology) - Cult.
IMPRINT: Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1988-
NOTES: Bibliography: v. 1, p. 455-473. * Includes index.
CONTENTS: 1. Mythologies : from Gingee to Kuruksetra - 2. On
Hindu ritual and the goddess.
ISBN: 0226340457 (v. 1) * 0226340465 (pbk. : v. 1)
* 0226340473 (v. 3)
LANGUAGE: eng
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: v. : ill. ; 24 cm.
AUTHOR: Hiltebeitel, Alf.
TITLE: The cult of Draupadi /
IMPRINT: Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1988-
CALL NUMBER: BL1138.4.D72H55 1988
Loan Call
Location Type Number Status
ARTS STACKS BL1138.4.D72H55 1988 v.2 In Library
ARTS STACKS BL1138.4.D72H55 1988 v.1 In Library
Meenan Vishnu
SRINIVASAN,K
>be patient. He almost blackmailed Ambedkar not to insist for the separate
>electorate for the Dalits whereas he could do nothing about Congress
>leaders/landlords' crimes of untouchability. His Ramarajya concepts are the
>first example of mixing religion and politics and those concepts intellectually
>reinforced the hold of Hindu and Manu laws in India. Dalits (Ambedkar) and
>Muslims (Jinna, Azad) were very critical of Gandhi for this.
Couldn't Gandhi have been against separate electorate in principle?
His opposition to creation of a country for Muslims as a way of
ensuring their interests are taken care of gives credence to this.
Since a reserving constituencies to particular castes in a debatable
way of taking care of those castes' interests, I wonder if Gandhi
can be called callous to Dalit cause based on this.
Regarding his not influencing other Congress leaders to do anything,
he is a man who believed in leading by personal example: he used
to live in the colony of scavengers in Delhi and used to insist on
everybody in his ashram cleaning their own toilets. I think, this
kind of removal of stigma in your heart against castes and professions
will go a long way in eradication of caste as opposed to any amount of
activism.
I do not know if Gandhi supported the Manu Dharmic elements of
Hinduism. Since Rama is a guy who called a "padagOtti" a brother
and enjoyed the hospitality of a lower caste woman more than that of
the sages, Ramarajya can be thought of as establishing equality
as opposed to establishing a feudal society. (No, given today's
scenario, I am not for RR. However, aspiring for RR does not
make Gandhi anti-dalit).
Also, the congress leaders did a lot more for getting entry of Dalits
into temples than Periyar. So, to say either Gandhi or the Congress
party were callous to the cause of Dalits may not be accurate.
--
SRINIVASAN,K
School of Textile Engineering Georgia Tech.
uucp: ...!{allegra,amd,hplabs,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!prism!gt4084c
ARPA: gt4...@prism.gatech.edu
Gayathri Krishnamurthy
>
>
> gaya...@baboon.ecn.purdue.edu (Gayathri Krishnamurthy) writes:
>
> [..]
>
> >too - that they can look on a goddess as a lover/wife ? The common
> >reaction to such a statement would be shock. This double standard
> >is again a product of our conditioning - that polygamy is OK while
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >polyandry isn't - what works for the god doesn't for the goddess.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Polyandry is also Polygamy. The word u were looking for
> shd be Polygyny.
Thank you *bow* :-). Asked Comrade Webster and he seems to agree :-)
> With that nitpicking aside :-) let us move to the statement
> that "this double standard is a product of...."
Stats deleted. No complaints with them :-)
> Looks like double standards right ? But, only 5-10 % of the men
> in the polygynous cultures have more than one wife at a time.
> So, monogamy wins out anyways :-)
:-) I was not talking of poly/mono gamy winning or losing. Merely saying that
while one way of life raises eyebrows way, way too high - a parallel
situation with the sexes swapped isn't even noticed. And the reason has more
to do with mindsets than genetic payoffs etc.
> As for conditioning being the reason, that is just one side of
> the story ! REPEAT: That is just one side of the story !
>
> Polygyny has genetic payoffs for men, whereas polyandry for men
> spells genetic suicide. Men neither go thru pregnancy nor lactate.
Well, here is some info about genetic suicides :
Saw a program on the Discovery channel sometime back about cats. A female
cat (I don't know the exact word for it so no nitpicking :-) ) has multiple
sexual partners one after another within a short period of time. This is
supposed to be beneficial as a wider gene pool is available and "better"
sperms can "win" the race. So this has genetic payoffs too.
> It doesn't make much "sense" for a man to join a harem of 12 women
> when he can have 1000's of children in his lifetime [provided he
> can manage to get many partners and is not sexually exhausted too]
> A woman can at the most have only 25 children !! [except for those
> in the guiness book, thru multiple births]
I have no comments on this :-). However shouldn't it be 'harem of 12 men'
- a li'l nitpicking for ya (haha ! had my revenge :-) )
> Polygyny - under right conditions - has reproductive benefits
> for the womenfolk.
In that case, polygyny and polyandry together should have better benefits
- by the cat theory above :-)
Anyway, bk - I guess I'll stop discussing payoffs of different sexual
behaviours etc as I would be digressing from the topic at hand.
> Ofcourse this will not be cited as the reason
> when a woman joins a harem. The reasons usually are different.
Yup ! I agree.
> [other stuff in general agreement with deleted]
[other stuff deleted as I'm in 'no comment mode' :-) - diplomacy, what ;-) ?]
Gayathri.
P.S : My last post on sexual behaviours, their payoffs and related stuff.
Sundara Pandian
SSP> Yes, Thraubathai is considered as Goddess in some places. In
SSP> TirunelVeli town, there is a temple called `thraupathi
SSP> amman' temple. Every year during the summer, there was a
SSP> big festival called `thee mithi' (walking on fire) festival
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
MV> Yes Sankarapandi is correct. Although I have not witnessed the
MV> worship of thirOvathai amman in TN, I read in the following book that
MV> She is worshipped along with Kunthi amman and Subaththirai amman.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I doubt how the author got the information that other goddesses in
the temple were Kunthi Amman and Subaththirai Amman. Even in north India,
there is no worship on Kunthi and Subaththirai (Arjun's wife/Krishna's
Sister, I presume), to the best of my knowledge. I seriously doubt that
the temples in TN called now `Dhraupathi Amman temples' were initially
temples for Dhraupathi of Mahabharatha. We should note that Dhraupathi
is not a _Tamil_ character and I have a serious doubt that whether the
(ancient) Tamil society, which imposed monoandry for all (chaste) women
could have accepted Dhraupathi, who had five husbands. In Silappathikaaram
itself, when Kannagi notes the `kaRpudai makaLir' who lived in Tamilakam
in her outburst when she hears Kovalan's death, she says only Tamil
women like Adhimandhi, and others and polyandry clearly looks like a
_taboo_ in those days. That it is still a taboo is a different matter,
I should also note the important observation made by SSP in his posting.
The practice of `fire-walking' in the `Dhraupathi vazhipaadu' in these
temples. Such practices by women are just not there in north India,
especially by women. For the north Indian epic character Dhraupathi,
we see worship only in the Tamil state and some temples as well.
Ma.Po.Chi belives that these were initially temples for Kannagi
and his belief is by the significance of fire-walking in the `Dhraupathi
worship'. Ma.Po.Chi. believes that fire-working by women in their
Dhraupathi worship was to glorify Kannagi's act of burning Madurai
(her chastity). Some other scholars have another theory
to make. They say that `Dhraupathi Amman' was originally a temple for
the Buddha Goddess `Thaara Devi'. (Thaara - Buddha's wife?) They interpret
like Thaaradevi Amman > Draupathi Amman. (I note here that `Dharman',
`Dharma Raajan' are some names for Buddha also.)
Ragunathan has a great interpretation to make. Ragunathan notes
that, right from the early Sangam days, most chaste women practiced Sati
following their husbands' death and such women were glorified in Tamil
society for their chastity. Ragunathan notes that such chaste women
who committed sati, were held as `dheyvam' (goddesses) for their
act and that people begged them for `varam' (boons) before the
`paththinip peNdir' entered the fire. We also find that the `paththinip
peNdir' gave `prasad' to other women and gave some `predictions' before
committing Sati in the early Tamil society. Ragunathan feels that the
`Draupathi Amman temples' in TN were initially temples for the chaste
women who committed Sati. His interpretation is `Theeppaayntha amman
kOyil' > `Dhraupathi amman kOyil'. It is a great observation by
Ragunathan and I agree with his logic.
Namaste,
- SP
V. Nagarajan
.
>
>O.k, I agree that Periyar's mixing of the terminologies are confusing me
>too. I think it is better to rename `Brahminism' as Indo-nazism as Arun
>Surendran suggested or with some other name. And my apparent confusion was
>purely unintentional and I regret for it.
Perhaps it would help if you explained what is meant by "brahminism"
or "indo-nazism" clearly. In fact i would appreciate Sundaramoorthy
also chipping in. I noticed him using the term in one of his posts.
Since i believe he is not one to use language loosely, his explication
would also be helpful.
>
>On the other hand, I beg to differ from you strongly on the following two
>opinions of yours.
>
>
>(1)
>> As i see it, the problem is oppression and bigotry, not caste. We all
>> seem capable of hating others and caste is to blame mainly to the
>> extent that it provides a reason for association.
>
>
>I think you have a very poor understanding about the caste oppression. I dont
>know how to explain this to you because it needs several pages of discussion
>with all examples of caste oppressions.
OK, please do explain so i can rectify my poor understanding. It is
possible that i missed something even tho i lived in a village for
16 years and still maintain ties to it as that is where much of my
family lives. I trust that you will not resort to cliches or slogans
and will stick only to facts. What i am looking for is not quotes from
books for after all for every Rajagowthaman, there is one M.N.
Srinivas. Please also clearly define caste and show how there would
be less oppression in the absence of caste in a FEUDAL SOCEITY.
Certainly there are individual cases of oppression that could not
happen if there were no such concept as jati (eg., kIzhaveNmaNi).
Similarly there can be no religious riots in the absence of organized
religion but a PRACTICAL solution cannot require the abolition of
religion as such. By way of clarification, i am NOT saying whether
caste should or should not be abolished; i am merely pointing out the
impractical aspects.
>
>> (Note how quickly
>> many of the attackers of "brahminism" slip into a language that is
>> indistinguishable from that of the RSS, VHP bigots.)
>
>
> I agree with this but this certainly cannot explain the above
>simplication of caste oppression.
>
>
>(2)
>> Caste has given
>> us stability but at the very high price of stagnation. But that's
>> another matter.
>
>
> I will say a strong NO for this because this is one of the philosophical
>justifications given for the establishment of caste divisions which I cannot
>stand. When you find us using the name `brahminism' objectionable, I am also
>finding this type of interpretations for caste system simply offensive. This
>is a way to rewrite the past and exactly being done by the RSS - VHP bigots
>today.
Mine was a simple observation (which i believe to be true and can
elaborate on it if you wish) and not a justification. I can similarly
say that chinese civilization has survived by making a clear
distinction between peasants and nobles and by institutionalizing the
oppression of the former by the latter. Again, this in way suggests
that i approve of it. I do not find stagnation desirable. The point
i tried to make (and did make in a private note to you some weeks
ago) is that compartmentalization does happen whether you like it
or not (on the basis of class, status, wealth, jati, etc.) but we
can make it more palatable by having mechanisms that facilitate easy
cross movements.
I will continue the rest of the discussion (on Gandhi, Ambedkar and
EVR) in a separate post.
- Nagarajan
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
[ serious valaiNYars skip. I'm making only some light-hearted
comments. You've been warned. ]
I enjoyed the following :-) :-) :-)
>
> Ragunathan has a great interpretation to make. Ragunathan notes
>that, right from the early Sangam days, most chaste women practiced Sati
>following their husbands' death and such women were glorified in Tamil
>society for their chastity. Ragunathan notes that such chaste women
>who committed sati, were held as `dheyvam' (goddesses) for their
>act and that people begged them for `varam' (boons) before the
>`paththinip peNdir' entered the fire. We also find that the `paththinip
>peNdir' gave `prasad' to other women and gave some `predictions' before
>committing Sati in the early Tamil society. Ragunathan feels that the
>`Draupathi Amman temples' in TN were initially temples for the chaste
>women who committed Sati. His interpretation is `Theeppaayntha amman
>kOyil' > `Dhraupathi amman kOyil'. It is a great observation by
>Ragunathan and I agree with his logic.
Are you writing a spoof on your own style ?! :-) :-)
Anyway, Guganathan says its great ! :-)
Also Guganathan says its an excellent logic and I agree :-)
>
> Namaste,
> - SP
>
anbudan
-Selvaa
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
>like Murugan were polygamists - any goddesses with multiple husbands who
>were just as tolerant to polyandry ? And the different definitions of 'Karpu'
>- is that an Aryo-Brahminical conspiracy too ? And not to sound offensive,
>there is a theory that salvation can be attained by looking on God as
>one's lover/husband ( a la Meera, vaLLi) - can the same be said for men
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>too - that they can look on a goddess as a lover/wife ? The common
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
gk, I don't think you're on solid ground. The 'nayagi'
'bhavam' is not as you imagine ( _all_ humans and all
living things are 'female' and ONLY God is 'male';
the meaning or interpretation is not as seem to imply).
Further, in the Sakthi concept, all humans and gods are
males and ONLY female is the Sakthi.
Therefore in theological concept BOTH types are there.
Also, note that Bharathiyaar had sung a song treating
vaLLi as his kaathali ( see his vaLLip paattu-1 ) !
>reaction to such a statement would be shock. This double standard
>is again a product of our conditioning - that polygamy is OK while
>polyandry isn't - what works for the god doesn't for the goddess.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
See above.
>Even gods are allowed their indulgences, which may even be praised
>- while goddesses are always good, loyal etc and transgressions
>will absolutely not be tolerated - being women they *have* to behave
>at all times.
>
>Indian tendency towards women has been one of seeing black and white.
>Either they deify women as 'goddess', 'sakthi' etc or treat her like a
>second class citizen who is inferior to the male race. A woman is either
>all good or all bad. This is *universal*.
>If you want to talk about "Dravidians being different - look at Auwai"
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The 'dravidian' society was less male dominant it appears..
The practice of marying a youger wife led to the apparent
disparity until manu laws arrived..
[..]
>
>As for striking a balance, there was a discussion on ThiruvaLLuvar
>(Luv :-) to borrow vijay's term for him) and a kuraL which was
>discriminatory - the one on "deivam thozhAL etc" (Selva, I don't
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>agree with your interpretation :-) so please don't 'attack' :-) me).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
okay, if you don't agree, let me hear your reasons, can I ?
That was a genuine reply, if there are flaws in my
interpretation I would gratefully learn from you.
I can show you many kuRaLs for which very inappropriate meanings
have been given. Luv does not espouse male-chauvenitic
ideas, people have merely misundersood certain words etc.
and have given wrong interpretation to certain
kuRaLs ( for example Mr. Ragunathan's
'discovery' of 'peNdir' in a kuRaL to say that it referred to
'many wives' ! :-) Ofcourse this is a most outrageous
flaw..)
[..]
>
>Gayathri.
>
>"Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic
> walls......into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake !"
> - Rabindranath Tagore.
anbudan
-Selvaa
S. Sankarapandi
In article <22mq4v$8...@news.u.washington.edu> ng...@carson.u.washington.edu (V.
Nagarajan) writes:
>In article <22kuhh$e...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> ssan...@magnus.acs.oh
io-state.edu (S. Sankarapandi) writes:
>.
>.
>>
>>O.k, I agree that Periyar's mixing of the terminologies are confusing me
>>too. I think it is better to rename `Brahminism' as Indo-nazism as Arun
>>Surendran suggested or with some other name. And my apparent confusion was
>>purely unintentional and I regret for it.
>
> Perhaps it would help if you explained what is meant by "brahminism"
> or "indo-nazism" clearly. In fact i would appreciate Sundaramoorthy
> also chipping in. I noticed him using the term in one of his posts.
> Since i believe he is not one to use language loosely, his explication
> would also be helpful.
>
IMO,
Brahminism is the philosophy which divided Indians into different castes
based upon birth. Brahmins are members of one of the so many castes
formed and practized by Brahminism. The present day members of that community
or the present day Brahmins are not responsible for the creation of such
division. However, they are equally responsible for the continution of the
birth-based-caste system as the members of all other castes with the exception
of people from all the castes (including Brahmin) who have disregarded such a
caste identity.
Brahminism is still kept alive and directly or indirectly enforced in India by
those people who believe in that philosophy and such people are from all
castes.
Whenever this `Brahminism' is criticized , there are communalists from all
other communities attack brahmins, that is people from Brahmin caste alone.
This is definitely unfair. In order to avoid this confusion, I also felt that
Arun Surendran's renaming of Brahminism with some other name like Indo-nazism
would separate the two, i.e., Brahminism and Brahmins.
I hope this is sufficient.
>>
>>(1)
>>> As i see it, the problem is oppression and bigotry, not caste. We all
>>> seem capable of hating others and caste is to blame mainly to the
>>> extent that it provides a reason for association.
>>
>>
>>I think you have a very poor understanding about the caste oppression. I don
t
>>know how to explain this to you because it needs several pages of discussion
>>with all examples of caste oppressions.
>
> OK, please do explain so i can rectify my poor understanding. It is
> possible that i missed something even tho i lived in a village for
> 16 years and still maintain ties to it as that is where much of my
> family lives. I trust that you will not resort to cliches or slogans
> and will stick only to facts. What i am looking for is not quotes from
> books for after all for every Rajagowthaman, there is one M.N.
> Srinivas. Please also clearly define caste and show how there would
> be less oppression in the absence of caste in a FEUDAL SOCEITY.
> Certainly there are individual cases of oppression that could not
> happen if there were no such concept as jati (eg., kIzhaveNmaNi).
> Similarly there can be no religious riots in the absence of organized
> religion but a PRACTICAL solution cannot require the abolition of
> religion as such. By way of clarification, i am NOT saying whether
> caste should or should not be abolished; i am merely pointing out the
> impractical aspects.
You have already written what I want to write. At present I dont have the time
to write on this aspect. However, I feel that you are aware of what I would
want to give as facts. I feel that only our inferences are going to be
different. IMO, castes are always rigid (religions are also rigid but crossing
of religions is not prohibited) and they are based upon birth. I am not
saying that all oppressions are going to disappear once castes disappeared.
Only caste based oppressions will disappear and other oppressions have to be
dealt after understanding them better.
What looks impractical to you (I mean, abolition of castes) looks practical to
me except that we may need some strict measures and sacrifices.
Similarly what looks practical to you (I mean, existence of castes with
flexiblity in order to facilitate cross movements) seems impractical to me.
How much you try to convince me on this aspect, I am not going to change my
opinions on this. Similarly, I also cannot convince you beyond this point nor
I have any other information to convince you further. I do remember we already
discussed about this through e-mail.
(I am not mistaking you here whether you support the existence of caste system
or its abolition. I fully understand what you say and hence there is no need
for disclaimers.)
>>
>>(2)
>>> Caste has given
>>> us stability but at the very high price of stagnation. But that's
>>> another matter.
>>
>>
>> I will say a strong NO for this because this is one of the philosophical
>>justifications given for the establishment of caste divisions which I cannot
>>stand. When you find us using the name `brahminism' objectionable, I am also
>>finding this type of interpretations for caste system simply offensive. This
>>is a way to rewrite the past and exactly being done by the RSS - VHP bigots
>>today.
>
> Mine was a simple observation (which i believe to be true and can
> elaborate on it if you wish) and not a justification. I can similarly
> say that chinese civilization has survived by making a clear
> distinction between peasants and nobles and by institutionalizing the
> oppression of the former by the latter. Again, this in way suggests
> that i approve of it. I do not find stagnation desirable. The point
> i tried to make (and did make in a private note to you some weeks
> ago) is that compartmentalization does happen whether you like it
> or not (on the basis of class, status, wealth, jati, etc.) but we
> can make it more palatable by having mechanisms that facilitate easy
> cross movements.
S. Sankarapandi
ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Subramanian Kalyanasundaram
Ms. Gayathri,
Thanks for following up my initial posting on this thread.
Remember, we need to go a long, long way to achieve EQUALITY of sexes and
also the RIGHT of women to control their reproductive choices.
Remember, the opposing forces include not only the male chauvinists
but also various Gods, Sons and Grandsons of God, Prophets and Avatars of
God.
Mosques,temples and Churches are the *symbols* of oppression of women.
Thanks,
K. Subramanian.
M. Sundaramoorthy
I retain the rather long text of SP as I feel it is necessary
to make my point.
Before writing on my main intention of this post, let me quickly
write few words about 'Draupathi' worship from what I have seen
and heard.
In North Arcot district, where the tamil folk theatre therukkooththu
is still in existence in its original form, the most often played
theme is baaratham. In big villages the ten-night therukkooththu
is a part of the festivals in Dharmaraja-Draupathi temples. And
'draupathi vasthrapaharaNam' or 'draupathi thugil' is a most
important and elaborate episode that takes one full night.
Chenji (Gingee) in South Arcot district plays an important role
in this Draupathi worship (I think there must be Dharmaraja-Draupathi
temple in Gingee). In traditional festivals, the concerned people
still go to Chenji and bring mud from there as souvenir that
is symbolically used to built the stage for the therukkooththu
(this part is called 'kaappu kattudhal'). There is even a reference
in kooththu songs relating Draupathi to Chenji:
chenji nagar piRandha sEvadiyaaL
According to Na. Muthuswamy, a theatrist, folklorist and writer,
the Draupathi worship might have come in Tamil society during
Desingu Rajan period who ruled Northern part of Tamil Nadu
from Chenji. (I think Desingu was a Vaishnavite ).
And as SSP brought out, 'thee midhiththal' is a part of the festivals.
Not every one does this. Only those people for whom Darupathi is
family deity do that. As I know only males do this (I don't understand
how SP links it to Kannagi burning Madurai and sati to this). And
Panchali in such families is a common name for girls. As I find in my
own village, this Draupathi worship is not confined to one caste and
polyandry is not their culture :-). (I think the worhshippers of any
God/Godesses only want boons from them and don't try to emulate.)
Now I come to the main point I wanted to make.
Somehow I always suspect the explanations of the scholars, whether
they are professionals or ametuers, who solely rely on words or
standard written texts such as Sangam literature, ThirukkuRaL,
Silappadhikaaram and Bakthi literature coupled with their fancy
imaginations to explain everything about Tamil society and culture
whether it is ancient, medieval or contemporary. I rather believe that
what was written through ages is much less than what had not been
written. And even what had been written need not be always true
and taken for granted to derive everything from them about the
popular culture, society etc. This tendency is highly prevalant in
the academic circles of the post-Tamil revival period of this
century and many amateurs believe their words as final and try
themselves to do so. Lack of serious and adequete studies that
have direct relevance to culture and society, such as folklore,
anthropology, archeology, history etc., in Tamil Nadu Universities,
makes us to believe what the Tamil Pundits say about Tamil culture
and society of any period, merely based on elitist written texts.
With their limited sources, they explain everything in glory details
using their own imagination and draw grand conclusions. We tend to
buy such theories and boast Tamil culture was great, Tamil society
was great etc. Only serious and sincere research in the now neglected
areas can verify the theories emanating from Tamil departments.
I find the serious article of SP, quoting Maposi, thomusi. etc.,
linking Draupathi to Kannagi, Adhimandhi-Attanathi, paththinip
peNdir, sati etc. quite hilarious. I strongly believe that their
imaginations might have played major roles in their conclusions
rather than facts. I wonder any of them talked or interacted with
people worshiping Draupthi, who is a folk Godess, to advance their
theories. The myths, folklore and rituals of those people, however
much distorted over time may be, must be more reliable sources than
the standard texts like Sangam literature, ThirukkuRaL etc.
I would rather believe an illiterate worshipper of 'choLLai
maadan' in Tirunelveli region than buying Selva's 'semantic
root' analysis of deriving 'sOlai maadan' from 'choLLai maadan'.
> Namaste,
> - SP
>
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
V. Nagarajan
>
>the end of my comparison of Gandhi and Periyar.
>
>Gandhi led a political struggle of the nation and led the liberation of India
>from the British rule. He was supposed to understand the problems of the
>majority of the people of India. But he never tried to understand the Dalit
>oppression seriously and almost all the Dalit leaders and movements had/have
>this concern. In stead, time and again, he supported the nonsense of Hinduism
>and Brahminism (aka Indo-nazism) and given the same rosy interpretations as the
>present day RSS and VHP bigots are giving. He discouraged the militant (I dont
>mean non-violence again) struggle of the Dalits and requested the Dalits to
>be patient. He almost blackmailed Ambedkar not to insist for the separate
>electorate for the Dalits whereas he could do nothing about Congress
>leaders/landlords' crimes of untouchability. His Ramarajya concepts are the
>first example of mixing religion and politics and those concepts intellectually
>reinforced the hold of Hindu and Manu laws in India. Dalits (Ambedkar) and
>Muslims (Jinna, Azad) were very critical of Gandhi for this.
>
liberation. He wanted economic liberation along with political
liberation for the majority of indians living in villages, wanted to
strengthen grassroots democracy thru village-level administration,
wanted gender, social and economic equality for all indians. He was
a greater socialist than he is given credit for tho his vision was
quite different than typical marxist brand of socialism.
Next, yes, Gandhiji believed that in true varnasramadharma there should
be no hierarchy. I have NEVER read anything that says that he denied
the existence of hierarchy-based oppression. On the contrary, he was
very vocal in condemning the segregation of the castes and practised
equality in his ashram. He was not fighting for the upper castes
unlike EVR, who you yourself say was fighting for veLLaLa interests.
Separate electorate for dalits is a complex issue. There are good
arguments for and against (the need for the dalits to have some
representation versus the issue of ghettoizing them or removing them
from mainstream politics) and with the muslims also demanding a
separate electorate at that time, i can see how Gandhi would have
been driven by something other than a black and white rationale.
If you don't agree with this there is nothing much one can do.
Moving on, i find your contention that Gandhiji mixed politics and
religion as tho the concept of secularism as we know it even existed,
somewhat mystifying. He certainly was not for imposing hindu laws
on nonhindus. Ramarajya to him was the ideal state - it was his
version of Utopia. I can understand the specific choice of name
being slightly off-putting, but your logic in concluding that this
was related to manu-dharma escapes me completely. Also, what do you
mean by the hold of hindu laws? Do you have any other suggestions,
like importing the protestant laws of the US to india?
>
>Periyar, on the other hand did not bother about political struggle. His
>struggle was almost like an indiviual spending his money and time to
>concentrate on the fight for the equality of the vellala communities with the
>brahmins. He did not steal any political struggle or movement. You can simply
>consider it as a reformist movement with a limited set of goals. In that
>struggle, he was not vigorous about the Dalits' equality (which, imo, is a
>great mistake) but he did encourage them to fight either under his movement or
>separately. More than that, he wanted to destroy the so-called Manu Dharma by
>destroying the hold of Hindu religion which, imo, is very essential for the
>liberation of all Indians, whether Brahmins, Vellalas, Dalits or women.
>Ambedkar and Periyar supported each other and they did not have any rapport on
>this issue unlike Ambedkar and Gandhi. I hope you will consider Ambedkar as
>one of the representatives of the Dalits.
>
The hold of the hindu religion... again, a very nebulous idea. Are
you opposed to every facet of the religion or just on the caste issue?
Besides, religion is not just rituals or going to temples but it is
also culture, indeed the very fabric of our social life. Atheism is
a religion too, albeit an impoverished one.
Is your last statement an indication that since Ambedkar was a dalit
leader and since he was chummy with EVR, EVR's checks out OK as a
supporter of dalits? Ambedkar has written quite extensively on
brahminism (my recollection is that he coined the word, which now is
synonymous with "everything that is wrong with india", but his
original use was in the sense of vedic (religion)) and anyone who was purporting to fight brahminism was of course a natural ally.
My question to you is, was EVR fighting the brahmins or brahminism?
>
>Now, I will ask you the same question to you. You came to defend Gandhi when I
>wrote about Gandhi-Ambedkar tussle but you would want to call Periyar only as a
>racist without giving a second thought for some of his rational principles.
>
I have never called EVR a racist but if you want to imply something
by attributing such a statement to me, i suggest that you say it
explicitly. My stand is that, despite all the hype about him, he was
fighting for the interests of his class. I respect the iconoclast
in him but nothing more. His "rational" principles and his childish
and crude methods of abusing a religion for shock value leave me
mightily underwhelmed.
- Nagarajan
ps: I don't agree with Gandhiji's every single belief or action. I have
tried to explain/rationalize some of his actions but that does not
mean i agree with him on these issues.
Sundara Pandian
Replies Sundaramoorthy M (sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu) SP's posting:
SP comments first:
What leads Tamil scholars like Ma.Po.Chi, Tho.Mu.Ci, Venkatasamy etc.
to think that the temples currently known as `Dhraupathi Amman temples'
were not originally temples for Dhraupathi of Mahaabharatha is the
serious question "How could the Tamil people have accepted Dhraupathi
as a folk goddess as she was married to five husbands, since polyandry
was not allowed in the Tamil culture (even to the goddesses)." The Tamil
scholars also observe that the `Draupathi worship' practised in some
villages for the north-Indian character `Draupathi' like `walking on
fire' etc. was not practiced anywhere in the north India where the
Mahabharatha is more popular. Draupathi is not portrayed as a goddess
in any Tamil literature. These considerations lead the Tamil scholars
to think that the Draupathi Amman temples today were initially meant
for some other goddesses and came to be known as temples for Draupathi
in due course of time. When I was talking with Ragunathan, he told me
that some Jain temples in Tamilnadu are now respected by local people as
Hindu temples. When the Bhakti movement emerged in Tamilnadu, many
Buddhist and Jain temples were either destoryed or converted into
Hindu temples by the Bhakti movement. Ragunathan named some such
temples in our conversation. Likewise, it is not improbable that the
`Draupathi Amman temples' might have stood for some other goddesses,
especially considering the fact that Draupathi is not generally
respected as a goddess in India.
> In North Arcot district, where the tamil folk theatre therukkooththu
> is still in existence in its original form, the most often played
> theme is baaratham. In big villages the ten-night therukkooththu
> is a part of the festivals in Dharmaraja-Draupathi temples. And
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 'draupathi vasthrapaharaNam' or 'draupathi thugil' is a most
> important and elaborate episode that takes one full night.
I commented on this earlier. Some scholars like Chini.Vengadasamy
opine that `Dharmaraja - Draupathi' temples were Buddhist temples originally.
They note that `Dharmaraja' was also a name for `Buddha' and `Draupathi'
came to usage from the Buddha goddess `Dara Devi' (Buddha's wife).
Vengadasamy may have also given some evidences from such temples (statues
etc.), but I have not read them. There are temples for Daradevi all over
in north India. It is also opined that the `Bhagavathi' temples in Kerala
were originally Buddhist/Jain temples. I don't have more details on this.
Ragunathan, however, does not accept that the Draupathi Amman temples
were Daradevi temples as he feels that the event `walking on fire' in
the `Draupathi worship' has a social significance. Whereas Ma.Po.Ci.
takes this `fire-walking' event to Kannagi's act of burning Madurai
invoking fire-goddess, Ragunathan takes this `fire-walking' event to
the Sati committed by the chaste women all along in Tamil history and
such women worshipped by others nearby as `theeppaayntha amman'.
> According to Na. Muthuswamy, a theatrist, folklorist and writer,
> the Draupathi worship might have come in Tamil society during
> Desingu Rajan period who ruled Northern part of Tamil Nadu
> from Chenji. (I think Desingu was a Vaishnavite ).
I will read more material on this.
> And as SSP brought out, 'thee midhiththal' is a part of the festivals.
> Not every one does this. Only those people for whom Darupathi is
> family deity do that. As I know only males do this (I don't understand
> how SP links it to Kannagi burning Madurai and sati to this). And
> Panchali in such families is a common name for girls. As I find in my
> own village, this Draupathi worship is not confined to one caste and
> polyandry is not their culture :-). (I think the worhshippers of any
> God/Godesses only want boons from them and don't try to emulate.)
See above. Ragunathan notes that, in the places where the chaste women
committed Sati were devoted by the local people, `walking on fire' is
very common. Ragunathan cites the Chorimuththaiyyan temple in the Papanasam
Hills in Tirunelveli as an example. (SSP, Have you heard of this temple?)
Ragunathan points out that, to the north of this temple, in the Pattavaraayan
temple, are idols for the dead Muththuppattan and his wives Bommakkaa and
Dhimmakkaa who committed Sati with him. Ragunathan notes that,in this
temple, `fire-walking' event is held every year, on Adi Ammaavaasai. This
`fire-waling' event is held there to get the blessings of Bommakkaa and
Dhimmakkaa who committed Sati there. (Ragunathan refers to a book
`muththuppattan kathai' by Na.Vaanamaamalai for more details on this temple
and the folk stories.) Ragunathan thus feels that the `paththini vazipaadu'
in Tamil culture was only the `theeppaayntha amman vazipaadu' or the
worship of the women who committed Sati. These considerations alongwith
his linguistic observation that `Theeppaayntha Amman' > `Draupathi Amman'
leads Ragunathan to conclude that the `Draupathi Amman' temples in TN
must have been the temples for the `Theeppaayndha Amman'.
> I find the serious article of SP, quoting Maposi, thomusi. etc.,
> linking Draupathi to Kannagi, Adhimandhi-Attanathi, paththinip
> peNdir, sati etc. quite hilarious. I strongly believe that their
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> imaginations might have played major roles in their conclusions
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> rather than facts. I wonder any of them talked or interacted with
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> people worshiping Draupthi, who is a folk Godess, to advance their
> theories. The myths, folklore and rituals of those people, however
> much distorted over time may be, must be more reliable sources than
> the standard texts like Sangam literature, ThirukkuRaL etc.
You are entitled to your opinions.
> M. Sundaramoorthy
> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
Namaste,
- SP
M. Sundaramoorthy
>
> or "indo-nazism" clearly. In fact i would appreciate Sundaramoorthy
> also chipping in. I noticed him using the term in one of his posts.
> Since i believe he is not one to use language loosely, his explication
> would also be helpful.
>
obligatory :-).
I might have used the word "brahminism", but don't remember when and
on what context.
If you still feel it necessary, I will write what I think about it
during the week end. I already spent enough time in reading newsgroups
and posting this week. (I try to resist spendig more time on newsgroups,
but not successful yet.)
>
> - Nagarajan
>
>
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
Gayathri Krishnamurthy
> In article <CAHKA...@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> gaya...@baboon.ecn.purdue.edu (Gayathri Krishnamurthy) writes:
>
> >like Murugan were polygamists - any goddesses with multiple husbands who
> >were just as tolerant to polyandry ? And the different definitions of 'Karpu'
> >- is that an Aryo-Brahminical conspiracy too ? And not to sound offensive,
> >there is a theory that salvation can be attained by looking on God as
> >one's lover/husband ( a la Meera, vaLLi) - can the same be said for men
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >too - that they can look on a goddess as a lover/wife ? The common
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> gk, I don't think you're on solid ground. The 'nayagi'
> 'bhavam' is not as you imagine ( _all_ humans and all
> living things are 'female' and ONLY God is 'male';
> the meaning or interpretation is not as seem to imply).
>
> Further, in the Sakthi concept, all humans and gods are
> males and ONLY female is the Sakthi.
>
> Therefore in theological concept BOTH types are there.
>
> Also, note that Bharathiyaar had sung a song treating
> vaLLi as his kaathali ( see his vaLLip paattu-1 ) !
OK. I do not know much about this. So, I accept defeat here. But there still
remains the question of differing standards for 'kaRpu'.
[...]
> >Even gods are allowed their indulgences, which may even be praised
> >- while goddesses are always good, loyal etc and transgressions
> >will absolutely not be tolerated - being women they *have* to behave
> >at all times.
> >
> >Indian tendency towards women has been one of seeing black and white.
> >Either they deify women as 'goddess', 'sakthi' etc or treat her like a
> >second class citizen who is inferior to the male race. A woman is either
> >all good or all bad. This is *universal*.
> >If you want to talk about "Dravidians being different - look at Auwai"
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> The 'dravidian' society was less male dominant it appears..
> The practice of marying a youger wife led to the apparent
> disparity until manu laws arrived..
Probably less male dominant - but still male dominant. I have no complaints
about Dravidian or Aryan societies being less or more male dominant. But it
makes me go 'Sigh....*slap on the forehead*' when current-day realities are
not seen and everything is made out into an anti-Brahminical or race
argument. If somebody says 'oppression of women is only in brahminical relegion
and not in mainstream Indian relegion' - it pains me to hear such things
because almost every society in the world has treated women like second
class citizens at the best and this is not an aryan-brahmin conspiracy on the
world or something like that. I do not accept arguments like 'Dravidians had
the half-male half-female concept' because some guy X can give a parallel
argument :
"I love both my parents equally and I respect and revere my mother as much as I
do my father"
That doesn't mean X has always treated women as equals etc. The argument fails
there. To me, this 'ardhanAri' concept itself appears to be some form of
extended romanticism like 'eerudal Or uyir' extended to 'sivamum sakthiyum onRE'
etc - IMHO here. The very presence of 'ardhanAri' itself proves nothing.
More importantly, since all societies have practised discrimination at one time
or the other, it is not relevant to bring race into this argument at all. It
pains me to see people bringing in race and caste for everything. What difference
does it make to present day women as to which race was more discriminatory ?
>
>
> [..]
> >
> >As for striking a balance, there was a discussion on ThiruvaLLuvar
> >(Luv :-) to borrow vijay's term for him) and a kuraL which was
> >discriminatory - the one on "deivam thozhAL etc" (Selva, I don't
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >agree with your interpretation :-) so please don't 'attack' :-) me).
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
> okay, if you don't agree, let me hear your reasons, can I ?
> That was a genuine reply, if there are flaws in my
> interpretation I would gratefully learn from you.
I do not remember all the arguments given at that time nor do I know much
about Luv to comment on this. But when the discussion was going on, I
remember not being very convinced about your interpretation. Anyway, I
don't want to discuss Luv here as I have to confess my ignorance as far as
Luv goes :-).
>
> anbudan
> -Selvaa
With Luv ;-),
Gayathri.
"Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand
of dead habit; where the mind is led forward by Thee, into ever-widening thought
and action - into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake !"
- Rabindranath Tagore.
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
[ a lot of stuff deleted, I agree with much of what SundarM has observed, except
his rather sweeping statements that what comes out of scholars..
While I agree some of the scholars works would fit SundarM's ,
it is an unfair comment for a number of scholars works like pi.el.saami
kalaikkOvan, iLankumaran, ka.pa.aRavaanan, vi.paa.ka. sundaram and so on..]
>
> I would rather believe an illiterate worshipper of 'choLLai
> maadan' in Tirunelveli region than buying Selva's 'semantic
> root' analysis of deriving 'sOlai maadan' from 'choLLai maadan'.
Ofcourse, you've your freedom to 'buy' and that depends
on your judgement. I would seriously question only one aspect
though- what would be your basis for 'buying'/accepting ?
You'll accept/believe in proportion to the illiteracy
level ?! Are you saying that if one is literate one
has a greater tendency to 'pad-up' or 'invent' explanations
which has no relation to what is really there, and hence
less trust-worthy ? If you can't follow a reasoning
and judge its merit but would like to rely on
your belief in illiterate's words, it is your choice and
I leave it there. Careful consideration is what is needed,
and after careful consideration you feel you can infer better
from one source than another thats fine, but if you wish to
dispute the conclusions of other method -school, you have to
justify. [ i know better is no answer, imo ]
>
> M. Sundaramoorthy
> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
anbudan
-Selvaa
M. Sundaramoorthy
I think I have not put it in a correct way or you misunderstood
me.
I did not put it as illiteratre vs. literate.
It is 'culture in which the word is used and that God is worshipped'
vs. 'the scholar who depends solely on his linguistic expertise
to crack the correct form of that particular word'.
When SP brought the colloquial form 'choLLai maadan', which
he argued was a distorted form of 'Sudalai maadan', you argued it
is actually 'sOlai maadan' with your semantic root analysis.
This word is a cultural word, which might be better explained
by the people of that culture, rather than the linguistic analysis
(unless the linguist himself/herself is from that culture).
I never visited south, except for a three days trip to Kutralam.
But I have read several short stories and novels set in that
region, which in my opinion portray the society and culture of
of that part of TN very well. The very important among such authors,
Nanjil Nadan writes stories mostly set in his native Nagerkoil
rural area. One can encounter the folk God Sudalai Madan
in his every other story. In all the descriptions, he uses
Sudalai Madan, who will become 'choLLa maadan' in conversations
between the characters.
After, your explanation, I confirmed with two friends hailing
from south TN that 'choLLa maadan' is indeed 'Sudalai Madan'.
Tell me now, which do I believe - your semantic root derived
'sOlai maadan' or 'Sudalai Madan' I read/heard from
the people of that culture?
>>
>> M. Sundaramoorthy
>> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
>
> anbudan
> -Selvaa
>
M. Sundaramoorthy
Note to SP: I will post a follow up to you on this thread after a
couple of days.
Mahesh Kumar
>In article <CADup...@vu-vlsi.ee.vill.edu> dan...@vu-vlsi.ee.vill.edu (Daniel C. Gnanaprakasam) writes:
>
>[stuff deleted]
>
>>Agreed , I am not expecting Mr. Periyar to change everything. Also I did
>>not make any assumptions that Mr. Periyar supported the practices of the
>>Church or that of Islam. All I was trying to point out, was their
>>silence ( Mr. Periyar and that of DK members later) more out of political
>>reasons. The last statement is my judgeent and I could be wrong.
>
>I have not been reading this thread. So I may be making a point
>already made. Your claim of "silence" is not true.
>
>Here is a excerpt from the book "E. V. Ramaswami Naicker-Periyar,
>A study of the Influence of a Persolaity in Contemporary South India"
>published by Department of History, University of Lund, Sweden.
>
>
>-begin quote-
>
>"In Kanchipuram tha rationalistic Buddhism was once at home, but the
>Brahmins killed the Buddhists and pulled down their monasteries".
>
>In an interview in November 1971 Periyaar, however, stated:
>"Now I have found that Buddhism is no longer good for this age. It
>has become a religion with rites and rituals".
>
>About Christianity he says: "It will be more difficult of abolish
>Islam and Christianity from society." ..."What was said 2000 years ago
>cannot be relevent today"... "Heaven in all religion is a way of
>collecting money"... "Can you accept Christ according reason?"
>
>Modern Rationalist (a DK publication) has a column ridiculing the
>Bible and Christian concepts concentrating mainly on the problem of
>combining God's love and justification with the evils of this world
>['Modern Rationalist', October 1971, pp.15-16]. "The Bible is a
>dangerous moral guide" is the heading of the article in the same
>publication, October 1972. When quoting the Bible there are obvious
>mistakes which indicates a lack of familiarity with the source. A
>remark of Western religion, Christianity, may also be quoted from
>'Viduthalai': "In the West people cling to God and religion but this
>'foolishness' has not prevented them from all sorts of progress ...
>the Westerner takes religion just as a ceremony| [Viduthalai 3/6/1972]
>
>Periyar's criticism of Islam, Buddhism and Christianity comes out as
>oppotune when serving his ideological propaganda but contains little
>deeper analysis. He can speak appreciatively of them when finding
>their ethics principles of equality and justice, thud advocating them
>if they can prove an alternative to Brahmanic Hinduism ['Uyar
>eNNanggaL II p. 33]. As religions, however, thery are hit by
>accusation of superstition, exploitation and irrationalism. These
>religiosn, in spite of their comparatively long presence in India,
>seem ti have little part in forming, or breaking, the traditionally
>dominant Hindu Brahmin society so that Periyar is obviously less
>concerned with them
>
>-end quote-
>>
>>
>>daniel
>
>Meenan Vishnu
As usual it took Mr. Vishnu a few days of scouring through obscure
books to come up with 20 sentences of 'quotes' to prove his theory
that Periyar was also opposed to certain practices of religions
other than Hinduism. You still havent answered this question.
How come Periyar and his followers did not show the same enthusiasm
in garlanding a statue of Jesus Christ or the holy Koran as they
did in the case of Hindu symbols?
ps. Did all these quotes come directly from Periyars mouth or is
some of it someones interpretation of his thinking?
Mahesh Kumar
Std. Disclaimer applies.
swaminathan,kashi r
The answer is obvious! He was afraid that they will
Cut off his ......
>did in the case of Hindu symbols?
>
>
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
> is actually 'sOlai maadan' with your semantic root analysis.
Sundaramoorthy, I don't recall having extended
or argued about 'sOlai' madan. SP and I discussed
about the root sense of 'maadan'. The 'sudalai'
part was never in doubt in my recollection ( at least
to the extent I participated). You must have
mistaken someone else's words for mine ! Or simply
misunderstood what I've said.
>
> This word is a cultural word, which might be better explained
> by the people of that culture, rather than the linguistic analysis
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> (unless the linguist himself/herself is from that culture).
Linguistic analysis for these purposes usually
involves cultural and historical facts and trends and
is not just some pure guesses based on how it sounds.
>
> I never visited south, except for a three days trip to Kutralam.
> But I have read several short stories and novels set in that
> region, which in my opinion portray the society and culture of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> of that part of TN very well. The very important among such authors,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I think it would be difficult to make this judgement by yourself,
if, as you say, have not exposed sufficiently to that
culture. [ just nit-picking, nothing serious ]
> Nanjil Nadan writes stories mostly set in his native Nagerkoil
> rural area. One can encounter the folk God Sudalai Madan
> in his every other story. In all the descriptions, he uses
> Sudalai Madan, who will become 'choLLa maadan' in conversations
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> between the characters.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I agree. chudalai > chodalai > chodla > choLLa
( the South tamils usually pronounce 'cha' rather
'strongly' , I've noticed)
>
> After, your explanation, I confirmed with two friends hailing
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
??? I'm quite sure you're seriously mistaken somebody's words
for mine ( may be SP or SSP can throw some light..
I can't follow what you mean ! )
> from south TN that 'choLLa maadan' is indeed 'Sudalai Madan'.
>
> Tell me now, which do I believe - your semantic root derived
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 'sOlai maadan' or 'Sudalai Madan' I read/heard from
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> the people of that culture?
Please tell me in which post I claimed as you state !
My discussions were only about maadan. ( I vaguely recall
quoting thEvaaram line 'sudalai podi poosi en uLLam kavar
kaLvan.. '..but not sure.)
>
>>>
>>> M. Sundaramoorthy
>>> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
>>
>> anbudan
>> -Selvaa
>>
> M. Sundaramoorthy
>
> Note to SP: I will post a follow up to you on this thread after a
> couple of days.
I think you've seriously misunderstood. In any case I don't
recall ever to have claimed 'sOlai' for sudalai/choLLai,
unless there was some circumstance to relate maadan (
usually connotes rich) with some sOlai.. If you can quote
my words I might understand better.
In any case, I understood you original comment as more
generic than a particular word ( choLLa/sudalai/sOlai maadan)
The semantic root sense I present often is to aid in grasping
the overall sense and how that root sense ramified into
other words.. I've found these as valuable aids in gaining a
deeper sense.
anbudan
-Selvaa
Sundara Pandian
[....]
MS> After, your explanation, I confirmed with two friends hailing
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> ??? I'm quite sure you're seriously mistaken somebody's words
> for mine ( may be SP or SSP can throw some light..
> I can't follow what you mean ! )
MS> Tell me now, which do I believe - your semantic root derived
MS> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
MS> 'sOlai maadan' or 'Sudalai Madan' I read/heard from
MS> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
MS> the people of that culture?
> Please tell me in which post I claimed as you state !
> My discussions were only about maadan. ( I vaguely recall
> quoting thEvaaram line 'sudalai podi poosi en uLLam kavar
> kaLvan.. '..but not sure.)
I did not want to comment on SundarM's remarks about the
discussion on `chollai maadan' as I did not read SCT for sometime
months earlier, and I thought that it was a discussion between
SankarP and SelvaK. After reading SelvaK's article, it looks like
SundarM is actually commenting on a discussion on `Sudalai Maadan'
that I took part. I wrote about it in my recent article also titled
`Sankarapandi, the Sudalai Madan'.
I agree with Selva that he did not write like, the colloquial
form `Chollai Maadan' derived from `Solai Maadan'. Also, it is not
true that I brought the word `Chollai Maadan' for a discussion.
It all started with SankarP's series of articles titled `Dalit
culture is the majority culture of Tamil Nadu.' and he signed as
`Sudalai Maadan' when he began his series. Rajam Krishnan, who took
part in the discussion followed up on Dalit Culture, was curious about
SankarP's new name and he asked in a seperate article, `What does
the _name_ `Sudalai Maadan' mean?'. I could have left it for SankarP
to answer, but I liked giving a `linguistic' reply to RajamK's question
and I studied the word `maadan' and its root sense `maadu'. I quoted
the kuRaL
`kEdil vizuchchelvam kalvi oruvaRku
maadalla maRRai yavai.'
=====
to note that `maadu' means `chiRappu' and thus `maadan' means
`chiRanthavan' from a linguitic point of view. I also noted that
`sudalai' means `mayaanam' and `sudalai maadan' may mean a god
for graveyards or something like that. Selva followed up my reply
and he gave some linguistic comments on my reply. To the best of my
recollection, he did not say that `Chollai Maadan' < `Solai Maadan'.
(`Chollai Maadan' was not in that discussion, in fact.) SankarP
followed up our replies and he replied RajamK that `sudalai maadan'
is a folk God or spirit and added more details.
Hope this clarifies the matter. :-)
-= SP =-
S. Sankarapandi
In article <930726182...@cec1.wustl.edu> s...@cec1.wustl.edu (Sundara Pand
ian) writes:
>Replies Selvakumar (selv...@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca) to SundarM:
>
>[....]
>
>MS> After, your explanation, I confirmed with two friends hailing
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>> ??? I'm quite sure you're seriously mistaken somebody's words
>> for mine ( may be SP or SSP can throw some light..
>> I can't follow what you mean ! )
>
>MS> Tell me now, which do I believe - your semantic root derived
>MS> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>MS> 'sOlai maadan' or 'Sudalai Madan' I read/heard from
>MS> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>MS> the people of that culture?
>
>> Please tell me in which post I claimed as you state !
>> My discussions were only about maadan. ( I vaguely recall
>> quoting thEvaaram line 'sudalai podi poosi en uLLam kavar
>> kaLvan.. '..but not sure.)
>
>
>form `Chollai Maadan' derived from `Solai Maadan'. Also, it is not
>true that I brought the word `Chollai Maadan' for a discussion.
>It all started with SankarP's series of articles titled `Dalit
>culture is the majority culture of Tamil Nadu.' and he signed as
>`Sudalai Maadan' when he began his series. Rajam Krishnan, who took
>part in the discussion followed up on Dalit Culture, was curious about
>SankarP's new name and he asked in a seperate article, `What does
>the _name_ `Sudalai Maadan' mean?'. I could have left it for SankarP
>to answer, but I liked giving a `linguistic' reply to RajamK's question
>
>
It is true that Rajaraman asked me what is meant the name `Sudalai Madan'.
Then I explained that it is a folk god whose temple always used to be in the
outskirts of the village near `mayaanam'. Sudalai Madan was supposed to be a
very powerful samy among the villagers, especially the Dalits in Tirunel Veli
and Kanya Kumari districts (some parts) who used to destroy the evil spirits
and help the good spirits. There was also a belief that SM protects the
`mayaanam' from devils. I also quoted a line `kadudai sudalai podi poosi uLLan
kavar kaLvan' as Periya puraaNam sentence and I was not sure whether it had
serious relation to Sudalai Madan. I also wrote that colloquially our people
call him as `cholla maadan'.
SP explained the `madan' part through linguistic roots.
Selva entered into the discussion correcting me that the sentence was not from
Periyapuraanam but from thiruvacakam. He joined SP's linguistic analysis of
Madan. Then he corrected me about `cholla madan' as derived from `solai madan'
which is a god worshipped in some other parts of TN.
I am quite sure about what I have written here except that I have not
reproduced the sentences.
Hope this clears everything. Let us leave this issue.
S. Sankarapandi
ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
M. Sundaramoorthy
>
>Replies Sundaramoorthy M (sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu) SP's posting:
>
>SP comments first:
>
> What leads Tamil scholars like Ma.Po.Chi, Tho.Mu.Ci, Venkatasamy etc.
>to think that the temples currently known as `Dhraupathi Amman temples'
>were not originally temples for Dhraupathi of Mahaabharatha is the
>serious question "How could the Tamil people have accepted Dhraupathi
>as a folk goddess as she was married to five husbands, since polyandry
>was not allowed in the Tamil culture (even to the goddesses)."
This is where I say, I am reluctant to accept whatever the
"scholars" say something based on only the *written texts* and the
*hypothetical culture*. The chances of these theories founded
on hypothetical culture going wrong is more when it comes to
folklore, because *popluar culture* is not same as the
hypothetical culture.
Culture, whether we like or not, takes its own natural course.
It doesn't stick to the path defined by the text books. We have
seen myths like "Tamil culture doesn't allow this and that. Tamil
people won't accept such leaders" shattered right in front our eyes. So
much filth was written and talked about the private life of a particular
politician and we saw the same person sweeping to power and then falling
again. I wonder, how much the private life of the person would have
contributed to the rise and fall of the person. People do not care
about the private life, as long as the person is believed to do good/bad
in public office. The same is true in the case of Gods/Godesses.
The Gods/Godesses are attributed many non-human qualities and
humans never try to emulate such qualities themselves. People want
only boons from them, not that they want to become like Gods/Godesses
(maybe there are few exceptions like Sai Baba :-) ). I don't think
any parents will tell their children the story of Krishna stealing
butter and ask them to do the same. They would tell such stories,
make them believe such characters are divine somehow and pray
them to make requests like "Krishna paramaathmaa! enakku nallaa
padippu tharaNum". The Gods/Godesses are never considered as role
models.
The above explanation of the "scholars" leaves lot of questions
unanswered. Let me state few:
(1). If the reason you cite above is real, what made the
Mahabaratha stories popular in Tamil Nadu?. How did the Tamils
accept the story and rewrote few versions, including the latest
one 'panchaali sabatham' by Bharathi?.
(2). Why is Bharatham the most often played theme in Tamil folk
theatre of which Panchali, who married five males, is an important
character?
(3). Do you think, in non-Tamil cultures (eg. Telugu), where
Mahabharatham is more popular than TN, such practice as a woman
marrying five men is acceptable?
Don't we hear cries Rama is not Tamil God and Rama is not talked
about in Tamil literature, untill Kamban wrote Ramakaadhai?. What
made him popular though he was not a Tamil?.
Every new God/Godess is accepted as long as the people are convinced
about their powers, not their characters. Did we know about Kollur
Moogambigai until MGR popularised?. Can one find a reference for
that Godess in Tamil literature?.
So linking some Godess whose characters do not go along with
"Tamil Culture" to some of the existing literary characters is
ill founded in my opinion.
>The Tamil
>scholars also observe that the `Draupathi worship' practised in some
>villages for the north-Indian character `Draupathi' like `walking on
>fire' etc. was not practiced anywhere in the north India where the
>Mahabharatha is more popular.
This doesn't mean anything. There are always local variations
in mythology. This depends on the imaginations of the local
people who added such myths and practices into the main stories.
You cannot get explanations for these in text books, because they don't
get recorded always.
There is a temple in Chegalpet district (I think near Madhurandhagam),
called 'Eri kaaththa raamar kOyil', and the myth is Rama controlled
the flood in a reservoir when the barrage was about to break. You
cannot find this incident in the standard Ramayanam text. You have to
hear this myth from the people of that village.
>Draupathi is not portrayed as a goddess
>in any Tamil literature.
Do you think you can get reference for every God/Godess,
myth, belief and custom in "Tamil literature"?. Tell me some
reference to 'kaattEri' which is worshipped in our region or
at least to popular Madurai MuniyaaNdi in the mainstream Tamil
literature.
> These considerations lead the Tamil scholars
>to think that the Draupathi Amman temples today were initially meant
>for some other goddesses and came to be known as temples for Draupathi
>in due course of time. When I was talking with Ragunathan, he told me
>that some Jain temples in Tamilnadu are now respected by local people as
>Hindu temples. When the Bhakti movement emerged in Tamilnadu, many
>Buddhist and Jain temples were either destoryed or converted into
>Hindu temples by the Bhakti movement. Ragunathan named some such
>temples in our conversation. Likewise, it is not improbable that the
>`Draupathi Amman temples' might have stood for some other goddesses,
>especially considering the fact that Draupathi is not generally
>respected as a goddess in India.
It is possible that there were Buddhist/Jain temples in
many places where the Hindu temple stand now. The fact that these
religions flourished before the revival of Hinduism and during the
crusade on these religions, many such temples would have
been destroyed and converted into Hindu temples. I am not arguing
on this point.
>
>
>> In North Arcot district, where the tamil folk theatre therukkooththu
>> is still in existence in its original form, the most often played
>> theme is baaratham. In big villages the ten-night therukkooththu
>> is a part of the festivals in Dharmaraja-Draupathi temples. And
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> 'draupathi vasthrapaharaNam' or 'draupathi thugil' is a most
>> important and elaborate episode that takes one full night.
>
> I commented on this earlier. Some scholars like Chini.Vengadasamy
>opine that `Dharmaraja - Draupathi' temples were Buddhist temples originally.
>They note that `Dharmaraja' was also a name for `Buddha' and `Draupathi'
>came to usage from the Buddha goddess `Dara Devi' (Buddha's wife).
>Vengadasamy may have also given some evidences from such temples (statues
>etc.), but I have not read them. There are temples for Daradevi all over
>in north India. It is also opined that the `Bhagavathi' temples in Kerala
>were originally Buddhist/Jain temples. I don't have more details on this.
See above.
>Ragunathan, however, does not accept that the Draupathi Amman temples
>were Daradevi temples as he feels that the event `walking on fire' in
>the `Draupathi worship' has a social significance. Whereas Ma.Po.Ci.
>takes this `fire-walking' event to Kannagi's act of burning Madurai
>invoking fire-goddess, Ragunathan takes this `fire-walking' event to
>the Sati committed by the chaste women all along in Tamil history and
>such women worshipped by others nearby as `theeppaayntha amman'.
>
I reserve my comment on Raghunathan's explanation until someone
clarifies if women participate in fire walking ritual in South
Tamil Nadu. At least in Northern TN, only males do this and linking
this to women committing Sati sounds strange to me. Even in such
a case, why should it be a part of Draupathi festival. (Did all
the five husbands of her die simultaneously and did she commit
sati after that?).
Regarding, Ma.Po.Si.'s attempt to link fire walking with Kannagi
burning Madurai indicates that he relied on his Silapadhikaram
scholarship to interprete this remotely connected ritual. Because,
Kannagi burnt the city, not herself. Here in this ritual, people
enter fire, probably to 'purify' themselves.
There are other festivals that have something to do with fire
- bOgi, Karththigai dheepam (chokkap panai). I don't know if there
are any scholarly interpretations linking with Kannagi burning
Madurai etc.
>
>> According to Na. Muthuswamy, a theatrist, folklorist and writer,
>> the Draupathi worship might have come in Tamil society during
>> Desingu Rajan period who ruled Northern part of Tamil Nadu
>> from Chenji. (I think Desingu was a Vaishnavite ).
>
> I will read more material on this.
Na. Muthuswamy's 'anRu poottiya vaNdi' on 'therukkooththu' has
some details on this.
Also, please note that the bibliographic details of the book
on Draupadi, posted by Meenan gives an indication in this regard.
It seems to contain a chapter 1. Mythologies : from Gingee to
Kuruksetra.
>
>> And as SSP brought out, 'thee midhiththal' is a part of the festivals.
>> Not every one does this. Only those people for whom Darupathi is
>> family deity do that. As I know only males do this (I don't understand
>> how SP links it to Kannagi burning Madurai and sati to this). And
>> Panchali in such families is a common name for girls. As I find in my
>> own village, this Draupathi worship is not confined to one caste and
>> polyandry is not their culture :-). (I think the worhshippers of any
>> God/Godesses only want boons from them and don't try to emulate.)
>
> See above. Ragunathan notes that, in the places where the chaste women
>committed Sati were devoted by the local people, `walking on fire' is
>very common. Ragunathan cites the Chorimuththaiyyan temple in the Papanasam
>Hills in Tirunelveli as an example. (SSP, Have you heard of this temple?)
Again, if someone tells whether or not women participate in this
fire walking festival it will be good to understand Raghunathan's
explanation.
I read about 'Chorimuththaiyyan' temple in passing. One of the
Pudumaipithan's short story starts like this:
"SaathaaraNa naatkaLil paapanasam rottil jana nadamaattamE avvaLavu
irukkaadhu; aanal Chorimuththaiyyan kOvil thiruvizhaa anRu mattum
andha rOttil vaddiyum mudhalumaaga makkaL nadandhu theerthu
viduvaargaL".
There are no more details about that temple in the story.
>Ragunathan points out that, to the north of this temple, in the Pattavaraayan
>temple, are idols for the dead Muththuppattan and his wives Bommakkaa and
>Dhimmakkaa who committed Sati with him. Ragunathan notes that,in this
>temple, `fire-walking' event is held every year, on Adi Ammaavaasai. This
>`fire-waling' event is held there to get the blessings of Bommakkaa and
~~~~~~~~~
>Dhimmakkaa who committed Sati there. (Ragunathan refers to a book
~~~~~~~~~~
>`muththuppattan kathai' by Na.Vaanamaamalai for more details on this temple
>and the folk stories.) Ragunathan thus feels that the `paththini vazipaadu'
>in Tamil culture was only the `theeppaayntha amman vazipaadu' or the
>worship of the women who committed Sati. These considerations alongwith
>his linguistic observation that `Theeppaayntha Amman' > `Draupathi Amman'
>leads Ragunathan to conclude that the `Draupathi Amman' temples in TN
>must have been the temples for the `Theeppaayndha Amman'.
>
The underlined names are interesting. There is a folklore in our region
that the Vijayagara era fort in Vellore was built overnight by
twins called Dhimma Reddy - Bomma Reddy.
>> I find the serious article of SP, quoting Maposi, thomusi. etc.,
>> linking Draupathi to Kannagi, Adhimandhi-Attanathi, paththinip
>> peNdir, sati etc. quite hilarious. I strongly believe that their
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> imaginations might have played major roles in their conclusions
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> rather than facts. I wonder any of them talked or interacted with
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> people worshiping Draupthi, who is a folk Godess, to advance their
>> theories. The myths, folklore and rituals of those people, however
>> much distorted over time may be, must be more reliable sources than
>> the standard texts like Sangam literature, ThirukkuRaL etc.
>
> You are entitled to your opinions.
Thanks.
>
>> M. Sundaramoorthy
>> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
>
> Namaste,
> - SP
M. Sundaramoorthy
Sundara Pandian
this thread any longer, as I feel that I need to make some
more references and evaluations on this subject. I will reply
SundarM, however, in this posting.
[....]
MS> So linking some Godess whose characters do not go along with
MS> "Tamil Culture" to some of the existing literary characters is
MS> ill founded in my opinion.
If this is a criticism on Ma.Po.Ci. for linking `Draupathi Amman'
with the existing literary character Kannagi, I agree. If this is a
criticism on Tho.Mu.Ci. as well, I disagree. There are indeed references
for `paththini vazhipaadu' in TN. For instance, Mu.Raghava Iyengar
notes in his book `chEran chenguttuvan' that though in the ancient times,
it was not common to respect chaste women with `paththinik kal' and all,
it became popular in the later days and that `paththinik kaRkaL' were found
in many parts of the South India. Raghava Iyengar also notes that in the
Kannada region, the `paththinik kal' is called as `maasthik kal' and
he observes that it is a corrupt form of `mahaa sathik kal'. This may
convince us that it was common in the later South India to respect the
Sati women as goddesses. ("theeppaayndha ammankaL")
[...]
SP> See above. Ragunathan notes that, in the places where the chaste women
SP> committed Sati were devoted by the local people, `walking on fire' is
SP> very common. Ragunathan cites the Chorimuththaiyyan temple in the Papanasam
SP> Hills in Tirunelveli as an example. (SSP, Have you heard of this temple?)
> Again, if someone tells whether or not women participate in this
> fire walking festival it will be good to understand Raghunathan's
> explanation.
Ragunathan only says that the devotees take part in the `fire-walking'
near the Chorimuththaiyan Temple on Adi Ammavasya. He doesn't say whether
women take part in this event, and I don't have any ideas either, as I
have not visited this temple.
Also, in the references I have made, I find that the name of the game
in the `Draupathi Worship' in the Draupathi Amman Temples is `chastity'.
I have read that this worship is done by the folklore to respect the
`chastity' of the goddess and seek her blessings. I find that this worship
takes about 14 days and those who walk on fire on the last day take `viradha',
etc. I can relate this to the `paththini vazipaadu' for those women who
committed Sati.
As I wrote earlier, I see the need to make more references and do some
evalutaions. This will by my last article on this thread for a while.
More on this later.
-= SP =-
Shiva Shivakumar
Interesting....
that Dravidians (read 'Tamils') were less male chauvenistic than Aryans
(read Brahmins)
recently one nettor said that he admired the Brahmin community for their
treatment of women (sorry I don't remember the exact words ...)
I have had a few (at least half a dozen) non-brahmin men/women remark
that in terms of education and independence of women, Brahmins have a better
record. The same remark was made with lot of admiration by one person and
another (my friend's mom) person complained that 'we are not strict enough
with our girls' (in all these cases, a key factor, namely, financial status
was roughly the same)
I never believed or disbelieved these statements because that did not make
any difference to my mom's or sisters' lives.
I hope GK doesn't think I am implying that everything is fine for Brahmin
women.
Not at all.
When I was about 11 years old, I heard that my grandmom's neighbour, called
'Athai' in Srirangam was widowed at the age of 6 and her head was shaved.
Athai was in her seventies and her life revolved around Ranganathar and
her brother's family. I couldn't sleep that night. It was not just sadness
that I felt - I vividly remember a feeling of shame - even guilt.
Well, that didn't prevent me from making my sisters and manni/aNNi bring coffee to
me in the front room and take back the empty cup :-)
Jagadisan Shivakumar
M. Sundaramoorthy
>In article <2326bo$m...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (S. Sankarapandi) writes:
>>
>>
>>Hope this clears everything. Let us leave this issue.
>
> No, you've thrown in wrong info and SundarM seems to
> cite this wrong info to draw some serious conclusions !
I haven't picked any information thrown by Sankarapandi. I rather
picked up the info. independently that was thrown in this net.
To the best of my memory, the words 'cholla maadan' and the
explanation 'sOlai maadan' did appear in this net. If you thought
I am attributing to you something you didn't write, you could have
pointed at the very first moment I said so at the end of my follow
up to SP. You rather asked me to justify, why I believe the
'illiterate', not the 'literate'. When I explained my stand on
the methods, you denied saying anything regarding 'cholla maadan'
- 'sOlai maadan'. Then SP went a step ahead to claim these words
never appeared.
It is too long ago this issue was discussed and it is difficult
for anyone to prove beyond doubt. This issue is not worth digging
up to prove who is wrong or right. It might be that concerned people
(including me) are not able to recall and reproduce exactly what
happened. If you (Selva) and SP think that I am attributing something
that you both haven't told, I sincerely apologise to you both. And
my intention was not to cook up something to malign your images,
but I only used it as a practical example in my post. If you both
think this issue was never discussed or you didn't say so, I am
sorry for the confusion. I hope my apology will put this worthless
issue to rest and leave you both in peace.
In any case, this is a lesson for me to be careful hereafter
when I quote someone, particularly when I don't have the exact words.
>>
>>
>>S. Sankarapandi
>>ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
>
>
> anbudan
> -Selvaa
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
>
Wrong ! 'thOdudaiya ceviyan..
..sudalai podi poosi ..' is Sambandhar thEvaaram
and I would not have said thiruvaasagam..
>Madan. Then he corrected me about `cholla madan' as derived from `solai madan'
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>which is a god worshipped in some other parts of TN.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sankarapandi, I am quite sure you're mistaken. I've not extended
sOlai maadan to the best of my knowledge !! I usually store almost
all my posts/replies, let me check.
>
>
>I am quite sure about what I have written here except that I have not
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>reproduced the sentences.
I'm almost quite sure you are wrong/mistaken. If I've
extended 'sOlai maadan' I don't know what logic I used !!
I don't usually extend words based on how a word sounds..
>
>Hope this clears everything. Let us leave this issue.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No, you've thrown in wrong info and SundarM seems to
cite this wrong info to draw some serious conclusions !
>
>
Sundara Pandian
Selva> [ To SSP ]
Selva> No, you've thrown in wrong info and SundarM seems to
Selva> cite this wrong info to draw some serious conclusions !
MS> I haven't picked any information thrown by Sankarapandi. I rather
MS> picked up the info. independently that was thrown in this net.
MS> To the best of my memory, the words 'cholla maadan' and the
MS> explanation 'sOlai maadan' did appear in this net.........
MS> ....... Then SP went a step ahead to claim these words
MS> never appeared.
MS> If you (Selva) and SP think that I am attributing something
MS> that you both haven't told, I sincerely apologise to you both.....
SundarM, please take back your apology. I thought we were having
a friendly discussion on this topic, recollecting our old articles.
It looks like both you (MS) and Selva are hurt by this discussion.
After reading the reply by SankarP and SelvaK, I made a logical order
of our old articles. It looks like,
Stage 1: SankarP starts his series under the name `Sudalai Maadan'.
Stage 2: Rajaraman replies his series and posts a seperate article
asking the nettors what does `Sudalai Maadan' mean ?
Stage 3: SP gives a linguistic explanation of `Sudalai Maadan' and
translates it to `mayaanaththu chiRanthavan', or a God in
graveyards. SP explains the word `maadan' with a kuRaL
`kEdil vizuchchelvam kalvi oruvaRku maadalla maRRai yavai'.
Stage 4: Selva replies SP, comments on `maadan' and warmly praises
SP for picking up an appropriate kuRaL to explain the root
sense of `maadan'.
Stage 5: SankarP follows up the articles by SP and Selva and comments
on his name `Sudalai Maadan'. He writes like this is a God
respected by the folks and is belived to drive away spirits.
He also quotes some verses on `sudalai', etc.
Stage 6: Selva replies SankarP, corrects the attribution of SankarP's
quote etc.
Earlier, when SundarM wrote in the net that I brought the word
`chollai maadan' for a discussion in the net, I corrected him, as
I only took part in the discussion on `Sudalai Maadan'. SankarP also
agrees on this point. I still believe that Selva did not comment on
`chollai maadan' in his reply to my article in Stage 4 in the above
table. I am very postive about it, as I did not mention `chollai maadan'
in my article. SankarP mentions that it was he(SSP) who first mentioned
`chollai maadan' in the discussion and Selva followed him up with
saying that `chollai maadan' came from `Solai maadan'. I have only
vague memories on articles in Stage 5 and Stage 6. I don't remember
all the details in these articles in Stages 5-6. My only memory on
Selva's article on Stage 6 is that he corrected SankarP's attribution
of the quote on `sudalai'. I can't comment anything more on this.
As our recollections may be poor on this matter, I suggest all
to close this matter. No need to apologise and all that.
-== SP ==-
eha...@gmail.com
Would the DK thugs ever have the guts to go and stand infront of any Mosque in Kashmir and proclaim and preach all those ' Paguttarivu( Rationalism) '?
Despite all these facts about DK/DMK , it is so sad and shocking to see almost 1.2 crores of Tamils have voted DMK in Lok Sabha !!