" } Google+
FYI.
Received this from a reliable source.
I always get in trouble with my so called Brahmin friends. In fact, one time
one asked me "Are you not Brahmin?" So, I asked him tell me who is "Brahmin".
No one in that gathering or any other has ever defined "Brahmin" to me. When I tell
them that we all are "Shudras" they all get in arms.
Any way, this article may be of interest to you.
By the way, I know the author for last 20+ years.
I like to get your feedback.
Sincerely,
Raam
Hari OM!
==============================
Who is a Brahmin?
by
S. Mitra
It is commonly assumed in India and elsewhere in the world that a person who introduces himself as a Brahmin is also accepted as the son of a Brahmin. It is not known how and when the Varna system or the allocation of different statuses began in the Indian society and later on when the various statuses began to be acquired simply by inheritance. It is a well-known fact that once a social custom is somehow accepted, it becomes normative. That is to say, it is taken for granted and over time it becomes a tradition. If it's validity or usefulness is questioned at a later time it usually falls in deaf ears until it becomes a public outcry.
Indeed it is interesting to note that the question arose even in the era of Mahabharata when the Brahmins were at the top of the social hierarchy. Although that exalted status was supposed to beacheived, it was true that then, as it is now, the statuses were mostly inherited and not acheived. It is no wonder that even then the social thinkers felt the need to settle the issue and we find the declaration in the shastras -
All human beings are born as shudras. Only through initiation by a qualified teacher one becomes a dwija or twice born. In the next stage, through extensive study of the scriptures one becomes a Vipra. Afterwards, one has to traverse, as the scriptures declare, the razor thin road to realize Brahman in order to become a brahmin.
Lord Buddha himself also had to talk about this issue. He expressed himself so elegantly when he said, 'him I shall regard as a brahmin who is not running after fulfilling any desire past or present, does not harbor any desire in his mind, does neither ask nor accept anyfavor from anyone.'
How does one then recognize a brahmin ? A true brahmin will certainly not blow his own horn. He needs no recognition from others unlike those of modern times who will deliberately bear signs or symbols at least on occasions when they feel the need to demonstrate their identity. But a true brahmin, like a musk-deer, cannot hide himself.
In Bhagavdgita, The Lord has said, ' I have created the four varnas by the differences ofguna and karma ( qualities and actions ) ‘ (4:13).. Later, in (18:42), He added a few pointers to recognise a brahmin. Those are tranquility, self-restraint, austerity, purity, forbearence, uprightness, knowledge and realisation which, as if born out of their nature, are reflected in their karmas.
In this context, the dialogue between Yudhisthhira and his ancestor Nahusha who, on that occasion, had to become a serpent due to a curse he received for his past mis-deed, is worth noting. At that time, the Pandavas were forest dwellers (Mahabharata, Vanaparva, 177:15-16). One of the many questions Yudhisthhira had to answer was, 'Oh king, who should we call a brahmin' ? Yudhisthhira's reply was unambiguous, 'when truthfulness, charity,forbearence, moral character, nonviolence etc. are reflected in a person, I call him abrahmin'. Note that the first and foremost among the traits mentioned by Yudhisthhira was truthfulness. In fact, truthfulness stands supreme among all the other traits. Not only that, but all the others also follow it. We find an excellent illustration of this principle in the life of Satyakamaas narrated in Chhandogya Upanishad (4:4). When Satyakama, desirous of acquiring spiritual knowledge, approached a teacher and requested to accept him as a disciple, the teacher wanted to know his lineage. Satyakam's reply was, 'before coming to you I asked my mother Jabala the same question and she said, 'I got you in my youth when I was busy with numerous duties in serving many. The question of knowing your ancestry did not cross my mind. Therefore, if necessary, introduce yourself as Satyakama, son of Jabala''. The teacher instantly declared, “no nonbrahmincan say what you have said. Prepare yourself for the ritual of discipleship”.
Remaining committed to truth the whole life is a task that is next to impossible. As such,Yudhisthhira himself, who was known as Dharmaputra, had to succumb to the pressure to conceal the truth when he was called upon to take the most crucial test of his life. Oh, how a person of his stature must have suffered from the pain caused by that single dark spot in his otherwise unblemished and dazzling character.
This incident of course took place long after Yudhisthhira's encouter with his serpent ancestorNahusha. Then, pleased with Yudhisthhira's answer Nahusha argued, 'the qualities you mentioned certainly can be found even in a person who has the label of a shudra.' Yudhisthhira's response was swift and firm. He said, 'if in a person those traits are not present he should be regarded as ashudra in spite of his social label of a brahmin and vice versa.'
While the similatities between the characterizations of a brahmin put forward by Yudhisthhira and Lord Krishna are noteworthy, the ascent to the spiritual peak is yet to be completed. InShantiparva of Mahabharata we find the description of that state (245:12), when the recognition ofbrahminhood is extended by the gods. That is a state of total surrender at which one does not care about how to cover the body, what to put in the mouth or where to rest.
Sri Ramakrishna once told one of his devotees who was not only a brahmin in terms of his inherited social status but he was also spiritually quite well advanced. Upon learning that he is a medical practitioner, Ramakrishna said that is not a profession for a brahmin to practice. Then, after finding out that the doctor has to support a large number of people, he recanted and later told him, 'don't give up the practice but do not earn more than you need to live a frugal life'. The doctor took his words and followed his advice until one day when a verse fromKrishnayajurvedasamhita caught his attention. It said among other things that a brahmin must not practice medicine. He thought, 'Sri Ramakrishna must have found me unfit for spiritual advancement and permitted to hold on to my profession’. Thereafter, he did not hesitate for a moment and gave up practicing medicine to earn his livelihood.
Nowadays, the visible differences among the castes are at a very low point, particularly in large urban areas. There, of necessity, one can not exercise any control over who one comes in close contact with in a public place. Also, there are very few vocations that are caste selective today. Yet, tradition does not easily lets loose its grip and many of the so called brahmins suffer in their hearts from the suppression of the indignity of unavoidable contacts with those they can not accept as their equals. Isn't our pride as rational thinkers contradictory to such a pattern of psychological state of mind ?
Yet, this is not a lesson to be learned from our glorious past. There were not many in those days who did not bow down before Sri Rama or Sri Krishna and neither of them were brahmins. Who again were disrespectful to Narada or Vyasa, the author of Mahabharata ? According to Bhagavata,Narada was the son of a maidservant like Satyakama and Vyasa's mother was a fisherman's adopted daughter and his father was a sage of unknown caste.
The following may not be out of place in this context which ironically is a contradiction in terms. The brahmin priests today, as in the past, depend for their livelihood mostly on nonbrahminyajmans. Not only do they gladly accept but they also expect appropriate offering when they perform a religious ritual but will not, at least in some parts of West Bengal, eat rice cooked by them. It is interesting to note that the need to perform designated rituals at different times of the year have been shrewdly instilled by the so called priests such that the yajmans believing that these will be beneficial, if not in this life but surely in the next, succcumb to that temptation. This has become a tradition which is so ingrained that the yajmans believe that in this endeavor their task is just to provide the materials called for the occasion and everything else will be taken care of by the priests. The priests appear to demonstrate the gravity of these rituals by chanting mantras written in Sanskrit although very few of them, are aware of the meanings and relevance of those mantras for the occasion. In most societies, codes of normative behavior are rarely questioned and that is why here also, both parties, priests as well as yajmans, believe that, understood or not, mantras chanted in any other order or by a nonbrahmin or in any other language will not serve the intended purpose.
The priests are of course acknowledged as brahmins by the society by virtue of only their lineage and not by their qualities. Although the scriptures clearly defines brahminhood which unfortunately have remained out of bounds to the nonbrahmins for so long, that now although they are accessible to anyone, very few of the so-called brahmins devote their time to understand their proper role in the society. The yajmans, however, are quite content by giving something like the power of attorney to the priests to take care of their need in this and the other world. It is interesting to note that in modern times, internal migration mostly from rural to urban areas or between urban areas, makes it possible for anyone to assume the identity of another caste under the veil of anonymity since, as yet, requiring a birth certificate and assigning a number soon after birth has not been properly instituted.
Be that as it may, the status of brahminhood that is usually inherited and not achieved, seems to be associated with a superiority complex. This phenomenon becomes more and more noticable in cosmopolitan cities outside India where prestige at this point in time is mostly associated with occupation and wealth and not with lineage. The mental deprivation felt by these so calledbrahmins for lack of recognition of the superiority of their caste thus manifests in patterns of irrational behavior like the formation of an exclusive group and naming it a brahmin society. While the formation of groups on the basis of language, occupation, religion and the like may make some sense, forming a group with that label appears not only to be a desperate attempt on the part of its members to derive a false sense of superiority where there is none, but it also is divisive and is harmful for the Hindus who should have a united front in their adopted country. I have seen a renowned professor in India filling his earthen water vessel from the tap himself and not asking his personal office bearer to get it for fear of contamination. I have heard a member of the Indian public service commission lamenting over the government allowing a nonbrahmin to chant from a scripture at the radio station. I have known parents disowning their children for choosing their mates from another caste. Even in this country, when parental influence over their children is declining I have seen an extreme example of a father’s threatening to commit suicide if the daughter chooses to marry without his blessings. Naturally, in these days of rapid social changes, it is no wonder that when the children marry within their so-called own caste, the parents will proudly announce the event with great fanfare.
The universality of social stratification is a reality at all times and in all places although, in some instances at least, extreme separation among groups characterized by absence of interaction is hard to accept. As there is no justification to let differences in skin color, physical characteristics and the like to be the determinants of social inequality, in the same way, the ancestry should not be used to define a person’s social status. But this is the ideal state that never was.
In Uttarakanda of Ramayana, there is the story of the death of a child of a brahmin. While mourning, the family was blaming Rama’s inability to maintain Dharma in the kingdom as the cause of the untimely death. The reason for this dereliction of duty was investigated and found to be the performance of austerity or tapasya by Shambuka, a shudra. How can a shudra who has no right to practice tapas dare to do such a thing in Ramarajya ? So Rama marched into the forest, found Shambuka and delivered the due punishment by beheading him. It is hard to believe that such an example is to be found in the scripture for the citizenry to understand their rights and obligations. Some modern critics of Ramayana have noted that the last or the Uttarakanda of Ramayana was not written by Valmiki because in the concluding section of the preceding or theYuddhakanda, he has already described the Phalasruti or the result that one can expect by listening to or reading Ramayana. Since the authority of a scripture is rarely challenged the purpose of such secret and quiet intrusion by anonymous authors can easily be understood.
It took a lot of courage to stand up and revolt against such long established and deep rooted social norms and traditions as we find much later in Mahabharata where, only a giant like Karna made his point loud and clear. Disgusted by the ridicule and insult showered on him by the Kshatriyas and the teacher Dronacharya, he said at the top of his voice, “ I had no control over my ancestry but I have the power to become what I want to be “. But singlehanded he was no match against the prevailing abusive human rights.
But that was then. Karna had to suffer from the indignities and humiliations but unbeknownst to him, he certainly laid the seed to germinate, albeit slowly. Not long ago, Sankaracharya, that great saint and venerable scholar, had to be taught that the soul has no caste by the Lord himself who in the disguise of a lower caste, was blocking the way for Sankaracharya to pass through. It is regrettable that the practice of untouchability, denial of rights to enter temples etc. have yet to become things of the past. When, oh when, shall we see the day when we can loudly declare that we are all Harijans.
END.
__._,_.___
Follow @lokakshema_hari Tweet
No comments:
Post a Comment