Gothrams

[Guest guest]

I belong to kausika gotram, can't really think

of anyone 'high and mighty' related to me. There

might have been some, but I don't know them.

 

My paternal grandfather is from 'kariyaappattiNam'

near thiruththuRaip pooNdi, don't remember any

fancy attachments to his name. He was called

thiruvEngadaach chaariyaar.

 

The rest of my family simply adds an 'aiyangaar'

to the names.

 

--badri

 

-----------------

S.Badrinarayanan

Graduate Student

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering

Cornell University

-----------------

[Guest guest]

I would like to make a few comments on gotrams.

>From a sociological standpoint, gotrams for most

south Indian brahmins (and for that matter, probably

all brahmins), are probably useless, since each gotram

by now has probably assimilated countless numbers of

non-brahmins, or was a concoction from the very beginning.

 

Many brahmins of South India, particlarly Sri Vaishnava

brahmins, are of mixed origin. This can be gleaned from

the very early days of the movement, when accusations

were made by other brahmins that Pancaratra Vaishnavas

(i.e., Sri Vaishnavas) were not "true" brahmins. This

contention is discussed in detail by Yamunacharya in

his Agama PraamaNya. The fact that he needs to defend

the brahminical origin of Vaishnavas implies that the

movement had a great deal of social fluidity. Dr. Srinivasan

also has some other speculations in this regard.

 

I am nominally of Srivatsa gotram, but I doubt if I

have any real connection to bhaargava, cyavana, and other

rishis. My connection with Nammalvar and Ramanuja on

both a psychological and social level is probably much

more direct.

 

Speaking of gotram concoction, I surmise that the

"SathamarShaNa" gotram that is so common among Sri

Vaishnavas (my mother's side included) is because

of Nathamuni and Yamunacharya's direct spiritual connection

with Nammalvar, who is called "Sathakopa" in Sanskrit.

I also doubt if they are direct descendants of the Vedic

rishis; they may have adopted sathamarshana as their

gotram to indicate greater connection with the Alvar.

 

The gotrams themselves are regionalized, indicating a

later origin to the separate gotrams. Dr. G.S Ghurye,

a prominent Indian sociologist, has noted that many

gotrams are exclusive to a particular region. The

implications of this are pretty obvious. An isolated

group of people could easily invent or assimilate

into a gotram, a very valuable thing considering the

status that brahminhood conveyed.

>From a Vaishnavite standpoint, gotrams are in the end

to be transcended and avoided. There is a verse:

 

ekaanti vyapadeshtavyo naiva graama kulaadibhih

vishnunaa vyapadestavyo ...

 

Unfortunately, I cannot remember the last paadam of

this verse, but it is quoted by Azhagiya Manavaala

Perumal Nayanaar in the Acharya Hridayam. The verse

means that a "ekaanti", a single-minded Vaishnava,

should not adorn himself with connections to his

village or his kula (gotram). Rather, he should

recognize himself as Vishnu's and Vishnu's alone,

and call himself Ramanuja-daasan, Sri Vaishnava

Daasan, Ranganaatha Daasan, and refer to a divya-ksetra

as his town.

 

I believe Desikar replaces his standard "abhivaadanam"

in his Prabandhasaaram with references to the Azhvaars

and the Prabandham, since they are his more significant

spiritual forebears.

 

I also think gotram tends to set apart brahmins from

non-brahmins, a vestige of an often distasteful social

past that I would rather move away from. For this

very reason, I avoid reference to it, as well as to the

term "Iyengar", whose meaning is shrouded in confusion.

The term "Sri Vaishnava" is so much more appealing.

 

Mani

[Guest guest]

 

I would like to make a few comments on gotrams.

 

>From a sociological standpoint, gotrams for most

south Indian brahmins (and for that matter, probably

all brahmins), are probably useless, since each gotram

by now has probably assimilated countless numbers of

non-brahmins, or was a concoction from the very beginning.

 

Many brahmins of South India, particlarly Sri Vaishnava

brahmins, are of mixed origin. This can be gleaned from

the very early days of the movement, when accusations

were made by other brahmins that Pancaratra Vaishnavas

(i.e., Sri Vaishnavas) were not "true" brahmins. This

contention is discussed in detail by Yamunacharya in

his Agama PraamaNya. The fact that he needs to defend

the brahminical origin of Vaishnavas implies that the

movement had a great deal of social fluidity. Dr. Srinivasan

also has some other speculations in this regard.

 

I am nominally of Srivatsa gotram, but I doubt if I

have any real connection to bhaargava, cyavana, and other

rishis. My connection with Nammalvar and Ramanuja on

both a psychological and social level is probably much

more direct.

 

Speaking of gotram concoction, I surmise that the

"SathamarShaNa" gotram that is so common among Sri

Vaishnavas (my mother's side included) is because

of Nathamuni and Yamunacharya's direct spiritual connection

with Nammalvar, who is called "Sathakopa" in Sanskrit.

I also doubt if they are direct descendants of the Vedic

rishis; they may have adopted sathamarshana as their

gotram to indicate greater connection with the Alvar.

 

The gotrams themselves are regionalized, indicating a

later origin to the separate gotrams. Dr. G.S Ghurye,

a prominent Indian sociologist, has noted that many

gotrams are exclusive to a particular region. The

implications of this are pretty obvious. An isolated

group of people could easily invent or assimilate

into a gotram, a very valuable thing considering the

status that brahminhood conveyed.

 

>From a Vaishnavite standpoint, gotrams are in the end

to be transcended and avoided. There is a verse:

 

ekaanti vyapadeshtavyo naiva graama kulaadibhih

vishnunaa vyapadestavyo ...

 

Unfortunately, I cannot remember the last paadam of

this verse, but it is quoted by Azhagiya Manavaala

Perumal Nayanaar in the Acharya Hridayam. The verse

means that a "ekaanti", a single-minded Vaishnava,

should not adorn himself with connections to his

village or his kula (gotram). Rather, he should

recognize himself as Vishnu's and Vishnu's alone,

and call himself Ramanuja-daasan, Sri Vaishnava

Daasan, Ranganaatha Daasan, and refer to a divya-ksetra

as his town.

 

I believe Desikar replaces his standard "abhivaadanam"

in his Prabandhasaaram with references to the Azhvaars

and the Prabandham, since they are his more significant

spiritual forebears.

 

I also think gotram tends to set apart brahmins from

non-brahmins, a vestige of an often distasteful social

past that I would rather move away from. For this

very reason, I avoid reference to it, as well as to the

term "Iyengar", whose meaning is shrouded in confusion.

The term "Sri Vaishnava" is so much more appealing.

 

Mani

It is claimed by some historians that Ramanuja wanted that Brahmins should accept other castes into their fold but Sri Vedantha Desika who firmly established Ramanuja's "Visishta Advaitha" however discarded the acceptance of conversion;he was no doubt broad minded to have matrimonial alliances without any restrictions whatsoever.Any light on this?

Venkiyes

[GOLDENLION2006]

I am a VADAMA Brahmin owing allegiance to Adi Sankaracharya,i.e., we belong to the SMARTA sect. I am a native of North Arcot District & belong to the Kaundinya Gotra. North Arcot & Chengalpattu Districts & northern parts of South Arcot constitute one zone known as Thondai Nadu. My maternal grandmother was from Tanjavur. Sri RAMANUJA, EMBAR & KOORATHAAZHVAN were all Vadama Brahmins. When Sri Ramanuja founded Visishtadvaita Vaishnavam, most of the Vadama Brahmins refused to embrace Vaishnavism & remained loyal to Adi Sankaracharya. The main reason why they rejected Ramanuja was that the Vadamas, like other followers of Adi Sankara, were neither fanatical Saivites nor fanatical Vaishnavites, and worshipped Shiva, Vishnu, Ganesh, Karthikeya (Subrahmanya), Shakti & Soorya (Sun) as different forms of one and the same Parabrahman or Paramatma. This is known as SHANMATA in Sanskrit and ARUSAMAYAM in Tamil (worship of six deities as one and the same Parabrahman), whereas Sri Ramanuja advocated that only Vishnu was Parabrahman and other deities should not be worshipped. But subsequently during the reign of Telugu-speaking Naicker (Naidu) Kings in Tanjavur & Madurai, KUMAARA THATHACHARYA, the rajaguru of the Naicker kings, converted many Vadamas to Sri Vaishnavism, made them settle down in Chola Nadu (Tanjavur & Tiruchi areas) & gave them houses and lands.

 

One of Sri Ramanuja's gurus, PERIYA NAMBI and the Thenkalai Acharya MANAVALA MAAMUNIGAL were BRIHACHCHARANAM Brahmins. Tirukoshtiyoor Nambi, another guru of Sri Ramanuja, was a SOZHIYA BRAHMIN. KAARPASA RAMAN who is mentioned in the biography of Ramanuja was a ASHTASAHASRAM Brahmin.