RE: Brahminism (2 types)

[Guest guest]

I see arguments from Sri Tatatchar, Sri Dileepan etc. regarding Brahminism.

Let me summarize my thoughts on this:

 

Note that there are two types of Brahminism : Guna based Brahminism and

Birth (jati) based brahminism. Bhagawadgita is not detailed enough on this

subject. Please refer to Srimadbhagawatam (final section) re: duties of

varnashrama dharmas. This provides a conclusive picture on this issue.

 

The idea is this: Guna based brahmin is the one to be respected irrespective

of his/her birth. Even a birth based Brahmin should cultivate proper gunas

and become a guna based brahmin. In essence guna basis is the proper basis.

However, birth basis provides certain responsibilities and sins if such

responsibilities are not fulfilled. For example: yajana-yaajana (doing

yagas and participating in others' yagas and making them happen), patana-

paatana (reading scriptures and teaching them), daana-parigraha (charity: be

the giver and receiver as per the circumstance and occasion)... These are

the duties for a brahmin. If a brahmin (or trivarnika..ie. brahmana,

kshatria, vaishya by birth) does not do the duty (ie. sandhya and veda

studies) assigned, he will incur sin. On the other hand if a sudra or 5th

category does not do sandhyavandana it does not matter. no sin is incurred.

Similarly, an animal like a tiger does not incur sin by killing while a

human being will incur sin; since a human is sastravasya (bound by

scriptures) and an animal is not bound by the rules of shastra. So beware

brahmins... if (you) do not do daily duties sin will definitely incur and

take effect in your lives causing unhappiness and miseries (now and in

future). The bottom line is that being a birth brahmin is not great. It is

a license and responsibility when misused will be a detriment. That is why

I wish, if someone is born as a trivarnika (brahmin, vaishya or Kshatria),

let that person be a "woman"; because a woman does not have "rules" such as

sandhya vandana. So she will not incur sin if sandhya or "agni karya" is

not done. But, of course a sthri (woman) has dharmas too as Sri Sadagopan

wrote in his recent mail. In short, being a birth based brahmin is more a

pain then credit!

 

Note a jati brasta, like AJAMILA (prior to his reformation), was never

eulogised. He was verily shunned though was born as a brahmin. I do not

claim to be a brahmin, since I do not do the duties assigned to a brahmin

correctly. So, there is nothing wrong if someone criticises me.

 

So the essence is that one should not give credence or importance to birth

based brahminism and honor guna based brahminism irrespective of the

person's birth. However, one cannot eliminate the truth behind birth based

brahminism since our shastras are filled with such issues. Sri Tatachar's

views of only supporting guna based brahminism is laudable but the extreme

view of annihilating the significance(I said significance not importance) of

birth basis is not as per scriptures. One might ask what if it is not per

scriptures? then it does not matter,you can have whatever opinion you want,

it will not become "valid testimony".

 

Hope this clarifies the issue.

 

I would REQUEST the group members to Sort of put an end to this BRAHMIN /

CASTE issue on this group and move on to other topics. This topic is an

eternal subject with very little tattva. Others who are still interested may

want to look into archives and read all the stuff regarding this previously

written.

 

I am pained by mine and other' mistakes regarding this jati issue. We learn

about these subjects and hardly try to do our duties such as study of

scriptures. Hope Lord Krishna with all our acharyas show us a way to carry

out our duties properly.

 

Dasan Krishna Prasad Kalale

Krishna Kalale

619-658-5612 (phone)

619-658-2115 (fax)