the question of conversion into the "brahmin fold"

[Guest guest]

srImathE SaTakOpAya namah

srImathE rAmAnujAya namah

srImathE anantArya mahAguravE namah

srImathE vara vara munayE namah

 

 

dear bhagavathas,

 

the question that was raised by a member of the list

"whether it is true that ramanuja converted many

non-brahmins into brahimns" needs further discussion.

 

First of all, the classification "brahmin" is

birth-based only (in practice - in this context,

it does not matter what srI bhagavad gIta says).

Given that as a qualification, there can be

no "conversions" into the brahminical caste.

 

The important question that naturally arises is

whether

being a brahmin is in anyway better/worse with

respect to the goals that devotees pursue. Our

srIvaishNava AcAryAs, starting with the AzhvArs

(only 3 out of 11 are known to have been born into

a brahmin community) through svami maNavALa

mAmunigaL have taught us, and demonstrated to us

through their actions that there are no differences

whatsoever among srIvaishNavas, let alone narrow

caste based differentiation.

 

svami ALavandAr, for example had mAranEri nambi

and thiru-k-kacci nambi as his sishyAs. rAmAnuja,

in his lifetime has shown so many times how

being a "non-brahmin" does not matter at all -

prime examples are the episodes of ramanuja

holding piLLai urangavilli dasar's hand after

taking bath from cauvery, periya nambi's

response to ramanuja when he enquired about

periya nambi performing funeral rites to

maranEri nambi is a great lesson for us in

this context. svami piLLai lOkAchAr, in

srivacaha bhUshaNam (that greatest of rahasya

granthas that shows us what a SV life should be

about), very clearly teaches us about these

issues.

 

The following is a paraphrasing of svami PBA's

summary commentary on srIvacanabhUshaNam

 

SVB:194 - 196:

bhagavatha apacharam is not just one type.

They are things like trying to question/prove

a bhagavtha's community of birth, their

acara anushtanams, their physical condition,

their relatives, their place of living. Talking

ill of and/or disrespecting a bhagavatha who

was born in a lower community based on his

birth is one of those. Trying to inquire into

a bhagavathas birth is even worse than tryng

to inquire into the materials that make the

archa form of the Lord.

 

SVB:201:

The apacharas committed by people of

higer birth towards people of lower birth,

and those committed by people of lower birth

towards people of higer birth are all bad. It

is not such that "those of higer birth can

committ sins against other people, and those

of lower birth cannot"

 

SVB207:

All the sastras eulogize birth in the brahmin

community. While it is so, how can one say that

such a birth is useless - If that question arises,

here is the answer - The reason brahmaNathvam

is eulogized is because one of its characteristics

is learning the vEdAs, understnading their meaning

and then understanding the way to reach the Lord.

Nowhere is it said that "however one may be,

brahmaNathvam is good".

 

SVB 208:

The highness or lowness of birth is immaterial

for the goal.

 

SVB 209:

Then what is necessary? Only bhagavad sambandham

is necessary.

 

The quintessence of the "brahmin" question is

treated in the following - One cannot but shed

tears over the greatness of our AchAryAs, and

even more tears over the ignorance of all of us

in NOT following their teachings.

 

SVB 210 - 216:

If the following question is raised:

A person born in a higher community and a

person born in a lower community both have

bhagavad sambandham. Then, both are bhagavathas.

At this time, doesn't the one born in a higher

community have more speciality ("siRappu") as

he has both?

 

Then, the answer is as follows:

Those who raise the above question classify

the highness and lowness of birth based on

the community that one is born.

The birth that lends oneself easily to servitude

towards the Lord and His devotees (sEsathva)

is the higher birth. A birth that does not lend

oneself toward sEsathva is a lower birth.

If one is born as a brahmin, there is a possibility

that he might take the path of upAyAs other

than the Lord and fail in the endeavour to

reach Him. Moreover, since those born in the

higher birth have the ingredients (knowledge,

concept of "higher" birth) for ego (ahamkara),

the humility (naichchiyam) tht needs to be

natural for a srIvaishNava has to be acquired

by him. For one who is born in a "lower"

community, he traditionally does not have the

right to learn the different upAyAs towards

goals and cannot have ahamkaram. And that

lends him to have sEsathva and naichchiyam

naturally. HENCE BEING BORN IN A LOWER COMMUNITY

IS BETTER (srEstam).

 

Now, the natural question is, if our AchAryAs

have shown so much open mindedness and so much

reforms, why does the current religion have so

much "brahminical" tendencies (like many

non-brahmin bhagavathas not allowed into the

gOshti, many people not dining with them etc.),

then the simple answer, though however

difficult it is to digest, is that most of

the community (in both the sects) is reluctant

to let go of the assumed "superiority" of a

brahmin birth. This "brahminisation" of

srIvaishNavam is not new - It has been happening

for centuries, and in fact is a major cause of

difference in opinion among many people (not

among vEdAnta dEsika and piLLai lOkAchAr as

many would immediately assume) of far lower

stature than our great AchAryAs.

 

Once certainly does need to ask the question

whether ANYTHING (let alone being born into

a brahmin family) would cause a person to

be "better" than another? If so, the only

possible thing might be the helplessness

and complete surrender to God. Then, in

that case, does birth really matter? Should

we even think about it?

 

This above mail is not a tirade against anyone,

not especially the bhagavatha who brought up

this question. In fact, I am very happy that

he asked the question as it gave me the opportunity

to re-read the relevant sections of srIvacanabhUshaNam

and marvel at the universality of our religion,

and the greatness of our AchAryAs.

 

AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE saraNam,

 

adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan,

varadhan

 

 

 

 

Find the one for you at Personals

http://personals.