Brahmanism

Introduction: This is my  response to one message in which it is mentioned how ‘Brahmanism’ was opposed even by a Brahmin.

My response:

Brahmanism, Dalitism, OBCism, Communism, Capitalism, terrorism, socialism, secularism and various other ‘isms’ are not the product of one particular community.  It is a concept in which various others equally contributed.  I am saying this not to defend the so called Brahmanism but to point out the fact that this so called ‘Brahmanism’ is very high among other OBCs in India, particularly in Tamil Nadu, where Dalits were suppressed not by Brahmins but by other caste people who most of the time remind as LandLords¹.  Any social concept never stems from one particular community.  For example in ancient times both the Kings [rather Kshatriyas] and Brahmins collaborated with each other for their political, economic and social survival  To expand their political authority the Kings used their economic power by giving huge lands.² So whenever we read any such bashing against any kind of ‘isms’ we need to keep this fact in our mind.  Because when such books or speeches were made then only a particular community alone comes to the minds of the people.

We can safely say that the so called brahmanism evolved around the dharma shastras which were written ‘of the Brahmins, for the Brahmins and by the brahmins’ in defining their ‘relationship with oneself and others’.  It was never meant to be implemented in letter and spirit, though all other varnas used it to define their relationship with themselves and others.  Brahmins neither had the physical [numerical] strength nor had economic strength to implement this ‘Brahmanism’.  At the same time we also should recognize the fact that they never wanted to have ‘power’ but only ‘authority’ [like Sonia family in Congress, RSS in BJP etc.] to implement their Brahmanism through other agencies, particularly by the Kshatriyas by often remaining their ‘Prohita’ [ pro + hita, taking care of their welfare].

Later when caste groups felt the power of ‘Brahmanism’ to dominate them, they began to fight in the air using targeting an enemy who was not even there.  Several individual Brahmins³ and groups also joined with those caste groups to oppose this ‘Brahmanism’.  But not addressing the actual villain in life viz., casteism everyone began to attack this Brahmanism.  But it will never succeed.  Unless we challenge casteism, recognizing that it also has its benefits [see UH on this subject] it will use this so-called Brahmanism to defend its role and right in the society. 

As I mentioned caste was existing even before Brahmanism appeared in literature and history.  Like race in the west it is pan-Asian reality.  Now no one can escape from its clutches as it has now become a political power.  Almost every state has its own political party exclusively based on a particular caste.  Candidates were chosen based on the  caste equation in that constituency. We need not mention about the various caste associations, particularly in Tamil Nadu, where anti-Brahmanism still remains strong.  In Andhra no one can do politics without caste identity.  Even Christian converts cannot give up their caste identity, particularly in South India. There is Nadar Christian Association; the fight between Nadar and Dalit Christians in the churches were recorded in several scholarly Dalit Christian Literatures [note they are not merely ‘Christian from Dalit but still wanted to remain “Dalit” Christians.]  As I pointed out in UH, we all diagnosed the problem but no one is prescribing the solution.  And even if we manage to find some solutions, nobody wants to implement it as it wants to keep the problem alive so that each caste group can use it for their own vested interest at the same time fighting the non-existing Brahmanism.  Every social group needs to create ‘the other’ to tell its own people that unless they support that particular leader [as a saviour], their survival is threatened.  Christians need a Satan, Muslims need a Kafir, Hindus need ‘conversion’ [used by the other religious minorities to annihilate it], communism needs capitalism and capitalism communism etc. etc.

Racism was not consciously introduced by the White.  Till they alone were dominating their own life by keeping slaves only as a commodity to serve their interest there never came the concept of White supremacy.  When the slavery was abolished and as the new generation of non-whites began to demand their legitimate right to live like the whites, then racialism creeped.  I am saying this not actually knowing the nature and origin of racialism.  The same is the case with Brahmanism, though we cannot compare it with racialism.

It’s interesting to note that we have the term “brahmanism “, even “casteism “, we don’t have “kshatiyaism, vaisyism or shuraism”. I don’t know the reason for this. I am not sure whether our own scriptures or literatures ever talk about this “Brahmanism”. I am only asking a question. Or,  like so many “isms “, this “Brahmanism”, was invented or introduced by the western scholars which was translated as ” brahmanvad “. Brhmins never created “caste “, it was there even before their appearance in history and literature. Varna system was organized by this “Brahmanism “,. I deliberately say not by Brhmins but by “brahmanism “, which one can’t change individually, but a social group can do in upward mobility.4 Several shudras become kshatriyas. Several kshatriyas become brahmins. Whereas caste is fluid,  flexible and evolved and continues to evolve.

Two case studies from my own life can prove this:

When one of my  close family members married someone outside the caste, everyone opposed except me.  I supported not because I wanted to abolish caste but seeing the fact that if a boy or girl is compelled to marry against their will to marry someone inside their caste, then the other person alone will be much affected, not the boy or girl of the family.  In case of such compulsion they should inform the other partner why they have arranged the marriage against the wishes of their own child.

Next is about the Brahmanism which is used by the Brahmins to insulate themselves to define their relationship with oneself and others.  Recently when my mother passed away, several people from the village came to show their final respect to her.  Though my brother was not happy for them to put garland as it is not allowed in our tradition, he tolerated it.  But once the final rites were started, my cousin’s father-in-law, who is not a Brahmin as he arrived late after the rituals commenced, came close to the dead body through the veranda where my brother and I were sitting.  Once the ritual started, my brother signalled him not to come.  Then he stopped but was not offended by such an act.  Later when I asked about this to my brother he said, ‘once the ritual is started no one should come near the dead body except the close blood relatives from the family.  Because the soul would be still lingering around the body refusing to leave.  Then with proper ritual we have to persuade it to leave and make sure that it starts its journey to join with its ancestor through proper ritual in the next 13 days.  Till that ritual is completed that area would remain ritually polluted and those outsiders coming close will be affected by it and they might even face some problem in their life.  But once that particular ritual is completed we will allow them to put the final food in the form of rice in her mouth [known as ‘vakkarisi’] in Tamil [several of you have done it].  Only to keep his interest and pollution of that area I didn’t allow him to come close.  Even I declared that once we started the ritual no one should cross the cord that was attached with the dead body which I held in my hand.

But no outsider will understand this or accept it.  However this is the way they defined their relationship with themselves and others.  Not knowing so many complicated practical values in such ideals, there is no point in opposing it in the name of fighting some evil system in society.

As long as we remain human, casteism and racialism won’t go.  We may fight in the air targeting some non-existing enemy forgetting the one who is with us with flesh and blood in the name and form of caste.

When the Freedom Fighters realized that unless we threw away the British Raj we couldn’t live as free Indian citizens and they managed to throw them thrown out from our lives we cannot live as free human beings.  But no caste group wants to do that or can do that as they know very well that we cannot avoid certain unnecessary evils in our life and in several cases we need its service to survive.  I am not sure who is that unnecessary evil: Caste or Brahmanism. As long as they continue to fight in the air targeting the shadow ideology forgetting the elephant in the room with flesh and blood there is no hope for deliverance.

One time there was a heated debate on the very same subject of ‘Brahmanism’ in one Tamil TV.  At the end the Brahmin participant said, ‘we are ready to give up our brahmanism and even caste identity.  Are others ready.’  When I lived at Mathigiri I had a Dalit neighbour who opposed not only Brahmanism but also Brahmins. He refuses to even give water when our borewell dries.  But I had a cordial relationship with him and his family members.  When his father passed away he went to his native place and returned after the funeral rituals.  His wife, in front of him, said that they have done all the ‘rituals as per the tradition’ inviting Brahmin priests to do the tenth day ritual.  With a smile I asked him, ‘you don’t believe in God or these kinds of rituals.  Then why did you perform them’.  In response he said, ‘Personally I don’t like it and don’t want to do it.  But I had to do them because of the family.  Above all I don’t want to take any risk by not doing certain rituals.  Though I don’t believe in them, what if something goes wrong if I fail to do ancestral rituals as per the tradition.  Then everyone will blame me and I too will later regret it.  It cost not much to do those particular rituals with Brahmins as it was very simple and quick as they never do any elaborate rituals as they do for your community or other communities.  So I have done it’.  I appreciated his honest confession.  Several people perform marriages without having any Brahmin priest or any kind of religious ritual.  But when it comes to death rituals, most of them don’t want to take risks as they have the fear about the unknown worlds beyond their control.  The ‘WHAT IF QUESTION’ helped the Brahmins to survive in spite of all the challenges they face.

Note: Orthodox Brahmins who perform all kinds of rituals to the twice born, particularly exclusively for Brahmins won’t do ritual to them.  There is a special kind of Brahmins[known as ‘Panchanga Brahmins in Tamil]  for this purpose and they alone are invited to do such rituals for so-called low caste people. Rituals to offer material in fire are done only to the so called upper castes and not to others.  And Vedic mantras were also used only for the former and only Purana mantras for the later.  Though this tradition came from the belief that Vedic mantras were not to be chanted for the Shudras and Panchamas, now as all the mantras are available in Youtube, such tradition is not strictly observed. And when any wealthy or powerful [political Leaders from the suppressed community require such Vedic rituals, most of them are not denied to them now.  This shows the change and continuity of traditions in Hinduism.

Similarly Brahmins doing puja in temples cannot do such rituals for anyone, as they are ‘made brahmins’ by the kings5 to do rituals in temple known in Tamil as ‘Sivachariyars’  or ‘Gurukkal’ [or devalaka6 Brahmins in Sanskrit] from the non-brahmins so called high caste groups, particularly from Pillaimars, as orthodox Brahmins who studied Veda properly won’t do such rituals for others.

 Notes

1.. …Many non-Brahmin groups enjoyed high status and could press Brahmins into service as junior partners in their hegemonic ventures, especially in the plains.—, Narendra Subramanian, Ethnicity and Populist Mobilization: Political Parties, Citizens and Democracy in South India, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, (1999), second impression 2011, pp. 88

2.. known as Brahmadeya, See Ranjeeta Dutta, From Hagiographies to Biographies: Ramanuja in Tradition and History, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 2014, pp. 85, 89; Vijay Nath, Puranas and Acculturation: A Historico-Anthropological Perspective. Munshirma Manoharlal, New Delhi, 2001; R. Champakalakshmi., ‘From Devotion and Dissent to Dominance: The Bhakti of the Tamil Alvars and Nayanars’, in David N. Lorenzen.  Religious Movements in  South Asia 600-1800. New Delhi,  Oxford, 2004, p. 66; Champakalakshmi, Religion, Tradition, and Ideology: Pre-colonial South India, Oxford, New Delhi (2011), 2012, pp. 19-20, 41] in the newly conquered territories.  Even when the defeated king managed to  regain his kingdom back, as he cannot deny the rights of the Brahmins who acquired lands in his territory, he had to accept them. But those lands were managed mostly not by Brahmins but by other tenants who were OBC [thankfully at that time these technical terms were not used like OBC etc.] [See Y. Subbarayalau, South India Under The Cholas, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, (2012) Second edition 2013, 221]

3.. Basavanna, the Brahmin who opposed Brahminsim and started Lingayat is the best example.  But now the very same community is divided based on various caste groups.  You mentioned Guru Nanak.  Then how are we going to justify the clash between the ‘Jat Sikh’ and ‘Majibi Sikhs’ who were not even allowed in certain Gurudwara to go and worship. Our National poet Subramanya Bharatiyar from Tamil Nadu, even brought Harijan children to his home and invested them with holy thread to oppose Brahmanism.  He wrote several songs opposing caste system.

4…The dominant castes in multi-caste villages have usually provided the model for the other castes of upward social mobility, whether in terms of Sanskritisation or through the pursuit of new economic opportunities….— Replication or dissent?  Culture and institutions among ‘Untouchable’ Scheduled Castes in Karnataka, G.K. Karnath, In Dipankar Gupta, ed. CASTE IN QUESTION, Identity or Hierarchy?, New Delhi, SAGE Publications, 2004, Dipankar Gupta,.  p.142

5…For instance, a king who did not have the requisite number of Brahmins for performing an important ceremony did not hesitate to raise members of a lower ranking group to the status of Brahmins (Baines, A. Ethnography.  Strassburg: Trubner Varlag.  1912: 27).  Where, however, there was an entrenched group of Brahmins, the king had to recognize their power and make the necessary adjustments.—Mobility in the Caste System. 187-199, in, The Indian Village Myth and Reality (First published in Studies in Social Anthropology: Essays in Memory of Sir E.E. Evans-Prichard, J.H.M Beattie and g. Lienhardt (eds), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1975). Pp.3-39, in M. N. Srinivas, Collected Essays, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, (2002) Paperbacks 2004,  p. 189

6…Temple priests are comparatively a later institution and they were generally looked down upon in olden times and are regarded as inferior even in modern times.  Manu [III.152] says that a devalaka i.e. a brahmana who took [p.109] remuneration to perform service before the image in temple for three years continuously was unfit to be invited at a sraddha or to officiate in a sacrifice for gods.—P. V. Kane, History of Dharmasastras, Pona, Bandarkar Oriental Research Institute.  Vol. II. Part. I. Ch. III. Teaching the Vedas. pp. 109-110.

See more in: ‘Temples, deities, and the law’,  Richard H. Davis, in ‘Dharmasastra: a textual history’,  Patrick Olivelle, in Hinduism and Law: An Introduction, Timothy Lubin, Donald R. Davis, Jr;, and Jayanth K. Krishnan,(eds.),  New Delhi, Cambridge University Press, 1010, pp. 200, 201; Champakalakshmi, 2012, op. cit., [as Navalakhas]; History of the Reception of Dharmasastra.  Donald R. Davis, Jr. pp.371-382, in Patrick Olivelle and Donald R. Davis, Jr. Eds. Hindu Law: A New History of Dharmasastra, New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 2018, pp. 376-77;  and Stietencor gives elaborate information:

…The Manusmrit {3.152; 11.26} and its commentators reflect the orthodox view very clearly.  Devalakas are there defined as persons who live on the god’s treasures: devakosopabhoji ca namna devalako bhavet.²¹  While serving the image they take for themselves the food misappropriating what was originally offered to the god….— Heinrich von Stietencor, Delhi, Permanent Black, 2005, Hindu Myth, Hindu History . p. 59

21. Quotation from Devala according to the commentary of Kulluka to Manu 3152

Manu. The Manusmrti with the Commentary Manavarthamuktavali of Kulluka.  Ed. Narayan Ram Acharya “Kavyatirtha”. 10^th edn. Bombay: Nirnaya Sagar Press, 1946.

The commentary of Kulluka on the word devalaka alleges that they serve their deities not for the sake of religion, but solely for the sake of profit: (p.59)

Devalakah pratimaaparicaarakah, vartanaarthatvenaitat karma kurvato ‘yam nisedho na tu dharmaartham.²²

The Bhavisya Purana even contains a warning that if a devalaka Brahmin conducts the rites of purification of a deceased person (samskara) he catches hold of all the forefathers (pitr) and throws them down head first.²³—ibid. pp.59-60

22. Kulluka on Manu 3.152

23. BhvP 1, 139.22:

Dvijo devalako yasya samskaaram samprayacchati

So ‘dhomukhaan pitrn sarvaan aakramaya vinipaatayet.

BhvP. Bhavisya Purana.  Bhavisyamahapurana.  Ed. S=Ksemaraja Srikrsnadasa.  Bombay: Venkatesvara Presa, 1869/97      

Manu. The Manusmrti with the Commentary Manavarthamuktavali of Kulluka.  Ed. Narayan Ram Acharya “Kavyatirtha”. 10^th edn. Bombay: Nirnaya Sagar Press, 1946.