Who is a brahmin?

[Guest guest]

Who is a Brahmin is very clearly stated in the Gita by the paramacharya:

Self-control, tranquility, uprightness, patience, purity, humility, learning,

austerity, wisdom, and faith (Chapter 18, Verse 42).

 

This has no race, religion or space limitation.

Wherever, whenever, whoever has the above qualities or

have greater tendency towards those qualities is a Brahmin.

This is the basic/primary truth as revealed in the Gita.

Taken this way, a person can be a brahmin as long as he or she has

inclinations as stated above-without even having heard of Vedas, Upansihads

or Gita. After all Veda means knowledge. It is like being godly without

knowing god.

This is the interpretation I am most comfortable with and makes sense to me.

Looks like we are caught up in a contextual definition which is simply out of

context.

 

Koti Sreekrishna Tatachar

[Guest guest]

Srimatey Nigamantha Maha Desikaya Namaha

Dear All,

For those to whom Krishna talks to on a daily or otherwise periodic basis, the

statements made could be true. Krishna would wake them up and tell them what

varna He has decided for them for that periodicity of time. For others He has

decided only one varna by which He makes them take birth in a particular family

which is Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaisya or Sudra. Is this acceptable?

Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan.

sadhu Rangarajan <sadhu wrote:

 

 

WHO IS A BRAHMIN?

 

 

 

SADHU PROF. V. RANGARAJAN

 

Bharatamata Gurukula Ashram &

 

Yogi Ramsuratkumar Indological Research Centre

 

SISTER NIVEDITA ACADEMY

 

"Sri Bharati Mandir", Srinivasanagar, Krishnarajapuram, Bangalore 560 036

 

(Phone: 091-80-5610935, 5613716; e-mail: sadhurangarajan

 

 

 

The Purusha Sookta of the Rig Veda, when it says, "Braahmano asya mukham aaseet,

baahoo raajanya kritah, uroo tadasya yad vaishyah, padmyaakum shoodro ajaayata",

it speaks about the four main limbs of Rashtra Purusha-- the brahmanas or the

men of realization who are the guides of the nation's destiny and its

spokespersons, compared to the mouth, the kshatriyas, the men in whom strength

and valour is predominant to protect the nation, compared to the shoulders, the

vaishyas who are the producers of wealth, compared to the stomach which supplies

energy to the whole body, and the shoodras, the common masses who are the

foundation of the society, compared to the feet on which this body stands.

Nowhere it is said one is superior to the other and that the varna is determined

by birth. "Chaaturvarnyam mayaa srishtham guna karma vibhaagashah"--"the four

varnas are determined by me on the basis of quality and temperament", says Lord

Krishna. Krishna Dwaipayana Vyaasa, who is the compiler of the Vedas and to whom

the authorship of Brahmasutras, Mahabaharata and the Puranas are attributed, was

the son of a fisherwoman. Satyakaama Jaabaali, the great Upanishadic seer, was

the son of a prostitute. Narada, who has given us the Bhakti sootras, was the

son of a servant maid. Valmiki was a hunter-cum-dacoit. But they all rose to the

status of the highest brahmins of the land by their sadhana and

self-realisation. Ravana, son of a brahmana and a scholar in the Vedas, fell to

the realm of Raakshasa by his sensuality and self-forgetfulness.

 

 

 

The Vedas are the ultimate authority and the statements in the Smritis and the

Puranas, if they do not follow the dictum and message of the Vedas, are to be

discarded. There are a lot of interpolations in the Smritis, Itihasas and

Puranas, made by some vested, so called brahmin, interests in different periods.

They have no authority or sanction and Hindu society should discard them. Even

otherwise, we now live in the age of science and reason and anything that is

superstitious, ridiculous and irrational is irreligion or anti-religion and no

religious sanction should be accorded to it on any account.

 

 

 

A true 'knowledgeable person' is a Brahmana. Vajrasoochi Upanishad defines who

is a Brahmana. It poses the question whether Brahmana is Jiva or Jnana or Karma

or the doer of Dharma and answers that none of these is Brahmana and asserts

that Brahmana is one who has realized the Atman--the

Existence-Consciousness-Bliss. To such a Brahmajnani, Vedas are

redundant--"Yatra Vedaa avedaah!" Then why should a true Brahmin recite or study

Vedas? They are needed only for those who are yet to attain the state of a

Brahmin. How can there be discrimination of caste, creed or sex among the

seekers of Wisdom or Jnana?

 

 

 

The first and foremost question that we would like to raise is who is the true

Brahmin or Dharmacharya in the Hindu society today who is eligible to interpret

the ancient Dharmashastras or give new injunctions.

 

 

 

A Brahmana, according to Manu Dharma Shastra is one who does not keep food for

the next meal. Any one who engages himself in any profession earning income or

trading in religion by performing religious rites etc. for remuneration is a

Shudra. Could you find a Brahmin priest today who lives just on daily Bhiksha

and performs his duties expecting nothing at all in return? Can you point out

one Dharmacharya who lives like the rishis of yore in any remote forest

hermitage, surviving on fruits, roots and nuts that Mother Nature provides and

runs Gurukulas to impart religious and spiritual education to aspirant

disciples? What right or eligibility the Brahmins of the present day and the

so-called Dharmacharyas trading in religion and making fortunes have to speak

about Dharma Shastras?

 

 

 

The ancient Varna Dharma clearly indicated the qualities and functions of the

members of the four Varnas. "Janmanaa jaayate shoodrah, samskaaraat dwija

ucchyate"--"By birth all are Shoodras, only by Samskara one becomes a Dwija

(twice-born)"--Atri Smriti, 141-142. By this definition, ninety-nine point nine

nine nine percent of the Hindus today are Shoodras, not eighty percent. If you

recognize as Brahmin any one who has a surname like Aiyar, Ayyangar, Sarma,

Namboodiri, Dwivedi, Vajpayee or Tripathi who works as a doctor, engineer,

lawyer, professor, tradesman or government servant or a staff in any private

concern and earns his monthly salary, and who has no time even to do his

'Sandhyaavandana', not to speak of study of Vedas or scriptures, sometimes whose

Yagnopaveeta is also performed as a formality on the eve of his marriage, and if

you call his descendants also as Brahmins, whose fault it is? Do the Dharma

Shastras recognize them as Brahmins?

 

 

 

(Extracted from From A Sadhu's Epistles-12 published in TATTVA DARSANA Quarterly

of SISTER NIVEDITA ACADEMY)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Srirangasri-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more