ARE BRAHMINS PRIVILEGED?

A WIDE CANVAS

ARE BRAHMINS PRIVILEGED?

Over a century of political propaganda and academic writing has spread the idea that the Brahmins have been the privileged class throughout history. Nobody has cared to explain what those privileges were. This idea is now firmly entrenched in our socio-political consciousness and forms a cornerstone of our public policies. Brahmins are considered "forward" and discriminated against by a govt which declares its loyalty to a 'casteless' society. The power of propaganda has been such that not only the general public, even the Brahmins themselves have been made to believe that they have been privileged! They too have not cared to examine the bases of that supposed privilege.

Varna System- Duties or Privileges?

The four-fold Varna system assigned specific duties and responsibilities to each Varna. They do not talk of rights or privileges. Generally speaking, religious education was the responsibility of the Brahmin.Rulership was assigned to the king. Trade, commerce, agriculture- economic activities generating income and wealth were assigned to the Vaishyas. Services were assigned to the Shudras.

 Manu.

Upon close examination, it could be seen that each assignment amounted to what in modern political jargon would be called "reservation". But it was also "Exclusion" as much. No one of one Varna could undertake the work of another, barring times of distress. The Brahmin was assigned 6 specific duties:

• learning Veda
• teaching Veda
• performing Yajna
• officiating in the performance of yajna
• accepting ceremonial gifts (daana. This is not just any gift or charity from any one)
• giving daana.

Brahmin's duties in Ancient Tamil Literature.

These are well recognised not only in Manu and other dharma sastras, but also in the ancient Tamil works like Tholkappiam and Tuirukkural.

 The 'Kural' specifically refers to the six-fold duties in Kural 560 when it mentions Brahmins as 'of sixfold duties'- ("aru thozhilore") but makes it contingent upon the righteousness of the ruler! In Kural 134, it makes the virtuous conduct of the Brahmin, contingent upon his birth, as more important than his learning.

It would be seen from this that the Brahmin was not permitted to take up any activity that would give him any economic or political advantage- the only two universal sources of privilege. He was dependent on the ruler for general protection (like everybody else) and on the persons qualified to perform yajna for the ceremonial gifts which alone was the source of  his income.

Perhaps the only privilege a Brahmin was shown was exemption from capital punishment- his head was spared not because he was a Brahmin as such but because it contained the Veda. In those days, the Veda was only memorised and preserved. So, this was a mark of respect to the Veda, not privilege of the Brahmin, as such. . He was subject to life-long humiliation: his sikha was cut, and he was driven out of his place (as we see in the case of Ashwattama in the Mahabharata.) Manu prescribes more severe punishment for Brahmins than for others. If a Brahmin is found to have given false evidence, he should be exiled from the kingdom, while for others, it is some lesser penalty. In the same way, where for some offences, the punishment involves beating,  the Brahmin has to be exiled. Now, one can judge what 'privileges' these are!

Brahmins and Brahminism 

In the days of Dravidian propaganda, E.V.Ramasamy Naicker spread the idea that the Hindu religion was a Brahmin invention, that the Hindu gods were a Brahmin creation, that the temples were the places which gave them the privileges etc. Over the years, these have become part of the 'general knowledge ' of the people of Tamil Nad. Knowledgeable people have neither examined these statements, not countered them. The Brahmins have been sitting like clay ducks, at most talking-or whispering- among themselves.

Hindu religion is based on the Veda. The Veda consists of revelations received and recorded by Rishis. We find several categories of Rishis- Deva Rishis, Brahma Rishis, Raja Rishis, Vysya Rishis,Sruta Rishis, Soota Rishis, Jana Rishis, Tapa Rishis etc. It would be clear from this that except Brahma Rishis, no one else is a clear Brahmin! Vishvamitra who 'discovered' the Gayatri mantra which every Brahmin recites three times a day is not a Brahmin. Vyasa who arranged the Veda is not a pure Brahmin- his mother was a fisher-woman. We see from the Upanishads that Brahmins used to approach enlightened Kshatriya kings for instruction. Manu who gave us the code of dharma was a Kshatriya, not Brahmin. Our two most popular and famous Avataras worshipped extensively-Rama and Krishna- are Kshatriyas, not Brahmins. The Brahmin Avatars like Vamana and Parashurama are not worshipped at all, while even the boar, tortoise or fish avatara are worshipped! Krishna mentions several Kings in the Gita as Brahmajnanis- Vivasvan, Manu , Ikshvaku, Janaka- none of whom was a Brahmin. Valmiki who gave us the Adikavya is not a Brahmin. Kalidasa who gave us our classical literature is not a Brahmin. Why, recently, the two powerful defenders of Hinduism in the 20th century- Swami Vivekananda and Sri Aurobindo are not Brahmins. Those who say Hinduism is a creation of the Brahmins should read our literature or have their heads examined.

For whom are the Temples?

Take the temples. These were built for the benefit and convenience of the non-Brahmins who were not eligible to study the Veda and conduct the ritual worship as prescribed there. The duty of Brahmins there is only to recite mantras and enhance the power of the Deities, as the Vigrahas there do not have inherent powers and these powers have to be infused and periodically renewed.The pure Vedic religion does not require or depend upon external aids like temples at all! Even today,the homas are performed invoking the presence of the deities in various objects like a kumbha of water or Agni for the time of the homa or puja and then released! If Brahmins are associated with temples, it is only for the sake of others! People who are really interested in the subject should read Tirumantram of Tirumular to learn how temples are to be treated. 

Jnanis like Tayumanavar transcended the stage of temple worship. Even Tirumular says the 'heart is the highest temple, the body is the temple' (Vullamae perum koil, voon vudambu aalayam). He also says, one should search for God inside oneself, as one should search for sweetness in the honey.

Taenukkul inbam karuppo sikappo?

Vaanukkul Easanait tedum madiyileer

Taenukkul inbam serindirundaarpol

Voonukkul Easan uraindirundaane.

Oh ye thoughtless ones searching for God high up in the sky! Is the sweetness in honey black or red? Just as sweetness pervades honey, God pervades the body!

So the temple is not required for the Brahmin or the Jnani. It is for the benefit of all. If some do not like it or agree with it, it is their pleasure! But why abuse those who visit temples? Is this the expression of their culture?

Towards the end of the 50s, as some younger Dravidian leaders like C.N.Annadurai were planning to enter politics, they changed their so called 'atheist' stand to one of saying  that they believed in 'One God, One Community'. This is what the Veda has been declaring for ages: EKAM SAT and all species of life on earth, including the Devas and Asuras have come from the same source!

 Annadurai went to the extent of saying that he was "not against Brahmins, but against Brahminism". This was hailed as a great statement. But if you examine closely, it is sheer nonsense. What is Brahminism? It is what Brahmins do! Will you call one a lawyer or physician, if he does not practise law or medicine? Can there be a Brahmin without practising Brahminism? Tiruvalluvar, by whom all Tamil leaders swear, recognised this  and clearly said in Kural 134:

Marappinum vottu kolalaagum paarppaan

Pirappozhukkam  kunrak kedum.

Vedas even if forgotten can be learned again. But if the Brahmin falls from (ie gives up) the discipline that he has inherited by birth, everything is spoiled or lost..

Care:

• Valluvar uses the word 'paarppaan' for the Brahmin here. It means one who sees the truth of things ie Brahmin! It is not a term of abuse. (There are other words to designate Brahmins in Tamil like Andanar, Vediyar, Maraiyor, Arutozhilor, Irupirappaalar, etc each of which carries a specific significance.)
• pirappu ozhukkam= discipline (virtuous conduct) that comes by birth. This is Brahminism!
• Valluvar says: 'kedum'. He does not say the Brahmin who falls from his discipline is spoiled- 'keduvaan.' Kedum means everything is spoiled. 

Tiruvalluvar. This edition carries an English translation rendered by the freedom fighterV.V.S.Aiyar in 1915. Though he qualified as a barrister in London, he refused to take the oath of allegiance to the British govt and so was charged with sedition. This translation was done in Pondicherry where he was living as a fugitive, expecting deportation any time. 

Modern Tamil Nad and India have forgotten him.
This edition is published by Sri Ramakrishna Tapovanam, Tirupparaithurai-639115.

However, it must be recorded that when he became Chief Minister, Annadurai really behaved like a statesman. Two incidents are worth recording here. When he became CM, one C.K Ramakrishnan, a Kerala Brahmin was the Chief Secretary! People were wondering what would happen to him- whether a Dravidian CM would tolerate a Brahmin from Kerala as chief secretary. Annadurai reassured him and continued him as the chief secretary.

Some time then , the rice supply to Guruvayoor temple used for 'Brahmana bhojanam' as part of Annadanam was stopped. The temple authorities who were very particular about observing all the prescribed rituals without fail, feared some misfortune if the Annadanam was stopped. An SOS came to Sengalipuram Anantarama Dikshitar who was a great devotee of the temple. He wrote a letter to CM, Annadurai seeking rice from Tamil Nadu govt and sent an emissary to his office. The CM took the letter, but gave no reply. The next day, Dikshitar was informed that a load of rice had been desptched by train by 8 am that day! Such gestures have not been seen in the 46 years since the sad demise of Annadurai.

So there can be no Brahmins sans Brahminism. Some learned elements inside the Dravidian camp  realised this. And what did they do? They saw to it that this Kural is not included in the portion prescribed for schools- so that no Tamilian can know the truth, unless he reads the whole Kural on his own!

Brahmins in service, professions, etc.

The Dravidian movement started, in the beginning of the last century, as a protest by non-Brahmin community leaders against what they considered as the dominance of Brahmins in govt service and in professions like law and medicine, and demanding justice. It later became the Justice Party. The British saw an opportunity there. By then the Indian National Congress was spreading its influence among the educated middle class, most of them Brahmins. The colonial govt felt that they could not take the loyalty of the Brahmins for granted and that their dependence on them should be reduced. So, they encouraged the Justice party elements. (The same tactics they adopted later in respect of Muslims vis a vis Hindus and encouraged Jinnah).

But soon, some elements started talking of Dravidian-Aryan theories. Besides, they openly preached 'atheism' and anti-Hinduism. This did not please leaders who were non-Tamilians and also practising Hindus. (Let us remember: it was composite Madras Presidency then). So the Tamil elements claiming Dravidian ancestry took over. But this argument for a Dravidastan did not cut any ice outside Tamil areas. So, E.V.R adopted the anti-Hindu, anti Brahmin, anti-God movement, opposing Brahmins not only in service, but everywhere.

Did any one ever enquire why Brahmins took to service? In brief, the reasons are:

• Brahmins had always depended on others for economic sustenance, as they were prohibited from carrying on any other profession or trade, in competition with any one else.
• this depended on the Vedic rites and rituals being conducted regularly and on a large scale. But with the collapse of the native rulers, and disruption in general life due to several invasions, wars, etc this had become difficult.
• Some learned Brahmins had been given land and living space by some rulers to maintain temple worship, Patashalas, etc. But the majority remained in dire poverty and they had to migrate to bigger areas, towns etc seeking livelihood. 
• service in govt was the only option available, though the pay was dismal.They had no other source of income.
• those who owned land had leased it for cultivation. The land given to Brahmins thus always supported other families. But as tenancy reforms were enforced, and communist movement spread, they found it difficult to continue. One important fact was that there were mostly no written agreements, the arrangements were traditional and often hereditary , honoured on either side for 'fear of God'. But as the Dravidian movement spread, fear of God evaporated, and the general political climate encouraged default and confrontation. So those few Brahmins who owned land also had to sell the land and migrate to towns.
• they were forced to abandon their traditional education, take to modern schooling, get the certificate and a job.

This is how Brahmins came to enter service. It was because of lack of alternative skills and occupations- which was their limitation by birth! Temple priests and Vedic pundits remain poor even today. They have no source of regular, guaranteed income.

Ironies of History

History is a leveller. Today every political group would like to get history written according to its views and preferences. But impartial study of history from genuine sources is a humbling experience.

It shows no empire, however powerful, lasts. No group holds power for long. Old strengths turn into weakness; friends turn foes.

In Tamil Nad, we notice two ironies. First, due to historical forces, Brahmins have been compelled to take to professions and trades which are prohibited in the sastras. They took to hoteling-selling food, which is prohibited. They took to law- which involves arguing for any side, regardless of truth-which is prohibited. They took to dance, music, drama, cinema-which being 'lalita kalas' are prohibited. It is not possible for them to revert to their old style of 'simple living and high thinking' in a predominantly rural environment. They have become urban and metropolitan. They usually cross the seas- which is prohibited. As engineers, accountants, MBAs, they have to work for any company which may do things prohibited in the sastra- tobacco, meat, liquor, etc companies. They may even work for govts which oppose Hinduism! Our Orthodox religious leaders have neither advice nor alternative solutions or suggestions!

The other irony relates to our rulers. The Congress fought for freedom and in those days they really suffered. Many of the workers left schools and colleges, their work and profession and struggled for freedom. Their families were often ruined. During that period, the Dravidian leaders were against the British giving India freedom. EVR even gave a telegram to British authorities asking them to keep Madras presidency with them, as part of British empire, even if they left the rest of India! When Gandhiji and all the Congress leaders were in prison (4 years) after the Quit India Movement, Dr.Ambedkar joined the Viceroy's council as a member ( ie like a Cabinet minister) and vigorously supported them in all their actions, including the repressive measures, and he took particular delight in taunting the Congress when their leaders were in prison. He too did not want the British to leave India. But in Tamil Nad today, these are the two groups wielding power! The Dravidian elements have been ruling  for nearly 50 years!

History is unpredictable!

Varna and Separation of Powers.

In constitutional arrangements, there are two doctrines which are taken as basic: Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances. They were propounded by the French Enlightenment thinker Montesquieu. He said that in a modern state, power should not be centralised in one authority- it should be divided or separated. And one division should act as the check on the other. He identified  the executive, legislature and judiciary as the three divisions. The legislature makes the law, the executive implements it and the judiciary decides on the proper interpretation and also decides disputes. The US and the UK are perhaps the only two countries where this works satisfactorily. But there are significant differences. In the UK, the PM (Executive) is also a member of Parliament and sits there. He derives his power from the MPs of his party. In the US, the President is directly elected. He cannot control the Senate, and is often at its mercy, especially if the proposed measure is sensitive, and his party does not enjoy majority there! And on important issues, national interests prevail,cutting across party lines and his own party cannot be taken for granted. But in a sense, above both is the Judiciary which is fiercely independent. It has the power of judicial review- can scrutinise any legislation to ensure that it does not violate the Constitution. (Now, critics say the Federal Reserve has become another independent pillar, controlling all others!)

Now, look at our old Varna system from this angle!

The Brahmins had monopoly over religious education, but no administrative, legislative or economic power. The King had to rule according to the old laws- he did not have power to make new law. But he had no independent means of income- he depended on taxes and it could not exceed one sixth of the income! He could not increase it at will! The Vysya controlled trade, commerce and industry. The money was literally flowing through his hands.But in those days when trade was mostly local and mainly through barter, how much could he accumulate? And he had heavy sastric obligations on his income- he had to support dharmic activities. This dharmic instinct is so ingrained in them that even today, it is the Vysyas who come forward for any dharmic work- look at the Marwaris, Gujaratis, the Aggarwals and our own Nattukottai Chettiars- how many temples they have helped, how much they spend on charity! But with all their wealth they had no political power! The artisans and crafts people worked rather as guilds- nobody could interfere with their trade or tradition! The Shudras had to serve, but they were neither slaves nor bonded labour. They too were protected by the sastras. 

It will thus be seen that while separation of powers operates in a modern state only in the political sphere, under Varna system, the whole society operated under it! The US constitution which enshrines Separation of powers between the three wings of the state, could not and did not prevent money power influencing politics! The US political system is brazenly and shamelessly rooted in money power and it is said that it is democracy in name, but plutocracy in fact! But this could not happen in India under Varna system. Money did not influence the king. Learning could result in advice, but not generate money thereby. Learning did not lead to wealth or power.Pupils had to be taught free. Source of livelihood was assured for everyone, which he could follow without outside competition.

We are so influenced by foreign thinking in such matters that we hardly examine them on our own terms. Historically, Brahmins have been like the others- some times high, some times low, mostly level! Yes, they have had checks and balances on them! Their so called privilege is a modern prejudice!

NOTE:

Plato in 'Republic' divided society into 3 classes, and clearly defined their duties.He said:

There is nothing more disastrous for the community, then, than the intrusion of any of the three classes into either of the other two, and the interchange of roles among them, and there could be no more correct context for using the term 'criminal'.

Republic,IV,434b.

Thus, the idea of functional division of society- in economics called division of labour, and in politics called separation of powers- has occurred to other thinkers too. (Plato thought of 3 classes probably because the Greek society, like most ancient societies, had slaves to do some jobs. It is the eternal glory of ancient India that it did not have slaves.) Those who follow the West to blindly criticise and condemn the Varna should take time to read  the classics in the original.