Posted on 04/08/2018 5:51:46 AM PDT by C19fan
Irony punctuation is any proposed form of notation used to denote irony or sarcasm in text. Written English lacks a standard way to mark irony, and several forms of punctuation have been proposed. Among the oldest and most frequently attested is the percontation point proposed by English printer Henry Denham in the 1580s, and the irony mark, used by Marcellin Jobard and French poet Alcanter de Brahm during the 19th century. Both marks take the form of a reversed question mark, "⸮".
KEWL! Thanks!
well, the Aryans used the same in their own society - the priests were on top and the warriors next ad then the farmers/agriculturalists
Nope. Before them the Harappan cities were of a high civilizationNikki haley isn't a Brahim or of a Brahmin family
Indians of today are the result of the merging of Aryans and Dravidians -- while the Aryans kept the priesthood for themselves, they did incorporate the agriculturalists and to some extent the warrior/ruling classes into their castes
The migrations starting with the Xiongnu (proto-Mongolic/Turkic) started only around 200 to 100 BC when the Han Dynasty won wars against them pushing them west
Some Tibeto-Burmese folks were already there in India's north-east when the Dravidians first came
DNA can predict stronger chances of an IQ range, but not completely . Children of smart parents and grandparents can still be dumb and vice-versa. 80% yes, that smart parents produce smart kids, but Gattaca got it wrong, there are exceptions
I know that Niki Haley is a Sikh, but she has the qualities of the Brahmin. That makes her a Brahmin IMHO.She also is a Brahmin of the USA. We do have them.
But you want to play the race card? But the term Brahmin is not just all about race and birth into a caste.
I guess you must subscribe to the Obama Liberal Fascist meme on a racially and ethnic divided America. So please drift away into the oblivion which suits all race carders & race mongers perfectly: the dust bin of history where y’all belong.
May the force be with you Skybalker.
**************************************************
“Brahmin and renunciation tradition in Hinduism
“The term Brahmin in Indian texts has signified someone who is good and virtuous, not just someone of priestly class.[14] Both Buddhist and Brahmanical literature, states Patrick Olivelle, repeatedly define “Brahmin” not in terms of family of birth, but in terms of personal qualities.[14] These virtues and characteristics mirror the values cherished in Hinduism during the Sannyasa stage of life, or the life of renunciation for spiritual pursuits. Brahmins, states Olivelle, were the social class from which most ascetics came.[14]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmin
There are Sikhs of Brahmin origin and Sikh of Shudra origin
Sikhism was started as an egalitarian religion transcending caste,for that reason Brahmins didn't join (they lost their privileges as priest rulers)
Nikki Haley's ancestry is not Brahmin in the main - her family and origins are in the 3rd level of the caste system (varana?) -- agriculturalists
the term Brahmin is not just all about race and birth into a caste. - the term Brahmin is specifically about birth into a caste - don't you get it, you can't "become a Brahim", you are born into it or not
Don't you get it? The concept of caste is integral to the Sanatana Dharma concept of rebirth -- you "evolve" or "devolve" based on your actions, either upwards or downwards. And upwards is the Brahmin
Brahmin, Shudra etc. is based on what family you are born into.
it's got nothing to do with race as both the Aryans and the Dravidians were/are Caucasians. it's about which family you were born into.
Haley is not a 'Brahmin' by caste.
And "brahmins" can also be scum as we saw in the recent rape of an 8 year old
Brahmin, Shudra etc. is based on what family you are born into.>>>>>>>>>>
Suirethig, buit not exclusively, it was and still is possible to achieve Brahmanic status through both spiritual and temporal merit. And you know that is true.
You can ask anyone or reead some of the texts of Hindu or Buddhist saints who became Brahmins but were born into a lower caste.
This was absolutely necessary or the caste system would never have worked, they all would have succumbed to genetic inbreeding as a mater of biology.
Nobody is talking through their hat except you.
Nikki Haley is a Brahmin in my books. And possibly the first wopman president of the United States.
Who do you refer to?
Trike Daily Pali Canon
The Buddha Talks to a Brahmin Supremacist
How a Buddhist teaching on dismantling the superiority of the brahmin class can help us take on racism.
By Krishnan VenkateshFeb 09, 2017
The Buddha Talks to a Brahmin Supremacist
The belief that a group of people can be born superior to all other groups has been around for a very long time, and even existed during the time of the Buddha.
For 3,000 years, society in South Asia has been dominated by the caste system, according to which a person is born into one of four major castes (varna), or social stations: laborers, merchants, warriors, and brahmins. According to the earliest Hindu scriptures, brahmins—scholars and priests—were the highest caste and viewed as morally and spiritually superior to the others; indeed, they are called “brahmins” because according to one of the hymns of the Rg Veda, they were born from the mouth of Brahman [God].
In the Pali Canon, the Buddha has many conversations with brahmins who, clearly provoked by his ideas of radical equality, routinely approached him to argue and learn. Late in the Middle Length Discourses, we meet a group of 500 brahmins who live in the town of Savatthi, where the Buddha is staying at the time. When they hear that the Buddha has been teaching that all the castes are equally “pure,” they are outraged, and decide to send a smart young brahmin to go and debate him.
In the following conversation between the Buddha and the proud brahmin Assalayana (after whom the Assalayana Sutta is named), the Buddha offers some ways to address the obdurate belief in superiority of caste, race, or any other birth group.
Master Gotama, the brahmins say, ‘Brahmins are the superior caste; any other caste is inferior. Only brahmins are the fair caste; any other caste is dark. Only brahmins are pure, not non-brahmins. Only brahmins are the sons and offspring of Brahma: born of his mouth, born of Brahma, created by Brahma, heirs of Brahma.’ What does Master Gotama have to say with regard to that?
The Buddha begins to dismantle Assalayana’s notions of superiority by noting that we all enter the world the same way:
But, Assalayana, the brahmins’ brahmin-women are plainly seen having their periods, becoming pregnant, giving birth, and nursing [their children]. And yet the brahmins, being born through the birth canal, say, “Brahmins are the superior caste . . .”
The Buddha grounds this initial discussion in physical reality, as it is difficult to argue that people who give birth the same way are fundamentally different. Besides, how delightful is it that a creature who emerges from the nether end of its mother can entertain fantasies about its own transcendent superiority! We see from this exchange that the Buddha has a wry sense of humor as well as a comedian’s gift for drawing out the absurd.
The Buddha then proceeds to ask questions that he already knows Assalayana’s answers to. First, whether a person is a brahmin, a warrior, a merchant, or a laborer, if he does bad things, can he expect to suffer bad consequences? And if he does good things, can he expect to be rewarded with good consequences? Surely, replies Assalayana. Good people are good people, and bad people are bad people, no matter what they come from, and all can be expected to suffer the appropriate consequences. Even a brahmin supremacist has to admit to knowing some brahmins who are terrible people and some farm laborers who are wise and noble.
Next, the Buddha asks whether brahmins, warriors, merchants, and workers have the same relationship to their bodies and to the physical world. When anybody from any caste goes down to the river to bathe, do they not all scrub their skin and then rinse with water? And when they start a fire using logs, kindling, and a lighter, do they not all produce fire and heat, and smoke that makes everyone cough? Using the same materials and techniques, every human being will produce the same fire; thus notions of caste superiority have no basis whatsoever in the physical nature of the world.
At this point, in case Assalayana doesn’t believe that the laws of physics, chemistry, and biology have any bearing on the issue of ethical supremacy, the Buddha swerves back to the question of merit within the same caste. Between two brahmin brothers, is it possible for one to be worthier than the other—for example, the hard-working, respectful brother, versus the lazy, slanderous one? That is, when we’re dealing only with brahmins, it is clear that merit has nothing to do with birth; at least, we behave as if the more virtuous brother has deserved more respect.
To his credit, at this point in the conversation Assalayana has already understood the weakness of his prejudices. The brahmin student Assalayana sat silent, abashed, his shoulders drooping, his head down, brooding, at a loss for words. He is too intelligent not to see that when he thinks about it, the supremacist posture turns out to be an embarrassment to the intelligence. The Buddha then delivers an amusing coup de grâce by retelling the legend of the ancient Hindu sage Devala the Dark’s challenge to seven arrogant brahmins:
But do you know, masters, if the mother who bore you went only with a brahmin, and not with a non-brahmin?
No, master.
And do you know if the mothers of the mother who bore you—back seven generations of mothers—went only with brahmins, and not with non-brahmins?
No, master.
And do you know if the father who sired you went only with a brahmin woman, and not with a non-brahmin woman?
No, master.
And do you know if the fathers of the father who bore you—back seven generations of fathers—went only with brahmin women, and not with non-brahmin women?
No, master.
We know next to nothing about the sexual behavior of our parents, let alone our ancestors; about some things there is just no knowing. If we do not know the circumstances of our conception and the conceptions of those who conceived us, we have no right to claim superiority because of birth.
That being the case, do you know who you are? the Buddha asks.
That being the case, master, we don’t know who we are.
Assalayana has learned something, as have we: how a Buddha dispels an inveterate, vehemently held prejudice by calmly asking what it is based on. Throughout all of this, the Buddha has expressed no irritation, anger, or indignation. He is engaging with Assalayana on Assalayana’s own terms, using images and vocabulary from ordinary life. He treats Assalayana with respect, trusting his intelligence and knowing that the young man is smart enough to put two and two together for himself. If the Buddha had asked leading questions, Assalayana would have been put on the defensive and potentially found ways to argue back. Instead, the Buddha appears to be genuinely interested in what Assalayana will say, but he also knows what a reasonable response to the questions will be because the Buddha himself—having been born in the warrior caste—has thought them through.
Did the Assalayana Sutta shake the caste system to its foundations and transform Indian society? No. Even today, the matrimonial pages of South Asian newspapers will specify not only castes but sub-castes and sub-sub-castes, and fairness of complexion is still explicitly preferred.
But still, for today’s practitioners, this Buddhist sutta illustrates a tactic we might use against racist sentiment: it demonstrates a method of unraveling deep-rooted prejudice by asking questions that activate intelligent reflection. In these times in which racism is openly espoused both in-person and online, this persistent form of questioning might serve as one of the more trustworthy tools we can use against it.
https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/buddha-talks-brahmin-supremacist/
How ‘Non Brahmins’ became ‘Brahmins’
Viswamitra and Menaka
Compiled by by London Swaminathan;
Post No.848 dated 18th February 2014
I have already written how Ramanuja converted lot of people from non Brahmins to Brahmins. I have also written another post ‘Who is a Brahmin?’
Now see what Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan, a great scholar, philosopher and former President of India, says about non Brahmins becoming Brahmins:
“Caste divisions are based on individual temperament, which is not immutable. In the beginning there was only one caste. We were all Brahmins or Sudras. A Smriti text says that one is born a Sudra, and through purification he becomes a Brahmin. People were divided into different castes according to social needs and individual action.
The Brahmins are the priests. They should have neither property nor executive power. They are the seers who constitute the conscience of society.
The Kshatriyas are the administrators, whose principle is reverence for life.
The Vaisyas are traders and craftsmen, men of technical ability who aim at efficiency.
The routine workers, the proletariat are the Sudras. They take no interest in their work as such, where they carry instructions and contribute only a fraction. They lead a life of innocent impulse and adopt traditional ways.
“Hinduism has a bewildering variety of racial elements at all levels of development. The four orders supersede the original racial elements. It is a classification based on social facts and psychology. The recognition of the spirit in man is the essential feature of Hindu religion, and in this respect all men are equal.
In the Mahabharata , we are told that the Yavanas (Greeks), the Kiratas, the Dardaras (Dards), the Chinas (Chinese), the Sakas (Scythians), the Pahlavas (Parthians), the Savaras (Pre Dravidian Tribes) and several other non Hindu peoples, belonged to the one or the other of the four classes. These foreign tribes were absorbed into the Hindu society.
“The great empire builders, the Nandas, the Mauryas and the Guptas were according to the orthodox view, low-born. The Gupta emperors married the Licchavis, who were regarded as Mlecchas.
The basis of the Varna dharma is that every human being must try to fulfil the law of his development.
Non Brahmins who became Brahmins:
“While it was the intention of the scheme to develop the requisite spirit and tradition in the members of the classes by a proper employment of the forces of heredity and education, it was not viewed in a rigid way. In special cases individuals and groups changed their social class.
Visvamitra, Ajamidha and Puramidha were admitted to the status of the Brahmin class, and even composed Vedic hymns.
Yaska in his Nirukta, tells us of two brothers Santanu and Devapi , one became a Kshatriya king and the other a Brahmin priest.
Kavasa, the son of a slave girl Ilusa, was ordained as a Brahmin priest at a sacrifice.
Janaka, a Kshatriyas by birth, attained the rank of a Brahmin by virtue of his ripe wisdom and saintly character.
The Bhagavatham tells us the elevation of the Kshatriya clan named Dhastru to Brahminhood.
Jatyutkarsa is provided for. Even though a Sudra, if you do good, you become a Brahmin. We are Brahmins not on account of birth or the performance of rites, not by study or family, but on account of our behaviour. Even if we are born Sudras, by good conduct we can raise ourselves to the highest status.
“The human being is always becoming. His essence is movement, not arrested movement. Megasthenes gives us a division different from the caste groupings. He puts the class of statesmen and officials at the top and hunters and jungle men as the sixth division.
Patanjali refers to Brahmin kings, and Manu to sudra rulers. There were Brahmin soldiers in the time of Alexander, as there are today.
“Manu’s unfortunate references to Sudras were perhaps motivated by his opposition to Buddhism. Manu limits the right to study the dharma sastras to Brahmins, while Sankara holds the members of all castes can read them.
A famous verse of Mahabharata makes out that we are all born Brahmins, and happen to belong to different classes on account of our conduct and occupation.
The Bhagavad Gita points out that there are only four Varnas based on natural aptitude and vocation, and two classes of persons, divine (Deva) and demoniac (Asura)”.
From the book Radhakrishnan Reader- An Anthology, published by Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan.
King Baliraja’s wife was Sudeshna. Bali persuaded her to produce a son through Dirghatama. She had five sons named Anga, Vanga, Kalinga, Pudrya and Suhya. Each of them started a separate dynasty and ruled over different parts. This anecdote describing how Kshatriyas kings were sometimes born of Brahmana fathers, was related by Bhishma to Satyavati to support his suggestion that a Brahman be invited to produce sons in the wives of Vichitravirya who had died childless (MB 1/104)
Yajur Veda prays for all the Four Castes:
“Give lustre to our Brahmanas
Give lustre to our Kingly men
Give lustre to our Vaisyas and Sudra” (Y.V. VS 18-48)
Buddha and Asoka on Brahmins:
Buddha has one full chapter on Brahmins in The Dhammapada. That was the last chapter, probably to emphasise their importance. He admired the ascetic virtues of the Brahmanas. Buddha talked about building a new type Brahminhood irrespective of one’s heredity.
Emperor Asoka showed respect to Brahmins by mentioning them first and then other sects like Sramans etc. in his edicts. (E.g Girnar Edict No-13).
Buddha had two Brahmin Teachers :
Gautama’s search led him to become the disciple of the Brahmin ascetics Aalaara Kaalaama and Uddlaka Raamaputta who instructed him in their own doctrine and discipline.
Brahmins
Brhad- aranyaka Upanishad
Knowing him, the atman, the Brahmins relinquish the desire for posterity, the desire for possessions, the desire for worldly prosperity and go forth as mendicants (bhikshacaryam caranti)iii-5
Brahmins in Ancient Tamil Nadu
There were two types of Brahmins in ancient Tamil Nadu, those who followed the Srutis (Vedas) and Smritis (Law Books) and others who did not follow the Vedic strictures. Prof. V R RAMACHANDRA DIKSHITAR in his commentary on The Cilappatikaram (Purancheri iruththa katai lines 37,38) adds the following details:
“A community of Brahmanas , but coming low in the social hierarchy. They are said to be ‘ambanavar’ who took to the profession of acting and dancing. As they did not pursue their swadharma society regarded them as inferior. The position which the Brahmanas held in the society in the age of the Cankam classics is clear. There was the Vedic Brahmana engaged in reading and teaching the Vedas and also in performing Vedic sacrifices. He evoked respect from every one. There was the laukika Brahmana who strayed from the prescribed path and took to professions other than those enjoined by the law of the land.
“In the Akananuru (24) we have the expression ‘velaparppan’ meaning Brahmana engaged in making bangles. Among the laukikas come the ‘ambanava’ also. The term ‘ur parppan’ in South Indian inscriptions is another reference to the laukika members of the Brahmana community. This only shows that in addition to the Vedic Brahmanas there also existed Brahmanas who took to worldly professions, and to whom society did not give the same status as that enjoyed by the Vedic Brahmanas”.
My comments: Nakkirar was a well known Tamil poet of Sangam Age. Though he was a Brahmin ,he did not follow the Brahminical customs. He was making bangles cut out of white Chanks (conches). When he questioned another poor Brahmin by name Dharumi in the Royal Court of Pandyas, Shiva himself came in support of the Brahmin poet. But Nakkirar challenged even Lord Shiva. When Shiva laughed at his challenge, he asked him “At least I belong to the sect of Bangle makers. You don’t even have a clan, or caste or creed.”
https://tamilandvedas.com/2014/02/18/how-non-brahmins-became-brahmins/
ping
One man may be born a Brahmin ill-tempered, unhealthy, despised by his peers and his lessers living a short life filled with antagonisms of every sort.
Another man is born a Sudra vital, joyful, enthusiastic, loved and admired by family, friends and his betters who lives a long life filled with love and marvelous experiences.
Which man had the more fortunate birth?
.............................
I don’t know much about history.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.