Prologue
The British, experts in the art of divide and rule, have successfully portrayed the entire Brahmin species as a cunning, conceited, clever, covetous, contemptible close-knit clan and pitted the rest of the entire society against them.
When a falsehood is relentlessly repeated ad nauseam, it starts gaining credibility and over time, it gets vociferous advocates who will spread it further, as a result of which, the factual truth is completely obliterated. The list of such false accusations and the refutation thereof is quite long and deserves altogether a different dissertation.
Things have gone too long, too far, too much. And the time has come to call it quits. Brahmins have been, for several decades, defamed and denigrated, condemned and castigated, treated as apartheid and outlaws in their own native land to such an extent that, a sizeable section of the Brahmin folk themselves have developed ‘Stockholm Syndrome’, justifying the inhuman treatment being meted out to them. In this loathsome exercise, the anti-national Communist historians, cleverly and cunningly compiled a compendium of false narrations with ignoble intention and indecent haste, as true history and thrust them on the credulous readers as authentic versions to bolster their larger obnoxious agenda of wiping out the eternal ethereal values of our glorious nation.
A Word About The Social Structure Before The British
The modern concepts of division of labour, adoption of congenital core skills for natural advantage in executing various tasks, keeping in mind the welfare of all, and also ensuring maximum benefit for every section of the society were all voluntarily practised in our nation before the advent of the British [The system, christened as ‘Varnashrama Dharma’ and now being groundlessly criticised, chastised and castigated as though it is an elemental and eternal evil for all the ills pervading the society]. It was ‘Each for all and all for each’, without any iota of selfishness. Each section respected the other. No one treated his avocation as merely a job for wages or as a privilege of birth, but as a bounden duty, he owes to the society. Everyone lived a peaceful, happy, contented life. If, by exceptional skills or through extraneous circumstances someone or some group grows rich, the largesse was invariably returned to the society for the welfare of all. The innumerable choultries that were in existence in those days were testimonies to their intrinsic altruism.
Tiruvalluvar emphasises charity as the cardinal criterion for the householder.
ஈதல் இசைபட வாழ்தல் அதுவல்லது
ஊதியம் இல்லை உயிர்க்கு.
The same tenet is articulated in the following proverb in Sanskrit:
दानं भोगो नाशः तिस्रो गतयो भवन्ति वित्तस्य।
यो न ददाति न भुङ्क्ते तस्य तृतीया गतिः भवति॥
Meaning:
Wealth gets utilised in three ways:
Donation, consumption, and destruction. Wealth of the one who neither gives his wealth for charity nor uses it for appropriate self-consumption has a third destination, destruction!
(It will be of no use to either the individual or to the society).
It is significant to note that here also the priority is provided to philanthropy and not personal pleasure. In the olden days, pilgrims travelled quite comfortably without any inhibition about food or shelter. There used to be choultries everywhere and travellers were accommodated invitingly.
It is very difficult if not impossible to comprehend the picture of the ideal society that existed in those days. Here is an interesting story.
The Story Of Subbier
It was the later part of the British period.
Angarai, a small agraharam village near Tiruchi, where around two hundred Brahmin families were living and Subbier was one rich mirasdar among them. He was enjoying around 2000 acres of fertile land. He was a good samaritan to the core. ‘Annadhanam’ to all at any cost was his motto. His house was large and everyone in his household was ever ready to serve strangers with delicious food.
Pilgrims and pedestrians would unhesitatingly go to his house in large numbers for food and shelter and their complete satisfaction was his cardinal criterion.
As long as he was rich, he could comfortably engage in charitable exercises. But. Darker days came. His income dwindled and became zero. Still, penury did not deter him.
ஆற்றுப் பெருக்கற்று அடிசுடும் அந்நாளும் அவ்வாறு
ஊற்றுப் பெருக்கால் உலகூட்டும் – ஏற்றவர்க்கு
நல்ல குடிப்பிறந்தார் நல்கூர்ந்தார் ஆனாலும்
இல்லையென மாட்டார் இசைந்து. [ஔவையின் நல்வழி
Meaning:
A river, even when after becoming dry will continue to provide water through its springs. Similarly, a nobleman, even when he becomes poor will not stop his charity.
He sold the jewels of the womenfolk in his house and continued his services. He could not pay his annual taxes to the British government. His dues grew up in arrears. Unfortunately, somebody in the village who was jealous of his fame complained to the collector that he was just pretending to be poor and avoiding payment of dues. The collector assured him that he would take action.
One night, Subbier, while walking outside his house, heard a feeble voice begging for food. For serving such unexpected visitors there would always be sumptuous food in his house. He went inside, filled a flat-bottomed vessel neatly with rice and all side dishes, gave it to that fellow, and told him, ‘Satiate your hunger; now it is pitch dark; return the empty vessel tomorrow morning. Even if you cannot return it, keep it yourself.’
The next day, the collector visited the village to demand the dues from Subbier. After thorough interrogation, here is how the conversation flowed:
Collector: When was the last time you fed a needy?
Subbier: Last night one stranger came and I gave him food.
Subbier went on to narrate the incident in detail.
Collector: Do you have any evidence?
Subbier: No
Collector: Where is that vessel now? Can you show me?
Subbier: No, I told him to either return or keep it himself.
The collector removed a curtain beneath his table and asked, ‘Is this that vessel?’
Everyone was shocked. Subbier could not believe that it was the collector himself who had come incognito as a beggar to test him. Collector, having understood the greatness of Subbier told him, “I bow down to your charitable character. As long as I am here none from my office will come and disturb you. Go ahead with your service. I wish you all the best.”
This incident was recorded in great detail in a book, ‘Nalluaraikkovai’ by Dr. U V Swaminatha Iyer. The descendants of that lineage are identified with the sobriquet, ‘Annadhanam’ in their names.
Epilogue
This is just one small incident in one family and like this, there are hundreds of examples where Brahmins served society in different ways but unfortunately, such occurrences did not receive their due recognition and in many cases, were completely forgotten.
Here are a few names of Brahmins from public life:
Neelakanta Brahmachari. V V S Iyer, Vaidyanatha Iyer, Vanchinathan, Arya Bhashyam, Bhashyam Iyengar, Satyamurthy, Ambujammal, S Srinivasa Aiyengar, Subramania Bharati, N Goplaswamy Iyengar.
With some intense search, we may know a few of them. But, consider these names:
Sankarakrishna Iyer, a young farmer; Jagannatha Ayyangar, a young cook; Harihara Iyer, a young merchant; V. Desikachari, a merchant; Vembu Iyer, a cook; ‘Vande Matharam’ Subramania Iyer, a schoolmaster; Pichumani Iyer, a cook.
These were a few patriotic Brahmins among those arrested along with Neelakanta Brahmachari in the conspiracy of Ashe’s murder by Vanchinathan. Most of them were in their twenties when got arrested. We can easily infer that all of them are from lower middle-class or poor families. They have literally sacrificed their lives for our nation. Do we know anything about them? Don’t we owe them anything for their sacrifice?
An important disclaimer before we conclude. This article does not, we repeat it does not advocate any acrimony among any group of castes. Far from it. If, by chance, any of the statements are misconstrued and consequently misinterpreted as endorsing ill will, we offer our apologies forthwith. Our message, rather, our plea is that let us not vilify Brahmins as a single entity and throw mud on them. There are good and bad people in each group, in each section of the society. It is unfair to generalise promoting some secretive, sinister agenda. In Merchant of Venice, there is a topic, ‘Shylock is more sinned against than sinning-Discuss’. we can extrapolate that statement, ‘Unfortunate Brahmins are extremely, excessively sinned against over a long period than sinning. A corrective step is called for.
(with inputs from Project Madurai)
Parasuram Sharma is a retired bank officer and an octogenarian whose interests include Sanathana Dharmam, Samskritam, history and politics.
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.