The angst of the Tamil Brahmin

Rashmun wrote: A putative theory about brahmins suppressing nonbrahmins for the last 2,000 years and denying them education and other privileges has gained currency and is today taken for granted. 

Rashmun wrote: A putative theory about brahmins suppressing nonbrahmins for the last 2,000 years and denying them education and other privileges has gained currency and is today taken for granted. 

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote: A putative theory about brahmins suppressing nonbrahmins for the last 2,000 years and denying them education and other privileges has gained currency and is today taken for granted. 

The above allegation (in bold) is just plain dumb. How and why did brahmins have to deny education (related to Sanskrit and Vedas) to others, considering there was no special financial advantage in getting such education (learning Sanskrit and Vedas)? Moreover, the process of acquiring such knowledge (in Sanskrit and Vedas) was too tedious and time consuming. People (non-brahmins) simply avoided the whole thing (learning Sanskrit and Vedas and becoming brahmins) on their own.

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote: A putative theory about brahmins suppressing nonbrahmins for the last 2,000 years and denying them education and other privileges has gained currency and is today taken for granted. 

The above allegation (in bold) is just plain dumb. How and why did brahmins have to deny education (related to Sanskrit and Vedas) to others, considering there was no special financial advantage in getting such education (learning Sanskrit and Vedas)? Moreover, the process of acquiring such knowledge (in Sanskrit and Vedas) was too tedious and time consuming. People (non-brahmins) simply avoided the whole thing (learning Sanskrit and Vedas and becoming brahmins) on their own.

Adi Sankaracharya has clarified in his commentary to the Brahma Sutra that sudras are not permitted to study the Vedas and not permitted to know about Brahman(God).

---
Smriti moreover speaks of Vidûra and others who were born from Sûdra mothers as possessing eminent knowledge.--Hence the Sûdra has a claim to the knowledge of Brahman.

To this we reply that the Sûdras have no such claim, on account of their not studying the Veda. A person who has studied the Veda and understood its sense is indeed qualified for Vedic matters; but a Sûdra does not study the Veda, for such study demands as its antecedent the upanayana-ceremony, and that ceremony belongs to the three (higher) castes only. The mere circumstance of being in a condition of desire does not furnish a reason for qualification, if capability is absent. Mere temporal capability again does not constitute a reason for qualification, spiritual capability being required in spiritual matters. And spiritual capability is (in the case of the Sûdras) excluded by their being excluded from the study of the Veda.--The Vedic statement, moreover, that the Sûdra is unfit for sacrifices intimates, because founded on reasoning, that he is unfit for knowledge also.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34103.htm

----
And also:

The Sûdras are not qualified for that reason also that Smriti prohibits their hearing the Veda, their studying the Veda, 

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34107.htm

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote: A putative theory about brahmins suppressing nonbrahmins for the last 2,000 years and denying them education and other privileges has gained currency and is today taken for granted. 

The above allegation (in bold) is just plain dumb. How and why did brahmins have to deny education (related to Sanskrit and Vedas) to others, considering there was no special financial advantage in getting such education (learning Sanskrit and Vedas)? Moreover, the process of acquiring such knowledge (in Sanskrit and Vedas) was too tedious and time consuming. People (non-brahmins) simply avoided the whole thing (learning Sanskrit and Vedas and becoming brahmins) on their own.

Adi Sankaracharya has clarified in his commentary to the Brahma Sutra that sudras are not permitted to study the Vedas and not permitted to know about Brahman(God).

---
Smriti moreover speaks of Vidûra and others who were born from Sûdra mothers as possessing eminent knowledge.--Hence the Sûdra has a claim to the knowledge of Brahman.

To this we reply that the Sûdras have no such claim, on account of their not studying the Veda. A person who has studied the Veda and understood its sense is indeed qualified for Vedic matters; but a Sûdra does not study the Veda, for such study demands as its antecedent the upanayana-ceremony, and that ceremony belongs to the three (higher) castes only. The mere circumstance of being in a condition of desire does not furnish a reason for qualification, if capability is absent. Mere temporal capability again does not constitute a reason for qualification, spiritual capability being required in spiritual matters. And spiritual capability is (in the case of the Sûdras) excluded by their being excluded from the study of the Veda.--The Vedic statement, moreover, that the Sûdra is unfit for sacrifices intimates, because founded on reasoning, that he is unfit for knowledge also.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34103.htm

----
And also:

The Sûdras are not qualified for that reason also that Smriti prohibits their hearing the Veda, their studying the Veda, 

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34107.htm

That's the usual B.S. from you.   

People would not go for learning Sanskrit and Vedas because what Sankara did or did not say, but simply due to the fact that doing so (learning Sanskrit and Vedas and becoming brahmin, especially after a very rigorous and time consuming exercise) was not a hugely advantageous career move, as also explained in the following (even using Lord Macaulay's writings / minutes),
"Macaulay report refutes the caste basis for quotas"  -- http://creative.sulekha.com/macaulay-report-refutes-the-caste-basis-for-quotas_591797_blog


.

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote: A putative theory about brahmins suppressing nonbrahmins for the last 2,000 years and denying them education and other privileges has gained currency and is today taken for granted. 

The above allegation (in bold) is just plain dumb. How and why did brahmins have to deny education (related to Sanskrit and Vedas) to others, considering there was no special financial advantage in getting such education (learning Sanskrit and Vedas)? Moreover, the process of acquiring such knowledge (in Sanskrit and Vedas) was too tedious and time consuming. People (non-brahmins) simply avoided the whole thing (learning Sanskrit and Vedas and becoming brahmins) on their own.

Adi Sankaracharya has clarified in his commentary to the Brahma Sutra that sudras are not permitted to study the Vedas and not permitted to know about Brahman(God).

---
Smriti moreover speaks of Vidûra and others who were born from Sûdra mothers as possessing eminent knowledge.--Hence the Sûdra has a claim to the knowledge of Brahman.

To this we reply that the Sûdras have no such claim, on account of their not studying the Veda. A person who has studied the Veda and understood its sense is indeed qualified for Vedic matters; but a Sûdra does not study the Veda, for such study demands as its antecedent the upanayana-ceremony, and that ceremony belongs to the three (higher) castes only. The mere circumstance of being in a condition of desire does not furnish a reason for qualification, if capability is absent. Mere temporal capability again does not constitute a reason for qualification, spiritual capability being required in spiritual matters. And spiritual capability is (in the case of the Sûdras) excluded by their being excluded from the study of the Veda.--The Vedic statement, moreover, that the Sûdra is unfit for sacrifices intimates, because founded on reasoning, that he is unfit for knowledge also.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34103.htm

----
And also:

The Sûdras are not qualified for that reason also that Smriti prohibits their hearing the Veda, their studying the Veda, 

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34107.htm

That's the usual B.S. from you.   

People would not go for learning Sanskrit and Vedas because what Sankara did or did not say, but simply due to the fact that doing so (learning Sanskrit and Vedas and becoming brahmin, especially after a very rigorous and time consuming exercise) was not a hugely advantageous career move, as also explained in the following (even using Lord Macaulay's writings / minutes),
"Macaulay report refutes the caste basis for quotas"  -- http://creative.sulekha.com/macaulay-report-refutes-the-caste-basis-for-quotas_591797_blog


.

it was a great career move in those days to know the Vedas since performing Vedic rituals and rites was a good and stable source of income. it was also a respectable profession to perform Vedic rituals and rites since it allowed direct contact on respectable terms with the high and the mighty (the kshatriyas). Further, brahmins are at the top of the caste hierarchy, and the reason for this is that the brahmins themselves put themselves on top of the hierarchy. In the ancient hindu custom of niyoga, a woman unable to bear a child because her husband was impotent was permitted to copulate with a brahmin (and only with a brahmin) for the purpose of having a child. Guess who came up with this rule?

Compare the life of a brahmin in ancient India to that of a sudra living like a serf, or doing miscellaneous menial jobs like cleaning toilets (bhangis), skinning cows (chamaar), etc. In fact even though bhangis and chamaars are  two sub-castes of sudras (dalits), calling someone a bhangi or chamaar is considered an abuse.

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:
The above allegation (in bold) is just plain dumb. How and why did brahmins have to deny education (related to Sanskrit and Vedas) to others, considering there was no special financial advantage in getting such education (learning Sanskrit and Vedas)? Moreover, the process of acquiring such knowledge (in Sanskrit and Vedas) was too tedious and time consuming. People (non-brahmins) simply avoided the whole thing (learning Sanskrit and Vedas and becoming brahmins) on their own.

Adi Sankaracharya has clarified in his commentary to the Brahma Sutra that sudras are not permitted to study the Vedas and not permitted to know about Brahman(God).

---
Smriti moreover speaks of Vidûra and others who were born from Sûdra mothers as possessing eminent knowledge.--Hence the Sûdra has a claim to the knowledge of Brahman.

To this we reply that the Sûdras have no such claim, on account of their not studying the Veda. A person who has studied the Veda and understood its sense is indeed qualified for Vedic matters; but a Sûdra does not study the Veda, for such study demands as its antecedent the upanayana-ceremony, and that ceremony belongs to the three (higher) castes only. The mere circumstance of being in a condition of desire does not furnish a reason for qualification, if capability is absent. Mere temporal capability again does not constitute a reason for qualification, spiritual capability being required in spiritual matters. And spiritual capability is (in the case of the Sûdras) excluded by their being excluded from the study of the Veda.--The Vedic statement, moreover, that the Sûdra is unfit for sacrifices intimates, because founded on reasoning, that he is unfit for knowledge also.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34103.htm

----
And also:

The Sûdras are not qualified for that reason also that Smriti prohibits their hearing the Veda, their studying the Veda, 

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34107.htm

That's the usual B.S. from you.   

People would not go for learning Sanskrit and Vedas because what Sankara did or did not say, but simply due to the fact that doing so (learning Sanskrit and Vedas and becoming brahmin, especially after a very rigorous and time consuming exercise) was not a hugely advantageous career move, as also explained in the following (even using Lord Macaulay's writings / minutes),
"Macaulay report refutes the caste basis for quotas"  -- http://creative.sulekha.com/macaulay-report-refutes-the-caste-basis-for-quotas_591797_blog


.

it was a great career move in those days to know the Vedas since performing Vedic rituals and rites was a good and stable source of income. it was also a respectable profession to perform Vedic rituals and rites since it allowed direct contact on respectable terms with the high and the mighty (the kshatriyas). Further, brahmins are at the top of the caste hierarchy, and the reason for this is that the brahmins themselves put themselves on top of the hierarchy. In the ancient hindu custom of niyoga, a woman unable to bear a child because her husband was impotent was permitted to copulate with a brahmin (and only with a brahmin) for the purpose of having a child. Guess who came up with this rule?

Compare the life of a brahmin in ancient India to that of a sudra living like a serf, or doing miscellaneous menial jobs like cleaning toilets (bhangis), skinning cows (chamaar), etc. In fact even though bhangis and chamaars are  two sub-castes of sudras (dalits), calling someone a bhangi or chamaar is considered an abuse.

Wrong, as usual. 

Nobody ever chooses a career and spends a lot of time and energy learning it (e.g. gaining knoledge in Sanskrit and Vedas to become brahmin) because that profession (brahmin for example) might lead to impregnating a few childless women (as in Niyoga fertilization). Moreover, in Niyoga, a brahmin was down on the list as a potential sperm donor / impregnator, much behind the immediate family members of childless woman (brothers etc. of the husband of childless woman). The claim that non-brahmins would be lured into becoming brahmins, after learning Sanskrit and Vedas, because it led to many opportunities for impregnating childless women in Niyoga tradition, is totally baseless. 

In addition, brahmins were also not the controllers of society as far as the social power structure, instead the kshatriyas were the rulers in society. So the claim that non-brahmins wanted to be social leaders and controllers and therefore would try to become brahmins, by learning Sanskrit and vedas, is again without any merit.

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Adi Sankaracharya has clarified in his commentary to the Brahma Sutra that sudras are not permitted to study the Vedas and not permitted to know about Brahman(God).

---
Smriti moreover speaks of Vidûra and others who were born from Sûdra mothers as possessing eminent knowledge.--Hence the Sûdra has a claim to the knowledge of Brahman.

To this we reply that the Sûdras have no such claim, on account of their not studying the Veda. A person who has studied the Veda and understood its sense is indeed qualified for Vedic matters; but a Sûdra does not study the Veda, for such study demands as its antecedent the upanayana-ceremony, and that ceremony belongs to the three (higher) castes only. The mere circumstance of being in a condition of desire does not furnish a reason for qualification, if capability is absent. Mere temporal capability again does not constitute a reason for qualification, spiritual capability being required in spiritual matters. And spiritual capability is (in the case of the Sûdras) excluded by their being excluded from the study of the Veda.--The Vedic statement, moreover, that the Sûdra is unfit for sacrifices intimates, because founded on reasoning, that he is unfit for knowledge also.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34103.htm

----
And also:

The Sûdras are not qualified for that reason also that Smriti prohibits their hearing the Veda, their studying the Veda, 

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe34/sbe34107.htm

That's the usual B.S. from you.   

People would not go for learning Sanskrit and Vedas because what Sankara did or did not say, but simply due to the fact that doing so (learning Sanskrit and Vedas and becoming brahmin, especially after a very rigorous and time consuming exercise) was not a hugely advantageous career move, as also explained in the following (even using Lord Macaulay's writings / minutes),
"Macaulay report refutes the caste basis for quotas"  -- http://creative.sulekha.com/macaulay-report-refutes-the-caste-basis-for-quotas_591797_blog


.

it was a great career move in those days to know the Vedas since performing Vedic rituals and rites was a good and stable source of income. it was also a respectable profession to perform Vedic rituals and rites since it allowed direct contact on respectable terms with the high and the mighty (the kshatriyas). Further, brahmins are at the top of the caste hierarchy, and the reason for this is that the brahmins themselves put themselves on top of the hierarchy. In the ancient hindu custom of niyoga, a woman unable to bear a child because her husband was impotent was permitted to copulate with a brahmin (and only with a brahmin) for the purpose of having a child. Guess who came up with this rule?

Compare the life of a brahmin in ancient India to that of a sudra living like a serf, or doing miscellaneous menial jobs like cleaning toilets (bhangis), skinning cows (chamaar), etc. In fact even though bhangis and chamaars are  two sub-castes of sudras (dalits), calling someone a bhangi or chamaar is considered an abuse.

Wrong, as usual. 

Nobody ever chooses a career and spends a lot of time and energy learning it (e.g. gaining knoledge in Sanskrit and Vedas to become brahmin) because that profession (brahmin for example) might lead to impregnating a few childless women (as in Niyoga fertilization). Moreover, in Niyoga, a brahmin was down on the list as a potential sperm donor / impregnator, much behind the immediate family members of childless woman (brothers etc. of the husband of childless woman). The claim that non-brahmins would be lured into becoming brahmins, after learning Sanskrit and Vedas, because it led to many opportunities for impregnating childless women in Niyoga tradition, is totally baseless. 

In addition, brahmins were also not the controllers of society as far as the social power structure, instead the kshatriyas were the rulers in society. So the claim that non-brahmins wanted to be social leaders and controllers and therefore would try to become brahmins, by learning Sanskrit and vedas, is again without any merit.

The following extract from the Mahabharata depicts Pandu advising Kunti to do niyoga with a brahmin on the ground that respectable women have been known to do it with brahmins:

The self-born Manu hath said that men failing to have legitimate offspring of their own may have offspring begotten upon their wives by others, for sons confer the highest religious merit. Therefore, O Kunti, being destitute myself of the power of procreation, I command thee to raise good offspring through some person who is either equal or superior to me. O Kunti, listen to the history of the daughter of Saradandayana who was appointed by her lord to raise offspring. That warrior-dame, when her monthly season arrived, bathed duly and in the night went out and waited on a spot where four roads met. She did not wait long when a Brahmana crowned with ascetic success came there. The daughter of Saradandayana solicited him for offspring. After pouring libations of clarified butter on the fire (in the performance of the sacrifice known by the name of Punsavana) she brought forth three sons that were mighty car-warriors and of whom Durjaya was the eldest, begotten upon her by that Brahmana. O thou of good fortune, do thou follow that warrior-dame's example at my command, and speedily raise offspring out of the seed of some Brahmana of high ascetic merit.'"

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01121.htm

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:
That's the usual B.S. from you.   

People would not go for learning Sanskrit and Vedas because what Sankara did or did not say, but simply due to the fact that doing so (learning Sanskrit and Vedas and becoming brahmin, especially after a very rigorous and time consuming exercise) was not a hugely advantageous career move, as also explained in the following (even using Lord Macaulay's writings / minutes),
"Macaulay report refutes the caste basis for quotas"  -- http://creative.sulekha.com/macaulay-report-refutes-the-caste-basis-for-quotas_591797_blog


.

it was a great career move in those days to know the Vedas since performing Vedic rituals and rites was a good and stable source of income. it was also a respectable profession to perform Vedic rituals and rites since it allowed direct contact on respectable terms with the high and the mighty (the kshatriyas). Further, brahmins are at the top of the caste hierarchy, and the reason for this is that the brahmins themselves put themselves on top of the hierarchy. In the ancient hindu custom of niyoga, a woman unable to bear a child because her husband was impotent was permitted to copulate with a brahmin (and only with a brahmin) for the purpose of having a child. Guess who came up with this rule?

Compare the life of a brahmin in ancient India to that of a sudra living like a serf, or doing miscellaneous menial jobs like cleaning toilets (bhangis), skinning cows (chamaar), etc. In fact even though bhangis and chamaars are  two sub-castes of sudras (dalits), calling someone a bhangi or chamaar is considered an abuse.

Wrong, as usual. 

Nobody ever chooses a career and spends a lot of time and energy learning it (e.g. gaining knoledge in Sanskrit and Vedas to become brahmin) because that profession (brahmin for example) might lead to impregnating a few childless women (as in Niyoga fertilization). Moreover, in Niyoga, a brahmin was down on the list as a potential sperm donor / impregnator, much behind the immediate family members of childless woman (brothers etc. of the husband of childless woman). The claim that non-brahmins would be lured into becoming brahmins, after learning Sanskrit and Vedas, because it led to many opportunities for impregnating childless women in Niyoga tradition, is totally baseless. 

In addition, brahmins were also not the controllers of society as far as the social power structure, instead the kshatriyas were the rulers in society. So the claim that non-brahmins wanted to be social leaders and controllers and therefore would try to become brahmins, by learning Sanskrit and vedas, is again without any merit.

The following extract from the Mahabharata depicts Pandu advising Kunti to do niyoga with a brahmin on the ground that respectable women have been known to do it with brahmins:

The self-born Manu hath said that men failing to have legitimate offspring of their own may have offspring begotten upon their wives by others, for sons confer the highest religious merit. Therefore, O Kunti, being destitute myself of the power of procreation, I command thee to raise good offspring through some person who is either equal or superior to me. O Kunti, listen to the history of the daughter of Saradandayana who was appointed by her lord to raise offspring. That warrior-dame, when her monthly season arrived, bathed duly and in the night went out and waited on a spot where four roads met. She did not wait long when a Brahmana crowned with ascetic success came there. The daughter of Saradandayana solicited him for offspring. After pouring libations of clarified butter on the fire (in the performance of the sacrifice known by the name of Punsavana) she brought forth three sons that were mighty car-warriors and of whom Durjaya was the eldest, begotten upon her by that Brahmana. O thou of good fortune, do thou follow that warrior-dame's example at my command, and speedily raise offspring out of the seed of some Brahmana of high ascetic merit.'"

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01121.htm

Notwithstanding what Pandu talks to his wife in the Mahabharata, the priority of a brahmin as a candidate for Niyoga fertilization (potential sperm donor) was quite low (check out the other candidates on the list, much ahead of a brahmin). Moreover, based on the above talk, how many people would want to become brahmin (after learning Vedas and Sanskrit) so that the could be a part of Niyoga?  None.

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

it was a great career move in those days to know the Vedas since performing Vedic rituals and rites was a good and stable source of income. it was also a respectable profession to perform Vedic rituals and rites since it allowed direct contact on respectable terms with the high and the mighty (the kshatriyas). Further, brahmins are at the top of the caste hierarchy, and the reason for this is that the brahmins themselves put themselves on top of the hierarchy. In the ancient hindu custom of niyoga, a woman unable to bear a child because her husband was impotent was permitted to copulate with a brahmin (and only with a brahmin) for the purpose of having a child. Guess who came up with this rule?

Compare the life of a brahmin in ancient India to that of a sudra living like a serf, or doing miscellaneous menial jobs like cleaning toilets (bhangis), skinning cows (chamaar), etc. In fact even though bhangis and chamaars are  two sub-castes of sudras (dalits), calling someone a bhangi or chamaar is considered an abuse.

Wrong, as usual. 

Nobody ever chooses a career and spends a lot of time and energy learning it (e.g. gaining knoledge in Sanskrit and Vedas to become brahmin) because that profession (brahmin for example) might lead to impregnating a few childless women (as in Niyoga fertilization). Moreover, in Niyoga, a brahmin was down on the list as a potential sperm donor / impregnator, much behind the immediate family members of childless woman (brothers etc. of the husband of childless woman). The claim that non-brahmins would be lured into becoming brahmins, after learning Sanskrit and Vedas, because it led to many opportunities for impregnating childless women in Niyoga tradition, is totally baseless. 

In addition, brahmins were also not the controllers of society as far as the social power structure, instead the kshatriyas were the rulers in society. So the claim that non-brahmins wanted to be social leaders and controllers and therefore would try to become brahmins, by learning Sanskrit and vedas, is again without any merit.

The following extract from the Mahabharata depicts Pandu advising Kunti to do niyoga with a brahmin on the ground that respectable women have been known to do it with brahmins:

The self-born Manu hath said that men failing to have legitimate offspring of their own may have offspring begotten upon their wives by others, for sons confer the highest religious merit. Therefore, O Kunti, being destitute myself of the power of procreation, I command thee to raise good offspring through some person who is either equal or superior to me. O Kunti, listen to the history of the daughter of Saradandayana who was appointed by her lord to raise offspring. That warrior-dame, when her monthly season arrived, bathed duly and in the night went out and waited on a spot where four roads met. She did not wait long when a Brahmana crowned with ascetic success came there. The daughter of Saradandayana solicited him for offspring. After pouring libations of clarified butter on the fire (in the performance of the sacrifice known by the name of Punsavana) she brought forth three sons that were mighty car-warriors and of whom Durjaya was the eldest, begotten upon her by that Brahmana. O thou of good fortune, do thou follow that warrior-dame's example at my command, and speedily raise offspring out of the seed of some Brahmana of high ascetic merit.'"

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01121.htm

Notwithstanding what Pandu talks to his wife in the Mahabharata, the priority of a brahmin as a candidate for Niyoga fertilization (potential sperm donor) was quite low (check out the other candidates on the list, much ahead of a brahmin). Moreover, based on the above talk, how many people would want to become brahmin (after learning Vedas and Sanskrit) so that the could be a part of Niyoga?  None.

Let us imagine a scenario in the days of the Mahabharata wherein you are a brahmin and you are approached by a woman with the request to impregnate her. Are you suggesting that you would have done this out of a sense of duty and responsibility, without experiencing any sexual pleasure?

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:
Wrong, as usual. 

Nobody ever chooses a career and spends a lot of time and energy learning it (e.g. gaining knoledge in Sanskrit and Vedas to become brahmin) because that profession (brahmin for example) might lead to impregnating a few childless women (as in Niyoga fertilization). Moreover, in Niyoga, a brahmin was down on the list as a potential sperm donor / impregnator, much behind the immediate family members of childless woman (brothers etc. of the husband of childless woman). The claim that non-brahmins would be lured into becoming brahmins, after learning Sanskrit and Vedas, because it led to many opportunities for impregnating childless women in Niyoga tradition, is totally baseless. 

In addition, brahmins were also not the controllers of society as far as the social power structure, instead the kshatriyas were the rulers in society. So the claim that non-brahmins wanted to be social leaders and controllers and therefore would try to become brahmins, by learning Sanskrit and vedas, is again without any merit.

The following extract from the Mahabharata depicts Pandu advising Kunti to do niyoga with a brahmin on the ground that respectable women have been known to do it with brahmins:

The self-born Manu hath said that men failing to have legitimate offspring of their own may have offspring begotten upon their wives by others, for sons confer the highest religious merit. Therefore, O Kunti, being destitute myself of the power of procreation, I command thee to raise good offspring through some person who is either equal or superior to me. O Kunti, listen to the history of the daughter of Saradandayana who was appointed by her lord to raise offspring. That warrior-dame, when her monthly season arrived, bathed duly and in the night went out and waited on a spot where four roads met. She did not wait long when a Brahmana crowned with ascetic success came there. The daughter of Saradandayana solicited him for offspring. After pouring libations of clarified butter on the fire (in the performance of the sacrifice known by the name of Punsavana) she brought forth three sons that were mighty car-warriors and of whom Durjaya was the eldest, begotten upon her by that Brahmana. O thou of good fortune, do thou follow that warrior-dame's example at my command, and speedily raise offspring out of the seed of some Brahmana of high ascetic merit.'"

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01121.htm

Notwithstanding what Pandu talks to his wife in the Mahabharata, the priority of a brahmin as a candidate for Niyoga fertilization (potential sperm donor) was quite low (check out the other candidates on the list, much ahead of a brahmin). Moreover, based on the above talk, how many people would want to become brahmin (after learning Vedas and Sanskrit) so that the could be a part of Niyoga?  None.

Let us imagine a scenario in the days of the Mahabharata wherein you are a brahmin and you are approached by a woman with the request to impregnate her. Are you suggesting that you would have done this out of a sense of duty and responsibility, without experiencing any sexual pleasure?

Forget the above scenario. Think instead whether you (or anyone else) would choose to become a brahmin, after going through a rigorous and lengthy (time consuming) exercise in learning Vedas and Sanskrit, if that might lead you to impregnate a few childless women if lucky? No, of course.

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

The following extract from the Mahabharata depicts Pandu advising Kunti to do niyoga with a brahmin on the ground that respectable women have been known to do it with brahmins:

The self-born Manu hath said that men failing to have legitimate offspring of their own may have offspring begotten upon their wives by others, for sons confer the highest religious merit. Therefore, O Kunti, being destitute myself of the power of procreation, I command thee to raise good offspring through some person who is either equal or superior to me. O Kunti, listen to the history of the daughter of Saradandayana who was appointed by her lord to raise offspring. That warrior-dame, when her monthly season arrived, bathed duly and in the night went out and waited on a spot where four roads met. She did not wait long when a Brahmana crowned with ascetic success came there. The daughter of Saradandayana solicited him for offspring. After pouring libations of clarified butter on the fire (in the performance of the sacrifice known by the name of Punsavana) she brought forth three sons that were mighty car-warriors and of whom Durjaya was the eldest, begotten upon her by that Brahmana. O thou of good fortune, do thou follow that warrior-dame's example at my command, and speedily raise offspring out of the seed of some Brahmana of high ascetic merit.'"

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m01/m01121.htm

Notwithstanding what Pandu talks to his wife in the Mahabharata, the priority of a brahmin as a candidate for Niyoga fertilization (potential sperm donor) was quite low (check out the other candidates on the list, much ahead of a brahmin). Moreover, based on the above talk, how many people would want to become brahmin (after learning Vedas and Sanskrit) so that the could be a part of Niyoga?  None.

Let us imagine a scenario in the days of the Mahabharata wherein you are a brahmin and you are approached by a woman with the request to impregnate her. Are you suggesting that you would have done this out of a sense of duty and responsibility, without experiencing any sexual pleasure?

Forget the above scenario. Think instead whether you (or anyone else) would choose to become a brahmin, after going through a rigorous and lengthy (time consuming) exercise in learning Vedas and Sanskrit, if that might lead you to impregnate a few childless women if lucky? No, of course.

were the brahmins who were impregnating childless women doing it out of a sense of responsibility and duty, or were they experiencing sexual pleasure in the act? Who made this rule allowing only brahmins to do niyoga on childless women?

I know you have been saying a woman's kin (like her husband's brother) could also do niyoga on her, but leaving aside the woman's kin who made the rule that only brahmins (and not men of any other caste) could impregnate her  through niyoga? Was it the brahmins themselves who came up with rule?

Did the brahmins participating in niyoga experience sexual pleasure while doing niyoga, or were they simply doing it out of a sense of duty and responsibility?

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:
Notwithstanding what Pandu talks to his wife in the Mahabharata, the priority of a brahmin as a candidate for Niyoga fertilization (potential sperm donor) was quite low (check out the other candidates on the list, much ahead of a brahmin). Moreover, based on the above talk, how many people would want to become brahmin (after learning Vedas and Sanskrit) so that the could be a part of Niyoga?  None.

Let us imagine a scenario in the days of the Mahabharata wherein you are a brahmin and you are approached by a woman with the request to impregnate her. Are you suggesting that you would have done this out of a sense of duty and responsibility, without experiencing any sexual pleasure?

Forget the above scenario. Think instead whether you (or anyone else) would choose to become a brahmin, after going through a rigorous and lengthy (time consuming) exercise in learning Vedas and Sanskrit, if that might lead you to impregnate a few childless women if lucky? No, of course.

were the brahmins who were impregnating childless women doing it out of a sense of responsibility and duty, or were they experiencing sexual pleasure in the act? Who made this rule allowing only brahmins to do niyoga on childless women?

I know you have been saying a woman's kin (like her husband's brother) could also do niyoga on her, but leaving aside the woman's kin who made the rule that only brahmins (and not men of any other caste) could impregnate her  through niyoga? Was it the brahmins themselves who came up with rule?

Did the brahmins participating in niyoga experience sexual pleasure while doing niyoga, or were they simply doing it out of a sense of duty and responsibility?

The discussion is on whether anyone would be swayed into learning Sanskrit and Veda through tedious and lengthy effort to become a brahmin who might enjoy the extra perk of having sex with a childless woman to father a baby, which you seemed originally to imply, albeit wrongly, as an attractive reason for people to become brahmins.

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Let us imagine a scenario in the days of the Mahabharata wherein you are a brahmin and you are approached by a woman with the request to impregnate her. Are you suggesting that you would have done this out of a sense of duty and responsibility, without experiencing any sexual pleasure?

Forget the above scenario. Think instead whether you (or anyone else) would choose to become a brahmin, after going through a rigorous and lengthy (time consuming) exercise in learning Vedas and Sanskrit, if that might lead you to impregnate a few childless women if lucky? No, of course.

were the brahmins who were impregnating childless women doing it out of a sense of responsibility and duty, or were they experiencing sexual pleasure in the act? Who made this rule allowing only brahmins to do niyoga on childless women?

I know you have been saying a woman's kin (like her husband's brother) could also do niyoga on her, but leaving aside the woman's kin who made the rule that only brahmins (and not men of any other caste) could impregnate her  through niyoga? Was it the brahmins themselves who came up with rule?

Did the brahmins participating in niyoga experience sexual pleasure while doing niyoga, or were they simply doing it out of a sense of duty and responsibility?

The discussion is on whether anyone would be swayed into learning Sanskrit and Veda through tedious and lengthy effort to become a brahmin who might enjoy the extra perk of having sex with a childless woman to father a baby, which you seemed originally to imply, albeit wrongly, as an attractive reason for people to become brahmins.

You are mixing up two different things. They are:
1. Did brahmins come up with the rule of niyoga whereby, other than the woman's kin, only brahmins can perform niyoga on a childless woman? And if yes did the brahmins performing niyoga experience sexual pleasure or did they simply do it out of a sense of duty and responsibility?

2. Were brahmins in ancient India better off financially than the sudras? Was the social status of brahmins superior to that of a sudra?

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:
Forget the above scenario. Think instead whether you (or anyone else) would choose to become a brahmin, after going through a rigorous and lengthy (time consuming) exercise in learning Vedas and Sanskrit, if that might lead you to impregnate a few childless women if lucky? No, of course.

were the brahmins who were impregnating childless women doing it out of a sense of responsibility and duty, or were they experiencing sexual pleasure in the act? Who made this rule allowing only brahmins to do niyoga on childless women?

I know you have been saying a woman's kin (like her husband's brother) could also do niyoga on her, but leaving aside the woman's kin who made the rule that only brahmins (and not men of any other caste) could impregnate her  through niyoga? Was it the brahmins themselves who came up with rule?

Did the brahmins participating in niyoga experience sexual pleasure while doing niyoga, or were they simply doing it out of a sense of duty and responsibility?

The discussion is on whether anyone would be swayed into learning Sanskrit and Veda through tedious and lengthy effort to become a brahmin who might enjoy the extra perk of having sex with a childless woman to father a baby, which you seemed originally to imply, albeit wrongly, as an attractive reason for people to become brahmins.

You are mixing up two different things. They are:
1. Did brahmins come up with the rule of niyoga whereby, other than the woman's kin, only brahmins can perform niyoga on a childless woman? And if yes did the brahmins performing niyoga experience sexual pleasure or did they simply do it out of a sense of duty and responsibility?

2. Were brahmins in ancient India better off financially than the sudras? Was the social status of brahmins superior to that of a sudra?

No, I am not mixing two things, but you are -- basically to wiggle your way out as usual (after you lose the argument) by hijacking the thread in a different direction.