Dec 17, 2008

பாரதி தாசன் பதிவு பற்றி ஒரு பின்னூட்டம்


I enter here, having been guided here by a member who feedbacked in another blog. Sorry for coming late here.You have a good point; and that is, if Bharatidasan accepted Bharat as an Iyer, he was bound to accept all Brahmins as Iyers. He cannot criticise them; he cannot hate them. Hating them en masse is fascism, according to you.I have heard this argument before. Perhaps for the audience who clapped for you in the meeting, it was fresh.Bharatidasan was attracted to Bharati for qualities, which are not generally found in others. And, more importantly, among his own castemen.According to Bharati himself, his castemen were cowards, never willing to help anyone who tried to point out their errors of social conduct like untouchablity at the time. He found fault with them for failing in their obligations cast upon them by the religion. He was of the view that if the religion is followed in letter and spirit by each brahmanan, it would do good to society; and such a brahmanan can never be a person for hatred. He will be loved and venerated.

முன்னாளில் வேதம் ஓதுவார் பிராமணர்மூன்று முறை பெய்யுமடா வானம்.இன்னாளில் எதுவும் செய்யது காசு பாப்பார்.In another place,பாப்பானுக்கு இதிலேவுண்டு பீசு

Bharati was referring to the brahminical fear of police; and their tendency to work as informers to police during independenc struggle.I write here not to tar all brahmins with the same brush; but to bring home the point that Bharati was deeply dissatisfied with his own castemen.It is exactly for such traits that they came to be severely criticised by others too. Therefore, Bharatidhasan distinguished Bhrathi from the other paarppanars. He found in him qualities which are to be found in any human, and, perhaps, in a typical brahmin as an obligation.A brahmin is one, according to Hindu scriptures, who should possess certain qualities. Such qualities are written in the Hindu scriptures. If those are not found in them, and they claim they are ordinary like you and me, then they should forego the title brahmanan, which they are not willing to do.The brahmins want to enjoy the exalted status given to them in the religion; and at the same time, dont want to follow the religion. This is the hypocricy which was attacked by Bharathi.In my opinion, Bharatidhasan is perfectly correct in singling out Bharathi for praise, and distinguising them from other brahmins; and condemning them.If Brahmins had behaved as expected of them, there would have been no cause, even remotely, for, what is called today, பார்ப்பனத்துவேசம்.

Write more Rajanayahem!

Good luck.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.