Question about Varna

[ravi chandrasekhara]

Dear Jaldhar,

Thanks for your input.  Being a Brahman myself, in our
family we often hear comments such as " conduct not
becoming of a Brahmin".  But as you stated caste/varna
doesnt change with conduct,e.g. there are "bad
Brahmans".  But this brings up another interesting
situation.  A late uncle of mine (through marriage)
underwent all the samskaras for Brahmans but didnt
perform sandhya-vandana, didnt always wear his
yagnopaveeta, and consumed meat and liquor.  But upon
his demise, another relative who had his upanayana
performed his last rights.  His son was ineligible to
do so, as he hadnt undergone his upanayana yet.  So my
question is, do Brahmans who transgress certain
shastric rules still eligible to undergo samskaras
etc. e.g. is a beef-eating Brahman allowed to undergo
Brahminic samskaras ?

Pranam, Ravi Chandrasekhara MD
--- "Jaldhar H. Vyas" <jaldhar at BRAINCELLS.COM> wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Mar 2002, ravi chandrasekhara wrote:
>
> > Dear List Members:
> >
> > This is the best summary I could find regarding a
> > dialogue between Yudhisthira and a Yaksha from the
> > Mahabharata:( I discoverd this website of this
> > gentleman involved with a Hindu Temple in
> Connecticut
> > http://www.geocities.com/sheenu06033/index.html)
> >
> > I welcome reponses to my question about varna,
> >
> > Pranam --  Ravi Chandrasekhara MD
> >
> > In fact that question was put to Yudhishtira by
> the
> > Yaksha (See my book: Yaksha Prashna, A Hindu
> Primer,
> > IND-US, 1984). Listen to the Yaksha and
> Yudhishtira.
> >
> >
> > rajan kulena vrttena svadhyayena shrutena va
> >
> > brahmanyam kenabhavati prabruhyetatsu nishcitam
> >
> >
> > King, how does one become a Brahmin: by birth?
> >
> > character? study of the Vedas? education? Tell me
> > precisely.
> >
> >
> >
> > shrnu yaksha kulam tata nasvadhyayo nacashrutam
> >
> > karanam hi dvijatve ca vrttameva na samshayha
> >
> > Listen, Yaksha, it is neither birth nor education,
> nor
> > even the study
> >
> > of the Vedas. Without doubt, it is character alone
> > that marks a Brahmin.
> >
>
> I finally got around to looking at this based on an
> electronic copy of the
> BORI critical edition of the Mahabharata I have.  I
> also found a copy of
> this episode at sanskrit.gde.to which says at the
> end it is based on ch.
> 297 of Prof. Tokunagas' files (apparently based on
> the BORI edition) and
> ch. 313 of Pandit Kinjawadekars' edition.  Both
> sources do not contain the
> above quoted shlokas.  The nearest they have is the
> following shlokas:
>
> yakSha uvAcha
>
> The yaksha said:
>
> kiM brAhmaNAnAM devatvaM kashcha dharmaH satAmiva |
> kashchaiShAM mAnuSho bhAvaH kimeShAmasatAmiva ||
>
> What is the divine nature of the Brahmanas? What is
> their dharma like
> that of the True?  What is their human nature?  what
> is their [adharma] like
> the False?
>
> yudhiShThira uvaacha
>
> Yudhisthira said:
>
> svAdhyAya eShAM devatvaM tapa eShAM satAmiva
> maraNaM mAnuSho bhAvaH parivAdoHsatAmiva
>
> Svadhyaya is their divine nature, Tapa [is their
> conduct] like the True,
> Death is their human nature, contempt [is their
> vice] like the False.
>
> A few things to note here:
>
> * the Mahabharata is not a "book" in a unitary
> sense.  rather it is
> "history" (itihasa--literally what has been said) a
> collection of
> traditions.  In the process of transmission variants
> can arise.  A
> critical edition is a best attempt by scholars to
> piece together the most
> likely origanal texts based on comparing and
> contrasting existing variants
> and manuscripts.  Thus it is not infallible and the
> fact those shlokas are
> not there doesn't necessarily mean they are not
> genuine but it does cast a
> cloud of suspicion.  If this Shrinivasan fellow is
> using a variant, he
> should state his sources and the reasons they are to
> be preferred.
>
> * Of course it could also be true that I've read the
> wrong part of the
> Mahabharata.  it is after all huge, and material is
> sometimes repeated.
> however I doubt it.  Shrinivasan says it comes from
> Vanaparvan, mine says
> Aranyakaparvan but that is a synonym.  Shrinivasan
> says it is a
> conversation between Yudhisthira and a Yaksha who
> put the rest of the
> Pandavas under a spell after they chased a deer.  My
> source says the same.
>
> * There is no mention of birth anywhere in the above
> shlokas.  There is a
> mention of character--a Brahmana can be in the camp
> of the True or the
> False based on his conduct.  But a Brahmana of bad
> character is still a
> Brahmana.
>
>
> > Yudhishthira's answer is crisp, clear and
> unambiguous
>
> Given that it seems we don't know exactly what
> Yudhisthira said, this is
> hardly true.  what is crisp, clear, and unambiguous
> is ones' caste is
> based on birth as anyone who has spent even 5
> minutes in India knows.  So
> what I'm wondering is why do people like this
> Shrinivasan persist in
> trying to dredge up support (on the flimsiest basis
> as we have seen)  for
> this ridiculous fantasy?  Woe betide the people of
> Connecticut if such an
> ignorant person is their priest.
>
> --
> Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
> It's a girl! See the pictures -
http://www.braincells.com/shailaja/


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards®
http://movies.yahoo.com/