Birth and Caste (was Re: [Advaita-l] RE: Vedic Shakhas ...)

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, S Jayanarayanan wrote:

> There are two possibilities:
>
> 1) BrAmaNa-G -- The word "BrAhmaNa" refers to one who has GYAna.
> This id most definitely not by birth. Even the manIshha
> panchakam.h is enough to refute this.
>
> 2) BrAhmaNa-K -- The word "BrAhmaNa" refers to one who performs
> his duties as required by the Vedas, smR^itis, etc. It's your
> contention that this is by both birth and conduct.
>
> It is reasonable to suppose that the entire set of verses are
> speaking of the same definition of a BrAhmaNa. YudhishhThira
> wouldn't "shift gears" from one to another.
>
> So it could be the case that the definition of "BrAhmaNa" is
> either as BrAhmaNa-G or as BrAhmaNa-K throughout all the verses.

There is an alternative that you have not considered.  That Yudhisthira
believes being a Brahmana-K (or Shudra-K etc.) is the path to becoming a
Brahmana-G.

[...]

>
> Both the GAyatrI mantra as well as the upanayana are *kArmic*
> and have nothing whatsoever to do with GYAna.
>

Right.  Which is why your explanation is untenable.

-- 
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
It's a boy! See the pictures - http://www.braincells.com/nilagriva/