Dhol, ganvaar, shoodra, pashu, naari - Sab hain taadan ke adhikari; wait - what?
I do come from a Brahmin family; although (thankfully) not very orthodox. I was taught to be prim and proper...
Proper language - Shuddha Marathi; okay not so much, but quite. Swear words in public? Absolutely NOT.
Proper eating habits - don't make mouth sounds when chewing, don't use both hands, don't spill so much, "jevtana maandi ghalun bas" (fold your legs properly for meals), and so on.
I was taught Ram Raksha, Maruti Stotra, Ganpati Stotra when I started talking. 6 o'clock in the evening would mean sitting next to Jiji (what I call my dadi) and repeating shlokas after her in front of the Devghar. While my friends will find this hard to believe - I was sincere (till I got ideas of my own about God and all that, but that's beside the point). Even today, whenever I'm alone at home, I do light up the diya in the Devghar and say "Shubhankaroti kalyanam, aarogyam dhanasampadaa, shatrubuddhi vinaashaaya, deepah jyoti namostute".
I was brought up like this. I can speak fair Marathi if I make the effort. I got excellent marks in Sanskrit for 6 years in school, and I owe them to my Aai, Baba, Jiji and Aaba for they taught me all those shlokas and subhaashitas.
Point is, these are privileges. I was lucky to have them. Another 16-year-old in a non-Brahmin family will not be brought up like this. She will have a different set of teachings and values and 'good-and-bad'.
In 2014, I do not think it is correct to judge someone based on the caste they are born into. I have sociology as a subject and I'd agree that it does seem like a useless subject, but it is not. There's something called 'Ascribed status' and 'Achieved status'. Being a Brahmin is the social status that I was ascribed when I was born to my parents. What I make of myself in this world is going to become my Achieved status.
I can be very judgmental at times but I promise you that your caste will never be a criterion for what I think of you. I will judge you based on your Achieved Status, and only that. I don't believe any caste is superior (or inferior) to others.
In 2014, I do not think it is correct to judge someone based on the caste they are born into. I have sociology as a subject and I'd agree that it does seem like a useless subject, but it is not. There's something called 'Ascribed status' and 'Achieved status'. Being a Brahmin is the social status that I was ascribed when I was born to my parents. What I make of myself in this world is going to become my Achieved status.
I can be very judgmental at times but I promise you that your caste will never be a criterion for what I think of you. I will judge you based on your Achieved Status, and only that. I don't believe any caste is superior (or inferior) to others.
Also -
Just the other day, when I said "Konkanastha shobhlis" to a friend when she gave me the exact change I needed, I got an outraged look from another friend. What I said was based completely on stereotypes, obviously. Stereotypes do exist, and they became stereotypes for a reason. The one about blonds, for instance. It has almost become a synonym for 'dumb'. The arrogant Delhiites ; the dumb Sardars; the kanjoos Marwadis; the one about Bong boys being Mama's Boys; women drivers being incapable of driving smooth; blah blah blah. Blame the damn stereotype, right? No. Its existence is not reason enough to continue its use.
There are stereotypes surrounding Konkanastha Brahmins - fair complexion, light eyes, impeccable language, cleanliness freaks, kanjoos people, et cetera. I for one haven't ever been to a household where I've been offered limited food. I know only 3 people on a personal level who are Brahmins and have light eyes. I know Brahmins who really couldn't care less about their language. I also know Brahmins who don't give a damn about keeping the house like a hotel room.
Just the other day, when I said "Konkanastha shobhlis" to a friend when she gave me the exact change I needed, I got an outraged look from another friend. What I said was based completely on stereotypes, obviously. Stereotypes do exist, and they became stereotypes for a reason. The one about blonds, for instance. It has almost become a synonym for 'dumb'. The arrogant Delhiites ; the dumb Sardars; the kanjoos Marwadis; the one about Bong boys being Mama's Boys; women drivers being incapable of driving smooth; blah blah blah. Blame the damn stereotype, right? No. Its existence is not reason enough to continue its use.
There are stereotypes surrounding Konkanastha Brahmins - fair complexion, light eyes, impeccable language, cleanliness freaks, kanjoos people, et cetera. I for one haven't ever been to a household where I've been offered limited food. I know only 3 people on a personal level who are Brahmins and have light eyes. I know Brahmins who really couldn't care less about their language. I also know Brahmins who don't give a damn about keeping the house like a hotel room.
Stereotypes cannot be used as an excuse to call names in 2014, no.
I have laughed, or snickered, at least, at jokes on Konkanastha and Deshastha Brahmins more times than I care to admit. I have learnt to take jokes.
It is not possible to fight every existing stereotype, every single time it is used. We need to learn to make peace with certain facts, and this is one of them.
I feel very strongly about some of these stereotypes and if you do, too, you can start by avoiding their use, n'est-ce pas?
I feel very strongly about some of these stereotypes and if you do, too, you can start by avoiding their use, n'est-ce pas?
A original thinker. Excellent. And now if you excuse me, "A real brahmin."
ReplyDelete