Karunanidhi, Varnashrama Dharma and Brahmanism
Karunanidhi’s exposition on Varnashrama dharma: At last, Karunanidhi has accepted his own brand of “Brahmanism” or “Parppaniyam” followed by him. We should thank him for his confession. I used to ask many times why Kshatriyaism, Vaisyaism and Sudraism are not talked about or even whispered about them. It is not that such-isms are accepted but, it should be quite natural that when is accepted or targeted for heinous attacks and propagandist combats, naturally, others have to be considered for discussion.
In his so-called Question-answer Report (dated 18-04-2008), he has responded as follows:
பூணூல் இல்லாததுதான் காரணம்!
கேள்வி: அந்நாள் அமெரிக்க அதிபர் நிக்சன், அண்டை மாநிலத்து முதல்வர் ஹெக்டே இருவர் மீதும் அவர்களே தொலைபேசியை ஒட்டுக் கேட்டதாகக் கிளம்பிய குற்றச்சாட்டு காரணமாகத்தானே பதவியை ராஜினாமா செய்தார்கள் – ஆனால் அந்த வரலாறு தெரியாத சில வரட்டு மதியினர்; இங்கே தமிழகத்தில் இரு அதிகாரிகளுக்கிடையே தொலைபேசிகள் ஒட்டுக் கேட்கப்பட்டதற்காக முதல மைச்சர் ராஜினாமா செய்ய வேண்டுமென்கிறார்களே? இதற்குக் காரணம் என்ன?
கலைஞர்: என் செய்வது, இந்த முதலமைச்சருக்கு முப்பரி நூல் கிடையாதே! இவர் கடவுளின் முகத்தில் பிறந்த சாதியில் பிறந்தவர் அல்லவே – காலில் பிறந்த சாதியில் பிறந்தவரா யிற்றே! அதனால்தான் இந்த முதல்வர் தலைமையில் இந்த ஆட்சியில் அன்றாடம் நடைபெறுகிற அற்புத சாதனைகளை ஒரு சாரார் மூடி மறைத்துவிட்டு; வேண்டுமென்றே திட்ட மிட்டு சில விஷமச் செய்திகளைப் பரப்பி அந்த நெருப்பில் குளிர் காய முனைகிறார்கள். என்ன நடந்தது? எப்படி நடந்தது? யாரால் நடந்தது? என்று விசாரித்து அறிந்து வெளியிட உயர்நீதிமன்ற ஓய்வு பெற்ற நீதிபதியை நியமித் தாலும்; விகடன் கேலி செய்கிறார்! – சில பல ஆண்டுகளுக்கு முன்பு ஆந்திரத்து நடிகை, காஞ்சனமாலையின் பேச்சையே டேப் செய்து போட்டுக் காட்டி மிரட்டிய பணிய வைத்த பரம்பரையினர் அல்லவா?
Why he should give his exposition of much ‘hated’ Purusha sukta mantra and giving his exposition of much maligned Varnashrama Dharma confessing that he is a Sudra?
What is the significance of “Three-spun thread”? What exactly, he wanted to convey? If a person has “Three-spun thread”, can he escape from the charges of phone-tapping? Then, the “Three-spun thread” worn Hegde must have been escaped, but caught as per his own statement! Or perhaps, he has own brand of “Three-spun thread” and it is invisible to others! Anyway, only Padhmavathi, Dayalu Ammal or Rajathi Ammal can tell the truth. As he wears “Sacred Yellow Shwal”, he can wear his own brand of “Three-spun thread”!
Perhaps, he makes others to remember that all can wear the “Three-spun Thread” as prescribed in Manu Smriti.
Hailing from Telugu speaking community, Dhakshinamurthuy alias Muthuvelar Karnanidhi was raised traditionally and he was sporting a tuft on his head. In those days, it is not necessary that only Brahmins should have tuft on their heads, but it was customary that all would have tuft / Kudimi (as called in Tamil) on their heads. He learned Nadhaswaram upto certain level. Even today, he performs Pranayama and practices Yoga. He declares his religion as Hindu in all Government and other forms and applications.
The significance of declaring that “I am a Sudra”: Long back, he had declared that “I am Sudra” and so on. Ironically, when crisis comes or he comes to know that he is going to be out, he takes the weapon of “Shudras”. Earlier, the slogan was “Ulla shudra Atchiyaik Kappom” = “Let us protect the existing the Rule of Shudra”. Now, suddenly, he has implied it, but specifically. In fact, the Communists have accused him of promoting “Varnashrama Dharma”. Of course, the DK too then and there takes the stick to beat him. “He does not belong to the caste that came from the face of God; but born in the caste that came from His feet“, yes that means now, BSO has become SSO, in other words, the social pyramid had different pattern – SSO, VSO, KSO and BSO. V. T. Rajasekhara Shetty used to write, “Shudras may hate Brahmins but they love Brahminism“. So Karu loves “Brahminism” of his own brand.
He had a close Parppan-friend S. Viswanathan (SAVI). Once Karunanidhi requested him to search for a “good pappathi” for his nephew’s son for marriage alliance. In deed, Dayanidhi Maran could marry priya on August26, 1994. Priya has been a Brahmin, reportedly a niece of N. Ram, the present editor of the Karu’s favourite “Mount Road Mahavishnu“.
In another occasion also, he declared that his family has all castes – Nadar, Brahmin and so on. So he has become an expert in eugenics, just like the European racist experts, who conducted such experiments. There are other stories which are talked about, and all point to this aspect very clearly – eugenics.
In the SUN-group of about 52 companies, there have been Brahmins working, particularly, holding important posts. It is ironical to know why the Brahmins should work in such anti-Brahmin Companies or such anti-Brahmin Companies should have Brahmin staff and officers. This aspect has to be studied thoroughly.
Karunanidhi and Jayalalitha: Karunanidhi has been very much disturbed, thrilled or exited, whenever, he used to talk about her. He has used the most derogatory remarks many times right inside and outside TN Assembly as CM or as the DMK head or otherwise, which are well known to be repeated here. Under the guise of attacking her, he has assaulted Brahmin community like anything. Even the matured Moopanar, once commented that, “After all she danced in our function”, was referring to Jayalalitha. After MGR, definitely, his scourge has been against Jayalalitha only. The words and expressions used by him are the most unparliamentarily and cannot be printed with comfort.
“I am not against Brahmins, but against Brahmanism”: This is the usual way of his escapism or justification or even pastime to malign Brahmins. According to their ideological exposition that Brahmanism has been the dominating tendency, sitting at the top and thus controlling other Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and shudras. Therefore, they want to remove such hegemony in the society. Of course, now Brahmins have been almost eliminated from all spheres and they can survive only with their hard work and merit. Just by telling that one is Brahmin, he / she cannot get anything but scoff, insult and injuries. Thus, when Brahmins were not there, who have been dominating has to be checked out. Naturally, one has to look for other categories – Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and shudras. Tamils know that during C. N. Annadurai period, Mudaliars were dominating and M. G. Ramachandra Malayalees.
DMK not against Brahmins says Karunanidhi: The DMK president M. Karunanidhi said that the party had nothing against Brahmins but only opposed Brahminism. This was the policy followed by his mentor, C.N. Annadurai. Briefing presspersons after a meeting of the administrative committee of the party, Karunanidhi refuted AIADMK and Congress charges that he was deliberately whipping up communalism out of frustration in the wake of his party’s rout in the assembly elections held in June 2001.
Answering a question whether there was any difference of opinion between his party and the Dravidian Kazhagam on the establishment of the institute of Vedic sciences and Agama studies in the light of the support extended by Mr.K.Veeramani, Dravidian kazhagam leader, Karunanidhi said the former might have welcome the prospect of Harijans becoming archakas in temples. He did not know whether he had welcomed the proposed institute itself.
Karunanidhi said the former Supreme Court Judge Mahararajan in his report on the subject submitted to the former CM M. G. Ramachandran, in 1972 had said that everyone irrespective of caste or creed could not become a temple archaka unless some amendments to the Constitution were made. He would not agree with the view of some that the unfulfilled wish of E. V. Ramasamy, Dravidar Kazhagam leader, had been accomplished with the present government proposing the institute of Vedic Sciences. Could any Harijan think of becoming an archaka at the Meenakshi Amman temple Madurai or Kanchi Kamakshi Amman temple at Kanchipuram, he asked adding that the Kanchi Sankaracharya himself had expressed his views to the Maharajan Committee that only persons belonging to a particular community could become temple archakas. Thus, in short, his attack had been against Brahmins, though he pretend to argue in his characteristic way.
Moopanar’s criticism: “I have not given any advice to K. K. Mopanar, Congress (I) leader. I am a leader of a party and Mr. Moopanar is giving advice. This is the present political climate in Tamilnadu”. He quipped when a reporter referred to Moopanar’s criticism of the DMK leader’s anti-Brahmin speeches and writings and his suggestion that Karunanidhi either remain in politics or become a social reformer. Here, Moopanar had actually exposed his duplicity, as in reality, neither EVR nor Karunanidhi has not achieved substantially in the abolition of caste system and in fact, casteism increased with uglier tendencies.
The meeting urged the TN government to give up the proposal to establish the Institute of the Vedic Sciences as it would support and encourage Hindu fundamentalism. He never made such remarks, when Urudu University / Academy was proposed and even established.
Attacks on Brahmins: However, one can note the pattern of physical attacks, murderous attempts etc., carried on Brahmins only during his reigns 1969-71, 1971-76, 1989-91, 1996-2001 and now 2005-2008 Just remember the attacks, which I have already pointed out different forums. Can anyone believe that it could not happen so, had he been not CM? Or it happens only because he was / has been CM. Very often, he forgets that he was / is the ruler of crores of people of Tamilnadu, not simply anti-Brahmin CM, non-Brahmin CM or atheist CM and so on. His anti-Brahmin activism is fuelled by the DK by inciting directly and indirectly. DK used to dig and beat him using the anti-Brahmin stick telling that it is better to follow R. Venkatraman than Karunanidhi for the former respects his Teacher – Sankaracharya, whereas, the latter disrespects his teacher – EVR. Of course, Karu used to carry out gimmicks by criticising K. Veeramani for supporting Jayalaltha and so on. Once, he even ordered to arrest T. R. Balu for making anti-Brahmin rhetoric at a Public meeting conducted at Tana Street, Purasawakkam on October 9, 1990. DK interprets it as his soft corner towards Brahminism.
Many cases of Temple priests being attacked with weapons were reported in 2006-2007.
• Gurumurthy (74) was attacked and his sacred thread and kudimi / tuft cut off (April 23, 2007, at Neyveli town).
• The group also gate-crashed into the house of Gnanaskanda Gurukkal (42) and cut off sacred threads of Gnanaskanda Gurukkal, Ganesan Gurukkal, Gopinath Gurukkal and some other Gurukkals ran away.
• Vembu Iyer was attacked and his sacred thread and kudimi / tuft cut off (April 22, 2007, at Big Temple, Tanjore).
• The attack at Ayodhya Mantapam, West Mambalam, Chennai, had been the most heinous one, as not only petrol bombs were hurled but also two innocent Brahmins were attacked with Arival / big knives causing injuries. Incidentally, these people had nothing to do with any incidence.
So why this place and these two poor Brahmins were targeted have been unanswered even today. Though, the Police arrested some persons, no details were made available to understand the motive of the attack.
In 1980s, very similar incidences took place, of course, when Karunanidhi was CM (1989-91). When one reporter Ganapathy of “The Hindu” attacked and his sacred thread was cut, then only, because of the media, it caught the attention of the authorities and such incidences were controlled.
Conclusion: The Dravidian politicians should be subjected thorough critical study and psychoanalysis also, considering their double-think, double-speak, double-act and so on. There have been few critical studies of Dravidian movement and their leaders. P. Ramamurthy (1983), A. R. Venkatachalapathy (1994), Guna (1994) and others have brought out their critical views, but each has limitations, as the respective author has been bound and controlled by his ideological and political affiliation for example over-zealous Tamil chauvinism (including anti-Telugu, anti-Kannada, anti-Malayalam categories), Sri Lankan issue, LTTE-support, anti-Indian, anti-Hindu, anti-Hindi etc.
Of all of them, as Karunanidhi has been living giant of Dravidian ideology, he should be studied carefully. We cannot brush aside just by considering him a senile and so on. Of course, he could always take shelter under such a pretext, if grave problem comes. Otherwise, his utterances have to be taken seriously, that too, when he makes such utterances or statements officially, inside Assembly. Incidentally, after talking all nonsense, and its reports appearing in newspapers and TV, they have indulged in expunging such remarks.
Just for political survival, if he goes on targeting, attacking and torturing physically and mentally one community, it cannot be accepted by any means. Then, there is no difference between him and Hitler. Ironically, this also adversely affect Brahmins, as the comparison of Brahmins with Jews, place them against Mohammedans. Of course, Osama bin Laden has already categorised Hindus as so.
In the caste based violence, only non-Brahmins were involved. Many times, such skirmishes would have been intra-caste and inter-caste violent incidences. However, Brahmins are blamed for such incidences. The Communists and other affiliated groups exhibit posters every central or state government compared with Brahmins for every happening, whether it petrol rise, or price rise in general. This has been so blind but followed by others and no authority questions, controls or prevents it.
 Reported in today’s newspapers in Chennai.
 His first wife is no more and M. K. Muthu was born through her.
 As the Tali tied by Harischandra to his wife would be visible only to him, the “Three-spun thread” worn by him must be visible to his wives only. Here also amomg “wives” – Manaivi and Thunaivi have to be differentiated.
 About the “Yellow thundu / shawl”, there have been much discussion connecting it with “Kalki Bhagawan”, as reported by Indian Express.
 The DK used to shout “Cut off the Kudimi and Punul of the Parppans”.
 Arunan, Dravida Iyakkam – Oro Marksiya Ayvu (The Dravidian Movement – a Marxist Point of view), A. Abdul Wahab, 6/16, By-pass Road, Madurai – 18, 1981. The expression BSO – Brahminical Social Order was reportedly used by Kanshiram.
 Periyar E. V. Ramswamy, The Salvation to shudra Slavery, Dalit Sahithya Akademy,
Bangalore, 1986, p.ix.
 The science of using controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristic in a population.
 The fight between Maran brothers and Karunanidhi is just a political stunt and gimmick, as Karunanidhi and his family members have been partners and directors in one or the other way in all the Companies and hence the financial bondage cannot be broken or separated. The Corporate veil has been so strong and it cannot be pierced and seen through!
 The Hindu, Wednesday, October 30, 1991, p.3. A report appearing with the same caption.
 Karunanidhi made many speeches against Brahmins and Hindu religion, the moment, his party got defeated in 2001 Assembly elections.
 In Murasoli, his writings had been as usual with blasphemy. Ironically, the fight between DMK and DK or rather “Udal” is revealed in the Murasoli (DMK mouth piece) and Viduthalai (DK mouth piece).
 Last year, innocent Brahmins were attacked with lethal weapons throwing petrol bombs in Ayodhya Mantapam,
West Mambalam, Chennai, in which two Brahmins received sword’s cuts.
 Kali. Pungundran, Kalainjaum, Kazhagamum (Kalinjar and Kazhagam or Karunanidhi and DMK), Dravida Kazhaga Publication,
 Ibid, p.37.
 Ibid, p.46-48
 P. Ramamurthy, Ariya Mayaiya? Dravida Mayaiya? Vidhuthai Porum Dravida Iyakkamum (Was it Aryan myth or Dravidian Myth? The Freedom Struggle and the Dravidian Movement, Pazhaniappa Brthers,
 A. R. Venkatachalapathy, Dravida Iyakkamum Velalarum (The Dravidian Movement and Vellalars), South Asian Books,
 Guna, Dravidattal Vizhnthom (We fell because of Dravianism), Tamizhaga ayvaran,