Jaldhar H. Vyas
jaldhar at braincells.com
Thu Jun 23 11:01:24 CDT 2005
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, Ramesh Murthy wrote:
> ** I doubt if this is true. To my knowledge, a Brahmarshi is simply a
> rishi who has realized Brahman. A rajarshi is a king who became a
> rishi (such as Visvamitra). Any king would be considered a kshatriya
> (i.e. by karma and not by janma). The usage of the word "stock"
> appears to indicate heredity, which I believe is a misinterpretation.
You can doubt and believe all you like but why in this day and age should
you need to guess? Check in a dictionary.
Also though some may wish otherwise, that caste is based on birth is also
obvious to anyone who has spent more than 5 minutes in India. (But don't
start that topic up again. It's been done to death on this list. Check
the archives if you must.)
> While this may not be a proper example, the freedom fighter
> Purushottam Das Tandon is often referred to as a "Rajarshi". By
> hereditary caste (jaati) he would be a brahmin. But being a
> politician, his varna, on the basis of his karma, would be that of a
> kshatriya. Hence the term Rajarshi.
In modern times all sorts of people have been given all sorts of flowery
titles. But a Rishi as far as our shastras are concerned is a
mantradrashta, nothing more, nothing less.
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list