> What I am wondering is: why is it that everybody is taking it for
> granted that dommaraaTa itself is an "inferior" thing, so much so that
> comparison to it is insulting? I mean, obviously, the people who practice
> dommaraaTa are considered socially inferior to those that practice
> avadhaanam, but beyond that, what are the valid comparison points that
> objectively distinguish avadhaanam from dommaraaTa in a qualitative sense?
>
(May be I should continue the 'Sacred Cow Alert')
I am truly sorry if I gave the impression that 'dommaraaTa' is an
inferior thing. The 'dommaaraaTa' reference, as I said in reply to Madhav
turumeLLa's post earlier, was the historical equivalent of referring to a
circus or gymnastics. The Srisri reference I gave earlier specifically
talks about the concentration powers and the training required for these
exhibitions.
It is interesting that nobody in this forum took exception to comparing
avadhaanam to gymnastics. I think it has to do with the 'elite' status
that gymnastics has acquired compared to the nomadic, socially inferior
status of dommaraaTa, which is, in reality, nothing but an exhibition of
gymnastic skills. Sociologically, we tend to respect 'mental' skills
at a level higher than 'physical skills', and the display of athletic
/entertainment skills at the 'street' level does not get the same respect
as the same at the 'court' level (e.g.: vaudeville to cinema, gOLeelu to
Golf).
Regards. -- V. Chowdary Jampala