எங்கே Sri Vaishnavam

[RVR]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

A small input

Arya Samaj is the only organisation which recognises conversion from other religions to Hindu religion.

Once a person becomes a Hindu, Arya Samaj offers all the Hindu scriptures including vedhas, upanisheds to the new converts. There is no gender discrimination. Recently I attended a marriage performed in Arya Samaj style and personally discussed with the priest and he confirmed that they are teaching Vedhas and Upanisheds to all.

The traditional mutts have lot of compulsions. Mutt head is the trustee of traditions, customs and practices. He doesn't have the liberty to deviate from the path set by his predecessors. One of the earlier Madathipathi of Kanchi Kamakoti Peetam, Sri Bodhendra Saraswathi Swamigal (17th century AD) gave up the post of Peetathipathi and attained Jeeva Samadhi in the banks of Kaveri river at Govindapuram near Aduthurai (Kumbakonam-Mailadurai route) reciting name Lord Rama.The present incumbant Sri Jayendra Saraswathi Swamigal also wanted to give up the Madathipathi post almost twenty years back but due to the persuasion of his mentor Paramacharyal, returned back to th mutt.

Holding the position of Peetathipathi is probably a tough job of protecting the traditions on the one side and yielding to reforms on the other side. Paramacharyal has written lot of articles about the difficulty of the position he was holding at various places in `Deivathin Kural'. I wish no body criticise them.

Kanchi mutt runs Vedha Patasalas where only Brahmacharys are taught Vedhas in traditional way. I have not seen others (including Grahasthas like me) learning there. By traditionally ladies are not permitted.

But similar thing in happening in other religions also. I have not seen a lady pastor either in catholic or protestent church. Ladies are not permitted in mosques. It is probably gender discrimination in all religions and nothing to do with the traditional hindu mutts.

All the best

 

[Raghy]

Sri VenkataRamani said :-

"Holding the position of Peetathipathi is probably a tough job of protecting the traditions on the one side and yielding to reforms on the other side. Paramacharyal has written lot of articles about the difficulty of the position he was holding at various places in `Deivathin Kural'. I wish no body criticise them."

Sri RV sir,

I humbly beg to differ with you, please. "Netri kannai thirappinum kutram kutrame!" Even God Almighty is criticised. Personally, I had a grievence with Paramacharyal; I still have a grievance with all the mutts. Paramacharyal's word was respected as the word of God. He wielded the power to bring a huge social reform in Tamil Nadu. He could have single handedly wiped out the castesim in Tamil Nadu. Just one announcement.. I can only lament that along with I don't know how many millions. I am sorry, but I am not able to help it.

 

[happyhindu]

Sir,

Arya Samaj is the only organisation which recognises conversion from other religions to Hindu religion.

Iskcon does too. Traditionally, one just needs to follow a hindu way of life. No formal conversion is needed.

Once a person becomes a Hindu, Arya Samaj offers all the Hindu scriptures including vedhas, upanisheds to the new converts. There is no gender discrimination. Recently I attended a marriage performed in Arya Samaj style and personally discussed with the priest and he confirmed that they are teaching Vedhas and Upanisheds to all.

Not only arya samaj, based on the info i have known so far, all non-purvamimansa based mutts teach vedas to all. Only dharmashastras discriminate based on caste and gender. No other body of hindu literature does so.

Mutts, as homes to monastic traditions, are generally associated with the uttaramimansakas or vedantins. They do not discriminate based on occupation (jati) and gender.

Please correct me if am wrong, but Purvamimansakas are followers of Mimansa sutras (Jaimini). They did not even recognize 'brahman" until the bhakti period. It was most likely Sri Adi Shankara who integrated the concept of 'brahman' with purvamimansaka ritualism. No one knows if the occupation of a priest results in the realization of brahman. However, today, purvamimansaka mutts have grown to be what we call as brahmanical mutts.

The traditional mutts have lot of compulsions. Mutt head is the trustee of traditions, customs and practices. He doesn't have the liberty to deviate from the path set by his predecessors. One of the earlier Madathipathi of Kanchi Kamakoti Peetam, Sri Bodhendra Saraswathi Swamigal (17th century AD) gave up the post of Peetathipathi and attained Jeeva Samadhi in the banks of Kaveri river at Govindapuram near Aduthurai (Kumbakonam-Mailadurai route) reciting name Lord Rama.The present incumbant Sri Jayendra Saraswathi Swamigal also wanted to give up the Madathipathi post almost twenty years back but due to the persuasion of his mentor Paramacharyal, returned back to th mutt.

Holding the position of Peetathipathi is probably a tough job of protecting the traditions on the one side and yielding to reforms on the other side. Paramacharyal has written lot of articles about the difficulty of the position he was holding at various places in `Deivathin Kural'. I wish no body criticise them.

Criticism is as one perceives it sir. I do not think anyone was criticizing them either on this thread or elsewhere. What we present as info, is just that - info. To some, Paramacharya's words are final. To others, it may not be so. Simply presenting info does not amount to criticizm sir.

I wud not infringe upon someone's choice of freedom to restrict vedas to select people, similarly i wud not expect someone to infringe upon my choice to seek information other than what Paramacharya has said.

An aside: Just as one might not be comfortable with what one sees as "criticism" of the acharyas one follows, its exactly the same feeling for those whom we label as 'godmen' - those followers too wud not like 'criticism" of their gurus. I realized that after i spoke to one follower of the oneness movement (the "kalki" bhagvan one) (please note: am neither a follower nor an agent, nor do i wish to be branded as such, just for saying this). All i realize is this - its each to his own path.

Kanchi mutt runs Vedha Patasalas where only Brahmacharys are taught Vedhas in traditional way. I have not seen others (including Grahasthas like me) learning there. By traditionally ladies are not permitted.

But similar thing in happening in other religions also. I have not seen a lady pastor either in catholic or protestent church. Ladies are not permitted in mosques. It is probably gender discrimination in all religions and nothing to do with the traditional hindu mutts.

i suppose its best not to compare with other religions, esp just in case, we consider them lesser than our own. and btw, tehre are women pastors and women imams; and after protests women are being allowed into mosques in our own country in kerala.

All the best

 

[RVR]

Sri VenkataRamani said :-

"Holding the position of Peetathipathi is probably a tough job of protecting the traditions on the one side and yielding to reforms on the other side. Paramacharyal has written lot of articles about the difficulty of the position he was holding at various places in `Deivathin Kural'. I wish no body criticise them."

Sri RV sir,

I humbly beg to differ with you, please. "Netri kannai thirappinum kutram kutrame!" Even God Almighty is criticised. Personally, I had a grievence with Paramacharyal; I still have a grievance with all the mutts. Paramacharyal's word was respected as the word of God. He wielded the power to bring a huge social reform in Tamil Nadu. He could have single handedly wiped out the castesim in Tamil Nadu. Just one announcement.. I can only lament that along with I don't know how many millions. I am sorry, but I am not able to help it.

Thanks Sri Raghi,

Paramacharyal is no more. This forum is permitting you criticise him. I am a follower of Paramacharyal and personally I feel it is not correct to criticise him since he is not available here to defend himself.

My humble opinion is Paramacharyal spent most of his time in looking inward by silent meditation. He didn't collect money for the mutt. Many wealthy people approached him with money but he advised them to spend on charities directly. He didn't bother whether the visiting person is Prime Minister of India or an ordinary person like me. At the height of Dravidan movement he lived where the bakthi culture was under series threat. But by his silence and grace, he has ensured that the bakthi culture revived among all communities toward the end of his life. Probably he would have considered reviving Bakthi culture as his primary duty and performed it silently and effectively.

One thing which I would like to mention here is, he had excellent knowledge on ancient Tamil Bakthi Literature. His writings are available in Tamil (Deivathin Kural) which all the Tamilians could read and understand. I personally feel that he has changed the impression that Kanchi mutt is interested in promoting only sanskrit. He promoted Sambandar's Kolaru pathigam at every nook and corner of Tamilnadu. He promoted Tiruppavai, Thiruvembavai and Thiruppalli Ezhuchi at every nook and corner.

This forum seems to have different rules for different people. It is not permitting me to use even the name of a living Godman but liberally permit people to criticise even dead people.

Thank you and all the best

 

[RVR]

An aside: Just as one might not be comfortable with what one sees as "criticism" of the acharyas one follows, its exactly the same feeling for those whom we label as 'godmen' - those followers too wud not like 'criticism" of their gurus.

Let them criticise my acharyas. No problem. I am willing to answer to the best possible extent. I myself has criticised my own Acharyas in the past in this forum . But why I am being discriminated from criticising other Godman. Are other Godman more Sacred than my Acharyas?

Why they criticise even Paramacharya when he is not alive today? Is it correct?

I think the rules should apply evenly and fairly. Otherwise there is no point in arguing here.

All the best

 

[happyhindu]

Thanks Sri Raghi,

Paramacharyal is no more. This forum is permitting you criticise him. I am a follower of Paramacharyal and personally I feel it is not correct to criticise him since he is not available here to defend himself.

My humble opinion is Paramacharyal spent most of his time in looking inward by silent meditation. He didn't collect money for the mutt. Many wealthy people approached him with money but he advised them to spend on charities directly. He didn't bother whether the visiting person is Prime Minister of India or an ordinary person like me. At the height of Dravidan movement he lived where the bakthi culture was under series threat. But by his silence and grace, he has ensured that the bakthi culture revived among all communities toward the end of his life. Probably he would have considered reviving Bakthi culture as his primary duty and performed it silently and effectively.

One thing which I would like to mention here is, he had excellent knowledge on ancient Tamil Bakthi Literature. His writings are available in Tamil (Deivathin Kural) which all the Tamilians could read and understand. I personally feel that he has changed the impression that Kanchi mutt is interested in promoting only sanskrit. He promoted Sambandar's Kolaru pathigam at every nook and corner of Tamilnadu. He promoted Tiruppavai, Thiruvembavai and Thiruppalli Ezhuchi at every nook and corner.

This forum seems to have different rules for different people. It is not permitting me to use even the name of a living Godman but liberally permit people to criticise even dead people.

Thank you and all the best

Sir,

Neither Sri Raghy, me or Sri Nara have criticized Paramacharyal. Please let me know where anyone has.

If merely mentioning info other than what Paramacharyal has said amounts to criticism, then I do not know what to call info-sharing as. I think i have explained better in the post above.

This forum does not seem to be having different rules for different people. I wonder why you think so.

As far as your position on godmen goes, i do not believe in restricting speech. But i think the forum took the simple stand of not wanting to offend or hurt anyone, considering the kind of remarks that were being made on that thread. Hope we will not make a fuss out of it.

 

[RVR]

Sir,

Neither Sri Raghy, me or Sri Nara have criticized Paramacharyal. Please let me know where anyone has.

If merely mentioning info other than what Paramacharyal has said amounts to criticism, then I do not know what to call info-sharing as. I think i have explained better in the post above.

This forum does not seem to be having different rules for different people. I wonder why you think so.

As far as your position on godmen goes, i do not believe in restricting speech. But i think the forum took the simple stand of not wanting to offend or hurt anyone, considering the kind of remarks that were being made on that thread. Hope we will not make a fuss out of it.

Sorry. Even the name of the Godman was removed in all the places. Where as criticism of Kanchi Acharya directly apprears in this forum threads. Rules are not equal. Some Godman seems to be more sacred than Kanchi Acharyas.

Sri Raghy has directly talked about Paramacharyal when he is not alive today. Whereas a living Godmans name is removed in all the places. Is it fair and correct?

All the glorifying sentences of the same Godman still appears. It is nothing but discrimination.

 

[happyhindu]

Sorry. Even the name of the Godman was removed in all the places. Where as criticism of Kanchi Acharya directly apprears in this forum threads. Rules are not equal. Some Godman seems to be more sacred than Kanchi Acharyas.

Sri Raghy has directly talked about Paramacharyal when he is not alive today. Whereas a living Godmans name is removed in all the places. Is it fair and correct?

All the glorifying sentences of the same Godman still appears. It is nothing but discrimination.

Sigh, i think the best option is to delete that whole thread or perhaps delete the sentences you consider glorifying or what other option i dunno. Hope Shri KRS or Shri Kunjuppu or Praveen will look into it.

What wrong thing has Sri Raghy said about Sri Paramacharya?

 

[RVR]

Sigh, i think the best option is to delete that whole thread or perhaps delete the sentences you consider glorifying or what i dunno. Hope Shri KRS or Shri Kunjuppu or Praveen will look into it.

What wrong thing has Sri Raghy said about Sri Paramacharya?

Sri RV sir,

I humbly beg to differ with you, please. "Netri kannai thirappinum kutram kutrame!" Even God Almighty is criticised. Personally, I had a grievence with Paramacharyal; I still have a grievance with all the mutts. Paramacharyal's word was respected as the word of God. He wielded the power to bring a huge social reform in Tamil Nadu. He could have single handedly wiped out the castesim in Tamil Nadu. Just one announcement.. I can only lament that along with I don't know how many millions. I am sorry, but I am not able to help it.


He says even if a third eye is opened `What Paramacharyal has done is a great sin'. Is it not a direct attack on Paramacharyal who is no more with us now.

The forum does't even permit the name of a living Godman pronounced adversely. But permits dead people attacked directly.

Is it not discrimination? Is it fair?

 

[happyhindu]

Sri RV sir,

I humbly beg to differ with you, please. "Netri kannai thirappinum kutram kutrame!" Even God Almighty is criticised. Personally, I had a grievence with Paramacharyal; I still have a grievance with all the mutts. Paramacharyal's word was respected as the word of God. He wielded the power to bring a huge social reform in Tamil Nadu. He could have single handedly wiped out the castesim in Tamil Nadu. Just one announcement.. I can only lament that along with I don't know how many millions. I am sorry, but I am not able to help it.


He says even if a third eye is opened `What Paramacharyal has done is a great sin'. Is it not a direct attack on Paramacharyal who is no more with us now.

The forum does't want even permit the name of a living Godman pronounced adversely. But permits dead people attacked directly.

Is it not discrimination? Is it fair?

hope shri raghy clarifies.

i do not understand the context of the tamil sentence.

 

[Raghy]

Sri RV sir,

Kindly find a way to forgive me for offending your feelings, please. I did not in anyway 'criticised' Paramacharyal. I will never even dare mention Paramacharyal by actual name. I 'had' grievances; I lament... Sir, this is not criticism.

Sir, I was a farmer. So many times when I was young, I stood looking at the dark clouds gathering; cool brezze blowing; a chill in the air... I sincerely expected rain and got disappointed so may times. I was never angry with nature for that. I would silently cry and caress the paddy, worrying about it. Paramacharyal was a dark cloud laden with plenty karunai rain. I lament for the failure of karunai rain. I have a right to lament Sir. May be our society did not deserve the karunai rain. I am sure, million others lament too.

 

[RVR]

Sri RV sir,

Kindly find a way to forgive me for offending your feelings, please. I did not in anyway 'criticised' Paramacharyal. I will never even dare mention Paramacharyal by actual name. I 'had' grievances; I lament... Sir, this is not criticism.

Sir, I was a farmer. So many times when I was young, I stood looking at the dark clouds gathering; cool brezze blowing; a chill in the air... I sincerely expected rain and got disappointed so may times. I was never angry with nature for that. I would silently cry and caress the paddy, worrying about it. Paramacharyal was a dark cloud laden with plenty karunai rain. I lament for the failure of karunai rain. I have a right to lament Sir. May be our society did not deserve the karunai rain. I am sure, million others lament too.

Sri Raghy,

I am also coming from an agricultural family and my father was very much a farmer. We have also seen vagaries of monsoon during cultivation.

I am not mistaking you since probably you must not have seen the previous threads involving another `Godman'. The Godman's name was removed from all my postings after four days of appearance.

My question is against the forum administrators and not you. I am a follower of Kanchi Acharyas and they have been very liberally criticised in these forums. Infact I myself has criticised the present Acharyas. I fully agree with your sentence `Netri Kannai Thiranthalum Kutram Kutrame'. But please don't apply it to people who are no more with us now.

But forum administrators were totally intolerant when I criticised a living Godman. Is it correct? Is it fair?

The forum has a brahmin tag name. Brahmin Gurus can be criticised liberally but not other community Godman. Is it fair?

I am again telling you, I have nothing against you. Let the forum administrators answer my question.

All the best

 

[Raghy]

Deleted because this post is not required. I have explained my position to Sri RV sir in the previous post.

 

[Raghy]

Sri RV Sir,

I had no desire to criticise Paramacharyal. Honestly, I was looking for a social reform from that Mahatma. It did not happen. I am only a human being. When Paramacharyal left us, I fully realised that the social reform would not happen. RV Sir, once may be in a hundred years... even once in multiples of hundred years one mahatma comes amoung us who is very polite, humble but very powerful. Paramacharyal was all of that and much more. May be Paramacharyal decided we did not desrve to be saved. Who knows? But, I lament.

Once again I feel bad for hurting your feelings. Kindly forgive me.

 

[kunjuppu]

venkat,

i understand that the wound still has not healed re godmen.

what is it that can be done to heal it?

personally, as an ordinary member, i agree with your sentiments, that unless and otherwise objected by members, as far as possible, we should let precedence be the guide.

in this case, kanchi mutt was criticized by several folks. we did not bestow the same freedome when it came to saibaba. it was a proactive measure against possible injury to some members' feelings, even though nobody had complained so far.

we have a long way since then, and moved on to new efforts, such as swayamvaram, with an enthusiasm and cooperation.

it would indeed be a shame, to let this old hangover create a pallor over the ceremonies.

i do not know how many options are there.. but here are a few

- do nothing (not much of an option)
- reopen the thread, and let people criticise saibaba
- open a separate thread re godmen and see what comes
- declare the past policy was perhaps not warranted in the light of 20/20 vision ie nobody really cared if saibaba was criticised here or not

no matter what, i think, we should quickly come to a closure, re this, as this has potential to break out once again into injured feelings.

our members are too valuable to be discarded. here is a call for initiative leadership from the moderators ..& management.

please resolve this to all's satisfaction

 

[RVR]

Sri RV Sir,

I had no desire to criticise Paramacharyal. Honestly, I was looking for a social reform from that Mahatma. It did not happen. I am only a human being. When Paramacharyal left us, I fully realised that the social reform would not happen. RV Sir, once may be in a hundred years... even once in multiples of hundred years one mahatma comes amoung us who is very polite, humble but very powerful. Paramacharyal was all of that and much more. May be Paramacharyal decided we did not desrve to be saved. Who knows? But, I lament.

Once again I feel bad for hurting your feelings. Kindly forgive me.

Shri Raghy,

I am not at all hurt by your postings. I believe in freedom of speech and please don't have any inhibitions that you have hurt me.

Once again I am making it clear that I have grievances only against the administrators of this forum, who use censoring selectively. Let them answer my queries.

Paramacharyal has faced lot of problems during his period. Dravidian movement was in its upward curve only during his period and if had opened his mouth, he would have been targetted much more than what he has already faced.

However he sent a silent message to everybody and former prime ministers Indira Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi visited him for his blessings during their difficult times. But he didn't give any VIP treatment to any of them.

He mastered Tamil Bakthi literature and silently wrote lot of articles propagating the Tamil Literature. Normally we are identified with sanskrit only but Paramacharya silently propagated Tamil Bakthi Literature. For example during early sixties he propagated Thirugnana Sambandar's Kolaru Pathigam. He propagated Andal's Tiruppavai and Manickavasagar's Thiruvembavai & Thiruppalli Ezhuchi. Today these songs have become very popular at every nook and corner of Tamilnadu, thanks to Paramacharyar.

All his writings are available under the title `Deivathin Kural' in Tamil which is being quoted by all communities even today. MGR met him when he was Chief Minister of Tamilnadu and it was a great thing to happen those days. Paramacharyal's main focus was to keep the Bhakthi spirit alive inspite of the dravidian onslought and he succeeded in that effort. Today almost all the younger generation leaders of all the Dravidian parties are visiting temples and perform poojas. Offcourse the other communities also visit temples more regularly and the maximum heat against our community has definitely subsided. However they use bashing against our community just for convenience which we are unable to stop it.

Sri Jayendra Saraswathi mingles with other communities more freely and to day the mutt is patronised more by other communities than our community. However he got into problems in between due to overdrive on the political front and was made to suffer. However, I am sure he will get out of his problems soon and the glory of the mutt will also restored.

Again I request you not to have any ill feeling about your writings and I have nothing against you in my mind.

All the best

 

[praveen]

Couple of ways where this could be sorted out, in my opinion.

1. Keep talking about the old ways. That was done this way and this is being in an another way, while another was dealt like this..... etc.. etc.. etc.. with no solution.

2. Move on. Dont forget the old one, but keep that as a point to remind us of certain things - good and bad.

But forum administrators were totally intolerant when I criticised a living Godman. Is it correct? Is it fair?

The forum has a brahmin tag name. Brahmin Gurus can be criticised liberally but not other community Godman. Is it fair?

I cannot stress the fact the admins and moderators are humans and have their own views and judgements. So, what was said in personal capacity cannot be taken as a stand of the site. Hence the reason why there is a disclaimer after each and every post.

Having said that, i am not going to say the way it was dealt with is right or wrong. At that moment of time, it was felt correct so what was done was done. Obviously it has and have had its demerits as well - i.e. the point raised by you.

As far as i have known, members can express their views openly and clearly but at the same time, sometimes certain views do tend to cross the invisible line and starts affecting the sentiments of other members. If such a thing happens, tempers flare and arguments rise up and people start to complain (in one extreme case, physical/personal threat also).

Once again I am making it clear that I have grievances only against the administrators of this forum, who use censoring selectively. Let them answer my queries.

Each topic is different in its own merit and there is no yardstick to measure what can be said and what cannot be said.

Sometimes things that were "censored" in one thread are allowed to be posted in another, because it would have added merit to the discussion happening. While the same in the other thread would have caused certain discomforts or in view of certain other external factors would have been edited/removed/warned....

And the fact there is no set guidelines is also obvious from the above. It is difficult to set standards because standards in itself is debatable. So each time something is moderated, it is solely based on that topic and its sensitivity only and not based on any previous posts by that member (with a few exceptions).

Hope this clears things a bit.

None of us have anything against anyone (individual or community). We want you to enjoy your experience here and grow together as an individual and more importantly as a community.

----------------------------------------------------------------

And yes, i will be around on this sunday, so we can def discuss this (if needed).

 

[RVR]

Sri Kunjuppu ji,

Thanks for your kind words.

I have nothing against ordinary members who discuss issues freely. I wish administrators don't interfere when ordinary members discuss various topics. Definitely we are all not seeing on all matters and differences of opinion is bound to come up. It has not stopped us from discussing further.

Personally I have debated with Prof Nara ji to the maximum extent. We don't see eye to eye on several subjects. But I have highest regard for his knowledge and I am sure he would have enjoyed debating with me.

I expect administrators to watch the proceedings from the sidelines and should interfere only when un-parlimentary language are used or the discussions are targeted at personal level or non relevant issues are debated. They have to behave like true umpires in a Cricket match and should not come to play. If things becomes controversial, they can hide the postings temporarily, discuss with the concerned people through private messages and as a last resort remove it totally. But in my case, my postings appeared for four days without any problem and suddenly removed without all the procedures which I mentioned above.

Is it correct? If so why you allow postings about my Gurus to appear without any editing? Is that Godman more sacred than my Gurus? Can you criticise Gurus of Brahmin sect more freely and cannot even use the name of the controversial Godman? Let the adminstrators reply for all my queries.

My service to our community is always there and with or without this forum, I shall continue to serve. There is no problem. I wrote to you earlier in a different thread that Thambras President has invited me for discussions. I don't want to put this forum against thambras. On the contrary I shall be more happy if I can combine the resources of both of them to the best advantage of our community. Sri Swaminatha sharma virtually left this forum but I only prevailed upon him to continue and make use of it in the larger interest of our community & `swayamvaram' function.

Personally I have nothing against Sri Raghy or Ms.Happy Hindu. I always love to discuss with them without any problem in the future.

As you suggested, let the admininstrators come out with better solutions.

All the best

 

[RVR]

Sri Praveen,

Please don't try to give evassive replies.

I want specific answers

Can you permit criticising Paramacharyal who is no more with us now? Can you permit criticising Sri Jayendra Saraswathi Swamigal?

If so why the same yardstick is not used against other living Godman? Is he more sacred than the above two Gurus?

Why you permitted my postings for four continuous days and suddenly allowed it to be removed without even consulting me? Is it correct?

If you cannot answer, please accept my statement below.

Your moderator doesn't follow any democratic principles, don't believe in freedom of expression and doesn't know how to play the role of umpire in the forum.

I am willing to close the chapter if you give me satisfactory reply or accept the latter statement.

All the best

 

[silverfox]

Dear Sri Venkataramani:

Let me answer this on behalf of Praveen. Praveen, I hope this is ok with you. Praveen doesn't get involved in the day-today postings of members unless needed.
Why don't let us all put this behind us and move on? Let me say this: Members have the right to write about anybody - be it Paramacharyal or Sai Baba - and criticize them as long as we follow the norms and guidelines of this forum, which are: we shouldn't use derogatory words or name-calling, use respectful language even when criticizing, shouldn't write stuff without any factual proof. I agree that people in the public domain are fair game.
Let us move on.
Thank you for your continued participation.

Sri Praveen,

Please don't try to give evassive replies.

I want specific answers

Can you permit criticising Paramacharyal who is no more with us now? Can you permit criticising Sri Jayendra Saraswathi Swamigal?

If so why the same yardstick is not used against other living Godman? Is he more sacred than the above two Gurus?

Why you permitted my postings for four continuous days and suddenly allowed it to be removed without even consulting me? Is it correct?

If you cannot answer, please accept my statement below.

Your moderator doesn't follow any democratic principles, don't believe in freedom of expression and doesn't know how to play the role of umpire in the forum.

I am willing to close the chapter if you give me satisfactory reply or accept the latter statement.

All the best

 

[Nara]

Was SriVaishnavism present in any form before Sri Nathamunigal?

Absolutely. Right before Nathamunigal, there was the host of 12 Azhvars. Ramanuja himself states that he is not inventing anything new, but reestablishing the ancient Parama Vaideeka religion expounded in the Vedas and kept alive by the ancient rishees. After Vyasa, the Acharyas who are beleived to have contributed to the Sri Vaishnavas tradition include Bodhayana, Danka, Dramida, and others.

Also Vaishnavam is present in the ancient Tamil Sanga literature. Examples of literary allusions used in poems like Paripadal can be found in Azhvar pasurams.

Yet, the acharya lineage passes from Sriman Nathamunigal to Swami Nammazhvar and on to Viswaksenar, Sri and Sriman Narayana.

Cheers!

 

[Nara]

....I am willing to close the chapter if you give me satisfactory reply or accept the latter statement.

Dear Shri RV sir, I have a great deal of respect for you. I appreciate the principled stand you take. I also like the umpire analogy you cited.

Umpires make mistakes sometimes. Hardly ever they admit they have made a mistake. But when Shri Praveen says, "....the admins and moderators are humans" I think he has been gracious.

Even though I have some complaints about some of the calls, on the whole I think the quality of umpiring in this forum is excellent. IMHO, free expression is not at all stifled here.

In any case, now Shri Silverfox has addressed your main complaint head-on. Therefore, I request you to accept this as a satisfactory conclusion to the disagreement.

Cheers and best regards...

 

[RVR]

Dear Sri Venkataramani:

Let me answer this on behalf of Praveen. Praveen, I hope this is ok with you. Praveen doesn't get involved in the day-today postings of members unless needed.
Why don't let us all put this behind us and move on? Let me say this: Members have the right to write about anybody - be it Paramacharyal or Sai Baba - and criticize them as long as we follow the norms and guidelines of this forum, which are: we shouldn't use derogatory words or name-calling, use respectful language even when criticizing, shouldn't write stuff without any factual proof. I agree that people in the public domain are fair game.
Let us move on.
Thank you for your continued participation.

Thanks Sri Silverfox,

This is what I want. I believe in the following statement of the father of the nation Mahatma Gandhi

"My belief in the Hindu scriptures does not require me to accept every word and every verse as divinely inspired .... I decline to be bound by any interpretation, however learned it may be, if it is repugnant to reason or moral sense"

I wish every Hindu follows the above.

I am not against anybody criticising Paramacharya. If we have to stop criticising people who are not alive now, then it ok. Otherwise I feel no body is above criticism.

In fact I have told both Sri Raghy and Ms.Happy Hindu that I am not objecting to their statement. I have objected only to the behavior of this forum administrators. Since I don't know who are all behind, I generally used the term administrators. I only posted my counter to Sri Praveen's reply. If he is not involved in the day to day functioning, it is ok.

I have listened EVR's speeches in my younger days. I voluntarily attended the meetings with an open mind that he is going to criticise us. But it has not allowed me to give up my faith in our religion, rituals and customs.

Let the forum follow the following statement of the eminent french writer.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" -- Voltaire

I would like to make the following suggestions and it is up to the administration to consider and take appropriate decisions.

1. The moderators should not participate in the discussions. They have to play the role of umpires and ensure fair play.

2. I know all the moderators will not be available all the time and may be only one moderator will be available at any point of time.

If the moderator present has some reservation about some postings, let him make the posting hidden for some time till internally discussed with other moderators.


3 If all the moderators are of the same opinion that the posting should not be put to public view, then call the member, discuss with him pointing the objectionable portions and give him an opportunity to correct it by himself.

There is nothing wrong if it takes time. Heavens are not going to fall in between. I am sure the member will not feel offended.

4. Once it is published, then removing the postings should be not be attempted. This morning I saw `vijay tv affair' closed. You can close the thread without allowing further discussions explaining the reasons.

5. I think all the moderators are outside India. I have nothing against moderators being outside India. But the local problems are quite different from the problems faced by our community outside India. If possible appoint a moderator within India, preferably within Tamilnadu, so that he can understand the local problems and mindset of the local members. May be right now more outside members are using the forum since internet penetration is low in India. But things are changing fast and I am sure more local members will participate in the discussions in the future.

Personally I have nothing against anybody including all the administrators of the forum and I wish the forum should grow much faster and bigger in the future.

I request the administrators to consider my above points and device rules and regulations so that no body is offended at the end of the day.

The following is my personal request to all the members and administrators.

I request all the members to consider the position of poor & downtrodden members of our community in Tamilnadu and India. Both State and Central Governments in India are not supporting them and unless we all support, they cannot come up in life. I am on the verge of my retirement and would like to spend my full time for the betterment of our community. I could immediately think of two specific areas - education and medical. Swayamvaram and other things will be mostly self financing and we don't have to spend anything from our pocket. Our resources may be limited and we have to use it effectively and efficiently.

I request all of you to consider the above

All the best

p.s. Hopefully I can revive my favourite topic on spiritual frauds

 

[RVR]

Dear Shri RV sir, I have a great deal of respect for you. I appreciate the principled stand you take. I also like the umpire analogy you cited.

Umpires make mistakes sometimes. Hardly ever they admit they have made a mistake. But when Shri Praveen says, "....the admins and moderators are humans" I think he has been gracious.

Even though I have some complaints about some of the calls, on the whole I think the quality of umpiring in this forum is excellent. IMHO, free expression is not at all stifled here.

In any case, now Shri Silverfox has addressed your main complaint head-on. Therefore, I request you to accept this as a satisfactory conclusion to the disagreement.



Cheers and best regards...

Prof Nara ji,

I have already replied. We will continue to debate, debate and debate :clap2:

All the best

 

[praveen]

Thanks Silverfox Appreciate the clarification.

Venkataramani,
Glad to get those feedbacks from you. The same will be discussed in the next few days and hopefully we will put an end to this once and for all.

Thank you

Let me not be in the way and i would like to read more on what is going to be discussed on this main topic