-
This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
-
Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
A Few Glimpses from South Indian History
- Thread starter sangom
- Start date
- Status
namaste suraju06.
Your query prompted me to search the Forum for curiosity sake. I found some posts. Do you mean these posts? My impressions in square brackets.
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/general-discussions/4598-most-dangerous-man.html#post51258
[Here the accusation seems more by emotional reaction on a presumption.]
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/general-discussions/1646-echos-partition.html#post14028
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/general-discussions/1646-echos-partition-2.html#post14036
[Heated exchange of words and accusations, and it is surprising that the member is not banned.]
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/politics-current-affairs/4302-caste-basis-census-2.html#post48366
[An instance of tolerance and good advice.]
Your query prompted me to search the Forum for curiosity sake. I found some posts. Do you mean these posts? My impressions in square brackets.
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/general-discussions/4598-most-dangerous-man.html#post51258
[Here the accusation seems more by emotional reaction on a presumption.]
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/general-discussions/1646-echos-partition.html#post14028
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/general-discussions/1646-echos-partition-2.html#post14036
[Heated exchange of words and accusations, and it is surprising that the member is not banned.]
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/politics-current-affairs/4302-caste-basis-census-2.html#post48366
[An instance of tolerance and good advice.]
OP
OP
sangom
0
Dear Shri Saidevo,
To recapitulate, the first point raised by you in post #310 that :
"• You are wrong to say that it was just tolerance among the public for the Sanskrit-based worship of the brahmins. For your information, there was a Tamizh king by name PerunaRkiLLi who performed the rAjasUya yajna, so he was known by the title 'rAjasUyam vETTa PerunaRkiLLi'. Another king, by name Peruvazhudhi, performed many yanjas, and came to be known with the title 'palyAgasAlai mudukuDumi Peruvazhudhi'.
Perunarkilli - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Purananuru- Sangam Literary Work of India"
A reference to one or two kings with the honorifics indicating their having performed yagas shows only that much; namely, the said kings were lenient to the vedic brahmans who believed in the sacrificial religion. It does not necessarily follow that the general populace followed that religious faith or that they wholeheartedly accepted that religion.
U.V. Swaminatha Iyer's commentary (உரை) gives the following information about puṟanāṉūṟu :
Minor deities referred to:
சிறு தெய்வங்கள் :- கள்ளிநீழற் கடவுள், கூளி, நடுகற்றெய்வம், பேய், பேய்ப்பெண்டிர், பேய்மகள், பேயாயம்
ciṟu teyvaṅkaḷ :- kaḷḷinīḻaṟ kaṭavuḷ, kūḷi, naṭukaṟṟeyvam, pey, peyppeṇṭir, peymakaḷ, peyāyam
Customs:
பிணத்தைத்தாழியாற்கவித்துப் புதைத்தல், வெறியாடல்
piṇattaittāḻiyāṟkavittup putaittal, veṟiyāṭal
Legends:
ஆலமரம், சுடுகாடு, தூண், மலை இவர்ரில் தெய்வங்கலுண்டென்றல்; மேல்கடல் பழையதென்பது
ālamaram, cuṭukāṭu, tūṇ, malai ivarril teyvaṅkaluṇṭeṉṟal; melkaṭal paḻaiyateṉpatu
To me, these details indicate that at least the lower strata of the society — which perhaps included most groups other than aracar & antaṇar — must have been following a different religion, different customs and believing in certain legends of their own. Only a detailed reading of all the verses will confirm whether these godheads, customs and legends were accepted by the brahmans or antaṇar also, in their life, as an integral and seamless constituent group of the sangam Tamil society. If they had accepted these in those days, it looks like later there must have been a great departure between the antaṇar and the rest in these matters.
I find from the commentary (உரை) of Ouvai Cu. Duraiswami Pillai, the undernoted observation which may have a bearing on the point:
"இவ்வாறு சான்றோர் பலர் மூவேந்தரும் ஒருமை மனத்தவராய் வாழ வேண்டுமென வற்புறுத்தியும், அவர் அவ்வன்புறையை மறந்து பொருது கெட்டனர்; கெடவே, வடநாட்டு வடவரும், களப்பிரரும், வடுகரும், மோரியரும், பல்லவரும், துருக்கரும் மேலைநாட்டு வெள்ளையருமாகப் பலர் புகுந்து தமிழகத்து அரசியல், சமயம், மொழி, பொருணிலை, சமுதாயம் முதலியவாழ்க்கைக் கூறுகளையழித்துத் தமிழர் என்றும் பிறர்க்கே யுழைத்து ஏழையாகும் இழி நிலையை யுண்டாக்கி விட்டனர்."
(Though many sages had thus advised the triumvirate of Tamizh kings to live amicably, they fought among themselves and destroyed themselves. Consequently, many like the vadavas from the north, kalabhras, mauryas, pallavas, turks, the white westerners, etc., encroached (invaded) and destroyed the beauty of Tamizhakam's polity, religion, language, economy, society, etc., and created a situation in which the Tamils always were enslaved and impoverished.)
I do not know to whom the words "vadavas from the north" refers to, but it seems the commentator subscribes to the view that infiltrators from the north also were cause of destruction of beauty of Tamizhakam's polity, religion, language, economy, society, etc.
(Note: Due to a demise of one of my close relatives, I may not be able to get time for typing my comments on the remaining points, in the next few days. I am posting this part reply so that an impression is not created as if I have run away.)
To recapitulate, the first point raised by you in post #310 that :
"• You are wrong to say that it was just tolerance among the public for the Sanskrit-based worship of the brahmins. For your information, there was a Tamizh king by name PerunaRkiLLi who performed the rAjasUya yajna, so he was known by the title 'rAjasUyam vETTa PerunaRkiLLi'. Another king, by name Peruvazhudhi, performed many yanjas, and came to be known with the title 'palyAgasAlai mudukuDumi Peruvazhudhi'.
Perunarkilli - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Purananuru- Sangam Literary Work of India"
A reference to one or two kings with the honorifics indicating their having performed yagas shows only that much; namely, the said kings were lenient to the vedic brahmans who believed in the sacrificial religion. It does not necessarily follow that the general populace followed that religious faith or that they wholeheartedly accepted that religion.
U.V. Swaminatha Iyer's commentary (உரை) gives the following information about puṟanāṉūṟu :
Minor deities referred to:
சிறு தெய்வங்கள் :- கள்ளிநீழற் கடவுள், கூளி, நடுகற்றெய்வம், பேய், பேய்ப்பெண்டிர், பேய்மகள், பேயாயம்
ciṟu teyvaṅkaḷ :- kaḷḷinīḻaṟ kaṭavuḷ, kūḷi, naṭukaṟṟeyvam, pey, peyppeṇṭir, peymakaḷ, peyāyam
Customs:
பிணத்தைத்தாழியாற்கவித்துப் புதைத்தல், வெறியாடல்
piṇattaittāḻiyāṟkavittup putaittal, veṟiyāṭal
Legends:
ஆலமரம், சுடுகாடு, தூண், மலை இவர்ரில் தெய்வங்கலுண்டென்றல்; மேல்கடல் பழையதென்பது
ālamaram, cuṭukāṭu, tūṇ, malai ivarril teyvaṅkaluṇṭeṉṟal; melkaṭal paḻaiyateṉpatu
To me, these details indicate that at least the lower strata of the society — which perhaps included most groups other than aracar & antaṇar — must have been following a different religion, different customs and believing in certain legends of their own. Only a detailed reading of all the verses will confirm whether these godheads, customs and legends were accepted by the brahmans or antaṇar also, in their life, as an integral and seamless constituent group of the sangam Tamil society. If they had accepted these in those days, it looks like later there must have been a great departure between the antaṇar and the rest in these matters.
I find from the commentary (உரை) of Ouvai Cu. Duraiswami Pillai, the undernoted observation which may have a bearing on the point:
"இவ்வாறு சான்றோர் பலர் மூவேந்தரும் ஒருமை மனத்தவராய் வாழ வேண்டுமென வற்புறுத்தியும், அவர் அவ்வன்புறையை மறந்து பொருது கெட்டனர்; கெடவே, வடநாட்டு வடவரும், களப்பிரரும், வடுகரும், மோரியரும், பல்லவரும், துருக்கரும் மேலைநாட்டு வெள்ளையருமாகப் பலர் புகுந்து தமிழகத்து அரசியல், சமயம், மொழி, பொருணிலை, சமுதாயம் முதலியவாழ்க்கைக் கூறுகளையழித்துத் தமிழர் என்றும் பிறர்க்கே யுழைத்து ஏழையாகும் இழி நிலையை யுண்டாக்கி விட்டனர்."
(Though many sages had thus advised the triumvirate of Tamizh kings to live amicably, they fought among themselves and destroyed themselves. Consequently, many like the vadavas from the north, kalabhras, mauryas, pallavas, turks, the white westerners, etc., encroached (invaded) and destroyed the beauty of Tamizhakam's polity, religion, language, economy, society, etc., and created a situation in which the Tamils always were enslaved and impoverished.)
I do not know to whom the words "vadavas from the north" refers to, but it seems the commentator subscribes to the view that infiltrators from the north also were cause of destruction of beauty of Tamizhakam's polity, religion, language, economy, society, etc.
(Note: Due to a demise of one of my close relatives, I may not be able to get time for typing my comments on the remaining points, in the next few days. I am posting this part reply so that an impression is not created as if I have run away.)
S
ShivKC
Guest
Looks like there exists 2 sets rule book.
http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/philosophy-scriptures/2222-purushasuktam-varna-15.html
Post 145/146
01-06-2010 01:36 PM #146 happyhindu
Happyhindu writes back
if any one counter asks the identity, you will be warned. thats what the rule book says, I guess
namaste shrI Sangom.
My heartfelt condolences about the demise of your close relative. May BhagavAn grant the departed soul Atma-shAnti.
Thank you for taking the trouble to present some points supporting your views, I appreciate that. I also appreciate shrI Nara's advice in his latest post. As brahmins have been a part of Tamizh society since the Sangham period, and they never treated the other castes as inferior until in the recent past, my views are about finding evidences to their mutual understanding in the daily life they lived, although the three Kings were at each other's throats more often than not.
Inasmuch as tempers had run high and ugly on many occasions in the past and considering that many leading posters have been guilty of it at one time or another as can be found from the archives of TBF, Edtd - KRS. So, I have decided to remain silent from posting further here, at least for sometime--I don't know for how long.
Thank you both once again for your views. I wish you all the best in your progressive endeavours.
Dear Sri Saidevo Ji, I do not understand this penchant for not heeding to the Moderator's directive. If you want to be silent, that is your choice - KRS
My heartfelt condolences about the demise of your close relative. May BhagavAn grant the departed soul Atma-shAnti.
Thank you for taking the trouble to present some points supporting your views, I appreciate that. I also appreciate shrI Nara's advice in his latest post. As brahmins have been a part of Tamizh society since the Sangham period, and they never treated the other castes as inferior until in the recent past, my views are about finding evidences to their mutual understanding in the daily life they lived, although the three Kings were at each other's throats more often than not.
Inasmuch as tempers had run high and ugly on many occasions in the past and considering that many leading posters have been guilty of it at one time or another as can be found from the archives of TBF, Edtd - KRS. So, I have decided to remain silent from posting further here, at least for sometime--I don't know for how long.
Thank you both once again for your views. I wish you all the best in your progressive endeavours.
Dear Sri Saidevo Ji, I do not understand this penchant for not heeding to the Moderator's directive. If you want to be silent, that is your choice - KRS
Last edited by a moderator:
N
Nara
Guest
Dear Saidevo, I don't want to express any opinion on the issue itself, but I feel your above comment must be put in the proper context. If this is a violation of Shri KRS's admonishment that this matter is closed, I request him to delete my post, or I can withdraw the post myself.
IMO, going personal is never a good idea. Doing it repeatedly has no excuse. Doing it even after a warning from a moderator is perplexing. If this behavior is permitted nobody would take the moderators seriously. The member in question said those who espouse a view that he opposed vehemently are morally bankrupt. I think it would be very difficult to find anything that is more serious than this expressed here, at least in the 18 months I have been here. For this, he was only given a warning, not banned. But he repeated it again and again. If no action was taken at this point I feel moderators will have no voice.
We have all had at one point or other felt wronged and wanted to leave the forum. I was the last one to feel that way. These things have a way of working themselves out. We love the word duel and that is why we congregate here. So, I hope you won't remain silent for long. If you wish, take a brief vacation of sorts from the forum, but do come back ASAP, who will I fight with otherwise
? Cheers!
I am letting this stand as the message itself is not about what happened, even though it cites it. Let us not discuss this any further here. If you still feel you have an issue, I can be contacted through the PM.- KRS
Last edited by a moderator:
Dear Sri suraju06 Ji,
Who called whom a 'coward' and when in what context or is this a theoretical question?
Banning anyone here is a serious matter and depends on the context.
Regards,
KRS
Who called whom a 'coward' and when in what context or is this a theoretical question?
Banning anyone here is a serious matter and depends on the context.
Regards,
KRS
N
Nara
Guest
Shri KRS, I did, I think twice, if my memory serves me right. Once it was SuryaKasyapa who had made a snide innuendo against me, calling me a necessary evil. I said passing such innuendos with thinly veiled plausible deniability is an act of a coward. The second time was a similar circumstance of hiding behind deniability but leaving no doubt who the intended innuendo was directed at and this time it was Shri suraju06 himself.
Saidevo has provided the link for the first one. The second one can be found in the archives, but I don't want to spend the time to look for it.
Cheers!
Folks,
In the past, when I was absent, lots of things were said in the heat of the moment. From what I understand, Sri Praveen Ji gave out several infractions to several folks. He also posted a long message expressing his frustration.
When I came back again from my illness, as far as I am concerned, the slate is clean. Moderation will be applied to the current situation. We do not need to go back.
Regards,
KRS
In the past, when I was absent, lots of things were said in the heat of the moment. From what I understand, Sri Praveen Ji gave out several infractions to several folks. He also posted a long message expressing his frustration.
When I came back again from my illness, as far as I am concerned, the slate is clean. Moderation will be applied to the current situation. We do not need to go back.
Regards,
KRS
Shri KRS Ji,
The above post by ShivKC is twisted out of context. Anyone can go thru the thread on Purusha Suktam and read the thread in entiriety. The context of me and Anand conversing on that thread is totally different from ShivKC repeatedly hounding me for me identity in the thread http://www.tamilbrahmins.com/genera...-aryan-invasion-interpretting-scriptures.html
Regards.
N
Nara
Guest
Dear happy, I think you should not worry about what ShivKC says. You are well known for your knowledge, and how articulate you are. Reasonable people in the forum surely have noticed that this gentleman has been going after you, for whatever reason best known to himself. I think the best thing to do is give him a long rope, and knowing how he behaves, will surely hang himself, figuratively speaking of course.
Cheers!
This is exactly what Vivek was advocating--"not to look back" and "go forward" with svadharma as much as we can, as brahmins today have moderated themselves . Poor fellow, Vivek, he did not know that it was alright to lose temper when a time interval separates it, because time heals, and that he should have spoken figuratively as our friend Nara has done in post no.337.
I am losing patience with this endless postings. This is the final warning. If any of you again talk about Sri Vivek-V Ji, your post will be unceremoniously deleted and infractions issued. - KRS
I am losing patience with this endless postings. This is the final warning. If any of you again talk about Sri Vivek-V Ji, your post will be unceremoniously deleted and infractions issued. - KRS
Last edited by a moderator:
Sri Saidevo Ji, Sri ShivKC Ji, Sri Swami TaBra Ji and Sri tbs Ji,
I deleted all your posts above because they violated my directive not to bring up the ouster of Sri Vivek-v ji here. Professor Nara Ji, when he responded at least had the courtesy to request me that I may delete his post if it violated my previous directive.
But that does not seem to be the case with any of you. You all seem to think that you have every right to violate my directive, as Sri Vivek-v Ji did. This is not acceptable.
I am shocked that a senior like Sri Saidevo Ji (whom I have known as a Forum contributor, not only here, but at Kanchi Forum as well, will question the moderation.
Rest, I am not surprised. Especially the supposedly veda trained ex soldier Sri TBS Ji.
I have not banned any of you. But this can not continue. If you keep it up, I will take action.
Regards,
KRS
I deleted all your posts above because they violated my directive not to bring up the ouster of Sri Vivek-v ji here. Professor Nara Ji, when he responded at least had the courtesy to request me that I may delete his post if it violated my previous directive.
But that does not seem to be the case with any of you. You all seem to think that you have every right to violate my directive, as Sri Vivek-v Ji did. This is not acceptable.
I am shocked that a senior like Sri Saidevo Ji (whom I have known as a Forum contributor, not only here, but at Kanchi Forum as well, will question the moderation.
Rest, I am not surprised. Especially the supposedly veda trained ex soldier Sri TBS Ji.
I have not banned any of you. But this can not continue. If you keep it up, I will take action.
Regards,
KRS
Last edited:
S
ShivKC
Guest
im sure you would come transparent here, and reply to my post, than deleting it .thank u
if have comprehended things wrongly, pls correct me.
Okay Sri Shiv KC Ji, Let me correct you. But first I have deleted the rest of your posting here, because it again referred back to my original directive and the reasons that Sri Saidevo Ji has given tracing back to it. Sri Saidevo Ji, who I personally like by the way, because of his treasure of knowledge about our scriptures, just did not follow my instructions. He had other avenues available - he could have PMed me, but instead he took the route of questioning the Moderator's authority and judgement.
Folks here know that I liked Sri Vivek-v Ji. He is a young man with passion. But again, he did not listen to the Moderator's voice. A Forum like this just can not allow that. I tried to tell him not to do it when I sensed he was going to do it, after he did it I asked him twice to think about his words and yet he would not comply. Even after I banned him, and the s/w had the glitch, he still would not take his word back, which was clearly a direct invective against Sri Sangom Ji. When a Moderator tells you something in the interest of the Forum and if you keep on not heeding it - there can only be one conclusion drawn - you are wedded to your own ideas ideas so much you do not give a damn about other different ideas and actually see those folks with opposing ideas as your enemy. This just is not acceptable.
When you and others started questioning our decision to ban him, I clearly said that i will not allow it, because I saw all the acrimony from the past. Yet, despite my request, several folks, including you violated that edict, including Professor Nara Ji. The only reason I let the Professor's post there was because it reflected my own thinking and it explained why I banned Sri Vivek-v Ji.
I just can not have a situation anymore in this Forum, where the decisions of the Moderator is questioned. I gave enough warnings. And I have not banned anyone after Sri Vivek-v Ji.
I do not want anyone quitting, but I am not going to beg them not to quit if they do not understand the basic rule of a civilized Forum - listen to the Moderator.
Regards,
KRS
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
OP
sangom
0
Thank you, Shri Kunjuppu.
sravna
Well-known member
Dear Shri KRS Ji,
Even as one who has a great admiration for you in the way you have strived to maintain civility in the forum as a moderator, I am more than a little surprised in the way some voices have been muffled in the recent past. It is my humble opinion that one cannot be too picky in the way a member has to express his views or what he should say as each puts across his views in his own style and it is this clash of diversities that make spending time on this forum educative and worthwhile.The issue of deference to age, for example matters less in exchanges in a forum unless there is blatant rudeness in the way a member communicates. So, it is my humble opinion again that some latitude should be allowed in judging whether something crosses the limits of civility.
I request you to not take this as questioning your judgements but take it as a perspective like those of some others which differs from yours. But eventually you are the boss in deciding what to allow and not allow.
Dear Sri Sravana Ji,
Thank you for your post. But please understand that there have been upheavals in this Forum in my absence and mainly due to two opposing camps not being able to have civil conversations with each other.
I just can not let it continue.
We do not expel folks without reasons, because it goes aginst the purpose of this Forum - to have the widest and the biggest audience. But we just can not have folks, who think that they can run roughshod over the Moderator.
My personal views tend to be conservative. But then the orthodox of our community are intent on polarizing this Forum at the personal level - as a Moderator I can not allow that.
Unless these folks understand that this Forum is for all views, I have a job to do - to correct this.
Regards,
KRS
Even as one who has a great admiration for you in the way you have strived to maintain civility in the forum as a moderator, I am more than a little surprised in the way some voices have been muffled in the recent past. It is my humble opinion that one cannot be too picky in the way a member has to express his views or what he should say as each puts across his views in his own style and it is this clash of diversities that make spending time on this forum educative and worthwhile.The issue of deference to age, for example matters less in exchanges in a forum unless there is blatant rudeness in the way a member communicates. So, it is my humble opinion again that some latitude should be allowed in judging whether something crosses the limits of civility.
I request you to not take this as questioning your judgements but take it as a perspective like those of some others which differs from yours. But eventually you are the boss in deciding what to allow and not allow.
Dear Sri Sravana Ji,
Thank you for your post. But please understand that there have been upheavals in this Forum in my absence and mainly due to two opposing camps not being able to have civil conversations with each other.
I just can not let it continue.
We do not expel folks without reasons, because it goes aginst the purpose of this Forum - to have the widest and the biggest audience. But we just can not have folks, who think that they can run roughshod over the Moderator.
My personal views tend to be conservative. But then the orthodox of our community are intent on polarizing this Forum at the personal level - as a Moderator I can not allow that.
Unless these folks understand that this Forum is for all views, I have a job to do - to correct this.
Regards,
KRS
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status
Share this page
Share this page
Latest ads
-
For rent [Property for Rent] 1st Floor Independent House In AdambakkamIndependent House 1st Floor
- Bav2003 (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
- Expires
-
Wanted Need of a Brahmin lady cook in AdambakkamRequire a Brahmin female cook in 40s to 60 to cook for a family of 4 adults +2 kids in...
- LakshmiRajesh (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
-
Wanted Need Brahmin cook for homeBrahmin cook needed to make breakfast and lunch at home (Mylapore) for 4 people. Please text...
- ram1618 (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
-
-