This is with ref; to Mr.Suraju06 post regarding Moola Nakchaththira girls. Instead of discussing the main point raised aiby me in the post he talked too about vaishnavite etc., Take it from me ,I am a pure vaishnavite first vaishnavite next . First you must read my post in detail and understand what I have posted in that. Wherefrom you got the message from my post that I am against moola nakchathtira girls. I only supported such girls should not be rejected. This man is talking too much about vaishnavism etc., I strongly object to this type of discussion beyond the main point in the post
Who is Mr Suraju to tell me about vaishnaism. I know vaishnavism better than that person.
First Mr.Suraju must withdraw his question "are you a vaishnavite"?
Second he might have studied so many texts of Jyothish sastra. I dont deny that. Then he must mind his language.
Go to my post again and read it carefully. I never mentioned anywhere in the post that moola nakshthira girls are not to be considered for marriage.
How then Mr. Suraju jumped to that conclusion?
As a member he got the right to reply but only to the point raised in the post.
But he should not stray away from the main point.
I am sure he will understand himself.
Who is Mr Suraju to tell me about vaishnaism. I know vaishnavism better than that person.
First Mr.Suraju must withdraw his question "are you a vaishnavite"?
Second he might have studied so many texts of Jyothish sastra. I dont deny that. Then he must mind his language.
Go to my post again and read it carefully. I never mentioned anywhere in the post that moola nakshthira girls are not to be considered for marriage.
How then Mr. Suraju jumped to that conclusion?
As a member he got the right to reply but only to the point raised in the post.
But he should not stray away from the main point.
I am sure he will understand himself.
