-
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.
- Status
Story tellers would start with any assumption and conclude their story with what they want to say. But if someone has to consider this statement with any seriousness then one has to look for the records which pre-date the others as the earliest idea formation period of a concept.
Ganapathi artharva-sheershopanishat of atharva veda is a set of hymns dedicated to Lord Ganapathi including the usual set of adjectives like eadanta, vakra tunda, lambodhara etc. supposedly predate all the fanciful theories of dirt or turmeric.
So buddhist vinayaka, various tantra ganapathis and the jain-dhirasara door frame ganapathi look alike has to predate the atharvasheersha to give any credence to your fanciful idea to have it declared that Lord Ganapathi ais a tribal God.
I have quoted the Ganapathi atharvasheersha only to bring to your notice how quickly you jump the gun with only half baked knowledge to declare that Aitareya brahmanam is the only vedic text recounting about Lord Ganapathi and start to weave your imagination as a beautiful fabric.
In view of the above it does not appear to be so but then you are entitled to your fancies as long as you do not parade it as a fact.
P.S.: Not interested in your diversionary tactics of trayee-veda and atharva not being a part of the original veda etc. This forum is full of your stuff on that matter.
No, you are mistaken. I too would wish that you continue as an active contributor to this forum. Some of your posts are chanda mama stories for grown ups.
V
V.Balasubramani
Guest
Sir,
Pranams,
Thanx for sharing the information.
With regards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Ishvarah Sarvabhuthanam hriddese tishthati"
Last edited by a moderator:
prasad1
Active member
Chanda Mama stories were benign, they were not sermonizing to the illiterates. We all learn and share our opinions, sometimes forcefully, but not to rub others face in the dirt.
Any idea in whose reign this was build? Whilst the elephant head is puranic and the atharva shiras is tantric, the human head Vinayaka (minus the elephant head) is supposedly indo-aryan, so am curious who got this built.....
lol, you are casting me in the same mold as yours -- however, let me remind you, am not a brahman believer in imaginative tales of puranas, itihasas and such like.so the ganapati atharva shiras predates the puranic fanciful theories?? nice...but i expect proof please..
really? please elaborate on the atharva shiras please...
oh my, it appears you are jumping to conclusions. And those who accuse others overlook their own indignant religious bias. Tch tch....I thought the brahmanas (texts) were composed before the upanishads. Anyways, will wait for your records on the atharva shiras imagery / concept of brahman/brahaspati and the upanishad on it.Am free to post what i have come across. You need not bother about it. If it bothers you, do not read it. For facts to matter, you need to prove your statements on the atharva shiras please.
Who cares... If it so bothers you, please prove the trayee-vedas followed the same culture as atharva in respect to idol worship. Prove the atharva were part of the trayee-vedas. If only the difference started and ended with idol-worship, but anyways...
Lol, this is the best joke. Just that claims from you of not wanting a ban are not taken seriously,...and it does not matter / bother in anyway...so well...but may i remind you that am bunking chandamama stories which are considered "religion" such as certain cock-and-bull stories of puranas.....
Last edited:
I thot usernames like staunch_iyengar was one of the avatars of ramanujan... or no? any idea where he is now?Banning is not at all a big deal in our forum, right?
It might be compared to the 'end' of a phoenix bird!
P.S: I still remember many avtArs of Ramanujan!
prasad1
Active member
"Aadhi Vinayakar"
VELUDHARAN's TEMPLES VISIT: August 2012
After Paranthaka-1, his second son of Kandaraditha Chozha (A.D.950-957) ascended the Chozha throne after being a co-regent with Paranthaka Chozha from A.D.953. Though he was formally the all powerful Chozha king his thoughts were always around God Siva and about leading an austere religious life. He inspired the composition of the famous religious hymns in Tamil known as "Thiruvisaippa" which have been included in the ninth Thirumurai of Thevaram.)
http://www.medhajournal.com/partha-says.../613-parashurama-kshetra-part-5.html
VELUDHARAN's TEMPLES VISIT: August 2012
After Paranthaka-1, his second son of Kandaraditha Chozha (A.D.950-957) ascended the Chozha throne after being a co-regent with Paranthaka Chozha from A.D.953. Though he was formally the all powerful Chozha king his thoughts were always around God Siva and about leading an austere religious life. He inspired the composition of the famous religious hymns in Tamil known as "Thiruvisaippa" which have been included in the ninth Thirumurai of Thevaram.)
http://www.medhajournal.com/partha-says.../613-parashurama-kshetra-part-5.html
Last edited:
Many thanks prasad. Will look up details on this particular chola prince...
According to Kshatriya kula veera vanniyars, they are the first to bring Ganapathy to Tamil Nadu after they helped Pallavas defeat Chalukyas. According to them, there was no Ganapathy worship in TN before the defeat of Chalukya king Pulikesi in Baadhaami and it is those veera vanniyars who brought Ganapthy from baadhaami to TN and named it Vaathaapi Ganapathy. Is this true account? Was there no Ganapthy worship in TN before 6th or 7th century?
prasad1
Active member
Karpaka Vinayagar Temple is a 1600 year old Ganesha temple, located at Pillayarpatti, near Karaikudi, Sivagangai District of Tamil Nadu. Popularly known as Pillayarpatti Temple, Arulmigu Karpaga Vinayagar temple is one of the oldest cave temples in Tamil Nadu, India. The presiding deity, Desi Vinayaka Pillaiyar or Karpaka Vinayakar, is a 6 foot tall bas-relief carved out of an excavated cave. Lord Ganesh is seen with two arms and a trunk curled towards his right side (Valampuri Vinayagar).
Karpaka Vinayagar Temple Pillayarpatti Tamilnadu | Hindu Devotional Blog
The Rock Fort Temple, or Ucchi Pillayar Koil, is a combination of two famous 7th century Hindu temples, one dedicated to Lord Ganesh and the other dedicated to Lord Shiva. It is located on top, and carved into, a huge rock in Trichy.
Trichy?s famous "Rock Fort" Temple ? Tamil Nadu, India | Living in the Embrace of Arunachala
[video=youtube;d_aXfsYFYb0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=d_aXfsYFYb0[/video]
Ganesha emerged as a distinct deity in the 4th and 5th centuries CE, during the Gupta Period, although he inherited traits from Vedic and pre-Vedic precursors. He was formally included among the five primary deities of Smartism (a Hindu denomination) in the 9th century. A sect of devotees called the Ganapatya arose, who identified Ganesha as the supreme deity. The principal scriptures dedicated to Ganesha are the Ganesha Purana, theMudgala Purana, and the Ganapati Atharvashirsa.
Stories about Ganesha often occur in the Puranic corpus. Brown notes while the Puranas "defy precise chronological ordering", the more detailed narratives of Ganesha's life are in the late texts, c. 600–1300. Yuvraj Krishan says that the Puranic myths about the birth of Ganesha and how he acquired an elephant's head are in the later Puranas, which were composed from c. 600 onwards. He elaborates on the matter to say that references to Ganesha in the earlier Puranas, such as the Vayu and Brahmanda Puranas, are later interpolations made during the 7th to 10th centuries.
In his survey of Ganesha's rise to prominence in Sanskrit literature, Ludo Rocher notes that:
Above all, one cannot help being struck by the fact that the numerous stories surrounding Gaṇeśa concentrate on an unexpectedly limited number of incidents. These incidents are mainly three: his birth and parenthood, his elephant head, and his single tusk. Other incidents are touched on in the texts, but to a far lesser extent.
Ganesha's rise to prominence was codified in the 9th century, when he was formally included as one of the five primary deities of Smartism. The 9th century philosopher Śaṅkarācārya popularized the "worship of the five forms" (pañcāyatana pūjā) system among orthodox Brahmins of the Smarta tradition. This worship practice invokes the five deities Ganesha, Vishnu, Shiva, Devī, and Sūrya. Śaṅkarācārya instituted the tradition primarily to unite the principal deities of these five major sects on an equal status. This formalized the role of Ganesha as a complementary deity.
.........
According to Ellawala, the elephant-headed Ganesha as lord of the Ganas was known to the people of Sri Lanka in the early pre-Christian era.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganesh
Karpaka Vinayagar Temple Pillayarpatti Tamilnadu | Hindu Devotional Blog
The Rock Fort Temple, or Ucchi Pillayar Koil, is a combination of two famous 7th century Hindu temples, one dedicated to Lord Ganesh and the other dedicated to Lord Shiva. It is located on top, and carved into, a huge rock in Trichy.
Trichy?s famous "Rock Fort" Temple ? Tamil Nadu, India | Living in the Embrace of Arunachala
[video=youtube;d_aXfsYFYb0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=d_aXfsYFYb0[/video]
Ganesha emerged as a distinct deity in the 4th and 5th centuries CE, during the Gupta Period, although he inherited traits from Vedic and pre-Vedic precursors. He was formally included among the five primary deities of Smartism (a Hindu denomination) in the 9th century. A sect of devotees called the Ganapatya arose, who identified Ganesha as the supreme deity. The principal scriptures dedicated to Ganesha are the Ganesha Purana, theMudgala Purana, and the Ganapati Atharvashirsa.
Stories about Ganesha often occur in the Puranic corpus. Brown notes while the Puranas "defy precise chronological ordering", the more detailed narratives of Ganesha's life are in the late texts, c. 600–1300. Yuvraj Krishan says that the Puranic myths about the birth of Ganesha and how he acquired an elephant's head are in the later Puranas, which were composed from c. 600 onwards. He elaborates on the matter to say that references to Ganesha in the earlier Puranas, such as the Vayu and Brahmanda Puranas, are later interpolations made during the 7th to 10th centuries.
In his survey of Ganesha's rise to prominence in Sanskrit literature, Ludo Rocher notes that:
Above all, one cannot help being struck by the fact that the numerous stories surrounding Gaṇeśa concentrate on an unexpectedly limited number of incidents. These incidents are mainly three: his birth and parenthood, his elephant head, and his single tusk. Other incidents are touched on in the texts, but to a far lesser extent.
Ganesha's rise to prominence was codified in the 9th century, when he was formally included as one of the five primary deities of Smartism. The 9th century philosopher Śaṅkarācārya popularized the "worship of the five forms" (pañcāyatana pūjā) system among orthodox Brahmins of the Smarta tradition. This worship practice invokes the five deities Ganesha, Vishnu, Shiva, Devī, and Sūrya. Śaṅkarācārya instituted the tradition primarily to unite the principal deities of these five major sects on an equal status. This formalized the role of Ganesha as a complementary deity.
.........
According to Ellawala, the elephant-headed Ganesha as lord of the Ganas was known to the people of Sri Lanka in the early pre-Christian era.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganesh
Last edited:
Of course you are a fanciful story teller. My post nails your lie. The post is silly and the silly smiliey makes it sillier.
You have severe comprehension problems, dont you? You tom-tommed the various puranas and buddhist literature. You furnish their dates and their authorities. Thereafter I will give the details of ganapati atharva=sheersha upanishat.
c
Why? You are a google master. Just google as you are wont to and you will get the sanskrit version, sanskrit transliteration and english meanings too. In case you cannot find then revert back/. I will give the google link, the area of your speciality/
The silly looking smiley cannot hide the fact that you exhibited your half baked knowledge with a gusto. You said that only vedic reference is Aitareya brahmanam and I have given another reference to the vedic source. You can keep the tom foolery apart regarding which is first, brahmanam or upanishad. The reference of upanishad was given to hit the nail on the head of your blatant lie that aitareya brahmanam is the only source of ganapathi.
Of course you are free to post any fanciful idea that you conjure up in your mind. But as i said in the last post, if you parade it as a fact it will get rebuttals.
You yourselves know you are being downright silly. When you do not even know the existence of ganapathi atharvasheersha what are you going to know about the culture of that period.
By the way do you have even an idea of the probable date of the first puranam? lol
I thought as much. You are in the process of composing chanda mama stories. Earlier you just used to carry the chanda mama stores but these days you are busy writing them. Have a good time. lol
N
Nara
Guest
Narayan, I don't understand the point of such vitriol. It appears your objection is to the statement, "Incidentally, the story of Ganesha's birth from dirt off Parvati's skin is also found in Aitareya Brahmana (the only 'vedic' text recounting the story). " Your response is that there is another vedic reference to vinayaka, "including the usual set of adjectives like eadanta, vakra tunda, lambodhara etc. supposedly predate all the fanciful theories of dirt or turmeric. "
Is this is the basis on which you say Palindrome lies, her ideas are fanciful, she uses silly looking smilies, she makes up chandamama stories?
If you look at what she said in the first place it appears what you are saying does not contradict her at all. She says the "dirt" story is found only in Aitrayea Brahmana, and you are saying artharva-sheershopanishat has hymns praising Vinayaka but does not refer to "dirt" story. So, unless I am completely mistaken, if so let me know, you are not contradicting her at all, yet you have jumped off the handle calling her unnecessarily nasty names.
What is the matter with you guys? Do you have to be so downright obnoxious if you don't agree with something? Stop with this nonsense. Have your say, but enough with this detestable calumny....
Of course you are a fanciful story teller. My post nails your lie. The post is silly and the silly smiliey makes it sillier.
You have severe comprehension problems, dont you? You tom-tommed the various puranas and buddhist literature. You furnish their dates and their authorities. Thereafter I will give the details of ganapati atharva=sheersha upanishat.
c
Why? You are a google master. Just google as you are wont to and you will get the sanskrit version, sanskrit transliteration and english meanings too. In case you cannot find then revert back/. I will give the google link, the area of your speciality/
The silly looking smiley cannot hide the fact that you exhibited your half baked knowledge with a gusto. You said that only vedic reference is Aitareya brahmanam and I have given another reference to the vedic source. You can keep the tom foolery apart regarding which is first, brahmanam or upanishad. The reference of upanishad was given to hit the nail on the head of your blatant lie that aitareya brahmanam is the only source of ganapathi.
Of course you are free to post any fanciful idea that you conjure up in your mind. But as i said in the last post, if you parade it as a fact it will get rebuttals.
You yourselves know you are being downright silly. When you do not even know the existence of ganapathi atharvasheersha what are you going to know about the culture of that period.
By the way do you have even an idea of the probable date of the first puranam? lol
I thought as much. You are in the process of composing chanda mama stories. Earlier you just used to carry the chanda mama stores but these days you are busy writing them. Have a good time. lol
expected this. What else to expect from your likes? Btw its not just me smiling or grinning. All these accusations, insults, wild vitriolic probably indicate you have no idea about the atharva shiras upanishad. Also proves you have no access to the details of atharva shiras concept / imagery / mantra tradition / conceptualization of brahman and vinayaka as brihaspati, and so on. Let me tell you jstor may help but you do not like western scholars so well, leave it aside.
But then you accuse and claim that i am contradicting you. Anyways, since you need to prove (1) the atharva shirashopanishad is 'vedic' and predates all other narratives of ganesha's origin, (2) that atharva is just like the trayee-vedic and hence 'vedic' tradition according to you -- why not you present your evidence?? maybe going to a ganapatya priest near your home may help, i suspect the average priest may know much better than you do.
After you present your evidence, let the readership decide what are chandamama stories.....as for dates of puranas, starting from early puranas, look up my old posts, or read some books (all pretty well documented by various historians including indians like kane -- but all that may unfortunately make the indignant religious uncomfortable)...in any case, making yourself silly does not help in any manner...
Last edited:
I wud not want to go into claims made by present day communities (or on their self-entitlements). A similar claim is made by some vellalar families i know of -- they claim they are ganapatyas and that the god belongs to them. Have also heard of nagarathars making the same claim. So well...கால பைரவன்;206051 said:
Anyways, coming to the origin of present-day Ganesha, it appears the story of fixing elephant head predates the reign of hala (according to the book shankara and shanmata of the edition mentioned in my previous post in this thread). Hala was a Satavahana king who ruled between 19 to 24 AD in a region of present day Andhra. Incidentally his wife was from Ceylon..
We have so many times heard the mantra gananaAm tva ganapatim havamahe....
Appears there are various versions of this deity. However, there is very little research if they all refer to the same person or to different characters.
While the word ganapati occurs in rigveda, the meaning is literal as the "head of ganas" (gana supposedly means wise people). Apparently the word referred to the head of angirasas. According to Y Krishan, the word refers to brahmanaspati not to the classical ganesha.
Various puranas give various accounts of ganesha's origin. The story of elephant head and from dirt off shakti's skin is not there in the veda samhitas afaik (at least from what have read so far...only the maitrayani samhita of yajur explicitly uses the word "hastimukhaya vidmahe..." to indicate an elephant head - it is the fourth of 11 gayatris and am yet to know when it was written). We had earlier discussed keith's dating of krishna yajur but not sure that helps...
Anyways, since the elephant head story is puranic and since the indo-aryan bhils worship the ganesha form minus the elephant head; the elephant head version is supposed to have an indian geographical origin. Various samhitas of the yajur, as such, were composed in various geographical origins with the maitreyani samhita having an origin to the south of kurukshetra. So the origin is pretty native.
You may like the book "Ganesa: unravelling an enigma" by Y Krishan. Remember we had discussed Y Krishan's paper on buddhism? Back then i downloaded all papers by Yuvraj Krishan that i could find on jstor. There was one interesting paper called "is ganesa a vedic god?".
In that paper, Y Krishan presents a lot of evidence from various scriptures. He tries to make a distinction between various deities but seems lost after the initial explanations. The author fails to present sufficient clarity between the puranic version and the other versions, though he does make a distinction between the classical ganesha and all other ganapatis (the term ganapati being literal and used merely as a title for various deities such as indra. Also, the term ganesha is literal, meaning god of the ganas. Both the words in the vedic corpus, it seems, do not refer to the elephant-head deity).
Y Krishan concludes in that paper saying the set of 11 ganesha gayatris (including the "hastimukhaya vidmahe..." mantra) is a later-day interpolation into the yajur. He ends the paper saying Ganesha (the elephant-head god) is a non-vedic deity. The book "ganesha: unravelling an enigma" has a lot of info. Apparently, Ganesha of the form we know was a yaksha deity....
So far appears to me, the elephant head god was the version of certain folks who eventually got absorbed into the yajur vedic fold (if they did not get absorbed into the fold, how cud they make an interpolation?). In the atharva shirsa Ganapati is a tantric deity visualized as brihaspati. Need to find proof if the atharva deity is the same as the yajur one. If you have clues or know of any paper on this, please let me know. Have not checked but according to this the atharva text seems to be a recent one - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganapati_Atharvashirsa
Last edited:
No worries Renu. I thot i made a simple post to you and vgane. Did not expect it wud balloon into this. Anyways, those who object may have their reasons. If they explain, well and good. Lets see what zebra presents on the ganapati atharvashirsha upanishad....
Last edited:
renuka
Well-known member
Dear Palindrome,
I have noted that some members feel you write Chandamama material.
I would like members to know that never underestimate Chandamama material.
During my MBBS surgery exam finals I was the only Candidate for the day who knew what NYLON stands for when I was asked during Viva Voce what is the meaning of NYLON suture material.
I answered NYLON stands for New York(NY) and London(Lon) where it was invented at the same time...hence the name NYLON.
The examiner was very happy with my answer and he said "you are the only Candidate who knew this answer..from which Surgical book did you get this info from?"
I answered "I read it in Chandamama Sir"
The examiner started laughing!
So far Zebra is the only person to comment it is Chandamama material. Let him think, who cares. I know there is a better readership out there interested in stuff that nara sir, sangom sir and myself write.
Unfortunately i came across the wiki article on ganapati atharvashirsha late yesterday evening (did not know wiki had an artice on it) or wud have posted it for zebra much earlier itself. Perhaps then we cud have spared ourselves from the snowballing effect.
All my childhood when mom made ganesha out of turmeric paste, she wud emphasize on the antiseptic properties of turmeric and correlate the story to cleansing effect and dirt off parvati's skin. I believed her completely until a few years back when i started understanding what religion is about. Never expected traditional ladies like rajiram did not know the story...never expected this level of protestations from different posters either. Anyways...
Dear Palindrome
Your post # 34.
Apparently there is a stone slab there with inscriptions in which it is recorded that
the Temple was "embellished" by the emperor Rajaraja Cholan I .
That supposes that a Temple existed there pre Rajaraja Cholan I - whose reign was 1000 years ago.
The millennium celebrations of The Brihadeeswarar Temple, Tanjavur [ built by Rajaraja Cholan I ]
were held in 2011.
This doesn't quite answer your question, but this is as far as I could get.
Yay Yem
Your post # 34.
Apparently there is a stone slab there with inscriptions in which it is recorded that
the Temple was "embellished" by the emperor Rajaraja Cholan I .
That supposes that a Temple existed there pre Rajaraja Cholan I - whose reign was 1000 years ago.
The millennium celebrations of The Brihadeeswarar Temple, Tanjavur [ built by Rajaraja Cholan I ]
were held in 2011.
This doesn't quite answer your question, but this is as far as I could get.
Yay Yem
Dear AM & Palindrome,
Got hold of a 7th Century Adi Vinayakar older than the above in Tiruchi District
Vinayaka in unique form
[SIZE=-2]
The idol of Adi Vinayaka. — Pic. by Rajarathinam. THE NANDRUDAYAN Vinayaga temple in Devadhanam in East Boulevard road, Tiruchi, boasts of the unique Adi Vinayagar granite idol depicting Lord Ganesha with his original divine face without the usual elephantine head and the trunk.
The five-foot tall majestic presiding deity of the temple - Nandrudayan Vinayagar adorning a Naghabharanam around his waist, has a Naganandhi facing him at the Eastern entrance of the temple. It may be mentioned that Nandi Deva is generally associated with Siva Temples only. The Seventh Century Tamil savant Sambandar had in one of his pathikams praised the presiding deity of the temple thereby indicating that this is one of the oldest temples in Sirapalli (Tiruchi).
The four-foot tall Adi Vinayagar is installed in a separate shrine close to the sanctum sanctorum and the divine grace of the brilliantly sculptured granite idol is indeed captivating. In the one hand Lord Ganesha holds the axe, symbolising the destruction of all desires, a rope to indicate his willingness to rescue anyone from the mire of vasanas, the modaka representing the joyous reward of spiritual life, and lotus symbolising that all can achieve the supreme state of self-realisation. The large belly of Ganesha is to convey the idea that a Man of Perfection can consume and digest whatever experience he undergoes. The tiny rat which is seated in front of the Lord amidst a rich collection of food is to indicate that a perfect man - like the rat, will have total control over his desires.
Inside the small shrine one could also see the idols of Adi Sankara, Sage Veda Vyasa, Goddess Gayatri, Sadasiva Brahmendra and Saint Pattinathar. According to Sage Ramarathinam, Trustee of the temple, the Kanchi Paramacharya, used to offer worship at the Thayumanavar and Uchipillayar temples atop the Rockfort. When he visited the temple about 60 years ago he suggested the rendering of the Vedas in the temple everyday it is being followed, the reciting done by scholars. Just behind the sanctum sanctorum an Anjaneya shrine has been established and the temple has separate shrines for Lord Muruga, the Navagrahas, Goddess Durga and Lord Ayyappa in the other Mandapam. Special poojas are performed for Adi Vinayagar on Thursdays. In the annual music festival conducted for the past 83 years almost all leading musicians have participated. It may be recalled that Devadhanam of today is highly congested where daily wage earners, rag pickers, dealers in old second hand household articles, etc. live. A couple of centuries ago, prior to the establishment of the Town railway station Devadhanam was the entry point to the city from the East. Situated very close to the Cauvery, Devadhanam sported some very important and ancient temples, the Bhoologanathaswami temple, Veerasoora Mahakaliamman temple, Nandrudayan temple, etc. There were four huge tanks close to these temples all of which have now been converted into lorry stand, weekly market and parks. In recent years the residents of the area have taken a keen interest in preserving old and ancient temples.
The Hindu : Vinayaka in unique form
[/SIZE]
- Status
Share this page
Share this page
Latest ads
-
Wanted Fulltime care person neededLooking for a fulltime lady who can look after 80 yr old person who has dementia. She can manage...
- vashok (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
- Expires
-
Free [Bride Wanted] Bride WantedLooking for Bride - Family Oriented and brought up from Cultured Family
- SRIKANT S -(Bride Wanted) (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
- Expires
-
-
Free [Bride Wanted] TAMIL BRAHMIN VADAMA BRIDE WANTEDMust to be willing to relocate to Bengaluru Must be willing to accommodate joint family
- self today (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated:
- Expires
-
Wanted [Cook Wanted] Wanted cook for Home at Gandhipuram Coimbatore. Decent Salary offeredHi, we need a female Brahmin cook for home ( 5 members family) at Coimbatore. Morning and...
- gchitra (+0 /0 /-0)
- Updated: