Reverse wired nostrils

[Nara]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

1. Some people here think they have a birth right to bring gutter here and spray it all around.

Well, it looks like this guy is out looking for gutter as a service to new members, except that his nostrils are wired 180 degrees in reverse, what he says is gutter, is the truth. He won't even try to say why what I am saying is "gutter", because he doesn't have the goods. All he can do is write these abusive posts, heap as much invectives as he can about me.

Let it be, bring it on, do the worst you can. It is a reflection of your own crosswired nostrils for gutter and a complete lack of integrity -- run away from debate, but keep hurling abuses.

2. So an ex-vaishnav has the right to misinterpret or "interpret" Alwars the way he wants-

Azhvars predate Brahmin commentators by several centuries. So, these commentators were also guessing what would have been in the minds of Azhvars. These are great guesses, at times these commentaries are even greater than the original verses themselves. But, still these are interpretations.

Now, what I said about butcher சேஷம் is not interpretations at all. I am not here to interpret Azhvar's words for you. All I want you to do is take a look Azhvar's own words, then the early commentaries, and finally the current day practices. Then you make up your own mind. People like Vaagmi don't want you to do that, all they do is kick up a dust storm, I am an atheist from gutter etc., and other choice abuses.

Alright with this preamble, I would like you to consider the following the pasuram itself and make up your mind, I am not giving you any of my interpretation.

The pasuram I cited was Thirumalai #41. It is in this verse the Azhvar praises the சேஷம் of even a butcher, just so long as the butcher is a devotee of Ranganatha. I give the exact words of Azhvars, no interpretation from me: போனகம் செய்த சேடம் .... புனிதம்

Commentator says: புனிதம் = பரமபாவனம்

The commentators offer an interpretation about the butcher as follows: மாம்ஸத்தை அறுத்து கொடுக்குமவர்கள் ..

The commentator adds: .... ஜ்ஞானம் பிறப்பதற்கு முன்புத்த வ்ருத்தம்

This an interpretation of commentator. Azhvar's verse does not say these butchers have given up their trade. But, I have no problem with this interpretation, my point is not about that at all. The point is, it is an undeniable fact that both Azhvar and early commentators thought the சேஷம் of a butcher, or ex-butcher, is புனிதம் according to Azhvar, and பரமபாவனம் according to the commentator, the only caveat being the butcher, or ex-butcher, be a devotee of Ranganatha.

The question that still remains is, what is sesham? Is it leftover எச்சில் சோறு in the இலை? Or is it food leftover in the vessel? Or is it uncooked stuff in his house? Azhvar does not say anything, it could very well be any of the three including எச்சில் சோறு in the இலை. The commentator says it is leftover food in the vessel (அமுதுசெய்து கைவாங்கின கலத்தில் பிரஸாதம்). The present day brahmin SVs like Vaagmi don't want to talk about it, they want to serve the new members by crying Nara is பூச்சாண்டி ignore him.

 

[ashwin_ash]

Well, it looks like this guy is out looking for gutter as a service to new members, except that his nostrils are wired 180 degrees in reverse, what he says is gutter, is the truth. He won't even try to say why what I am saying is "gutter", because he doesn't have the goods. All he can do is write these abusive posts, heap as much invectives as he can about me.

Let it be, bring it on, do the worst you can. It is a reflection of your own crosswired nostrils for gutter and a complete lack of integrity -- run away from debate, but keep hurling abuses.


Azhvars predate Brahmin commentators by several centuries. So, these commentators were also guessing what would have been in the minds of Azhvars. These are great guesses, at times these commentaries are even greater than the original verses themselves. But, still these are interpretations.

Now, what I am said about butcher சேஷம் is not interpretations at all. I am not here to interpret Azhvar's words for you. All I want you to do is take a look Azhvar's own words, then the early commentaries, and finally the current day practices. Then you make up your own mind. People like Vaagmi don't want you to do that, all they do is kick up a dust storm, I am an atheist from gutter etc., and other choice abuses.

Alright with this preamble, I would like you to consider the following the pasuram itself and make up your mind, I am not giving you any of my interpretation.

The pasuram I cited was Thirumalai #41. It is in this verse the Azhvar praises the சேஷம் of even a butcher, just so long as the butcher is a devotee of Ranganatha. I give the exact words of Azhvars, no interpretation from me: போனகம் செய்த சேடம் .... புனிதம்

Commentator says: புனிதம் = பரமபாவனம்

The commentators offer an interpretation about the butcher as follows: மாம்ஸத்தை அறுத்து கொடுக்குமவர்கள் ..

The commentator adds: .... ஜ்ஞானம் பிறப்பதற்கு முன்புத்த வ்ருத்தம்

This an interpretation of commentator. Azhvar's verse does not say these butchers have given up their trade. But, I have no problem with this interpretation, my point is not about that at all. The point is, it is an undeniable fact that both Azhvar and early commentators thought the சேஷம் of a butcher, or ex-butcher, is புனிதம் according to Azhvar, and பரமபாவனம் according to the commentator, the only caveat being the butcher, or ex-butcher, be a devotee of Ranganatha.

The question that still remains is, what is sesham? Is it leftover எச்சில் சோறு in the இலை? Or is it food leftover in the vessel? Or is it uncooked stuff in his house? Azhvar does not say anything, it could very well be any of the three including எச்சில் சோறு in the இலை. The commentator says it is leftover food in the vessel (அமுதுசெய்து கைவாங்கின கலத்தில் பிரஸாதம்). The present day brahmin SVs like Vaagmi don't want to talk about it, they want to serve the new members by crying Nara is பூச்சாண்டி ignore him.

Dear Nara,

Your Brahmin jargon is confusing and bombastic and unintelligible, kindly use normal language for dullards like yours truly, if you don't mind..

 

[Nara]

... Just as someone played some mischief once in this forum with Alwar's words Kolmin, Kodumin "கொள்மின் கொடுமின்" taking it out of context to load his pet theme of IC/IR marriages to Alwar's words,.....

"கொடுமின் கொள்மின் again!!! (BTW, it is கொடுமின் கொள்மின், not கொள்மின் கொடுமின்). It was suraju some years ago, now it is Vaagmi. I wonder whether Vaagmi is suraju's alter ego, but who cares, they both are barking up the wrong tree. I am not the only one they are criticizing, when they say I am playing mischief, what they are saying is the azhvars and the Brahmin commentators are playing mischief. See below for more and I can quote word for word from their own texts if rubbing it in is called for.

Vaagmi, I have news for you, Azhvars do not belong to you SV Brahmins. They belong to all of us and each one of us is entitled to draw our own inspiration from Azhvar pasurams, erstwhile SVs turned atheists included. The azhvars, and many of the early acharyas, envisioned a reformed society, one in which varna and jati didn't matter. I can cite instance after instance from Aazhvar's own words and the commentaries and the hagiographical accounts of the early acharyas, every word from their own texts, nothing added from me. To reject them all as out of context is to insist special preference for your own prejudiced and contrived interpretations.

Those interested in the "கொடுமின் கொள்மின்" dispute can search the archives and look at the arguments presented. Azhvar simply says "கொடுமின் கொள்மின்", leaving it to us to interpret the phrase. The context for this phrase is the last few pasurams of Thirumalai in which Azhvar castigates those who pride themselves in their own superior birth-order jAti. So, when I take the phrase to mean IC (BTW, it was just IC, not IC/IR, another conflating of arguments that comes naturally to people like Vaagmi) I have every contextual basis for it. Take a look at it for yourself, the Azhvar is at his strident best, singularly chastising the most learned of Brahmins in the four vedas. Then tell me who got the context right, me or the Brahmin SVs like Vaagmi.

But, and this is important, I never argued that my view must be accepted by SV Brahmins. That is a lie. I challenge Vaagmi to cite my words. But he can't because I never said it, and he won't take his words back because he is devoid of any honor, his motivations in this site rarely go outside of hurling insults at me.

What I did say was, the present day SV Brahmins don't even follow the limited interpretation given by Brahmin acharyas from thousand years ago of the phrase "கொடுமின் கொள்மின்". Those acharyas (not me) implored the Brahmin SVs of their time and in the future to fall at the feet of vaishnavas whatever jAti they may have born in. Now, those of us who are familiar with the way SV Brahmins act know for a fact nobody but male Brahmin SVs of their own kalai can join their congregation. Everybody else, however great their devotion to Ranganatha may be must be kept at a safe distance. This reality and how diametrically opposite this reality is to Azhvar's message is what I was trying to present.

It is not surprising that for an ardent Brahmin like Vaagmi, one who wants Brahmanism declared a separate religion apart from the rest of the Hindus, my presentation is gutter talk, a stink his nose is wired to detect.

 

[tks]

Nara - What is your thesis statement in the topic area? You have declared yourself as an atheist - so why are you doing research on such topics and making comments?
Can you articulate your thesis (without castigating anyone or any group) as to what your belief is?
What do you want someone like me who is not familiar with many of these work to take away from your comments?

 

[ashwin_ash]

Now, those of us who are familiar with the way SV Brahmins act know for a fact nobody but male Brahmin SVs of their own kalai can join their congregation. Everybody else, however great their devotion to Ranganatha may be must be kept at a safe distance.

DA Joseph is the most "Iyengarest" of 'em all, and he lectures in all their hallowed temples with consummate ease, he is accepted into their cabal. Could it be hypocrisy?

 

[Vaagmi]

DA Joseph is the most "Iyengarest" of 'em all, and he lectures in all their hallowed temples with consummate ease, he is accepted into their cabal. Could it be hypocrisy?

Hi ashwin,

Being a christian no wonder you are peeved that a fellow christian has converted to Vaishnavism. If you want you can also get converted. You will be just welcome. LOL.

 

[renuka]

Hi ashwin,

Being a christian no wonder you are peeved that a fellow christian has converted to Vaishnavism. If you want you can also get converted. You will be just welcome. LOL.

Ashwin?? A Christian?? LOL

Vaagmi ji you are purely mistaken.

 

[sarang]

!

 

[ashwin_ash]

Ashwin?? A Christian?? LOL

Vaagmi ji you are purely mistaken.

Dear Doctor,

To quote Vaagmi,

Originally Posted by Vaagmi Hi ashwin,

Being a christian no wonder you are peeved that a fellow christian has converted to Vaishnavism. If you want you can also get converted. You will be just welcome. LOL.



So "Vaishnavism" is a separate religion and accepts converts!! Hypocrisy, to me! Brahmanism's downfall occurred due to Brahmins not accepting ground realities, and now we have a new religion here!!

 

[Vaagmi]

1.Well, it looks like this guy is out looking for gutter as a service to new members, except that his nostrils are wired 180 degrees in reverse, what he says is gutter, is the truth. He won't even try to say why what I am saying is "gutter", because he doesn't have the goods. All he can do is write these abusive posts, heap as much invectives as he can about me.

My point is that this vaishnav turned atheist (VTA) has no nostrils at all and that is why he is able to bring and pour so much of gutter/muck into this forum. Those who have nostrils-new members here certainly have these-are immediately taken aback by his odious and odorous outpourings . Whatever he is saying here is all recycled rubbish which have been answered a hundred times and several kilobytes have been wasted and sent to the archives. I am trying just to keep the new members here warned of what they are in for , if they were ever to go into the archives looking for his volumes of nonsense. I do not know him and I have nothing against him personally. But his views-the nonsense-I am against. If he thinks he can not separate himself from his views then it is not my fault.

Let it be, bring it on, do the worst you can. It is a reflection of your own crosswired nostrils for gutter and a complete lack of integrity -- run away from debate, but keep hurling abuses.

Already answered in point 1 above. Who is lacking in what, the people here
understand well though this VTA called them idiot brigade recently. That was perhaps not being abusive. LOL.

2.Azhvars predate Brahmin commentators by several centuries. So, these commentators were also guessing what would have been in the minds of Azhvars. These are great guesses, at times these commentaries are even greater than the original verses themselves. But, still these are interpretations.

a) This VTA has a need to show off. Otherwise he would not be saying things which are obvious like Alwars predate Commentators. B)and he craves adulation. Otherwise he would not have added himself to the list of great commentators-“commentators were guessing” and so he was also guessing like them? LOL. That is perhaps the reason why commentators are “great”. Or is he confused?

Now, what I said about butcher சேஷம் is not interpretations at all. I am not here to interpret Azhvar's words for you. All I want you to do is take a look Azhvar's own words, then the early commentaries, and finally the current day practices. Then you make up your own mind. People like Vaagmi don't want you to do that, all they do is kick up a dust storm, I am an atheist from gutter etc., and other choice abuses.

It is a settled issue. The word sesham in the given context means not the left overs in the leaf. Commentaries do not give any scope for any other interpretation. Read them any number of times.

Alright with this preamble, I would like you to consider the following the pasuram itself and make up your mind, I am not giving you any of my interpretation.

LOL. Some preamble this.

The pasuram I cited was Thirumalai #41. It is in this verse the Azhvar praises the சேஷம் of even a butcher, just so long as the butcher is a devotee of Ranganatha. I give the exact words of Azhvars, no interpretation from me: போனகம் செய்த சேடம் .... புனிதம்
Commentator says: புனிதம் = பரமபாவனம்
The commentators offer an interpretation about the butcher as follows: மாம்ஸத்தை அறுத்து கொடுக்குமவர்கள் ..
The commentator adds: .... ஜ்ஞானம் பிறப்பதற்கு முன்புத்த வ்ருத்தம்
This an interpretation of commentator. Azhvar's verse does not say these butchers have given up their trade. But, I have no problem with this interpretation, my point is not about that at all. The point is, it is an undeniable fact that both Azhvar and early commentators thought the சேஷம் of a butcher, or ex-butcher, is புனிதம் according to Azhvar, and பரமபாவனம் according to the commentator, the only caveat being the butcher, or ex-butcher, be a devotee of Ranganatha.

This is all verbatim reproduction of what is all there in the books. So no more comments. I completely agree with the interpretation of the commentators.

The question that still remains is, what is sesham? Is it leftover எச்சில் சோறு in the இலை? Or is it food leftover in the vessel? Or is it uncooked stuff in his house? Azhvar does not say anything, it could very well be any of the three including எச்சில் சோறு in the இலை. The commentator says it is leftover food in the vessel (அமுதுசெய்து கைவாங்கின கலத்தில் பிரஸாதம்). The present day brahmin SVs like Vaagmi don't want to talk about it, they want to serve the new members by crying Nara is பூச்சாண்டி ignore him.

What is sesham? Without what he (VTA) has understood of this word, he has tried cleverly(?) to leave the matter hanging. There is no problem talking about it for the present day vaishnavs. Sesham means not எச்சில் சோறு left behind in the இலை. It is what is left in the utensil from which food is served. For indicating left over food in the banana leaf there are other words too in Sanskrit. If we can allow people to interpret the word sesham as what is left over in the leaf then there is no bar on interpreting it as the vomit of the person who had had his food. That will be ridiculous. But for argument, it will be a valid interpretation !! People who have no knowledge of what Alwar or Commentator wanted to convey (that is at a far higher level), invariably get side-tracked into such silly interpretational misadventures. Our VTA is a good example of that. He can excel and shine in the company of people like bigriver and his walking stick who wrote an abusive piece of work called Kambarasam or Keemayanam. So he eminently deserves to be ignored.

 

[ashwin_ash]

My point is that this vaishnav turned atheist (VTA) has no nostrils at all and that is why he is able to bring and pour so much of gutter/muck into this forum. Those who have nostrils-new members here certainly have these-are immediately taken aback by his odious and odorous outpourings . Whatever he is saying here is all recycled rubbish which have been answered a hundred times and several kilobytes have been wasted and sent to the archives. I am trying just to keep the new members here warned of what they are in for , if they were ever to go into the archives looking for his volumes of nonsense. I do not know him and I have nothing against him personally. But his views-the nonsense-I am against. If he thinks he can not separate himself from his views then it is not my fault.



Already answered in point 1 above. Who is lacking in what, the people here
understand well though this VTA called them idiot brigade recently. That was perhaps not being abusive. LOL.



a) This VTA has a need to show off. Otherwise he would not be saying things which are obvious like Alwars predate Commentators. B)and he craves adulation. Otherwise he would not have added himself to the list of great commentators-“commentators were guessing” and so he was also guessing like them? LOL. That is perhaps the reason why commentators are “great”. Or is he confused?



It is a settled issue. The word sesham in the given context means not the left overs in the leaf. Commentaries do not give any scope for any other interpretation. Read them any number of times.



LOL. Some preamble this.



This is all verbatim reproduction of what is all there in the books. So no more comments. I completely agree with the interpretation of the commentators.



What is sesham? Without what he (VTA) has understood of this word, he has tried cleverly(?) to leave the matter hanging. There is no problem talking about it for the present day vaishnavs. Sesham means not எச்சில் சோறு left behind in the இலை. It is what is left in the utensil from which food is served. For indicating left over food in the banana leaf there are other words too in Sanskrit. If we can allow people to interpret the word sesham as what is left over in the leaf then there is no bar on interpreting it as the vomit of the person who had had his food. That will be ridiculous. But for argument, it will be a valid interpretation !! People who have no knowledge of what Alwar or Commentator wanted to convey (that is at a far higher level), invariably get side-tracked into such silly interpretational misadventures. Our VTA is a good example of that. He can excel and shine in the company of people like bigriver and his walking stick who wrote an abusive piece of work called Kambarasam or Keemayanam. So he eminently deserves to be ignored.

My oh my.. Vaagmi, if an atheist can be so erudite about religious or vaishnavite or whatever issues, true atheists such as Lenin, Marx, and so on must be turning in their graves LOL

 

[Vaagmi]

"கொடுமின் கொள்மின் again!!! (BTW, it is கொடுமின் கொள்மின், not கொள்மின் கொடுமின்). It was suraju some years ago, now it is Vaagmi. I wonder whether Vaagmi is suraju's alter ego, but who cares, they both are barking up the wrong tree. I am not the only one they are criticizing, when they say I am playing mischief, what they are saying is the azhvars and the Brahmin commentators are playing mischief. See below for more and I can quote word for word from their own texts if rubbing it in is called for.

Ok. Kodumin, kolmin. But your interpretation is nowhere supported by Alwars or Commentators. You twisted Alwar’s and Commentator’s words and interpreted it to mean marital relationship. Alwar and Commentators were far above your concerns. They were talking about giving knowledge and taking knowledge and not about giving and taking women in marriage. Earlier when you presented your spurious interpretation it was shown its place in this forum by suraju and you did not have an answer. It was a mischief played by you and you alone. You have already given whatever is there and nothing more to offer. You lost that argument miserably.

Vaagmi, I have news for you, Azhvars do not belong to you SV Brahmins. They belong to all of us and each one of us is entitled to draw our own inspiration from Azhvar pasurams, erstwhile SVs turned atheists included. The azhvars, and many of the early acharyas, envisioned a reformed society, one in which varna and jati didn't matter. I can cite instance after instance from Aazhvar's own words and the commentaries and the hagiographical accounts of the early acharyas, every word from their own texts, nothing added from me. To reject them all as out of context is to insist special preference for your own prejudiced and contrived interpretations.

Nara, that was no news. SVs know Alwar, Commentators, God and everything belong to the humanity. That is why we give interpreters like even bigriver and you a hearing. Reform that you talk about is just a lot of political BS for me. The reform that you are enthusiastic about is against nature. A kind of homogenizing fervour which has no scope for success in this world. As long as the world exists there will be differences among people and these can not be simply wished away. Recognizing these differences is not a crime or a sin as you would like us to believe. Managing these differences is in the realm of politics. So do not waste your time in trying to deny something which can not be denied. All your quotes are to support your contrived logic and interpretation and so I leave them aside.

Those interested in the "கொடுமின் கொள்மின்" dispute can search the archives and look at the arguments presented. Azhvar simply says "கொடுமின் கொள்மின்", leaving it to us to interpret the phrase. The context for this phrase is the last few pasurams of Thirumalai in which Azhvar castigates those who pride themselves in their own superior birth-order jAti. So, when I take the phrase to mean IC (BTW, it was just IC, not IC/IR, another conflating of arguments that comes naturally to people like Vaagmi) I have every contextual basis for it. Take a look at it for yourself, the Azhvar is at his strident best, singularly chastising the most learned of Brahmins in the four vedas. Then tell me who got the context right, me or the Brahmin SVs like Vaagmi.

Yes I would request learned members here to read not only the Alwar but also the commentators to understand the true context. Everyone would oppose superiority-inferiority attitudes, atrocities resulting from such a mindset and conflicts and exploitation that flow from such attitudes. But to load it to the words of Alwar amounts to tearing Alwar’s words out of context and making malleable to suit today’s political inclinations. There is no contextual basis for doing that. As I have said in another post in this forum if you are very deeply disturbed by the perceived atrocities, you may adopt a dalit boy/girl from India, take him/her to US and support him/her in his/her education and life. Or is it too much of a responsibility(which you do not want to take) in a society where “unconditional love” is a prerequisite that unlocks every uterus giving it an exotic freedom? (I have just quoted only your words. LOL). Don’t waste your time giving specious interpretation to ancient religious texts.

But, and this is important, I never argued that my view must be accepted by SV Brahmins. That is a lie. I challenge Vaagmi to cite my words. But he can't because I never said it, and he won't take his words back because he is devoid of any honor, his motivations in this site rarely go outside of hurling insults at me.

Nara, you know pretty well that your views will not be accepted by SVs and that is besides the point. Your words will not be accepted by other members here too. Members here know it well that I touch you or your posts only when you pompously present untruths, half truths, misinterpretations and utter nonsense.

What I did say was, the present day SV Brahmins don't even follow the limited interpretation given by Brahmin acharyas from thousand years ago of the phrase "கொடுமின் கொள்மின்". Those acharyas (not me) implored the Brahmin SVs of their time and in the future to fall at the feet of vaishnavas whatever jAti they may have born in. Now, those of us who are familiar with the way SV Brahmins act know for a fact nobody but male Brahmin SVs of their own kalai can join their congregation. Everybody else, however great their devotion to Ranganatha may be must be kept at a safe distance. This reality and how diametrically opposite this reality is to Azhvar's message is what I was trying to present.

Bring such a human being and SVs irrespective of kalais will show respect to him without bothering about his jAti. When did you try this? Please let me know. Also the result.

It is not surprising that for an ardent Brahmin like Vaagmi, one who wants Brahmanism declared a separate religion apart from the rest of the Hindus, my presentation is gutter talk, a stink his nose is wired to detect.

So I am an ardent Brahmin. What is the meaning of that? Would you care to explain? Again your pet rhetoric about “brahminism”. You have never cared to answer me when I asked you why do you call it-whatever it is- by that name. Yes my claim that Brahmins deserves to be designated as a minority in this country, following a minority faith exclusive to them, still stands. Please tell me what is wrong with that demand? That has nothing to do with your odious and odorous stuff presented here. Please go and get a nose fixed. Then you will realize what kind of stuff you are carrying around.

 

[Vaagmi]

My oh my.. Vaagmi, if an atheist can be so erudite about religious or vaishnavite or whatever issues, true atheists such as Lenin, Marx, and so on must be turning in their graves LOL

Hi Ash,

Bigriver used to quote from Sivapuranam so much of accurate info that I used to wonder what if this guy ever becomes Shankaracharya. LOL.

 

[Vaagmi]

Ashwin?? A Christian?? LOL

Vaagmi ji you are purely mistaken.

Renuka,

I never believed a doctor can certify in this matter. I accept your certificate. You must be knowing what you certify. LOL.

 

[sangom]

< snipped >

The question that still remains is, what is sesham? Is it leftover எச்சில் சோறு in the இலை? Or is it food leftover in the vessel? Or is it uncooked stuff in his house? Azhvar does not say anything, it could very well be any of the three including எச்சில் சோறு in the இலை. The commentator says it is leftover food in the vessel (அமுதுசெய்து கைவாங்கின கலத்தில் பிரஸாதம்). The present day brahmin SVs like Vaagmi don't want to talk about it, they want to serve the new members by crying Nara is பூச்சாண்டி ignore him.

Dear Shri Nara,

As per the practice of tabras in this part of the country, even 60 or 70 years ago, the word எச்சில் referred to what was left over (uneaten) in the plantain leaf (or metal plate and/or 'donnai' or any other device from which food is eaten). It was not சேஷம். சேஷம் is what is remaining in the vessels after part/s of those have been served for certain particular people for eating. The சேஷம் status is not affected by whether the concerned persons even touched the plate or plantain leaf. I remember that even if food served for the express purpose of eating by a தூரமனாள் was, for some reason/s, not even touched by that person, then that food plus whatever remained in the cooking vessels were treated as சேஷம் by the orthodox households, way back in those days. Later on, due to changes brought about by time, etc., if the தூரமனாள் did not eat (sometimes those women used to develop pain in the stomach etc., and refused to eat) only that which was served specially was thrown out mercilessly or, where the arrangements existed, such served food was kept closed and given to the maid servant who understood the ritual pollution associated with that food and so, would eat it only after completing all her jobs, just before leaving for the day. (the presumption used to be the servant's ritual pollution (அசுத்தம்) would stand erased by the bath she would take on the next day!


எச்சில் was a still higher or more powerful pollution and there was no difference between ordinary எச்சில் and சேஷம் எச்சில்; only thing was the சேஷம் எச்சில் of சிராத்தச்சாப்பாடு (பிராஹ்மணார்த்தம்) had either to be fed to a cow or should be interred (ஆழக்குழிவெட்டி புதய்க்கணம்), so to say.

Thus, for 'us people', சேஷம் and எச்சில் were and are two different things altogether.

 

[renuka]

Dear Doctor,

To quote Vaagmi,

Originally Posted by VaagmiHi ashwin,

Being a christian no wonder you are peeved that a fellow christian has converted to Vaishnavism. If you want you can also get converted. You will be just welcome. LOL.



So "Vaishnavism" is a separate religion and accepts converts!! Hypocrisy, to me! Brahmanism's downfall occurred due to Brahmins not accepting ground realities, and now we have a new religion here!!

Dear Ash,

You make me laugh!

 

[renuka]

So Forum is back to action again I guess..this times its Iyengar(Vaagmi) Vs Iyengar(Nara)..wonder who is Vadakalai and Thenkalai..that would the battle more interesting!LOL

 

[ashwin_ash]

So Forum is back to action again I guess..this times its Iyengar(Vaagmi) Vs Iyengar(Nara)..wonder who is Vadakalai and Thenkalai..that would the battle more interesting!LOL

Vadakalai, Thenkalai, ....kalai!!

 

[Nara]

So Forum is back to action again I guess..this times its Iyengar(Vaagmi) Vs Iyengar(Nara)..wonder who is Vadakalai and Thenkalai..that would the battle more interesting!LOL

I am no Iyengar now, please do not associate that caste word with me. Ex-SV atheist is what I would prefer! But then it is left to members to call me anything you want, if you are one who does not like what I say, then ask Vaagmi he has a sack full of insulting invectives to share.

 

[Nara]

Vadakalai, Thenkalai, ....kalai!!

This is childish ............. but then insulting has become the norm in the forum ...

 

[renuka]

I am no Iyengar now, please do not associate that caste word with me. Ex-SV atheist is what I would prefer! But then it is left to members to call me anything you want, if you are one who does not like what I say, then ask Vaagmi he has a sack full of insulting invectives to share.

Dear Nara ji,

I am trying to add fuel to fire here to keep Forum alive!LOL

Believe me Forum has been boring ever since New Years Eve..at least now we see some action and you have also started Reverse Wired Nostril thread..so lets us help you and Vaagmi keep it alive.

You see if its an Ex SV Atheist Vs Practicing Vaishanava battle it wont sound too interesting..if its Iyengar Vs Iyengar it would be a box office hit thread..see even Ash is adding another Kalai!LOL

 

[Vaagmi]

Vadakalai, Thenkalai, ....kalai!!

Vaagmi is vadakalai; Nara is ex-vadakalai; There is no thenkalai. Only there is an......kalai and that is Ashwin ash. LOL.

 

[Vaagmi]

I am no Iyengar now, please do not associate that caste word with me. Ex-SV atheist is what I would prefer! But then it is left to members to call me anything you want, if you are one who does not like what I say, then ask Vaagmi he has a sack full of insulting invectives to share.

The handy and convenient escape latch is open. LOL.

 

[krish44]

Dear Nara ji,

I am trying to add fuel to fire here to keep Forum alive!LOL

Believe me Forum has been boring ever since New Years Eve..at least now we see some action and you have also started Reverse Wired Nostril thread..so lets us help you and Vaagmi keep it alive.

You see if its an Ex SV Atheist Vs Practicing Vaishanava battle it wont sound too interesting..if its Iyengar Vs Iyengar it would be a box office hit thread..see even Ash is adding another Kalai!LOL

Rji it was a scholarly discussions on alwars by two 'respected veterans of this Forum'. One has disowned his Iyengr identity and would like to be called ex vaishnava Atheist and the other a solid defender of SV way of life as it existed in the past and now.Both could have avoided some name calling . It resembled a kulai[tap]adi shandai of south.members specially new got educated on alwars LOL

 

[krish44]

Rji it was a scholarly discussions on alwars by two 'respected veterans of this Forum'. One has disowned his Iyengr identity and would like to be called ex vaishnava Atheist and the other a solid defender of SV way of life as it existed in the past and now.Both could have avoided some name calling . It resembled a kulai[tap]adi shandai of south.members specially new got educated on alwars LOL

. Let us welcome further the new year with a brilliant exposure of thenkalai and vadagalai sampradayam and their practitioners. who shoots first