Self respect movement

[Nara]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Part 2 of my clarifications to some of the criticisms leveled against the texts I have been citing about EVR. I will repeat the parameters within which I am making these presentations.

1. I don't agree with every last word EVR has uttered, he himself exhorted his devotees to think for themselves and accept only what made sense to them,
2. I didn't broach the topic of EVR, it was brought in by others --in the past I have always ignored them, but this time I wanted to present his own words, in context, on the outrageous charges that are routinely made as though they are facts,
3. My admiration for EVR is based on the stands he advocated on caste, women, superstitions, etc.

---

People criticize EVR for marrying a girl in her 20s when he himself was in his 70s. Maniyammai came to EVR on her own and dedicated her life to his care. EVR himself stated the marriage was to provide Maniyammai with financial security after EVR was gone. It is famously known that just prior to marrying Maniammai EVR and Rajaji had a long private meeting. What they discussed is not known. But the repercussions of EVR marrying Maniammai is widely believed to be one of the items discussed.

In any case, if EVR and Maniyammai did get married for conjugal reason, what is it to those who hate both EVR and Maniammai anyway? Whether Maniammai loved EVR or not is a matter between Maniammai and EVR. Maniammai remained a loyal member of DK all her life. She dedicated herself to EVR all his life, and after his death, to his memory. From this, one can easily deduce she really loved EVR. The criticism leveled against EVR that somehow he did not allow the freedoms he was advocating for other women to Maniymmai is ridiculous.

EVR did not want to contest in elections. He wanted his party to be strictly about social reform. But, CNA, MK and others were convinced social change can come only if they take power, for which contesting in elections is a must. This is the primary reason for the split, EVR marrying Maniyammai was only a pretext.

When CNA won the elections of 1967 he went straight to EVR to pay his tributes. When he formed his ministry he paid homage to his mentor EVR. CNA declared that his victory was victory for EVR's ideology, even though EVR himself supported Congress in that election. One of the signature achievement of CNA's short-lived administration was legalizing Self-Respect marriages, one of the emblematic reforms EVR introduced. So, the idea that CNA's split from EVR was because he married Maniammai is false. It was nothing more than a pretext.

Cheers!

 

[kameshratnam]

வயதானவர்கள் இளம் பெண்களைத் திருமணம் செய்து கொள்ளக்கூடாது’ என்ற பொருள்பட ஈ.வெ.ரா பல மேடைகளில் முழங்கியிருந்தார். அந்தப் பேச்சுக்களைத் தொகுத்து ஈ.வெ.ரா-வுக்குத் தெரியாமல் இந்த (அ)சந்தர்ப்பத்தில் விடுதலை இதழில் அச்சேற்றிவிட்டார் அரங்கண்ணல். அவர் விடுதலை இதழில் துணையாசிரியராக இருந்தார்.


விடுதலை இதழின் உரிமையாளர் ஈ.வெ.ரா. அதில் வெளிவந்ததோ ஈ.வெ.ராவின் பேச்சு. தன்னுடைய கையால் தன் கண்ணைக் குத்துகிறார்களே என்ற கோபம் ஈ.வெ.ராவுக்கு; அரங்கண்ணல் வெளியேற்றப்பட்டார்.


பகுத்தறிவாளர்களின் பயணத்தில் இது இன்னொரு மைல்கல்.

 

[kameshratnam]

தீபாவளியன்று கருப்பு உடை தரித்து நரகாசூரனுக்கு (திராவிட தலைவனுக்கு) வாழ்த்துக்கூறி வலம் வருவதுடன் ஆங்காங்கு கூட்டம் கூடி அவனது கொலைக்காகத் துக்கப்பட வேண்டியதை விளக்கித்துக்க நாளாகக் கொள்ளவேண்டும்.
(விடுதலை 17-10-1965)

 

[kameshratnam]

ஈ.வே. ராமசாமி நாயக்கர் கூறுகிறார்:-


இராமாயணம் திராவிட மக்களை இழிவு செய்து ஆரியர்களைத் தெய்வங்களாக்க உருவானது.
(விடுதலை 26-01-1943)


அதே ஈ.வே. ராமசாமி நாயக்கர் கூறுகிறார்:-


இராமாயணம் – வால்மீகி என்கின்ற ஒருவரால் ஆரியர்களை (தேவர்களை) அயோக்கியர்கள், ஒழுக்கமற்றவர்கள், தீயகாரியங்களைச் செய்வதற்குப் பயப்படாத வஞ்சகர்கள் என்பதைக் காட்டவும், திராவிடர்களை (தென் இந்தியர்களை) மெத்த நாகரிகமுள்ள மேன்மக்கள், சூது வாதறியாத பரிசுத்தமானவர்கள், வீரர்கள் என்பதைக்காட்டவும் சித்தரிக்கப்பட்ட ஒரு கதை தொகுப்பாகும்.
(விடுதலை 17-10. 1954)

 

[Nara]

From page 109 of "Fuzzy and Neutrosophic Analysis of Periyar's Views on Untouchability" by W. B. Vasantha Kandasamy, a Dalit intellectual.

"The Congress Ministry in Madras and seven other Provinces resigned on 29 October 1939, following the outbreak of the Second World War. They protested against the British rulers involving India in the war without having consulted the High Command of the party. Consequently, the Governor and Governor General requested Periyar to come and form the ministry. The offer came once in 1940 and again in 1942. Even his friend C.Rajagopalachari personally requested Periyar to accept the offer and assured him of outside support. Periyar refused it on both the occasions. He reasoned that if he accepted power his aim of annihilating the caste system would receive a set back."

This may not be very acceptable to Brahminists as it does not support their supremacist agenda.

 

[Jaykay767]

Hi Nara,

Most of the Brahmins today myself included do NOT support untouchability, caste based discrimination. This is to be condemned by one & all.

However the issue is on "the reverse discrimination" that is happening due to the "hatred" being spread by these DMK movement/people associated with that.

Do we hate the germans of today for their past sins in supporting Hitler ??. Lets be clear - the German people in 1930+ were as much at fault as Hitler for electing him to power. But the germans born later & living today have NO support for the Nazis, are NOT at fault.

Similarly the brahmins of today should NOT be discriminated for the mistakes of their ancestors !!

& what most of them dont realize is hatred will destroy these DMK people & not the ones they target.

Tam Brams in particular are prospering all over, - when you persecute a community, they will rebound like no other - look at the jews !!

Cheers,
JK

 

[kameshratnam]

பிறவியிலிருந்தே பார்வை இல்லாத ஒரு நபருக்கு சிவப்பு வண்ணம் எப்படி இருக்கும் என்று யாரால் புரியவைக்க முடிகிறதோ, அவராலேயே கடவுள் இல்லை எனவும் ஆதாரபூர்வமாக நிரூபிக்க முடியும். ( கடவுள் இருக்கிறார் என்றும் ஆதாரத்தோடு நிரூபிக்க முடியும்)


அப்படி இல்லாமல் வெறும் தர்க்கத்தின் அடிப்படையில், அல்லது உதாரணங்களின் அடிப்படையில், நம்பிக்கையின் அடிப்படையில் வாத-விவாதம் செய்வது வீண் வேலை; (வெட்டி வேலைகூட).

 

[kameshratnam]

”கண்ணப்பர் தெலுங்கர், நான், கன்னடியன், தோழர் அண்ணாத்துரை தமிழர்” (பெரியார் ஈ.வே. ரா. சிந்தனைகள் – முதல் தொகுதி)

”நான் கர்நாடக பலிஜவார் வகுப்பைச் சேர்ந்தவன்” (குடியரசு 22.08.1926)

இன்று தமிழ் உலகில் தமிழ்ப்புலவர்களில் இரண்டு மூன்று புலவர்களின் பெயர்கள் அடிபடுகின்றன. அவர்கள் 1. தொல்காப்பியன், 2. திருவள்ளுவன், 3. கம்பன்.


இம்மூவரில்,


1. தொல்காப்பியன் ஆரியக்கூலி, ஆரிய தர்மத்தையே தமிழ் இலக்கணமாக செய்துவிட்ட மாபெரும் துரோகி.


2. திருவள்ளுவன் அக்காலத்திற்கு ஏற்ற வகையில் ஆரியக் கருத்துக்கு ஆதரவு கொடுக்கும் அளவில் பகுத்தறிவைப் பற்றி கவலைப்படாமல் நீதி கூறும் முறையில் தனது மத உணர்ச்சியோடு ஏதோ கூறிச்சென்றான்.


3. கம்பன் இன்றைய அரசியல்வாதிகள் – தேசபக்தர்கள் பலர்போல் அவர் படித்த தமிழ் அறிவை தமிழர் எதிரியாகிய பார்ப்பனருக்கு ஆதரவாய் பயன்படுத்தித் தமிழரை இழிவுப்படுத்தி கூலிவாங்கி பிழைக்கும் மாபெரும் தமிழ்த் துரோகியே ஆவான். முழுப்பொய்யன். முழுப்பித்தலாட்டக்காரன். தன்னைப் பார்ப்பானாகவே கருதிக்கொண்டு பார்ப்பான் கூட சொல்லப்பயப்படும் கருத்துக்களை எல்லாம் கூறி தமிழர்களை நிரந்தர கீழ்மக்களாக்கிவிட்ட துரோகியாவான். இம்மூவர்களும் ஜாதியையும், ஜாதித் தொழிலையும் ஏற்றுக்கொண்டவர்கள் ஆவார்கள்”.

 

[vembu]

Thanks for the exhaustive and brilliant rebuttal Shri Surjau Sir. It is a pleasure to read your posts.

 

[suraju06]

Folks,
Please refer to post # 301:

People criticize EVR for marrying a girl in her 20s when he himself was in his 70s. Maniyammai came to EVR on her own and dedicated her life to his care. EVR himself stated the marriage was to provide Maniyammai with financial security after EVR was gone. It is famously known that just prior to marrying Maniammai EVR and Rajaji had a long private meeting. What they discussed is not known. But the repercussions of EVR marrying Maniammai is widely believed to be one of the items discussed.In any case, if EVR and Maniyammai did get married for conjugal reason, what is it to those who hate both EVR and Maniammai anyway? Whether Maniammai loved EVR or not is a matter between Maniammai and EVR. Maniammai remained a loyal member of DK all her life. She dedicated herself to EVR all his life, and after his death, to his memory. From this, one can easily deduce she really loved EVR. The criticism leveled against EVR that somehow he did not allow the freedoms he was advocating for other women to Maniymmai is ridiculous.

1. Financial security:You don’t marry a girl who is 50 years younger than you and deprive her of emotional security to give her financial security. There are many other methods of giving that financial security. You can adopt her as your daughter and give her the security. If you can bequeath your properties to her so that her financial security will be ensured even without a marriage with you. Please read last para for knowing the truth.

2. What does EVR's meeting with Rajaji has to do with this exploitation of a young woman? Why is it brought into picture here? Is it to argue that a brahmin was indeed responsible for the injustice done to Maniyammai? What a pathetic argument this?


3. “If EVR and Maniyammai married for conjugal reasons”-what exactly is the meaning of this? What kind of conjugal reason can be there in a marriage that involves a 70 years old man and a 20 year old girl? A marriage is a marriage which is an arrangement by which a man and a woman mutually agree and come to live together and enjoy worldly pleasures together. This pleasure certainly includes sexual satisfaction, emotional security, physical security and the pleasure of begetting and bringing up children together. See the last paragraph for the truth.

4. What is it to those who are critical of EVR anyway?-It does matter because EVR is projected here as a champion of women's liberation and women's rights. His lectures are for women's liberation whereas his action is exploitation of a women. So it matters here. Accept that he was practising hypocrisy and we wont talk about this any more. Maniyammai served EVR out of affection and love and this love could not be equated or interpreted as the love between a young male and a young female. So all this talk of a platonic love is pulling the wool over the eyes of the scrutinising public. We are matured members here and we clearly understand what EVR did and why EVR did that.

5. The truth of the marriage is this. Maniyammai took refuge with the DK as a helpless women. She became a volunteer and served the party and its leader sincerely. The leader who was a widower and who was 70 years old exploited to the hilt her dependence on the party for her physical and financial security. There many such women who have gone through similar and worse exploitation in this world and they have never complained – just like Maniyammai.

EVR did not want to contest in elections. He wanted his party to be strictly about social reform. But, CNA, MK and others were convinced social change can come only if they take power, for which contesting in elections is a must. This is the primary reason for the split, EVR marrying Maniyammai was only a pretext.

EVR knew that he wont win a single seat if he had contested the election. So elections were just sour grapes for him. We are least bothered as to what can be the real reason for the split in DK. But the maniyammai marriage reveals the dirty marupakkam of EVR and that is the point we are discussing. No digression/subterfuge please.

When CNA won the elections of 1967 he went straight to EVR to pay his tributes. When he formed his ministry he paid homage to his mentor EVR. CNA declared that his victory was victory for EVR's ideology, even though EVR himself supported Congress in that election.

This is politics in which we are not interested here. EVR has changed his ideologies many times just like he changed his shirts. So there is nothing surprising about his politics.

One of the signature achievement of CNA's short-lived administration was legalizing Self-Respect marriages, one of the emblematic reforms EVR introduced. So, the idea that CNA's split from EVR was because he married Maniammai is false. It was nothing more than a pretext.

A simple civil marriage was recognized in the law much earlier. So there was nothing revolutionary about the self-respect marriages. It has been rightly said here that it was just emblematic. For one who was always looking for only the emblems to attack forgetting the underlying widespread roots of it, an SR marriage was again an emblem of a different kind: an emblem in the ceremonial flaunting of which the purohits were replaced by the dirty high priests of political parties and the Vedic mantras were replaced by vituperative casteist harangue.

Cheers.

 

[C RAVI]

Wonderful post #310, Shri Raju...

Any common man with the least education and basic awareness of humans, human relationships, human understanding and human values would for sure have the same views that you have displayed in your post #310.

Your consideration of SR marriage as an emblem of a different sort, that facilitates conduct of marriage by the dirty high priests of political parties and by vituperative casteist harangue, considering in contrast to the common long existing simple civil and legal marriages, is absolutely right.

In those days, it was very common atrocity to marry off very young girls to old and sick men for financial gains, unmindful of the will and wish of the young girls, who all were deprived of their basic human feelings of enjoying and appreciating beauty, charm, vigor and the true sense of pairing with a desirable groom.

If EVR need to be appreciated for his constructive stand on women for their welfare, relieving them from the control and exploitations and fighting for their basic rights to help them live their choice of living, he should have first set a paradigm of himself to prove his honestly and sensibility in his stand with which he advocates his ideologies for the betterment of women folks.

He neither was a true and honest revolutionist for the sake of the whole TN society by eliminating caste atrocities nor his stand for women welfare was genuine.

And as an atheists, there is nothing to admire him for his efforts to eradicate superstition. In fact, in the pretext of eliminating superstition and enlightening Hindu folks, he had derogated the very foundation of Hinduism with the best possible abusive criticism.

In all, he was just a plain BUT pakka politician and did his best to suite himself to be a true politician of the dirty politics.

Just as a critic, we can say that he was a smart guy with potent energies and mischievousness, with which he could pick up the social stigma and worked towards the betterment of the society in disguise, in order to gain social and political fame. Ironically this smart guy stretched too much to the extent of being hated by many of his fellow Hindu Theist folks and lost a chance of obtaining outstanding credibility.

 

[kameshratnam]

ஈ.வே. ராமசாமி நாயக்கருடைய இரண்டாவது திருமணம் 09-07-1949 ஆம் ஆண்டு நடந்தது. அப்போது ஈ.வே. ராமசாமி நாயக்கருக்கு வயது 72. மணியம்மைக்கு வயது 26.


மணியம்மையை விட 46 வயது அதிகம் ஈ.வே. ராமசாமி நாயக்கருக்கு. இந்த இரண்டாவது திருமணம் நடக்கும்முன் ஈ.வே. ராமசாமி நாயக்கர், திருமணங்கள் எப்படியிருக்க வேண்டும் என்று கூறியிருக்கிறார் தெரியுமா?


வயது பொருத்தமில்லாத திருமணத்தைப் பற்றி ஈ.வே.ரா!


ஈ.வே. ராமசாமி நாயக்கர் கூறுகிறார்:-


”மணமக்கள் விஷயத்தில் போதிய வயது முதலிய பொருத்தமில்லாததும், பெண்களின் சம்மதமோ அல்லது ஆணின் சம்மதமோ இல்லாமல் பெற்றோர் தீர்மானம் செய்துவிட்டார்களாதலால் கட்டுப்பட்டுத்தான் தீரவேண்டும் என்கின்ற நிர்பந்த முறையில் நடப்பது சுயமரியாதையற்ற மணங்கள் என்றே சொல்லலாம்”
(குடியரசு 03-06-1928)


ANNADURAI ON PERIYARs MARRIAGE
ஈ.வே. ராமசாமி நாயக்கரைப் பற்றி…. அண்ணா!


பெரியாரின் திருமணம் கட்சிப் பெருமையின் மீது வீசப்பட்ட ஈட்டி. இயக்கத்தின் மாண்பு, அதன் தலைவரின் தகாதச் செயலால் தரைமட்டமாகிவிடும். ‘உரத்த குரல் எடுத்து ஊரெல்லாம் சுற்றினாலும்’ தலைவர் போக்கால் ஏற்பட்ட கண்ணியக் குறைவைக் காப்பாற்றிவிட முடியாது. போற்றிப் பரப்பி வந்த இலட்சியங்களை மண்ணில் வீசும் அளவுக்குத் தலைவரின் சுயநலம் கொண்டுபோய்விட்டுவிட்டது. இனி அவரின் கீழிருந்து தொண்டாற்றுதலால் பயன் இல்லை. உழைத்து நாம் சிந்தும் வியர்வைத் துளிகள் அவரது ”சொந்த” வயலுக்கு நாம் பாய்ச்சிய தண்ணீராகவே ஆகும் என்று கருதி அவரது தலைமை கூடாது; அது மாறும்வரை கழகப் பணிகளிலிருந்து விலகி நிற்கிறோம் என்பதாக எண்ணற்ற கழகங்களும், தோழர்களும், நிர்வாகக் கமிட்டி உறுப்பினர்களும் கண்ணீர்த்துளிகளைச் சிந்தி ஒதுங்கி நிற்கின்றனர்.
(திராவிட நாடு – 21-08-1949)

 

[kameshratnam]

Grandfather tries to tie thali ( annadurai on periyar)
வயதுப் பொருத்தமில்லாத திருமணத்தைப் பற்றி அண்ணாத்துரை!


அதுமட்டுமல்ல 1940-ல் ஈ.வே. ராமசாமி நாயக்கரின் பத்திரிகையான விடுதலையில் அண்ணாத்துரை எழுதிய ஒரு தலையங்கத்தைப் படித்துப் பாருங்கள்.


“தாத்தா கட்ட இருந்த தாலி!” என்ற தலைப்புக் கொடுத்து அண்ணாதுரை எழுதுகிறார் :-


”தொந்தி சரிய மயிரே வெளிர நிறை தந்தமனைய உடலே” படைத்த 72 வயதான ஒரு பார்ப்பனக் கிழவர், ”துள்ளுமத வேட்கைக் கணையாலே” தாக்கப்பட்டு கலியாணம் செய்துகொள்ள ஆசைப்பட்டார்.


வயது 72! ஏற்கெனவே மணமாகிப் பெண்டைப் பிணமாகக் கண்டவர். பிள்ளைக்குட்டியும் பேரன் பேத்தியும் பெற்றவர். இந்தப் பார்ப்பனக் கிழவர். ஆயினுமென்ன? இருண்ட இந்தியாவில், எத்தனை முறை வேண்டுமானாலுந்தான் ஆண்மகன் கலியாணம் செய்து கொள்ளலாமே!


பெண்தானே, பருவ மங்கையாயினும் பட்டாடை உடுத்திக் கொண்டு பல்லாங்குழி ஆடி விளையாடும் சின்னஞ்சிறு சிறுமியாயினம், மணமாகிப் பின்னர் கணவன் பிணமானால் விதவையாகிவிடவேண்டும்.


இளமை இருக்கலாம். ஆனால் இன்பவாழ்வுக்கு அவள் அனுமதி பெற அந்தக் கூட்டம் அனுமதிப்பதில்லை. அவளது விழி, உலகில் உள்ள வனப்பான வாழ்க்கைச் சித்திரங்கள் மீது பாயலாம்.


ஆனால் என்ன பயன்? விம்மி விம்மி வாழலாம் விதவைக்கோலத்துடன். இல்லையேல் விபச்சாரியாகலாம். மறுமணத்துக்கு மார்க்கம் மலர் தூவியதாக இல்லை. கல்லும் மண்ணும் முள்ளும், குருட்டுக் கொள்கையினரின் முரட்டுப் போக்கும், சாத்திரமெனும் சேறும் நிரம்பியதாகவன்றோ இருக்கிறது.


அவள் பதினெட்டு ஆண்டுள்ள பாவையாக இருக்கலாம். மலர்ந்த மலராக இருக்கலாம். வாடை சுற்றுப்பக்கம் எங்கும் வீசலாம். அவளது தகப்பனார் மூன்றாம் மனைவியுடன் கொஞ்சிக் குலாவும் காட்சி அவளது கண்களில் படலாம்.


ஆனால் பூவிழந்த பூவை புத்தி கெட்டவர்களின் போக்கிரித்தனமான பொறியாகிய வைதிகத்தால் வாட்டப்பட்டு, நீலநிற வானத்திலே நின்றுலவும் நிலவைக்கண்டும், பாதி இராத்திரி வேளையிலே பலப்பல எண்ணியும், பாழான வாழ்வு வாழ வேண்டும். இல்லையேல் தொட்டிலில் கிடத்திச் சீராட்டிப் பாலூட்டி வளர்க்க வேண்டிய குழந்தையை, பாழும் கிணற்றில், கழுத்தை நெரித்து வீசவேண்டும்!


பேதைப் பெண், ஏன் இவ்வளவு துடுக்கு? இவ்வளவு பதைப்பா? என்று ”பெரிய பெரிய” மனிதர்களெல்லாம் கேட்பர் கோபத்துடன். எனவே பசித்தபாவை, பஞ்சத்தில் அடிபட்டு நசித்துவிடுவாள்.


ஆண் மகனுக்கென்ன; எத்தனை முறை வேண்டுமாயினம் மணம் செய்து கொள்ளலாம். காசநோய் இருக்கலாம். ஆனால் இதற்காக வேண்டி மணம் செய்து கொள்ளாதிருப்பானா? ஊரார், உனக்குக் காசம் இருக்கிறது. மணம் ஏன்? என்றா கேட்பர்! இல்லை! காசநோயால் கஷ்டப்படும் இவனுக்குக் காலமறிந்து கனிவுடன் ‘மருந்துதர’ ஒரு மங்கை நல்லாள் தேவை என்றுதான் கூறுவர். சட்டம் குறுக்கே நிற்காது. சமுதாயம் ஏனென்று கேட்காது. கொட்டு முழக்குடன் மங்கல ஒலியுடன் மணம் நடக்கும். மூன்றாம் முறையாயினுஞ் சரி, ஐந்தாம் ஆறாம் முறையாயினுஞ் சரி ஆண் மகனுக்கு அந்த உரிமை உண்டு! அக்ரமம்! என்று கூறுவர் அறிவாளிகள்.


ஆம்! அக்கிரமந்தான். ஆனால் கேட்பவர் யார்? கேட்டனர். ஒரு ஊரில்! கேட்டது மட்டுமல்ல, குறுக்கே நின்று இத்தகைய கூடா மணத்தைத் தடுத்தும் விட்டனர். தடுத்ததோடு நிற்கவில்லை. மணமகளை அதே நேரத்தில் தக்க மணமகனுக்கு மணமுடித்துக் கொடுத்தனர். அத்தகைய சீரிய செயல் புரிந்த சீலர்களை நாம் பாராட்டுகிறோம்.


கல்கத்தா அருகேயுள்ள மைமன்சிங் என்ற ஊரில், 72 வயதுள்ள பார்ப்பனக் கிழவனொருவன் இளமங்கை யொருத்தியை மணம் செய்து கொள்ள ஏற்பாடு செய்தான்.


பொன் அவிர் மேனியளைக் கிழவன், தன் பிண உடல் காட்டி எங்ஙனம் மணத்துக்குச் சம்மதிக்கச் செய்ய முடியும்! வாலிபம் இல்லை அவனுக்கு. ஆனால் பணம் இருக்கிறது. பெண்ணின் பெற்றோர் பணத்தைக் கண்டனர். கிழவனின் பெண்டாகப் போயினும், கை நிறையப் பொருள் இருக்குமல்லவா! மணத்துக்கு ஒப்பினர். சகல ஏற்பாடுகளும் நடைபெற்றன.


அந்த ஊரில் இந்தக் கிழவரின் கூடாத் திருமணத்தைத் தடுக்க வேண்டிப் பலரும் சென்று பலப்பல கூறினர்; கிழவர் கேட்டாரில்லை. திருமண நாள் குறித்துவிட்டார். மணப்பந்தல் அமைத்துவிட்டார். மங்கல ஸ்நானம் செய்தார். பட்டுடுத்திப் பணிபூண்டு, பரிமளம் பூசிப் பார்ப்பனக் கிழவர் பரிதாபத்துக்குரிய பாவையை மணமுடித்துக் கொள்ளப் பக்குவமானார்!


மைமன் சிங் ஊர்வாசிகள் கண்டனர். இந்த அக்ரமத்தை எப்படியேனும் தடுத்தே தீர வேண்டும் என உறுதி கொண்டனர். மயிலே மயிலே இறகுபோடு என்றால் போடுமா! எனவே ஊரில் உறுதி கொண்டவர்கள் உள்ளே நுழைந்தனர். மணக்கோலத்திலிருந்த பெண்ணைத் தூக்கிச் சென்றனர்.


இந்தத் திவ்வியமான திடுக்கிடும் செயல்புரிந்ததில் மூஸ்லீம்களும் இந்துக்களும் ஒன்றுபட்டே உழைத்தனர்.


கிழவர் கல்யாண மண்டபம் வந்தார். காலி இடத்தைத் தான் கண்டார். கடுகடுத்தார். முகம் சுளித்தார். கா, கூவெனக் கூவினார்.


இடையே அந்த இளமங்கையைத் தக்கவனொருவனுக்கு ஊராரே மணஞ்செய்து வைத்தனர்.


கண்டார் கிழவர் காரியம் மிஞ்சி விட்டதை. காரிகை போனால் போகட்டும். கைக்கு ஏதேனும் பொருளாவது வரட்டும் என்று கருதி, தனக்கு நேரிட்ட அவமானத்துக்கு, நஷ்ட ஈடாகப் பணம் கேட்டார்.


இந்தக் கூடாமணத்தைத் தடுக்க குணசீலர்கள், தமக்குள்ளாகவே பணமும் வசூலித்து விருந்தும் நடத்தினர்.


பாராட்டுகிறோம்.


பெண்ணாசைப் பித்துக்கொண்டு அலைந்து அந்தப் பார்ப்பனக்கிழவன் பணப்பேராசை தீர்ந்ததும் போதுமென்று இருந்துவிட்டான். பாவை தக்கனொருவனை மணந்தாள். ”தாத்தா” கட்ட இருந்த தாலியைத் தவிர்த்த, அந்த மைமன்சிங்வாசிகளை நாம் மனமாரப் பாராட்டுகிறோம்.


ஆனால் மைமன்சிங்கில் தடுக்கப்பட்டது போன்ற மணங்களை எத்தனை எத்தனையோ தடுக்கப்படாமல் நடந்தேறித்தான் வருகின்றன! தடுப்பாரில்லையே! அறிவு வளரவில்லையே!


ஏன் இத்தகைய கூடாமணங்களைக் கண்காணித்துத் தடுத்துச் சர்க்கார் முன்வரக்கூடாது என்று கேட்கிறோம். எத்தனை முறை ஊரில் உறுதி கொண்டவர்களால் தடுக்க முடியும்? இத்தகைய மணங்கள் நடக்கவொட்டாமல், நாகரிக சர்க்கார் மாதர் வாழ்வு கெடும் விதத்தில் நடைபெறும் இத்தகைய மூடத்தனத்தை தடுக்க, ஏதாவது வழி செய்ய வேண்டும். ஊருக்கு ஊர் பிரபலஸ்தர்கள், பகுத்தறிவாளர்கள் கொண்ட கமிட்டிகளை சர்க்கார் நிறுவி, இவ்விதமான கூடா மணங்கள் நடைபெற ஒட்டாது தடுக்க அக்கமிட்டிகளுக்கு அதிகாரம் அளிக்கலாம். குடித்துக் கெடுவதை, சூதாடிக் கெடுவதை, விபசாரம் செய்து கெடுவதை, தடுக்க சர்க்கார் சட்டம் செய்து சமுதாயக் கோளாறுகளை நீக்குவது போலவே, இவ்விதமான மணவினைகள் மூலம் மங்கையர் வாழ்வு மிதித்துத் துவைக்கப்படுவதையும் தடுக்கச் சட்டமியற்ற வேண்டும்.


துருக்கியில் கலியாணம் நடப்பதென்றால் மணமகனும், மணமகளும் நோய் ஏதுமின்றி இருக்கின்றனர் என முதலில் டாக்டர் சர்ட்டிபிக்கேட் வாங்கி சர்க்காருக்கு அனுப்ப வேண்டும்.


இந்தூர் சமஸ்தானத்தில் வயதில் அதிக வித்தியாசமுள்ள ஆண் மணந்துகொள்ளக் கூடாது என்ற சட்டம் கொண்டு வரப்பட்டது. சில சமஸ்தானங்களில் இத்தகைய சட்டமும் இருக்கிறது.


பம்பாய் மாகாண சட்டசபையில் எம்.எல்.ஏ. அம்மையாரொருவர் 45 வயதுக்கு மேற்பட்ட ஆடவன் 18 வயதுக்குக் குறைவான பாவையை மணப்பதைத் தடுக்க சட்டம் இயற்றவேண்டுமென்றம், சிந்து மாகாண சட்டசபையில் பேராசிரியர் கன்ஷாயம், பெண்ணின் வயதுக்கு மேல் 20 வயது அதிகமாக உள்ள ஆடவன் பெண்ணை மணக்கக் கூடாது என்றும் பேசி சட்டங்கள் இயற்ற முற்பட்டனர்.


இத்தகைய சட்டத்தின் அவசியத்தைத்தான் மைமன் சிங் மணவினை எடுத்துக்காட்டுகிறது.


சர்க்கார் கவனிப்பார்களா? சர்க்கார் கவனிக்கும்படி சமூகம் கேட்குமா?
(திராவிட நாடு 10.07-49)

 

[Nara]

Part 3 of my clarifications to some of the criticisms leveled against the texts I have been citing about EVR. I will repeat the parameters within which I am making these presentations.

1. I don't agree with every last word EVR has uttered, he himself exhorted his devotees to think for themselves and accept only what made sense to them,
2. I didn't broach the topic of EVR, it was brought in by others --in the past I have always ignored them, but this time I wanted to present his own words, in context, on the outrageous charges that are routinely made as though they are facts,
3. My admiration for EVR is based on the stands he advocated on caste, women, superstitions, etc.

---

People cite Satyakama Japala story often as proof positive that there was no restriction on who can study the Vedas. I have dealt with this issue at least twice in the past. But this argument is still repeated.

If Satyakama story does prove this, why did Adi Sankara and Ramanuja specifically quote Dharmashasthras to establish that "Shudras" are not allowed to do exactly what is now being asserted? Further, how hollow this argument is can be seen from the internal evidence of this story itself.

When Satyakama wanted to study he approached his mother and asked her what? Not permission to go study, but wanted to know who his father was. Why? Because he knew that is the first question he will be asked. He was proved right, that was the first question Gautama asked when Satyamaka went to him. So, let us not kid ourselves, it is abundantly clear lineage was a criterion even then.

Next, when Satyakama fearlessly tells the truth, Gautama states only a Brahmin will tell the truth in such a forthright manner and admits him on that basis. In other words, he is not "considered" a Brahmin because he spoke the truth, which is bad enough, but he "must" be a Brahmin that is why he spoke the truth. This is the stuff supremacist feelings are made out of. This is why EVR's message still resonates with almost all Tamil population.

 

[suraju06]

Folks,


This is with reference to post #314:

People cite Satyakama Japala story often as proof positive that there was no restriction on who can study the Vedas. I have dealt with this issue at least twice in the past. But this argument is still repeated. If Satyakama story does prove this, why did Adi Sankara and Ramanuja specifically quote Dharmashasthras to establish that "Shudras" are not allowed to do exactly what is now being asserted? Further, how hollow this argument is can be seen from the internal evidence of this story itself.
When Satyakama wanted to study he approached his mother and asked her what? Not permission to go study, but wanted to know who his father was. Why? Because he knew that is the first question he will be asked. He was proved right, that was the first question Gautama asked when Satyamaka went to him. So, let us not kid ourselves, it is abundantly clear lineage was a criterion even then.
Next, when Satyakama fearlessly tells the truth, Gautama states only a Brahmin will tell the truth in such a forthright manner and admits him on that basis. In other words, he is not "considered" a Brahmin because he spoke the truth, which is bad enough, but he "must" be a Brahmin that is why he spoke the truth. This is the stuff supremacist feelings are made out of. This is why EVR's message still resonates with almost all Tamil population.

I believe this is in reply to my post #286. Even though the poster has not said as much it appears to be the case. My answer is here. I find this arrangement convenient- the poster addressing all his posts to the members here in general and I addressing all my counters again to the members in general because this way one big problem is solved for me. I don’t have to worry and take extra care about whether I meet the civility criterion set by the member (not be the forum).
I will divide my argument into two parts. First I will deal with the knowledge part of this –about Satyakama Japala and the context in which I recorded his learning vedas and then in the second part will deal with EVR’s nonsense.

1. I had mentioned about the authority of the Vedas over the smritis to make it known that knowledgeable people accept only Vedas as the final authority wherever there is a difference between veda and smriti. While smritis speak about many discriminations on the basis of castes Vedas are clear about the castes as to what they are. I had quoted just three references out of many to prove my point. As there is no comment about this in the poster’s post, it is reasonable to presume that he has nothing to argue against that and just accepts the idea propounded. I move to the next step now. I had quoted three other sources to prove the point that there was no discrimination in the teaching of Vedas in vedic times. I had quoted 1) the conversation between jAnasruthi and Raigva in Chandokya Upanishad. 2) the conversation between Gavashan (a pancaman) and other sages in Aithareya Braahmanam. 3)And finally the story of Japala learning Vedas as we find in Chandokyam 4[SUP]th[/SUP] Prapaata. These are again only a few instances out of many found in Vedas. The poster has chosen to ignore the first two references quoted by me and has taken the third one to prove a non-existent “supremacist feelings”. A vedic teacher asks any student for his gothra only to know which veda should be taught first to the student. The student has to learn first the veda learnt by his ancestors and then other Vedas. This is the rule of teaching Vedas. This is the reason for asking the question about Japala’s gothra. When Japala replied honestly about his mother and his ignorance of his gothra he was appreciated for speaking the truth and accepted as a Brahmin (we do not know which gothra, for this is not told in the original text). Accepting him as a brahmin was only to highlight the importance of speaking truth for Brahmins were supposed to speak truth always-not even puraitheertha nanmai pyakkum poy of Tiruvalluvar-were supposed to be satvik in nature etc. So the teacher asks him to bring samith and proceeds to do upanayana to him. To see supremacist nonsense in this simple episode requires a highly conceited mindset. Moreover the point that Kshatriyas and Vysyas were eligible to learn Vedas has been completely ignored by the member. The Japala episode was brought in only to show that even a person who did not know which varna he belonged to was accepted as a student. So the contention that Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vysyas besides Shudras and pancamas and students from unknown varna were eligible to learn Vedas stands proved while the frivolous attempt to find supremacist tendencies in ancient society stands refuted.

Now about EVR’s nonsense: EVR and his fans try to club every one other than Brahmins into Shudra category and try to cover up all the casteist discriminations practiced by Kshatriyas and Vysyas on the real shudras and pancamans and the same discriminations and atrocities perpetrated by Kshatriyas, Vysyas and shudras joining together on the hapless pancamans. This is the kernel from which the supremacist argument here has sprouted. While EVR and Company’s(dominant castes’) attempt is to divide the Hindu society, exploit the pancamans for ever, put the blame for every thing on the Brahmins and enjoy the political power that flows from the hatred mongering, my attempt here is to stress the truth and suggest that all members of the Hindu society(this includes every caste and women) should learn and follow the Vedas, understand the true purport of castes in their context and live peacefully and prosperously. Vedas are after all knowledge and who can deny its accessibility?

Smiritis were not the creation of Brahmins.

I am keen to know what is the view of the member about the other instances of Shudras and Kshatriyas learning Vedas. The silence indicates that my contention has been accepted. Even if we leave aside the Japala episode there are enough evidence to prove my point.

This post has become quite lengthy. Excuse me. More will follow later. Cheers

 

[Raghy]

Dear Sri. Raju, Greetings.

I am keen to know what is the view of the member about the other instances of Shudras and Kshatriyas learning Vedas.

This is about non-brahmin's erudition in Sanskrit.... Kalidasa was not a brahmin; so was not Bhoja maharaj; Dhandi? He was not a brahmin; was Panini a Brahmin?

Sri Narayana Guru -

Narayana Guru was born on August 20, 1856, in the village of Chempazhanthi near Thiruvananthapuram, the son of Madan Asan, a farmer, and Kutti Amma. The boy was dotingly called Nanu. Madan was also a teacher ("Asan")[SUP][citation needed][/SUP] who was learned in Sanskrit and proficient in Astrology and Ayurveda

The Guru was born into an Ezhava family, in an era when people from backward communities like the Ezhavas faced much social injustices in the caste-ridden Kerala society.

Nārāyana Guru is revered for his Vedic knowledge, poetic proficiency,

.. Narayana Guru - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cheers!

 

[Nara]

Narayana Guru was despised by the Brahmins. They tried to stop him as much as they can. Now, shamelessly they want to cite him as though they deserve credit. How much the Brahminists would like to dictate what kind of reformer is acceptable to them. Guess what, those days of crass Brahmin domination are gone. Brahmins don't get to decide who is an acceptable reformer. If Narayana Guru struggled against Brahminism in Kerala in his own way, EVR did the same in his own way in Tamil Nadu.

http://www.narayanaguru.org/Book/chapt-5.html

One caste, one religion and one God for man.
Ask not, say not, think not caste.
Whatever be the religion, let man improve himself

 

[Raghy]

Dear Sri. Nara, Greetings.

Narayana Guru was despised by the Brahmins. They tried to stop him as much as they can. Now, shamelessly they want to cite him as though they deserve credit. How much the Brahminists would like to dictate what kind of reformer is acceptable to them. Guess what, those days of crass Brahmin domination are gone. Brahmins don't get to decide who is an acceptable reformer. If Narayana Guru struggled against Brahminism in Kerala in his own way, EVR did the same in his own way in Tamil Nadu.

http://www.narayanaguru.org/Book/chapt-5.html

One caste, one religion and one God for man.
Ask not, say not, think not caste.
Whatever be the religion, let man improve himself

What do you mean 'Brahmins shamelessly citing Narayana Guru'? I am citing Narayana Guru. I am citing Guru to show he learned Sanskrit and Vedas although he was not a brahmin. I am citing NarayanaGuru within context. If you look at my message in post #316, I did not hide the fact his caste faced injustices in those days. It is in the quotation.

My friend, I know what I am citing.

Cheers!

 

[Jaykay767]

PS: I posted this earlier but somehow "gotdeleted" - atleast if it is going to be deleted, let me know the reason!!. Lets pl continue to keep the torch of freedom burning - and allow"voices that standup for Brahmins" to continue in this forum at least!! I mean you have named as TB.com !!

Hi Nara,

I am not sure if you are just quoting EVR or endorsing his views !!

first lets get the history right. Rama is a Dark Prince/King, as per ValmikiRamayana, Ravana is described as White man.!! if you say my interpretation isincorrect, pl prove otherwise.

Unfortunately as much as the so called Aryans want to change Rama as a WhiteMan in our Vedas, Ramayana etc.. they cannot. Rama was a Dark Skinned DravidianKing mentioned in every ancient text, so either you say these texts are wrongor accept Rama was Dark King - period !!

EVR was driven by hatred, & carried away by the Aryan invasion theoryclaims!! I remember Kanimozhi once arguing on TV Channel that - "How canRavana be a Brahmin??". It is not possible!!. well - she has to go toValmiki and ask him to change Ravana as Shudra & Rama as Aryan - White Manetc.. so that she can continue in her illusion ! well neither she nor the socalled aryans have the knowledge to change the Ramayana verses to reflect that- LOL !!.

Rama, Krishna, Shiva, Vishnu are all Dravidian Dark Kings - worshipped as Gods.

If Brahmins want to subjugate the Shudras, why are they worshipping the DarkGods ???.

If EVR had stuck to fighting against Caste discrimination, & Brahmin supremacy,everyone would have supported him. if he quotes the Vedas, scriptures, &says Rama discriminated against Shudras, Vedic Gods discriminated againstShudras etc.. I would have promptly sent him to a Mental Asylum for permanenttreatment !! - LOL !

I mean so what if millions follow him ?? couldnt care a crap !!

LOL !!

Cheers,
JK

Dear JK Ji,

I deleted your original post because it was in response to Professor Nara Ji's post quoting EVR describing the Hindu god Rama in derogatory terms. We do not allow derogation of any specific God of any religion.

I will keep this on, but if this touches anything vile to God Rama, I will remove it. Thanks.

Regards,
KRS

Dear KRS Sir,

Really appreciate your clarification. I totally agree with you, describing Gods in a derogatory terms is simply unacceptable. thats why I posted a very strong response back saying I would have sent EVR straight to the mental asylum.

I am absolutely okay for the post to be deleted, if it spins into a to & fro response against our Gods.

Cheers,
JK

 

[Jaykay767]

PS: I posted this earlier but somehow "gotdeleted" - atleast if it is going to be deleted, let me know the reason!!. Lets pl continue to keep the torch of freedom burning - and allow"voices that standup for Brahmins" to continue in this forum at least!! I mean you have named as TB.com !!

Shudras are NOT a race or a tribe as per the Vedas !!. They are called Shudras because of bad behaviour, sinful actions etc.. Valmiki was a Shudra - Robber - bad man, after penance changes to a Good Man - Arya - Noble Man - Brahmin - & then to a Rishi !!

By the way - Rakshasas are White People - Ravana, Surpanaka etc.. - Marco Polo writes - for dravidians - Gods are Dark & Demons are White !!. Lets assume Marco Polo is correct because this is historical evidence, his writings are documented by - western researchers - so hopefully no disputes - LOL !!

so why would fair skinned Brahmins accept - White People as Rakshasas in our Scriptures ??? & call Dark People as Shiva Vishnu Rama Krisha as Gods ??

 

[suraju06]

Folks,

Please refer to post # 305:

From page 109 of "Fuzzy and Neutrosophic Analysis of Periyar's Views on Untouchability" by W. B. Vasantha Kandasamy, a Dalit intellectual.

1. Why this attempt to impress people with high sounding jargons? What Fuzzy and Neutrosophic analysis is may not be known to many members here. Intellectual dishonesty has manifold manifestations. Using jargons is one of them. Like I said earlier, instead of saying straightaway that you have read the letter written by Mahatma Gandhi to Ambedkar you can say you read the epistle or sri mukham written by Mahatma Gandhi and go stand before the mirror to see the glow around you and enjoy it.

"The Congress Ministry in Madras and seven other Provinces resigned on 29 October 1939, following the outbreak of the Second World War. They protested against the British rulers involving India in the war without having consulted the High Command of the party. Consequently, the Governor and Governor General requested Periyar to come and form the ministry. The offer came once in 1940 and again in 1942. Even his friend C.Rajagopalachari personally requested Periyar to accept the offer and assured him of outside support. Periyar refused it on both the occasions. He reasoned that if he accepted power his aim of annihilating the caste system would receive a set back."

2. How EVR forming a ministry would have affected his aim of annihilating (?) caste system is open to debate. It was politics that EVR was practising at that time and he had to do so many things and present them all to people in anti-brahmin color and clothes. This is one such antic.

This may not be very acceptable to Brahminists as it does not support their supremacist agenda.

3. We all know what is the back ground of Mrs. V. Kandaswamy. She made an attempt to create caste based divisions among the faculty and students in IIT, the institution which has students and teachers totally devoted to pursuit of knowledge and knowledge alone. The fact that she is a dalit does not mean every thing she says has to be accepted as truth. Particularly so when the EVR fans here refuse to accept what Venkatesan says, just because he is speaking from within the physical security provided by Hindutva. Brahmins have no supremacist agenda and no agenda whatsoever-unlike the EVRS who had an agenda to annihilate brahmins.

Cheers.

 

[C RAVI]

Shri KRS,

The moment I noticed that my post got deleted, and read the last two posts of Jaykay767, I was wondering as what must be the reason behind deletion of my post?

Then, when I could realize that Shri Nara's post was also deleted, I could understand the intent of your moderation.

I strongly agree that, a moderator should not be questioned for his moderation and deletion. I respect that. BUT, just want to know through this post, the following -

1) There was nothing derogatory about Lord Rama in terms of Shri Nara's personal opinion. He only highlighted as what was EVR's interpretations of Ramayana and how was he justifying his claims to his masses. Why this post was deleted when it was nothing but about what EVR's views were.

2) When this thread exclusively revolves around EVR, highlighting each and every aspects of EVR's ideologies, his remarks, comments, views etc.etc, in all his glory and admiration, what is so wrong if more of EVR's interpretation about Vedas, Gods and Demons were exposed here?

3) My post and that of Jaykay767's post, in response to Shri Nara's post, attempted to nullify the childish, laughable and utterly mischievous instigation of EVR against Vedas, Gods and Brahmins. Both the posts attempted to justify Ramayana and Lord Rama, detailing all the truth about Devas and Asuras. Neither our posts were abusive and uncivil nor Shri Nara's post attempted to personally derogate Ramayana and Lord Rama. In such cases, why all these posts need to be deleted?


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

Whether it's Ramayana or Mahabharatha or any other epic stories, they all had a common message - "Adharma can never last and win over/rule over Adharma", "Dharma should be sustained and administered ever", "Demonic intentions and behaviors would face severe repercussions, if demonic folks try to spoil the righteous acts, unmindful of warning" etc..etc..

Devas and Asuras are two dominant and opposing energies and had attacks on each other for each of their respective interests.

Ravana was a Brahmin with Demonic characteristics. Ravana was too inclined towards Lord Shiva and could win over his admiration for his severe penance/tapasya and Bhakthi. As such Ravana got many boons from Lord Shiva and gained extreme powers. He started playing mischief with Lord Rama in support of his sister Soorpanakai and had to face the consequences.

Like wise, Vaali had to face the repercussions of his miss deeds against his own brother - Sugriva.

Taadka and Soorpanakai were Asura naaris and had to face attacks from Rama and Lakshmana for their demonic acts despite the warnings posed on them, before the attack.

Lord Rama born as Kshatriya in Suryavansha, later known as Raghuvansha.

There is nothing to twist and claim that all the Non-Brahmins were portrayed as Asuras and all the Brahmins as Devas. It was all about Good and Evil and which one succeeds over the other.

All the Gods/Epic stories were to advocate adherence to Dharma, despite harsh tests of life and time. And these sense of righteousness is what is expected from every Hindu folks, irrespective of their knowledge and profession.

 

[suraju06]

Folks,

Please refer to post #317:

Brahmins don't get to decide who is an acceptable reformer.

Luckily the EVR fans too do not get to decide who is an acceptable reformer. If , god forbid, they were to get this power they would have chosen Kushboo as the greatest reformer. They have already built a temple for Kushboo and daily puja is being offered in that temple.

 

[T.S.Sankara Narayanan]

The Heading ," Self Respect Moment" has crossed 33 pages in this Forum and my view is the 324 th View. We can understand from this How we are Hunted by this moment in Tamil Nadu.

This is not the case for Brahmins in any other states in India except TN.

"Kudumi Cutting" and," Poonool Cutting " Rowdiness were drastically practiced in our State.

The Extreme Torture showed on us cannot be Excused or Forgotten as long as we live.

The DK and DMK people used to say that the practice of Kudumi and Poonool are symbol of Supremacy to show us different in society and it cannot be Tolerated.

At the same time Muslims in our Country are wearing," Kulla " and Muslim Ladies used to wear," Partha " to show them Separate in our Society.

These DK & DMK Rowdies has no GUTS to touch Muslims. They know that their Head will be cut if they attack on Muslim's Practices.

I am having plenty of Muslim Friends and some of them are Friends of mine since from my School and College days. So I am not Pointing out this to show a Hatred against any community especially Muslims.

These Muslims and even Christians never Condemned the barbarian attack of DK and DMK Rowdies.

But I have respect over My beloved Muthuramalinga Thevar for he Condemned the Rowdiness of DK & DMK on those days. More over he daringly Proclaimed that , Politics and Anmikam are my 2 eyes which is now followed by BJP.

 

[suraju06]

Dear Raghy,

Your post #316:

I consider all languages as just a medium for communication between one human being and another. If Sanskrit has beautiful imageries in the vedic hymns Tamil has equally good ones. The language should be able to get the ideas across without damage or attenuation. Any language that achieves this is ok for use. The decibels that we hear about a language being a mother (remember un utharaththu uthiththezhunthe onru pala oidinum?) , Goddess, beautiful women etc are all either politics or hyperboles. I am a worshipper of knowledge and I need language as the media to access it. So I like the most efficient medium that is available. Tomorrow if some one comes and threatens that he is going to make a language disappear I wont give my life to save it. I will get on with what is available because I have much more important thing to do.

I have read Narayana Guru's works. I have respect for his disarming, earthy cryptic presentation of complex ideas.