Yet another failed marriage

[Raji Ram]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

In Sing. Chennai, I find more number of 'out of proportion' girls than 'out of proportion' boys!

Is it the same in other cities too??

 

[C RAVI]

In Sing. Chennai, I find more number of 'out of proportion' girls than 'out of proportion' boys!

Is it the same in other cities too??

Shmt.Raji Ram,

Thanks for registering the fact here, though you are a lady..

You have carefully maintained yourself well at your age!!

 

[sangom]

In Sing. Chennai, I find more number of 'out of proportion' girls than 'out of proportion' boys!

Is it the same in other cities too??

Smt. RR,

Both boys and girls are very fatty nowadays. Reasons can be many but junk food culture, sedentary habits even from school days and the IT type of jobs which don't need much of physical activity are cited as the main reasons. Add to this the concept of today's mothers of insisting on having "bonnie" babies which in practice translates as fatty baby (மொழு மொழு கொழு கொழு, they say!).

The net result is that we have a burgeoning fertility clinics culture and also neo-natal specialization hospitals!

 

[suraju06]

Dear Mr. Kunjuppu,

Your post # 233 for reference: Excuse me for intervening.

I read the blog to which you had given the link 7. It was again another one of those innumerable blogs that are there in the web which specialize in brahmin baiting/bashing. They got this senile senior citizen in Thathachary as a handmaid to vouch for their vituperative outpourings. It came as a serial in the tabloid Nakkiran which is a published from Chennai. I am fed up with this kind of yellow web blogs and have stopped caring to reply when some one draws his knowledge extensively from it . Those who see in Thathachary a revolutionary and an avatar who has come to redeem the Hindu society, I have nothing to say. But I am going to write something about what you have reproduced in Tamil in your post #233 because the members who may read it may go with a wrong impression.

கன்னியை தூக்கிக்கொண்டு ஓடிய அந்தப் பக்கத்து வீட்டு காளைக்கு தமிழ்க்கூட்டம் என்ன தண்டனை கொடுத்தது தெரியுமா?
இதோ பாரடா... நீ அவளை தொட்ட முதல் ஆண்மகன். அதனால் அவள் உனக்குரியவள் தான். உன்னுடன் தான் வாழ வேண்டும் அவள்’ என இரண்டு பேரையும் சேர்த்து வைத்தது தீர்ப்பு.

You have left out the following passage which preceded the above quote in the original of Thathachary. I copy it here for the benefit of the anonimous reader here as he may not have a copy of the book written by Thathachary.

பெண்ணொருத்தி பூப்பெய்துகிறாள். உறவுப்பெண்கள் சுற்றிலும் மகிழ்ச்சி பொங்க முற்றுகையிட்டிருக்கிறார்கள். பெண்மை தாய்மை என்னும் பெருமைக்கெல்லாம் அடிப்படையே இந்தத்திருநாள் தானே. யுவதியின் முகத்திலோ வெட்கம்.
இதை பக்கத்து வீட்டுக்காளை பார்த்து பூரிக்கிறான். அவளது அழகு அவனை அழைப்பதாய் அவனுக்குத்தோன்றுகிறது. பெண்மையின் முதல் வெட்கத்தின் முகவரி அவள் முகத்தில் தெரிகிறது. அதைப்படிக்க அவன் ஆசைப்படுகிறான்.
சுற்றிலும் உறவுப்பெண்களீன் பாதுகாப்பு. அன்ன நடை போட்டா அவளை அடையமுடியும்?

பொறுத்திருக்கிறதுகாளை.பொழுதுசாயத்தொடங்கியபின் பாயத்தயாராகிறது. ராத்திரியின் மெல்லிய ஒளியில் தன் ராணியை நெருங்கியவன் நேரம் காலம் பார்ப்பதில்லை. ஒரே தூக்கு. அந்த ஆளான அழகை தன் இளங்கரங்களில் ஏந்தி சில நொடிகளில் சீறிப்பாய்ந்து மறைகிறான். ருதுவான மங்கை மாயமான பின் தேடுகிறார்கள்...... . கடைசியில் அந்த ஜோடி ஜொலித்துக்கொண்டிருக்கும் இடத்தைக்கண்டுபிடித்துவிடுகிறது கூட்டம். பக்கத்துவீட்டுக்காளை அவளைப் பருகி நெடுநேரம் ஆகியிருந்தது கையும் களவுமாகப்பிடித்தபின் என்ன தண்டனை தெரியுமா?

After reading the above passage please read again what you have quoted (and I have reproduced here in the beginning). Leaving aside the flowery embellishments the gist of what our Thathachary says is some thing like this.-The girl has reached puberty. On that very day the young man in the neighbourhood kidnaps the girl and rapes her. And there is elaborate justification given for his action. No where is it said that the girl and boy were in love earlier or that they were known to each other. All that is said by Thathachary is that the girl induced a sexual urge in the boy when she reached puberty and the boy went and grabbed the girl. And then he quotes a beautiful Tamil kavithai and moves on to interpret it as saying the same story. If mediocracy needs an example there can not be a better one. Now Mr. Kunjuppu you have to answer my this question. Do you think Thathachary’s explanatory story has anything to do with the Tamil kavithai given? Don’t you think if what Thathachary says were to become the ideal Tamil’s behavior as claimed (இதுதான் தான் தமிழர்களின் களவியல் என்று தமிழறிந்த எவரும் நம்பமாட்டார்கள்) there will be only rapes all around and Tamil women will not dare celebrate the occurrence of their first menwstrual cycle? And what is suggested here? முதலில் தொட்டவன் தான் உரிமை கொண்டாடவேண்டும் என்றால் ஒரு வல்லவன்- ஒரு கணக்குக்கு வைத்துக்கொள்வோம் - 20 பெண்களைத்தொட்டால் அவர்களை எல்லாம் பெண்டாளலாமா? இது என்ன காட்டுமிராண்டித்தனம்?
And what more: the Tamil kavithai quoted is full of mistakes. If cheeththalaichchaaththan (சீத்தலைச்சாத்தன்) were there he would have bled to death because of a gaping hole in his head. Please compare the kavithai as reproduced by Thathachary with original in a reliable publication and you would know what I say. செம்புலப்பெயல் நீர் போல அன்புடை நெஞ்சம் தாம் கலப்பது is not just one party carrying the other party and raping. What is said in the kavithai is something else which is very beautiful and the similie used is unique.

ஒரு பானை சோற்றுக்கு ஒரு சோறு பதம் - I am not going to write about all the other sleazy and mediocre claims of Thathachary here.

Cheers.

 

[tbs]

Dear Mr. Kunjuppu,

Your post # 233 for reference: Excuse me for intervening.

I read the blog to which you had given the link 7. It was again another one of those innumerable blogs that are there in the web which specialize in brahmin baiting/bashing. They got this senile senior citizen in Thathachary as a handmaid to vouch for their vituperative outpourings. It came as a serial in the tabloid Nakkiran which is a published from Chennai. I am fed up with this kind of yellow web blogs and have stopped caring to reply when some one draws his knowledge extensively from it . Those who see in Thathachary a revolutionary and an avatar who has come to redeem the Hindu society, I have nothing to say. But I am going to write something about what you have reproduced in Tamil in your post #233 because the members who may read it may go with a wrong impression.



You have left out the following passage which preceded the above quote in the original of Thathachary. I copy it here for the benefit of the anonimous reader here as he may not have a copy of the book written by Thathachary.

பெண்ணொருத்தி பூப்பெய்துகிறாள். உறவுப்பெண்கள் சுற்றிலும் மகிழ்ச்சி பொங்க முற்றுகையிட்டிருக்கிறார்கள். பெண்மை தாய்மை என்னும் பெருமைக்கெல்லாம் அடிப்படையே இந்தத்திருநாள் தானே. யுவதியின் முகத்திலோ வெட்கம்.
இதை பக்கத்து வீட்டுக்காளை பார்த்து பூரிக்கிறான். அவளது அழகு அவனை அழைப்பதாய் அவனுக்குத்தோன்றுகிறது. பெண்மையின் முதல் வெட்கத்தின் முகவரி அவள் முகத்தில் தெரிகிறது. அதைப்படிக்க அவன் ஆசைப்படுகிறான்.
சுற்றிலும் உறவுப்பெண்களீன் பாதுகாப்பு. அன்ன நடை போட்டா அவளை அடையமுடியும்?

பொறுத்திருக்கிறதுகாளை.பொழுதுசாயத்தொடங்கியபின் பாயத்தயாராகிறது. ராத்திரியின் மெல்லிய ஒளியில் தன் ராணியை நெருங்கியவன் நேரம் காலம் பார்ப்பதில்லை. ஒரே தூக்கு. அந்த ஆளான அழகை தன் இளங்கரங்களில் ஏந்தி சில நொடிகளில் சீறிப்பாய்ந்து மறைகிறான். ருதுவான மங்கை மாயமான பின் தேடுகிறார்கள்...... . கடைசியில் அந்த ஜோடி ஜொலித்துக்கொண்டிருக்கும் இடத்தைக்கண்டுபிடித்துவிடுகிறது கூட்டம். பக்கத்துவீட்டுக்காளை அவளைப் பருகி நெடுநேரம் ஆகியிருந்தது கையும் களவுமாகப்பிடித்தபின் என்ன தண்டனை தெரியுமா?

After reading the above passage please read again what you have quoted (and I have reproduced here in the beginning). Leaving aside the flowery embellishments the gist of what our Thathachary says is some thing like this.-The girl has reached puberty. On that very day the young man in the neighbourhood kidnaps the girl and rapes her. And there is elaborate justification given for his action. No where is it said that the girl and boy were in love earlier or that they were known to each other. All that is said by Thathachary is that the girl induced a sexual urge in the boy when she reached puberty and the boy went and grabbed the girl. And then he quotes a beautiful Tamil kavithai and moves on to interpret it as saying the same story. If mediocracy needs an example there can not be a better one. Now Mr. Kunjuppu you have to answer my this question. Do you think Thathachary’s explanatory story has anything to do with the Tamil kavithai given? Don’t you think if what Thathachary says were to become the ideal Tamil’s behavior as claimed (இதுதான் தான் தமிழர்களின் களவியல் என்று தமிழறிந்த எவரும் நம்பமாட்டார்கள்) there will be only rapes all around and Tamil women will not dare celebrate the occurrence of their first menwstrual cycle? And what is suggested here? முதலில் தொட்டவன் தான் உரிமை கொண்டாடவேண்டும் என்றால் ஒரு வல்லவன்- ஒரு கணக்குக்கு வைத்துக்கொள்வோம் - 20 பெண்களைத்தொட்டால் அவர்களை எல்லாம் பெண்டாளலாமா? இது என்ன காட்டுமிராண்டித்தனம்?
And what more: the Tamil kavithai quoted is full of mistakes. If cheeththalaichchaaththan (சீத்தலைச்சாத்தன்) were there he would have bled to death because of a gaping hole in his head. Please compare the kavithai as reproduced by Thathachary with original in a reliable publication and you would know what I say. செம்புலப்பெயல் நீர் போல அன்புடை நெஞ்சம் தாம் கலப்பது is not just one party carrying the other party and raping. What is said in the kavithai is something else which is very beautiful and the similie used is unique.

ஒரு பானை சோற்றுக்கு ஒரு சோறு பதம் - I am not going to write about all the other sleazy and mediocre claims of Thathachary here.

Cheers.

hi suraju sir,
vanakkam....i like ur explanations....there are brahmin baiting/brahmin bashers within brahmin community....sometimes EVR periyaar

is better than our own brahmin bashers....

 

[SANDHYAV]

sorry to interrupt in this spirituo-proverbo-astrological discussion.

1. In the name agnihotram, boys and girls do not disclose their previous relationships ( some sexual also )
2. They dont register their marriage for ever and live as partners for ever ( legally i wonder why the law does not consider registration vital )
3. Most unregistered marriages that end up in mutual divorce very little economic burden on either of them post divorce

 

[tks]

Dear Mr. Kunjuppu,

Your post # 233 for reference: Excuse me for intervening.

I read the blog to which you had given the link 7. It was again another one of those innumerable blogs that are there in the web which specialize in brahmin baiting/bashing. They got this senile senior citizen in Thathachary as a handmaid to vouch for their vituperative outpourings. It came as a serial in the tabloid Nakkiran which is a published from Chennai. I am fed up with this kind of yellow web blogs and have stopped caring to reply when some one draws his knowledge extensively from it . Those who see in Thathachary a revolutionary and an avatar who has come to redeem the Hindu society, I have nothing to say. But I am going to write something about what you have reproduced in Tamil in your post #233 because the members who may read it may go with a wrong impression.



You have left out the following passage which preceded the above quote in the original of Thathachary. I copy it here for the benefit of the anonimous reader here as he may not have a copy of the book written by Thathachary.

பெண்ணொருத்தி பூப்பெய்துகிறாள். உறவுப்பெண்கள் சுற்றிலும் மகிழ்ச்சி பொங்க முற்றுகையிட்டிருக்கிறார்கள். பெண்மை தாய்மை என்னும் பெருமைக்கெல்லாம் அடிப்படையே இந்தத்திருநாள் தானே. யுவதியின் முகத்திலோ வெட்கம்.
இதை பக்கத்து வீட்டுக்காளை பார்த்து பூரிக்கிறான். அவளது அழகு அவனை அழைப்பதாய் அவனுக்குத்தோன்றுகிறது. பெண்மையின் முதல் வெட்கத்தின் முகவரி அவள் முகத்தில் தெரிகிறது. அதைப்படிக்க அவன் ஆசைப்படுகிறான்.
சுற்றிலும் உறவுப்பெண்களீன் பாதுகாப்பு. அன்ன நடை போட்டா அவளை அடையமுடியும்?

பொறுத்திருக்கிறதுகாளை.பொழுதுசாயத்தொடங்கியபின் பாயத்தயாராகிறது. ராத்திரியின் மெல்லிய ஒளியில் தன் ராணியை நெருங்கியவன் நேரம் காலம் பார்ப்பதில்லை. ஒரே தூக்கு. அந்த ஆளான அழகை தன் இளங்கரங்களில் ஏந்தி சில நொடிகளில் சீறிப்பாய்ந்து மறைகிறான். ருதுவான மங்கை மாயமான பின் தேடுகிறார்கள்...... . கடைசியில் அந்த ஜோடி ஜொலித்துக்கொண்டிருக்கும் இடத்தைக்கண்டுபிடித்துவிடுகிறது கூட்டம். பக்கத்துவீட்டுக்காளை அவளைப் பருகி நெடுநேரம் ஆகியிருந்தது கையும் களவுமாகப்பிடித்தபின் என்ன தண்டனை தெரியுமா?

After reading the above passage please read again what you have quoted (and I have reproduced here in the beginning). Leaving aside the flowery embellishments the gist of what our Thathachary says is some thing like this.-The girl has reached puberty. On that very day the young man in the neighbourhood kidnaps the girl and rapes her. And there is elaborate justification given for his action. No where is it said that the girl and boy were in love earlier or that they were known to each other. All that is said by Thathachary is that the girl induced a sexual urge in the boy when she reached puberty and the boy went and grabbed the girl. And then he quotes a beautiful Tamil kavithai and moves on to interpret it as saying the same story. If mediocracy needs an example there can not be a better one. Now Mr. Kunjuppu you have to answer my this question. Do you think Thathachary’s explanatory story has anything to do with the Tamil kavithai given? Don’t you think if what Thathachary says were to become the ideal Tamil’s behavior as claimed (இதுதான் தான் தமிழர்களின் களவியல் என்று தமிழறிந்த எவரும் நம்பமாட்டார்கள்) there will be only rapes all around and Tamil women will not dare celebrate the occurrence of their first menwstrual cycle? And what is suggested here? முதலில் தொட்டவன் தான் உரிமை கொண்டாடவேண்டும் என்றால் ஒரு வல்லவன்- ஒரு கணக்குக்கு வைத்துக்கொள்வோம் - 20 பெண்களைத்தொட்டால் அவர்களை எல்லாம் பெண்டாளலாமா? இது என்ன காட்டுமிராண்டித்தனம்?
And what more: the Tamil kavithai quoted is full of mistakes. If cheeththalaichchaaththan (சீத்தலைச்சாத்தன்) were there he would have bled to death because of a gaping hole in his head. Please compare the kavithai as reproduced by Thathachary with original in a reliable publication and you would know what I say. செம்புலப்பெயல் நீர் போல அன்புடை நெஞ்சம் தாம் கலப்பது is not just one party carrying the other party and raping. What is said in the kavithai is something else which is very beautiful and the similie used is unique.

ஒரு பானை சோற்றுக்கு ஒரு சோறு பதம் - I am not going to write about all the other sleazy and mediocre claims of Thathachary here.

Cheers.

Dear Sri Raju

Thanks for following up on the reference and exposing the truth.
It is one thing for some sleaze ball (referring to whoever this Thathachary is) to express his sleazy thoughts . I cannot understand what kind of thinking goes into providing selective quotes celebrating this character ...

I hope the forum does not yet again degenerate back to its old ways...

Regards

 

[tks]

hi suraju sir,
vanakkam....i like ur explanations....there are brahmin baiting/brahmin bashers within brahmin community....sometimes EVR periyaar

is better than our own brahmin bashers....

Every community has such characters .. Such people must be highly disturbed...

 

[zebra16]

Dear Mr. Kunjuppu,

Your post # 233 for reference: Excuse me for intervening.

Post # 233 as it currently stands is by TBS. By any chance would you be referring to the post of usual BB stuff like "moTTai pATTis" and "Stockholm syndrome" symptoms?

 

[zebra16]

An old one from my archive
An old man in Dryden calls up his son in Toronto and says, "Listen, your mother
and I are getting divorced. Forty-five years of misery is enough."

"Dad, what are you talking about?" the son screams.
...
“We can't stand the sight of each other...any longer,” he says. "I'm sick of her face, and I'm sick of talking about this, so call your sister in Vancouver and tell her," and he hangs up.

Now, the son is worried. So he calls up his sister. She says, "Like hell they’re getting divorced!" and calls her father immediately. "You’re not getting divorced! Don't do another thing, the two of us are flying home tomorrow to talk about this. Until then, don't call a lawyer, don't file a paper, DO YOU HEAR ME?” and she hangs up.

The old man turns to his wife and says "Okay, they’re coming for Christmas and paying their own airfares."

And then there were people who were "sick" of the chorus shouting of the "gate crashers" who were shouting that they want "X" back and "Y" back.

 

[ozone]

Post # 233 as it currently stands is by TBS. By any chance would you be referring to the post of usual BB stuff like "moTTai pATTis" and "Stockholm syndrome" symptoms?

Even I scrolled up and down, flipped pages but had :noidea:.

 

[ozone]

And then there were people who were "sick" of the chorus shouting of the "gate crashers" who were shouting that they want "X" back and "Y" back.

:sorry:, I'm unable to understand. My quote was to think about, or at least laugh.

 

[suraju06]

I am equally perplexed. I do not know what happened to Kunjuppu's post in this thread which I quoted.

 

[zebra16]

Instead of looking at marriage (any type of marriage, I mean, hindu, Christian, Muslim, Jew, Parsi and so on) as something "sacred" ab initio or even before, if only we make ourselves more factual and reasonable and consider marriage in its temporal settings, marriage is licence for an adult man & woman, to have sexual enjoyment with/through/by each other,

In this thread you have chosen to contest or oppose the concept of considering marriage as "sacred".

Notwithstanding any dictionary meanings, the following was what I could glean from your various posts in this forum.

Marriage for vedics was for the purpose of procreation of a male child so that the family tree on the earth survives and the past family tree consisting of deceased ancestors are kept happy in the "heavens above" by performing the annual shraddham and masika tarpanam.

You yourselves had painstakingly quoted in the past, the extracts from relevant smrithis, which among others prescribed a minimum of (i) fasting and (ii) absence from sexual intimacy on the previous night of the shraddham.

Such voluntary cessation of pleasures is considered as a "prelude" to "sacred ritual" not only by vedic people but by many other religionists.

By theory of backward integration, the couple performing the shraddham, should themselves have been united in a way which was considered to be "sacred".

So your response at post #127 in this thread:

How to make any relationship "sacred", by doing pooja, aarti, etc?

is perplexing.

 

[zebra16]

:sorry:, I'm unable to understand. My quote was to think about, or at least laugh.

I thought and thought and then thought some more and finally arrived at some wrong conclusion.

 

[C RAVI]

Originally Posted by sangom
Instead of looking at marriage (any type of marriage, I mean, hindu, Christian, Muslim, Jew, Parsi and so on) as something "sacred" ab initio or even before, if only we make ourselves more factual and reasonable and consider marriage in its temporal settings, marriage is licence for an adult man & woman, to have sexual enjoyment with/through/by each other,

In this thread you have chosen to contest or oppose the concept of considering marriage as "sacred".

Notwithstanding any dictionary meanings, the following was what I could glean from your various posts in this forum.

Marriage for vedics was for the purpose of procreation of a male child so that the family tree on the earth survives and the past family tree consisting of deceased ancestors are kept happy in the "heavens above" by performing the annual shraddham and masika tarpanam.

You yourselves had painstakingly quoted in the past, the extracts from relevant smrithis, which among others prescribed a minimum of (i) fasting and (ii) absence from sexual intimacy on the previous night of the shraddham.

Such voluntary cessation of pleasures is considered as a "prelude" to "sacred ritual" not only by vedic people but by many other religionists.

By theory of backward integration, the couple performing the shraddham, should themselves have been united in a way which was considered to be "sacred".

So your response at post #127 in this thread:

How to make any relationship "sacred", by doing pooja, aarti, etc?"

is perplexing.

Exactly!!

 

[ozone]

Reference

Smt. RR,

Both boys and girls are very fatty nowadays. !

 

[sangom]

In this thread you have chosen to contest or oppose the concept of considering marriage as "sacred".

Notwithstanding any dictionary meanings, the following was what I could glean from your various posts in this forum.

Marriage for vedics was for the purpose of procreation of a male child so that the family tree on the earth survives and the past family tree consisting of deceased ancestors are kept happy in the "heavens above" by performing the annual shraddham and masika tarpanam.

You yourselves had painstakingly quoted in the past, the extracts from relevant smrithis, which among others prescribed a minimum of (i) fasting and (ii) absence from sexual intimacy on the previous night of the shraddham.

Such voluntary cessation of pleasures is considered as a "prelude" to "sacred ritual" not only by vedic people but by many other religionists.

By theory of backward integration, the couple performing the shraddham, should themselves have been united in a way which was considered to be "sacred".

So your response at post #127 in this thread:


is perplexing.

If you can give the urls of the various posts of mine I would have been in abetter position to answer. Now, I have to assume that whatever you have written above and the nuances relating to those, are all correct. Even so, I will try to clarify the position.

Some two years ago, "divorce" was still a very are occurrence among the tabra circle about which I know. Marriage was then still considered as a lifetime union of a man and woman, while divorce was generally looked upon by our people with some revulsion. If my memory is right, I had given the smriti stipulations etc., only in the context of discouraging divorce as a desirable and easy practice. But society, even the tabra society, seems to have changed very fundamentally during the recent past, divorces are heard of in a very large percentage of marriages, even within a few months of marriage. Since I think a certain minimum time has to elapse after marriage, for applying for divorce as per Law, the couple separate, stay away from each other and then one party, usually the male, applies for divorce whereas the female can go to court any time after marriage pleading cruelty (usually mental cruelty or harassment) by husband and in-laws. Both types of cases seem to be on the rise.

In such a milieu, it is not wise to wish for the erstwhile situation of "life time union" to be reinstated by the society at large and that a handful of people here writing about the "sacredness" of marriage will change the mind set of thousands, if not millions, of our tabra youth into accepting today's marriage also as equally sacred, non-violable, and so on. Rules are for the society but anachronistic rules and laws will be wiped out by time. This we will realize if we read as to how the vedic sacrifices virtually disappeared and were replaced by temples and a new set of Gods, and so on. Similarly, while it is true that our smritis say many things about marriage, and all that, I feel a stage has come now and marriages, even among tabras, is no longer sacred although we still continue to perform certain age-old rituals and so on.

I will recommend a simple, non-vaideeka, marriage either in the Registrar's Office or a good and convenient temple (again without the usual rites) and subsequent registration, as sufficient for our requirements today. That is the background and reason for my asking how to make a marriage sacred, by doing pooja, aarati etc. I thought the message will be clear - that our marriages are no longer what they were, and there is no point in trying to make a swan out of a duck. Hope the point is now clear.

 

[sangom]

I find that a venerable and deceased person like Agnihotram Ramanuja Thathachariar (ART) has been described, rather reviled, as a senile senior citizen. Since I have great regard and reverence even for the memory of that great soul, who was not only an authority on Yajurveda (he taught the Veda in the Tirupathi University), but also a close friend and associate of Shri Chandrasekharendra Sarasvati of the Kanchi Mutt from their youth, I was trying to find out what it was that the Late ART had said which has offended some of the "no changers" of this Forum and their mutual "jalra" group members.

I find that இறையனார் களவியல் is held by Tamil scholars as a sort of reference work giving the grammar of love poetry which is also known as அகம். இறையனார் it seems talks about the clandestine sexual union between a man and woman as the subject matter of களவியல் proper. It appears that as and when this illicit sex becomes public knowledge it used to be called கற்பு according to that text. Some references talk about an in-between stage during which the matter is known to the intimate friends of the man (பாங்கன்) and of the girl (பாங்கி) also.

Annamalai Reddiar's காவடிச்சிந்து, I understand, is a work which was made in accordance with the rules and grammar of Tamil Poetry. Its subject matter is the love of Murugan (the Tamil God) and his lover, வள்ளி. In this work we find the following:—

அஞ்சுவயதான பருவம்
தனில் எனது சிறு மனை முன்
அங்கசவேள் போல உருவம்—பெற்றே
அன்று வந்து நயந்து மாலையில்
நெஞ்சழிந்து மயங்கவே புணர்
ஆறுமுக வேலவனையே
நினைவு கொண்டே மதி மருண்டே
ஆறுதில்லை என்ன வினையே! (தலைவி பாங்கியை நோக்கி உரைத்தல்)

என்னடி நான் பெற்ற மங்கை?
இரு கொங்கைகளில் சங்கை?—எண்ண
எத்தனை கோடியோ செங்கை—விர-
லிடமே வளர் நகரேகைகள்
மிகவேபடு வகை தோகையில்
ஏய்ந்தமுருகவேள் கிள்ளி—உனைத்
தோய்ந்ததோ சொல்லடி கள்ளி (நற்றாய் இரங்கல்)

The heroine (here வள்ளி) has amorous meeting in the very first evening with her lover even at the age of five (அஞ்சுவயதான பருவம் & அன்று வந்து நயந்து மாலையில் நெஞ்சழிந்து மயங்கவே புணர்); if we apply the usual meaning of the word புணர், புணர்ச்சி, etc., as per களவியல், perhaps even sexual union is indicated. (ஊடல் உணர்தல் புணர்தல் இவைகாமம் கூடியார் பெற்ற பயன்._திருக்குறள்)

In the second-cited verse above, there is no doubt about the theme and the word தோய்ந்த means possibly 'having made contact', imo.

It looks to me from the above that Late ART did not deviate erroneously from the ancient (possibly pre-சங்கம்) practices among Tamil people.

As to the doubt "முதலில் தொட்டவன் தான் உரிமை கொண்டாடவேண்டும் என்றால் ஒரு வல்லவன்- ஒரு கணக்குக்கு வைத்துக்கொள்வோம் - 20 பெண்களைத்தொட்டால் அவர்களை எல்லாம் பெண்டாளலாமா? இது என்ன காட்டுமிராண்டித்தனம்?", I have read that cattle-rustling and women-rustling were integral part of the ancient battles between Tamil kings / chieftains. They must have either practised polygamy or else married soldiers must have been prevented from carrying away any woman and strict monogamy must have been there so that even a man with அங்கசவேள் போல உருவம் could not have carried away more than one girl. ART did not say about the same man carrying away 20 girls. So, this is an insinuation without basis, imho.

 

[prasad1]

We talk of a marriage is "sacred" and so is for life.
In my opinion every commitment has to honored till it is dissolved. Forget about religious, legal, by birth etc, even a verbal commitment must be honored, that is the ethics.
keep one's word - to uphold one's promise; to do as one says.
Every contract should have an exit clause. So too should a marriage.

I like Mr. Sangom's idea.

I will recommend a simple, non-vaideeka, marriage either in the Registrar's Office or a good and convenient temple (again without the usual rites) and subsequent registration, as sufficient for our requirements today.

 

[Raghy]

With real love marriages (not the cheating type), the couples know that they wont get any support from the parents so they tend nurture each other. Imo when it comes to arranged marriage, there are few heads to hinder with the youngsters nurturing together. Not so smart or informed youngsters fall into the traps. Instead of gaining relationship they tend to lose it all. Who knows the couple in the op message may already regretting what has happened.


Kind Regards

Dear Amirtha, Greetings.

While I agree with the essence of the message, personally I think in general elderly persons only try to help the youngsters. Of course, like you mentioned, there are noticable percentage of exceptions.

The situations gets worst when the elderly persons arejudgemental to each other and/or develop many points of disagreement with each other. Their egos take importance and the youngsters are forced to toe the line with elders out of loyalty. Any such situations bring down the curtain.

On the other hand, youngsters mostly left by themselves to sort things out end up sorting things out.

Cheers!

 

[suraju06]

Dear Sangom Sir,

Your post #269 for reference:

I find that a venerable and deceased person like Agnihotram Ramanuja Thathachariar (ART) has been described, rather reviled, as a senile senior citizen.

1)Meaning of the word ‘senile’ in English is “weak in body or mind because of old age”. There is nothing abusive about that word unless one has a special mental dispensation to look at things from a unique drishtikon.
2)The meaning of the word ‘revile’ in English from the same dictionary is “criticise angrily in abusive language”
3) Now I leave it to the judgment of members of the forum read my earlier post and the post #269 to judge as to who is angry and who is reviling, particularly taking into account the following sentence in the post #269:

“I was trying to find out what it was that the Late ART had said which has offended some of the Asthana Brahmanas of this Forum and gladdened their mutual "jalra" group members”.

Leaving that aside, I believe in assessing people’s view dispassionately as to whether it is right or wrong. Whether the person is dead and gone or is alive and kicking is not material to the task in hand. The moment we bring in past veneration and esteem into the picture while critically examining a view point it becomes something like holding a knife to the neck of the critic and emotionally blackmailing him into submission. I am sure many of the members here would agree with my view.

Since I have great regard and reverence even for the memory of that great soul, who was not only an authority on Yajurveda (he taught the Veda in the Tirupathi University), but also a close friend and associate of Shri Chandrasekharendra Sarasvati of the Kanchi Mutt from their youth,

I too have great regard for all those who were great scholars in Vedas and for Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi Swami of the Kanchi Mutt. But that is not adequate reason to hold back my views about this particular publication authored by Sri Thathachary.

I find that இறையனார் களவியல் is held by Tamil scholars as a sort of reference work giving the grammar of love poetry which is also known as அகம். இறையனார் it seems talks about the clandestine sexual union between a man and woman as the subject matter of களவியல் proper. It appears that as and when this illicit sex becomes public knowledge it used to be called கற்பு according to that text. Some references talk about an in-between stage during which the matter is known to the intimate friends of the man (பாங்கன்) and of the girl (பாங்கி) also.

The ‘clever’ interpretation attributed to Iraiyanaar does not hold water. It is not said anywhere that the clandestine sexual union between just a man and woman is known as Kalaviyal (களவியல்) or Akam (அகம்). It is the clandestine sexual union between a consenting man and a woman in love that is talked bout by Iraiyanar. That makes a sea of difference. The first one is rape pure and simple, if one was not a consenting partner and the second one is true அகம் or களவியல் which is the subject matter of volumes of Tamil poetry.

Annamalai Reddiar's காவடிச்சிந்து, I understand, is a work which was made in accordance with the rules and grammar of Tamil Poetry. Its subject matter is the love of Murugan (the Tamil God) and his lover, வள்ளி. In this work we find the following:—

அஞ்சுவயதான பருவம்
……………………பாங்கியை நோக்கி உரைத்தல்)

என்னடி நான் ……………..சொல்லடி கள்ளி (நற்றாய் இரங்கல்)

The heroine (here வள்ளி) has amorous meeting in the very first evening with her lover even at the age of five (அஞ்சுவயதான பருவம் & அன்று வந்து நயந்து மாலையில் நெஞ்சழிந்து மயங்கவே புணர்); if we apply the usual meaning of the word புணர், புணர்ச்சி, etc., as per களவியல், perhaps even sexual union is indicated.

As I do not have a copy of the the literary work காவடிச்சிந்து by Annamalai Reddiar I am unable to comment about it here. I would just venture to suggest that he could not have mentioned that at the age of five a girl could have had sexual union with any one. It is just unnatural even in a highly nuanced spiritual context of the subject. Yes, even for the pre Bharathi period of Tamil Literature (when Tamil poets used to write poetry about all sorts of things like பனை மரத்துக்கும் வேசைக்கும் சிலேடை, கப்பல் பயணத்துக்கும் புணர்ச்சிக்கும் சிலேடை, வெங்கடேசு ரெட்டப்ப பூபதியின் அந்தப்புர மஹிமை etc. That is why Bharathy came with a loud and bold declaration that his kavithai is with சொல் புதிது, பொருள் புதிது.(words are new and the content is new)

It looks to me from the above that Late ART did not deviate erroneously from the ancient (possibly pre-சங்கம்) practices among Tamil people.

Sir, I beg to differ.

ART did not say about the same man carrying away 20 girls. So, this is an insinuation without basis, imho.

முதலில் தொட்டவன் means one who (just) touched the girl first. Logically it follows that if a man touches a girl first he owns that girl. Now if he touches 20 girls one after other (first time as far as the girls are concerned but nth time as far as the man is concerned) he owns all of them. I am only pointing out the stupidity in this interpretation of Tamil’s களவியல். ART’s wrds in the book gives scope for only this interpretation.

Cheers.

 

[nachi naga]

sometimes being single to mingle is better ray2:

 

[sangom]

sometimes being single to mingle is better ray2:

Welcome back, Shri Nachi Naga. I am glad you have come back.

 

[suraju06]

Dear Sangom Sir,

I refer to your post #269 again:

“I was trying to find out what it was that the Late ART had said which has offended some of the Asthana Brahmanas of this Forum and gladdened their mutual "jalra" group members”.

I strongly object to your use of the words mutual, jalra etc., If a member expresses his/her support for a certain view expressed by another member of the forum he/she does it after using his/her skills of judgment and after applying his/her mental faculties to the subject. It is a misuse of the freedom given by the forum and it is also an objectionable outburst to call any one a jalra just because he/she expresses a view which is not agreeable to you. I have respect for you for the views you express here and the way you present them. But that does not include this outburst. I am sad I have to write this down here. I would have expressed my disagreement with you in my earlier post itself but I did not do that because when I did the same once earlier in the case of another member, I found to my dismay that my objection disappeared along with the original offending post of the other member. I did not want want my words in my earlier post to become such a victim of wholesale vanishing act.

Cheers.