"thamizhil poosai"

Ayyalusamy Rams

unread,

Aug 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM8/28/96

to

"thamizhil poosai"
******************

thamizhil poosai - doesn't sound natural to all Tamils?

How do we achieve this? I propose the following
points:

1. Tamils should stop financing temples untill Tamils are provided
with thamizhil poosai.

2. Don't go to temples which do not practice thamizhil poosai.
Also discourage other tamils from going to such temples.

3. Conduct all rituals in Tamil.

I wish other SCT-ians post more and more ways of making
"thamizhil poosai" in temples for Tamils.

From: kku...@crl.com (Kumar Kumarappan)

: It is my contention
: that for a Tamil like me, who does not know Sanskrit, materials and
: contents in Tamil would be the most logical source of inspiration to
: help attain a state of spirituality. Hence my trouble, with the current
: state of affairs in the practice of a homogenized religion that you are
: inclined to subscribe to, which calls for dominance of Sanskrit over
: Tamil.

It is high time that we should go for "thamizhil poosai".

--- Rams

RKumaras

unread,

Aug 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM8/28/96

to

I fully agree with you. It is very natural for any one to seek
spirituality
through his/her own language. Our language Tamil is rich in religious
literature. Saiva and Vaishnava saints have sung thousands of Tamil hymns
in
praise of God. It is an affront to the self-respect of the Tamils that the
Tamil language is not given pride of place during worship in Temples in
Tamil Nadu. We Tamils in USA should strive to establish at least one
Temple
where all the ceremonies are conducted in Tamil. For example, Tamils who
finance the Murugan Temple which is being built near Washington D.C.
should
insist that all ceremonies be performed in Tamil .

We should also discontinue the practice of conducting marriage ceremonies
in
Sanskrit which we do not understand, and instead promote use of Tamil to
perform marriage ceremonies.

R.Kumarasamy

President of CanTam Systems Inc.

unread,

Aug 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM8/29/96

to

Ayyalusamy Rams (ra...@pine.chem.upenn.edu) wrote:

: "thamizhil poosai"
: ******************

: thamizhil poosai - doesn't sound natural to all Tamils?

: How do we achieve this? I propose the following
: points:

well Said. hats off to you.

: 1. Tamils should stop financing temples untill Tamils are provided

Kumar Kumarappan

unread,

Aug 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM8/30/96

to

Ayyalusamy Rams (ra...@pine.chem.upenn.edu) wrote:

: "thamizhil poosai"

: I wish other SCT-ians post more and more ways of making
: "thamizhil poosai" in temples for Tamils.

I think most of us are starting out new life in a new world here in
North America with high expectations, and rightly so. There is less
baggage with us and less social pressures upon us in the religious
arena. This is an appropriate place to initiate fair, just and meaningful
practices in the Temples. I agree with your call.

How about the Toronto Temple - The necessary numbers should be there
for making a difference and insisting on Tamil services.

--kumAr

Kathiravan

unread,

Sep 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/2/96

to

The answer is Yes and No.

Read below.

Dear Kumarand Rams:

It is a good discussion you have
initiated. As long as a superiority myth is
there and vast majority of Temple goers are
ignorant of their rights and a few rich, slavish
Tamils work for the `tharma' the priests will
continue to relegate Tamil to a second class
language. The reasons they throw out has varied
according to times. W1hen somebody confronts
the `deva bAsha' theory they come up with
`unity thro sanskrit' theory. Both of the theories
fail in the case of of Tamil temple like the
Murugan temple here. The unity theory
or deva bAsha theory is used not only hegemonize
Tamil lnaguage or expression and making Tamil
look subservient and second class BUT also to
monopolize the profession of priesthood.

Coming to temples fully funded by
Tamils. We have a numberof them, atleast a
handful in Canada. We had perum kavik kO
sEthuraman who came from Tamil Nadu. He is
a prolific poet. He has written many
poem, small kAviyams-about 3 lakh lines
on many topics. One of his main theme is
iRaimai through public service, honesty
and straight-forwardness.

We went to a Murugan Temple in
Dorval area. Although it is fully funded
by Tamils there is no Tamil worship. I
talked to a manager in the temple. He
belives in Tamil worship. He is very
knowledgeable in Tamilness of Murugan
and also exposed to self-respect ideologies
during his stay in India. But the committee
is dominated by ignorant people who are
manipulated by a handful of priests.
The priests have convinced them against
using Tamil for worship. The
priests raise objections for using thiru
as opposed to Sri. That is the level of
superiority they espouse.

They had objected to use of kudamuzhukku
for kumbAbishEkam. What makes more meaningful
for Tamils ? What makes Tamils what they are?
These questions should be asked by Tamils.
It is they who fund the temple. They should
also develop the self-respect to question the
aims of Sanskrit worship. Only when Tamils
realize this and knowledge1able, self-respecting Tamils get
themselves into the Temple committees the
priests will listen. The priests will still fit
groups against each other. Hence the Tamils
have to show unity and willingness to carry
out their pUsai or whatever they want in
their language.

The priests can adopt various strategies.
They might bring some North-Indian with more
money into the committee to contain the Tamils.
All these have to be anticipated and understoosd
in the context of self-preservation of the priestly
tharma than anything else. Also the
Temple should initiate steps to employ Tamil Othuvars
.

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,

Sep 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/4/96

to

In article <508bor$c...@crl4.crl.com>, Kumar Kumarappan <kku...@crl.com> wrote:
>Ayyalusamy Rams (ra...@pine.chem.upenn.edu) wrote:
>
>: "thamizhil poosai"
>
>
>: I wish other SCT-ians post more and more ways of making
>: "thamizhil poosai" in temples for Tamils.
>
>I think most of us are starting out new life in a new world here in
>North America with high expectations, and rightly so. There is less
>baggage with us and less social pressures upon us in the religious
>arena. This is an appropriate place to initiate fair, just and meaningful
>practices in the Temples. I agree with your call.
>
>How about the Toronto Temple - The necessary numbers should be there

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>for making a difference and insisting on Tamil services.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

kumAr, I suggested to some Toronto trusties about including
the singing of thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam by professional
Othuvaars in addition to the pooja in Sanskrit, but even this has not
been materialized. The opposition to tamil from some so-called tamils,
the unfortunate ignorance of the abundant spiritual wealth
available in Tamil, and the misguided importance to just one
tradition are some of the reasons for not being able
to have tamil worship in Toronto Temple. But I'm optimistic that it will
be possible somtime in our lifetime.

Temple worship should be in Tamil where Tamils are in a majority.
This is elementary. But for this to happen, most of the tamils
should be able to assert and articulate this desirability.
The spiritual literature available in Tamil is no less than in any other
indian language. When a thEvaaram or Thiruvaasagam song is sung in
traditional paN, it will be much more soul stirring for a Tamil than
in any other language.

Just a few weeks ago, I attended a vELvi in Philadelphia and there
the mandhirams chanted were in Tamil and the vELvi was conducted in Tamil.
The person who was in charge of the vELvi was a woman.
There are also thiruppugazh manRams which conduct their musical prayers
in Tamil with a beautiful blend of Sanskrit mandhirams.

>
>--kumAr

selvaa

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,

Sep 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/4/96

to

In article <50fs61$q...@bmerhc5e.bnr.ca>, Kathiravan <kkri...@bnr.ca> wrote:
>
>
> Dear Kumarand Rams:
>
> It is a good discussion you have
>initiated. As long as a superiority myth is
>there and vast majority of Temple goers are
>ignorant of their rights and a few rich, slavish
>Tamils work for the `tharma' the priests will
>continue to relegate Tamil to a second class

Kathir, why don't you stop blaming others. If you
want Tamil in temple worship, see what can be done
to acheive your goal. Get involved in Temple
admin etc.

>language. The reasons they throw out has varied
>according to times. W1hen somebody confronts
>the `deva bAsha' theory they come up with
>`unity thro sanskrit' theory. Both of the theories
>fail in the case of of Tamil temple like the
>Murugan temple here. The unity theory
>or deva bAsha theory is used not only hegemonize
>Tamil lnaguage or expression and making Tamil

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>look subservient and second class BUT also to

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>monopolize the profession of priesthood.

If anyone is doing as you claim, it is the tamils who
are to be blamed, if at all someone has to be blamed.

>
> Coming to temples fully funded by
>Tamils. We have a numberof them, atleast a
>handful in Canada.

If Tamils fully or mostly funded the construction of
a temple, they should also know to assert their
wishes in the temple worship.
[..]

> We went to a Murugan Temple in
>Dorval area. Although it is fully funded
>by Tamils there is no Tamil worship. I
>talked to a manager in the temple. He
>belives in Tamil worship. He is very
>knowledgeable in Tamilness of Murugan
>and also exposed to self-respect ideologies
>during his stay in India. But the committee
>is dominated by ignorant people who are
>manipulated by a handful of priests.

Priests will conduct the worship as you
instruct or else you can select others who will do the
job.

>The priests have convinced them against
>using Tamil for worship. The
>priests raise objections for using thiru
>as opposed to Sri. That is the level of
>superiority they espouse.

Don't worry about what some claim, try and see
what can be done to acheive your goal.

>
> They had objected to use of kudamuzhukku
>for kumbAbishEkam. What makes more meaningful
>for Tamils ? What makes Tamils what they are?

I'm aware of many such systematic put-downs
but that is not important.
You can achieve what you want if you are
steadfast in your goal and actively pursue it.

>These questions should be asked by Tamils.
>It is they who fund the temple. They should
>also develop the self-respect to question the
>aims of Sanskrit worship. Only when Tamils
>realize this and knowledge1able, self-respecting Tamils get
>themselves into the Temple committees the
>priests will listen. The priests will still fit
>groups against each other. Hence the Tamils

~~~~~~~~~

>have to show unity and willingness to carry

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>out their pUsai or whatever they want in

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>their language.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yes, that is the point.

FAmily functions ( marriage etc.), temple worship,
basic government administration and education should be in one's
mother-tongue. 50 plus million Tamils can certainly realize
this rudimentary goal if they want.

>
> The priests can adopt various strategies.
>They might bring some North-Indian with more
>money into the committee to contain the Tamils.
>All these have to be anticipated and understoosd
>in the context of self-preservation of the priestly
>tharma than anything else. Also the
>Temple should initiate steps to employ Tamil Othuvars

Yes, such games might be played to preserve their
interests, and you may have to play yours to preserve your
interests. In the name of spirituality, art, science etc.
political games are always played and you have to play your game
to win your share.

selvaa

S. Prabaharan

unread,

Sep 5, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/5/96

to

C.R. Selvakumar (selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca) wrote:

: Priests will conduct the worship as you

: instruct or else you can select others who will do the
: job.

I attended a SL Tamil wedding sometime ago which was conducted
mostly in Tamil. They wanted the ceremony to be (mostly) in
Tamil and they found a priest who was willing to do that.
You can get what you want if you try. After all, you are the
one paying the bills! Also, without anyone telling them, some priests
in the NJ temple use Tamil Thevarams occassionally.

SP
:

: selvaa

DKKALYANAM

unread,

Sep 6, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/6/96

to

Idea of the priest who control the TEMPLE is to DOMINATE TAMILS by using
Sanskrit.

These PRIESTs feel threatend by TAMIL, because if TAMIL is used in TEMPLE
anybody can be a PRIEST. Wants to maintain status quo.

GEt rid of these BRAHMIN priesst, then we can get rid of SANSKRIT.

DKK

Thathachari

unread,

Sep 6, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/6/96

to

Hey,

Aren't you the guy that suggested the 'Final Solution' to the "problem"
of Brahmins? Good going old chap. Got any quotes on them gas chambers
yet? I suggest you subcontract the work out to certain blond haired
blue eyed friendly guys in S.America. They have a great track record.

Tell me this. How many of the ordinary people in TN (or for that matter
anywhere in India) care two hoots about what a priest (say in some small
local temple) is doing? The priests are in it for one thing - food and
money to *live* a meagre life.

BTW, thanks for letting us know what 'Your Kampf' is all about.

Thaths

Venkat Devarajan

unread,

Sep 6, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/6/96

to

In article <Dx867...@novice.uwaterloo.ca>

selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) writes:

> indian language. When a thEvaaram or Thiruvaasagam song is sung in
> traditional paN, it will be much more soul stirring for a Tamil than
> in any other language.

Whether a poojai should be performed in Sanskrit or Tamil is
debatable (and I have, just like you, wondered about the
desirability of a prayer in a language that we don't
understand). However, Thevaram and Thiruvasakam are also quite
incomprehensible to most Tamils that I have met in the US. Your
mileage with the Toronto Tamils may vary. If you were to suggest
that someone ought to explain the meaning of these verses to the
general Tamil audience then you open yourselves to the counter
suggestion that similar explanations may be provided for the
Sanskrit verses too. If the "stirring of the soul" that you
refer to is possible (and I agree it is) without truly
understanding the meaning of the lyrics, then the argument in
favor of Sanskrit poojai becomes even more reasonable.

My own personal opinion is that unless the real underlying
meaning of the poojai is explained, they all are less than
satisfactory, no matter what language they are in. I favor
non-ritualistic, silent and individual prayer in front of the
idols - in your very own language of the heart!

Venkat Devarajan
Dept. of Electrical Engineering
The University of Texas at Arlington

Kumar Kumarappan

unread,

Sep 6, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/6/96

to

C.R. Selvakumar (selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca) wrote:

: I suggested to some Toronto trusties about including

: the singing of thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam by professional
: Othuvaars in addition to the pooja in Sanskrit, but even this has not

: been materialized...........
: .............................But I'm optimistic that it will

: be possible somtime in our lifetime.

Even in a new world with seemingly less baggage, and possibly more
minds that are trained to think clearly, it takes ones lifetime to
effect a change that is reasonable. This is disheartening. But.....

: Just a few weeks ago, I attended a vELvi in Philadelphia and there

: the mandhirams chanted were in Tamil and the vELvi was conducted in Tamil.
: The person who was in charge of the vELvi was a woman.
: There are also thiruppugazh manRams which conduct their musical prayers
: in Tamil with a beautiful blend of Sanskrit mandhirams.

....this is encouraging. So was SP's post about the SL Tamil wedding
and the NJ temple observation. I would HOPE that this trend
finds more appeal with more Tamils. After all it is HOPE that keeps
us moving with a positive outlook.

--kumAr

Rangaswamy Rajamanickam

unread,

Sep 6, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/6/96

to

In article <50qk17$e...@crl14.crl.com>, Kumar Kumarappan <kku...@crl.com> wrote:

>....this is encouraging. So was SP's post about the SL Tamil wedding
>and the NJ temple observation. I would HOPE that this trend
>finds more appeal with more Tamils. After all it is HOPE that keeps
>us moving with a positive outlook.
>
>--kumAr
>

Ditto for the temple at Riverdale, Atlanta. The priest
uses Tamil at times during the poojas. I have also
heard Tamil devotional songs (& Telugu songs) being
played on a Stereo System when there is no crowd.

And the Ayyappan songs in TN are almost exclusively
in Tamil.

I do not understand why anybody should stand in the
way of Tamil poojai in TN temples (Sanskrit need
not be excluded, but should not be at the expense
of Tamil in TN)

Next I go to temple, I'll talk to the priest
about this.

Regards,
Rangaswamy

--
Rangaswamy Rajamanickam
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!rr57
Internet: rr...@prism.gatech.edu

Sundhar Soma

unread,

Sep 7, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/7/96

to

C.R. Selvakumar (selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca) wrote:
: In article <508bor$c...@crl4.crl.com>, Kumar Kumarappan <kku...@crl.com> wrote:

: >Ayyalusamy Rams (ra...@pine.chem.upenn.edu) wrote:
: >
: >: "thamizhil poosai"
: >
: >
: >: I wish other SCT-ians post more and more ways of making
: >: "thamizhil poosai" in temples for Tamils.

This is a very nice idea. Hope it materializes.

Traditionally, those who LOVE thamizh as a language
to the extremes....have started to be anti-Hindu
mainly for this reason of non-thamizh poojais!(IMO)

Kandhar shashti kavasam/ guha kavasam illadha murugar
kOvilai naan paarthadhu illai. AdhaE pOla
vishnu (shiva-vishnu) kovilE thamizh slOgangalal
pOjai seyvadhu pudhusu illai! I am not telling that
they don't chant sanskrit slokaas!
But the very those who chant sanskrit slOgams ALSO
chant thamizh slogams very efficiently. But beleive
me there are quite a few of the gurukkal's who DO
NOT CONSIDER Thiruvempaavai any less to VISHNU
SAHASARANAAMAM!

Yes...samisridha pOOjai, thamizhil poojayay vida
oru padi maelaagat thaan karudhp padukiradhu.
And it is not just by those who chant, but by PEOPLE in
GENERAL. The reason may be plenty and as usual one
can start pointing our skewed HISTORICAL fingers at
any xyz caste we don't like! But the reality is as
what thiru Kumarappan has effectively written.

Before trying to increase poojai in thamizh, one should
understand that nobody is doing poojai in sanskrit to
undermine thamizh! (Kathir's tone seems to be that
those who want sankrit poojai are anti-thamizh...they
are as much thamizh as anybody can be...).
Today, though every practising thamizh would cry
"appanE kaapaathappa" or something...They still prefer
a ganapathi hOmam to be in sanskrit (not because they
think god listens only to sanskrit) because they think
the words have a very profound meaning and such an
effective prayer cannot be said by our not-so-poetic
tongue! Further, it is NATURAL to think GREAT of something
until we UNDERSTAND! I am not saying (as some seem to solely
say) that sanskrit slOgams do not have profound meaning or
anything like that...It does have some very sensible prayers
(it may be surprising to some in the net! ;-) ).

The problem is not with those WHO do the poojai or
those who are incharge of the TEMPLE. The problem is the
people who visit them! Unfortunately, those who visit
neither know the slogams in thamizh NOR understand them.
(rather even tried to understand them). So it hardly MAKES
a difference for them....So they DON'T CARE! In that sense
I tend to differ with Selva that most tamils want the poojai
to be in Tamil! Ofcourse I may concur with him in that it
can only better to do thamizh poojai.

In that sense I beleive that Both thiru selvaa and thiru
kumarappan both prefer poojai in thamizh because it is
GOOD for THAMIZH! while thiru Raghu feels that sanskrit
poojai is good for Indian Unity.
I think, thamizh poojai should be proposed/otherwise
based soleley on whether it is good for THAMIZHS not
the language. I beleive they are different and that good
for one doesn't necessarily mean good for the other.

In response to Kathir...
Further talking about "Kumbhaabhishekam" and "kudamuzhukku",
I beleive that thamizhs KNOW kumbhabhishekam better than
the other! Ofcourse the latter is a fabulous thamizh word
and for someone who is from MARS and knows only the language
thamizh (without having lived in TN or practised hindusism
in thamizhnaadu) the latter would be easier to understand!
So..I think kumbhaabhisekham is a good word to use today.
(IMO).

I think, the way to go is not to force people to
do thamizhil poosai. Anything forceful will not be
successful!(IMO)

It would be easier to start with say every chevvai
kizhamai...we'll have thamizh mandhirangal! or some
such sort! A confrontational attitude requires a
fabulous unity to succeed! Something which is not
a feasible option....today as also in any near any
future (as I see it...ofcourse I am not being optimistic
here!).
<...>
: kumAr, I suggested to some Toronto trusties about including

: the singing of thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam by professional
: Othuvaars in addition to the pooja in Sanskrit, but even this has not

: been materialized. The opposition to tamil from some so-called tamils,

: the unfortunate ignorance of the abundant spiritual wealth
: available in Tamil, and the misguided importance to just one
: tradition are some of the reasons for not being able

: to have tamil worship in Toronto Temple. But I'm optimistic that it will

: be possible somtime in our lifetime.

It is extremely unfortunate that even such a request has
not materialized. And you have very well put the reasons
behind such a opposition to the thamizh poojai. Ignorance
is one major reason. Unfortunately, reality dictates that
it needs a personality to respect a merit in any tradition!
So probably what we need is some knowledgeable and respected
INDIVIDUAL(S) to support the idea and a more than well
established people to do the poojai.
<...>

: Just a few weeks ago, I attended a vELvi in Philadelphia and there
: the mandhirams chanted were in Tamil and the vELvi was conducted in Tamil.
: The person who was in charge of the vELvi was a woman.
: There are also thiruppugazh manRams which conduct their musical prayers
: in Tamil with a beautiful blend of Sanskrit mandhirams.

Thanks for the information..Hopefully, next time such a vELvi would
be more publicized that some more interested people can attend.

: >
: >--kumAr

Personally,

When I chant durgaa shUktham or shashti kavasam, I don't
feel in any way that thamizh is somehow made below sanskrit!
To me both are fabulous religious exercises which makes me
feel BETTER. The language difference never arises...
I don't think that even psychologically I find skt better
to thamizh (because of this or anything else)!

: selvaa

Just my opinion...

--cheers
Somasundhar

Kathiravan Krishnamurthi

unread,

Sep 9, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/9/96

to

In article <50qk17$e...@crl14.crl.com>, kku...@crl.com (Kumar Kumarappan) writes:
|> C.R. Selvakumar (selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca) wrote:
|>
|> : I suggested to some Toronto trusties about including

|> : the singing of thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam by professional
|> : Othuvaars in addition to the pooja in Sanskrit, but even this has not

|> : been materialized...........
|> : .............................But I'm optimistic that it will

|> : be possible somtime in our lifetime.
|>

|> Even in a new world with seemingly less baggage, and possibly more
|> minds that are trained to think clearly, it takes ones lifetime to
|> effect a change that is reasonable. This is disheartening. But.....

Kumar! Why should it take a life-time.
I mentioned about Montreal Murugan Temple.
It can happen in less than a year:-)).

I am removed from all the rituals
business and not into temple stuff.
But I would like the wishes of Tamils
come true. Do you know a priest in
TN or an organisation that trains
priests to do pUsai in Tamil.

We can directly influence the
Temple. It is a Tamil temple with 100%
Tamil contribution from the basement
to the gopuram.
I talked to the gentleman who can make
your life-time wish come true.
He is willing to make the change
gradually. He is also willing to hire
people from TN and also train existing
priests to perform pUsai in tamil.

|> : Just a few weeks ago, I attended a vELvi in Philadelphia and there
|> : the mandhirams chanted were in Tamil and the vELvi was conducted in Tamil.
|> : The person who was in charge of the vELvi was a woman.
|> : There are also thiruppugazh manRams which conduct their musical prayers
|> : in Tamil with a beautiful blend of Sanskrit mandhirams.
|>

Kalyan Sundaram

unread,

Sep 9, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/9/96

to

In article <50qd6n$9...@news.uta.edu>, ven...@uta.edu (Venkat Devarajan)
wrote:

********************************************

I think "Thamizhil vazhipaadu" is a better title for this thread.

Just my two coconuts worth.

:-)
--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Kalyan Sundaram
Email: kalyan_...@nt.com

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Kumar Kumarappan

unread,

Sep 10, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/10/96

to

Kathiravan Krishnamurthi (kkri...@bnr.ca) wrote:

: Kumar! Why should it take a life-time.

: I mentioned about Montreal Murugan Temple.
: It can happen in less than a year:-)).

This is gratifying and encouraging.

: I am removed from all the rituals

: business and not into temple stuff.
: But I would like the wishes of Tamils
: come true. Do you know a priest in
: TN or an organisation that trains
: priests to do pUsai in Tamil.

Yes. Good thoughts need to be translated into
good deeds. I certainly will do my best. I will
pursue this with you via email.

--kumAr

K. Srinivasan

unread,

Sep 11, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/11/96

to

In article <515k1o$1...@crl13.crl.com> kku...@crl.com (Kumar Kumarappan) writes:
>From: kku...@crl.com (Kumar Kumarappan)
>Subject: Re: "thamizhil poosai"
>Date: 10 Sep 1996 22:51:52 -0700
>Kathiravan Krishnamurthi (kkri...@bnr.ca) wrote:

>: Kumar! Why should it take a life-time.
>: I mentioned about Montreal Murugan Temple.
>: It can happen in less than a year:-)).

>This is gratifying and encouraging.

I have given them a six hour chanting cassetes of the "thamizh maRai" of
nammaazhvaar which can be used in place of Vedic Chantings on occasions.

K. Srinivasan

Suresh Rajan

unread,

Sep 12, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/12/96

to

In article <50qd6n$9...@news.uta.edu>, ven...@uta.edu (Venkat Devarajan)

writes:

|> In article <Dx867...@novice.uwaterloo.ca>
|> selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) writes:
|>
|> > indian language. When a thEvaaram or Thiruvaasagam song is sung in
|> |> > traditional paN, it will be much more soul stirring for a Tamil
|> than
|> > in any other language.
|>
|> Whether a poojai should be performed in Sanskrit or Tamil is
|> debatable (and I have, just like you, wondered about the
|> desirability of a prayer in a language that we don't
|> understand). However, Thevaram and Thiruvasakam are also quite
|> incomprehensible to most Tamils that I have met in the US. Your
|> mileage with the Toronto Tamils may vary. If you were to suggest
|> that someone ought to explain the meaning of these verses to the
|> general Tamil audience then you open yourselves to the counter
|> suggestion that similar explanations may be provided for the
|> Sanskrit verses too. If the "stirring of the soul" that you
|> refer to is possible (and I agree it is) without truly
|> understanding the meaning of the lyrics, then the argument in
|> favor of Sanskrit poojai becomes even more reasonable.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Would you please explain why you think that Sanskrit hymns are soul
stirring
while Tamil hymns are not? Is this a subjective or an objective opinion?

|>
|> My own personal opinion is that unless the real underlying
|> meaning of the poojai is explained, they all are less than
|> satisfactory, no matter what language they are in. I favor
|> non-ritualistic, silent and individual prayer in front of the
|> idols - in your very own language of the heart!
|>
|>
|>
|> Venkat Devarajan
|> Dept. of Electrical Engineering
|> The University of Texas at Arlington
|>
|>

Suresh

Suresh Rajan

unread,

Sep 12, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/12/96

to

In article <DxDuw...@news.uwindsor.ca>, somasun@server (Sundhar Soma)
writes:

Not true. After the TN's HR & CE dept. gave worshippers the choice between
Tamil archanai and Sanskrit archanai, something like close to 90% of
archanais
are performed in Tamil (if I remember the source of this, I will post it).
Makkal theerpE, mahesan theerpu! And if you don't believe me, I suggest
that
the next time you go home, go to any major temple and ask the poosari or
the
temple administrative staff about this breakdown.

People in general do prefer to worship in their mother tongue. For
example,
Christians in Karnataka have been agitating for years to have Mass said in
their mother tongue (currently, it is said in Tamil).

|>
|> Before trying to increase poojai in thamizh, one should
|> understand that nobody is doing poojai in sanskrit to
|> undermine thamizh! (Kathir's tone seems to be that
|> those who want sankrit poojai are anti-thamizh...they
|> are as much thamizh as anybody can be...).
|> Today, though every practising thamizh would cry
|> "appanE kaapaathappa" or something...They still prefer
|> a ganapathi hOmam to be in sanskrit (not because they
|> think god listens only to sanskrit) because they think
|> the words have a very profound meaning and such an
|> effective prayer cannot be said by our not-so-poetic
|> tongue! Further, it is NATURAL to think GREAT of something
|> until we UNDERSTAND! I am not saying (as some seem to solely
|> say) that sanskrit slOgams do not have profound meaning or
|> anything like that...It does have some very sensible prayers
|> (it may be surprising to some in the net! ;-) ).

First, very few people perform hOmams. Hence, your generalization about
all
practising Tamils is quite off the mark. Second, it is not like there is a
choice of language to perform ganapathi hOmam. Third, who says hOmams are
effective prayers? The very idea that if you sit in your house and stick
something into a fire (aka Agni) in front of you and mumble a few words,
it
will automatically reach the gods assembled in heaven is quite absurd.
Fourth,
what is the basis (other than your own biases) for your conclusion that
Tamil is not-so-poetic while Sanskrit is?

Suresh

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Sep 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/13/96

to

From: sra...@mylapore.engr.sgi.com (Suresh Rajan)

-Third, who says hOmams are
-effective prayers? The very idea that if you sit in your house and stick
-something into a fire (aka Agni) in front of you and mumble a few words,
-it will automatically reach the gods assembled in heaven is quite absurd.

Please inform us what type of prayer

will automatically reach the gods assembled

in heaven, then.

If you know of one, I'd like to know.

If you don't, your objection should be
to all prayers, not just this one.

RS

Venkat Devarajan

unread,

Sep 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/13/96

to

> |> selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) wrote:
> |>
> |> > indian language. When a thEvaaram or Thiruvaasagam song is sung in
> |> |> > traditional paN, it will be much more soul stirring for a Tamil
> |> than in any other language.
> |>

On which Venkat Devarajan commented:

> |> Whether a poojai should be performed in Sanskrit or Tamil is
> |> debatable (and I have, just like you, wondered about the
> |> desirability of a prayer in a language that we don't
> |> understand). However, Thevaram and Thiruvasakam are also quite
> |> incomprehensible to most Tamils that I have met in the US. Your
> |> mileage with the Toronto Tamils may vary. If you were to suggest
> |> that someone ought to explain the meaning of these verses to the
> |> general Tamil audience then you open yourselves to the counter
> |> suggestion that similar explanations may be provided for the
> |> Sanskrit verses too. If the "stirring of the soul" that you
> |> refer to is possible (and I agree it is) without truly
> |> understanding the meaning of the lyrics, then the argument in
> |> favor of Sanskrit poojai becomes even more reasonable.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>

Suresh Rajan then asked:

> Would you please explain why you think that Sanskrit hymns are soul
> stirring while Tamil hymns are not? Is this a subjective or an objective opinion?
>

Suresh: You have obviously misunderstood my words - not entirely
your fault. When I read my own words, I could see that it might
sound ambiguous. Here's a simpler explanation: Consider that
both Sanskrit and Tamil poojais are equally incomprehensible but
equally soul-stirring to an average Tamil. It then becomes
difficult to make a case to change the existing practice. This
is what I meant by the phrase that you underlined. The obvious
thing to do is to come up with simple Tamil prayers (I don't
think Thevaram is in this category, Thiruvasagam and Kandha
Shashti Kavacham are close - I would prefer something simpler
than all of them).

On the practical matter of performing Poojai in Tamil here in
the US: this is quite difficult unless the temple is run
entirely by Tamils. Here in the Dallas/Ft.Worth area, the
Mahalaksmi Temple is run by all the Indians. Tamizh Vazhipadu
(there is a good phrase!) is performed by a dedicated group
every month for the Murugan deity. This includes group
recitation of Kandha Sashti Kavacham and Tamizh Bhajan songs in
addition to Sanskrit archanai. The whole thing is soul-stirring!

Venkat Devarajan
817-272-3485

Shyamala Parameswaran

unread,

Sep 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/13/96

to

In article <519tod$m...@murrow.corp.sgi.com>, sra...@mylapore.engr.sgi.com (Suresh Rajan) says:
>
.... [other quotes not relevant here]

>Not true. After the TN's HR & CE dept. gave worshippers the choice between
>Tamil archanai and Sanskrit archanai, something like close to 90% of
>archanais
>are performed in Tamil (if I remember the source of this, I will post it).
>Makkal theerpE, mahesan theerpu! And if you don't believe me, I suggest
>that
>the next time you go home, go to any major temple and ask the poosari or
>the
>temple administrative staff about this breakdown.

I would be interested in the "source" for the above "info"
that is, on the HRCE's giving "worshippers the choice between

Tamil archanai and Sanskrit archanai, something like close
to 90% of archanais are performed in Tamil (if I remember
the source of this, I will post it)."

The facts from my recall:

The Archanai order was passed by HRCE, under Kazhagam rule.
If "choice" was given to "worshippers" in TN or elsewhere
or any polls were conducted on poosai lang. choice, the detailed
researchers would have mentioned it somewhere.

The wording of the order was presented as a recommendation
to temple administrations; quite strongly, I might add,
in a political setup clearly hostile to Samskritam and all
imputations given to its usage. An average Schmoe can
figure out the "choice" element contained therein.
The temple administrations were, if anything, quick to
understand the implications in flouting such an order
(or, recommendation). The fact "90 percent archanais
are performed in Tamil" has less or nothing to with "choice"
of "worshippers" per se, rather has more to do with temple
officials effecting the "change over" to Tamil archanais
as accomodation, for obvious reasons.

Kumar Venkataraman

unread,

Sep 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/13/96

to

> |> Whether a poojai should be performed in Sanskrit or Tamil is
> |> debatable (and I have, just like you, wondered about the
> |> desirability of a prayer in a language that we don't
> |> understand). However, Thevaram and Thiruvasakam are also quite
> |> incomprehensible to most Tamils that I have met in the US. Your
> |> mileage with the Toronto Tamils may vary. If you were to suggest
> |> that someone ought to explain the meaning of these verses to the
> |> general Tamil audience then you open yourselves to the counter
> |> suggestion that similar explanations may be provided for the
> |> Sanskrit verses too. If the "stirring of the soul" that you
> |> refer to is possible (and I agree it is) without truly
> |> understanding the meaning of the lyrics, then the argument in
> |> favor of Sanskrit poojai becomes even more reasonable.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>

> Would you please explain why you think that Sanskrit hymns are soul
> stirring
> while Tamil hymns are not? Is this a subjective or an objective opinion?
>
>

Kadavullae! Bhaktikku oru mozhi thaevayaa? Indha veen vaadhaththa
niruththa karunai puri, Kadavullae!

Note the capital 'K'! ;)

> |>
> |> My own personal opinion is that unless the real underlying
> |> meaning of the poojai is explained, they all are less than
> |> satisfactory, no matter what language they are in. I favor
> |> non-ritualistic, silent and individual prayer in front of the
> |> idols - in your very own language of the heart!
> |>
> |>

--
-----------------------------
What to do, what not to do...

Kumar Venkataraman (vku...@superlink.net)
193A Sierra Court
Woodbridge NJ 07095
(H) (908) 636-8756
(W) (201) 828-8434

The Untitled <http://mars.superlink.net/~vampire/vkumar>
--------------------------------------------------------

Thathachari

unread,

Sep 15, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/15/96

to

Suresh Rajan wrote:

<snip>

> First, very few people perform hOmams. Hence, your generalization about
> all
> practising Tamils is quite off the mark. Second, it is not like there is a
> choice of language to perform ganapathi hOmam. Third, who says hOmams are
> effective prayers? The very idea that if you sit in your house and stick
> something into a fire (aka Agni) in front of you and mumble a few words,
> it
> will automatically reach the gods assembled in heaven is quite absurd.

<snip>

Comrade Suresh. Would you say that all prayers are equal and some
prayers are more equal than others? Would you say that ways of
worshipping in Tamil are effective prayers? Would mumbling a few words
in Tamil ensure that my prayers reach the gods? What routing alogrith
do you think this is based on? Will preferential routing of Tamil
become part of the next generation of TCP/IP
(IP v.6)?

Thaths

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,

Sep 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/16/96

to

In article <51c9qd$1...@news.uta.edu>, Venkat Devarajan <ven...@uta.edu> wrote:

>
>> |> selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) wrote:
>> |>
>> |> > indian language. When a thEvaaram or Thiruvaasagam song is sung in
>> |> |> > traditional paN, it will be much more soul stirring for a Tamil
>> |> than in any other language.
>> |>
>

>On which Venkat Devarajan commented:
>

>> |> Whether a poojai should be performed in Sanskrit or Tamil is
>> |> debatable (and I have, just like you, wondered about the
>> |> desirability of a prayer in a language that we don't
>> |> understand). However, Thevaram and Thiruvasakam are also quite

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>> |> incomprehensible to most Tamils that I have met in the US. Your

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>> |> mileage with the Toronto Tamils may vary. If you were to suggest
>> |> that someone ought to explain the meaning of these verses to the
>> |> general Tamil audience then you open yourselves to the counter
>> |> suggestion that similar explanations may be provided for the
>> |> Sanskrit verses too. If the "stirring of the soul" that you
>> |> refer to is possible (and I agree it is) without truly
>> |> understanding the meaning of the lyrics, then the argument in
>> |> favor of Sanskrit poojai becomes even more reasonable.
>>

thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam are far more understandable
to tamils in Tamil Nadu than Sanskrit Mantras. The Tamils
I've come across in US also will find thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam
far more understandable than Sanskrit Mantras.

Consider an example from appar thEvaaram and an another from
thiruvaasagam. Since it is transliterated, it might look a bit more
complicated, but these are simple songs.

aattuviththaal aaroruvar aadaa thaarE
adanguviththaal aaroruvar adangaa thaarE
Ottuviththaal aaroruvar Odaa thaarE
uruguviththaal aaroruvar urugaa thaarE
paattuviththaal aaroruvar paadaa thaarE
paNiviththaal aaroruvar paNiyaa thaarE
kaattuvaiththaal aaroruvar kaaNaa thaarE
kaaNbaaraar kaNNuthulaayk kaattaak kaalE

-appar thEvaaram

vaanaagi maNNaagi vaLiyaagi oLiyaagi
oonaagi uyiraagai uNmaiyumaay inmaiyumaay
kOnaagi yaan enathenRu avar avaraik kooththaattu
vaanaagi n^inRaayai ensolli vaazhththuvanE

maaNikkavaasagar, thiruvaasagam.

In the first song, last line, you'll come across 'kaN n^uthal'
where the word 'n^uthal' (= neRRi) may not be common knowledge
but such occurence of one or two unfamiliar words we come across
even when reading Time Magazine, don't we ? In the second song
above we come across 'vaLi' ( = kaaRRu), but tamils know
that 'sooRaavaLi' means 'hurricane' and they can easily assimilate
vaLi = kaaRRu. The spiritual appeal of Tamil songs and Tamil worship
for a tamil must be clear !

There are 108 'pORRi's sung by Appar and one can follow easily
almost all of them. (For example see 'kaRRavar uNNum kaniyE pORRi'
series etc.). This is not to say that there are not some significant
unfamiliar words in thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam.
These few unfamiliar words occur
within many tamil words that are still in current use.

Your attempt to equate tamil thEvaaram-thruvaasagam and Sanskrit
mantras ( saying both are not understandable and hence you favor
Sanskrit poojai) is without a sound basis. For a Tamil, eventhough
a few tamil words are not familiar, there are far more number of words
that he/she understands and most importantly, the tamil context helps
him/her, and further he/she is moved by intmate tamil form
( consider the thEvaaram lines like 'ammaiyE appaa, oppilaa maNiyE')
As far as I know there are not any Sanskrit Mantras in the same class
as thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam ( by 'class' I mean same 'genre').

>
>
>Venkat Devarajan
>817-272-3485
>Dept. of Electrical Engineering
>The University of Texas at Arlington
>
>

selvaa

Shyamala Parameswaran

unread,

Sep 17, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/17/96

to

Selva's reply to Venkat deleted. Selva, I personally find the
diglossia in Tamil to be a major obstacle to my understanding
any Tamil that is not in spoken form. Whatever be the reasons
for this difficulty (my not learning Tamil etc.), these
difficulties exist for me with Samskritam literature as well,
more so, since it occurs only in written form. I am quite sure this
difficulty is not unique and that there are many in TN who share
this with me. This may have been a partial but important
point in Venkat's reply.

Of course, there are no problems to learning Tamil, or Samskritam, for
that matter, except that it has to be a concerted effort now.

While Tamil can and should be a medium, I feel there is no need
for the opposition that has been constructed i.e. Tamil versus
Samskritam, or the comparative measure of one being better.

A lot of work in Samskritam can be translated into Tamil and
made accessible. Much of the Mantras as you call it, are
beautiful slokams of praise for the Lord. (I'll post a short
piece later, in English translation as an example, which
is beautiful and no less than Thevaram etc.) In pursuing
the Supreme Lord, language is a mundane issue and much less
than real Bhakti/Saranagati -- which transcends any language
and where language is just a vehicle. So all the contentiousness
on the language front is a needless human distraction obstructing
the real goal of spirituality, imo.

It is not "Sanskrit" or "Mantras" but rather Samskritam and
Manthirams (this form you used in a previous post, why give
it up now?) which to me, on mere intuitiveness, shows how much
the two languages have shared, exchanged and enriched...

Shyamala

Parthasarati Dileepan

unread,

Sep 18, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/18/96

to

C.R. Selvakumar wrote:
>
> ( consider the thEvaaram lines like 'ammaiyE appaa, oppilaa maNiyE')
> As far as I know there are not any Sanskrit Mantras in the same class
> as thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam ( by 'class' I mean same 'genre').
>

"thvamEva maathaa, cha pithaa thvamEva
thvamEva bhanduscha sakhaa thvamEva
thvamEva vidhyaa, dhraviNam thvamEva
thvamEva sarvam, ma ma dhEva dhEva"

-- SaraNaagathi gadhyam by Sri Rmanauja

-- Dileepan

Suresh Vaidyanathan

unread,

Sep 19, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/19/96

to

In article <Dxu6K...@novice.uwaterloo.ca>,

C.R. Selvakumar <selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>
> thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam are far more understandable
> to tamils in Tamil Nadu than Sanskrit Mantras.

Sanskrit is not a foreign language and has borrowed
liberally from Tamil and other languages, as you have
convincingly argued in the past. Thus there are many
Sanskrit slokas that when written down are just as
_equally_ comprehensible to anyone that speaks Tamil.

Consider, for eg., the sloka that goes

kayEna vaca manasA indriyIrvA...
(This is in somebody's .sig file that posts here freqeuntly)

or

AkAshat patitam tOyam...

or that ends

... sambhavAmi yugE yugE

>
> aattuviththaal aaroruvar aadaa thaarE
> adanguviththaal aaroruvar adangaa thaarE

Another problem, and in all seriousness, is that these
lines remind me of Sivaji Ganesan & K.R.Vijaya.
So, although I understand the lines, I find them a
less conducive to prayer.

Of course, this is probably because of your choice
of example more than anything else.

Just my 2 cents,

Suresh
------

Suresh Rajan

unread,

Sep 20, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/20/96

to

In article <51ad6h$n...@hpindda.cup.hp.com>, sesh...@cup.hp.com (Raghu

Seshadri) writes:
|> From: sra...@mylapore.engr.sgi.com (Suresh Rajan)
|>
|> -Third, who says hOmams are

|> Please inform us what type of prayer

|> will automatically reach the gods assembled

|> in heaven, then.
|>
|> If you know of one, I'd like to know.
|>
|> If you don't, your objection should be
|> to all prayers, not just this one.
|>
|> RS

I was replying to the original post which said that "common folk may offer
prayers like 'Amma/Appa Kaapaathu' in Tamil while using Sanskrit for more
effective prayers like the Ganapathi hOmam. I fail to see how a hOmam can
be considered a more effective prayer. In fact, prayer should be personal
and
from the heart. Hence, IMO, a prayer like "Amma/Appa Kaapaathu" is
preferrable
to a hOmam or for that matter, any organized prayer like hOmams, Mass,
etc.
What is the point of having somebody else recite the prayer for you?

The "it" in the "it will automatically reach the gods" phrase in my post
refers to the offerings that people put into the fire and not the prayer
itself. Isn't the principle of hOmams that if you say the correct words
and
put offerings (food, clothes, etc.) into the fire (mouth of Agni), it will
automatically reach the gods? Personally, I don't buy the idea of Agni
being
some sort of celestial UPS guy. However, you are free to believe
otherwise.

Suresh

Suresh Rajan

unread,

Sep 20, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/20/96

to

In article <96257.142...@uicvm.uic.edu>, Shyamala Parameswaran

<U15...@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
|> In article <519tod$m...@murrow.corp.sgi.com>,
|> sra...@mylapore.engr.sgi.com (Suresh Rajan) says:
|> >
|> .... [other quotes not relevant here]
|>
|>

|> I would be interested in the "source" for the above "info"

|> that is, on the HRCE's giving "worshippers the choice between

|> The facts from my recall:
|>
|> The Archanai order was passed by HRCE, under Kazhagam rule.
|> If "choice" was given to "worshippers" in TN or elsewhere
|> or any polls were conducted on poosai lang. choice, the detailed
|> researchers would have mentioned it somewhere.
|>
|> The wording of the order was presented as a recommendation
|> to temple administrations; quite strongly, I might add,
|> in a political setup clearly hostile to Samskritam and all
|> imputations given to its usage. An average Schmoe can
|> figure out the "choice" element contained therein.
|> The temple administrations were, if anything, quick to
|> understand the implications in flouting such an order
|> (or, recommendation). The fact "90 percent archanais
|> are performed in Tamil" has less or nothing to with "choice"
|> of "worshippers" per se, rather has more to do with temple
|> officials effecting the "change over" to Tamil archanais
|> as accomodation, for obvious reasons.

The default language for archanais is still Sanskrit. A devotee has to
specifically ask for a Tamil archanai if that is his/her preference. The
last time I went to a temple in India, I did not notice a temple
administrator
standing in the sanctum sanctorum monitoring the priest's choice of
language
for archanais. I also fail to see how the TN govt. (under Kazhagam rule,
as
you point out) would go about punishing errant priests. It's not like they
can be transferred to a "thanni illaatha kaadu".

Suresh

PS : Welcome back. Why the long silence? We were feeling abandoned.

Suresh Rajan

unread,

Sep 20, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/20/96

to

In article <51c9qd$1...@news.uta.edu>, ven...@uta.edu (Venkat Devarajan)
writes:
|>

|> > |> selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) wrote:
|> > |>
|> > |> > indian language. When a thEvaaram or Thiruvaasagam song is
|> sung in
|> > |> |> > traditional paN, it will be much more soul stirring for a
|> Tamil
|> > |> than in any other language.
|> > |>
|>
|> On which Venkat Devarajan commented:
|>
|> > |> Whether a poojai should be performed in Sanskrit or Tamil is
|> > |> debatable (and I have, just like you, wondered about the
|> > |> desirability of a prayer in a language that we don't
|> > |> understand). However, Thevaram and Thiruvasakam are also quite

|> > |> incomprehensible to most Tamils that I have met in the US. Your

|> > |> mileage with the Toronto Tamils may vary. If you were to suggest
|> > |> that someone ought to explain the meaning of these verses to the
|> > |> general Tamil audience then you open yourselves to the counter
|> > |> suggestion that similar explanations may be provided for the
|> > |> Sanskrit verses too. If the "stirring of the soul" that you
|> > |> refer to is possible (and I agree it is) without truly
|> > |> understanding the meaning of the lyrics, then the argument in
|> > |> favor of Sanskrit poojai becomes even more reasonable.

|> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> >
|>
|> Suresh Rajan then asked:
|>

|> Suresh: You have obviously misunderstood my words - not entirely
|> your fault. When I read my own words, I could see that it might
|> sound ambiguous. Here's a simpler explanation: Consider that
|> both Sanskrit and Tamil poojais are equally incomprehensible but
|> equally soul-stirring to an average Tamil.

Your assumption that a Sanskrit hymn is as soul-stirring as a Tamil hymn
to an average devotee may or may not be true. I was trying to find out why
you think it is true. That's all.

|> It then becomes
|> difficult to make a case to change the existing practice. This
|> is what I meant by the phrase that you underlined. The obvious
|> thing to do is to come up with simple Tamil prayers (I don't
|> think Thevaram is in this category, Thiruvasagam and Kandha
|> Shashti Kavacham are close - I would prefer something simpler
|> than all of them).
|>
|> On the practical matter of performing Poojai in Tamil here in
|> the US: this is quite difficult unless the temple is run
|> entirely by Tamils. Here in the Dallas/Ft.Worth area, the
|> Mahalaksmi Temple is run by all the Indians. Tamizh Vazhipadu
|> (there is a good phrase!) is performed by a dedicated group
|> every month for the Murugan deity. This includes group
|> recitation of Kandha Sashti Kavacham and Tamizh Bhajan songs in
|> addition to Sanskrit archanai. The whole thing is soul-stirring!
|>
|>

|> Venkat Devarajan
|> 817-272-3485
|> Dept. of Electrical Engineering
|> The University of Texas at Arlington
|>
|>

Suresh

Suresh Rajan

unread,

Sep 20, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/20/96

to

In article <323C58...@utxsvs.cc.utexas.edu>, Thathachari
<tha...@utxsvs.cc.utexas.edu> writes:
|> Suresh Rajan wrote:
|>
|> <snip>

|> <snip>
|>
|> Comrade Suresh. Would you say that all prayers are equal and some
|> prayers are more equal than others?

Herr Thaths, the validity of any religious practice lies in the eyes of
the
practitioner. If a commom relegious practice is to be adopted, then it
should
be decided on the basis of the preference of the majority of the devotees.
This concept is called democracy, in case you are unfamiliar with it.

|> Would you say that ways of
|> worshipping in Tamil are effective prayers?

Nope. But atleast, it is intelligible.

|> Would mumbling a few words
|> in Tamil ensure that my prayers reach the gods?

Beats me. I have no proof that any prayer reaches God, if he/she exists.

Let me ask this. Would you sign a legal document that is written in a
language
that you don't know? Or, take a test in such a language? Or, be tried in a
court where the judge, lawyers and jury spoke in this unknown language?
Or,
consult a doctor who tells you his diagnosis in this unknown language?
Obviously not. Why should the act of praying be any different? Are prayers
meant to offer comfort to the devotees or to adhere to some mythical
doctrine?

Suresh

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Sep 20, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/20/96

to

Suresh Rajan wrote:

: Herr Thaths, the validity of any religious practice lies in the eyes of
: the practitioner.

and then immediately contradicts himself
with

: If a commom relegious practice is to be adopted, then it

: should be decided on the basis of the preference of the majority
: of the devotees. This concept is called democracy, in case you are
: unfamiliar with it.

Let me list all the absurdities in this
statement.

1 You contradict yourself - if you believe that the
validity of the puja lies in the man practising it,
then it doesn't matter what the majority thinks.
It is only up to the individual, and therefore
majority arguments are invalid, by your own
statement.

2 In many areas, majority cannot settle anything.
Can you establish who wrote the finest poetry,
or who was the greatest artist by crude democracy
arguments ? When the poet Bharati died, only
about 2 dozen people showed up for the funeral,
whereas when a cheap politician dies today,
millions line the streets. Does this mean
that el cheapo pols are greater than Bharati ?
Majority means for very little in many areas
of human judgment.

3 The group that is currently involved are the
Hindus, not the Tamils. Non-tamil hindus outnumber
Tamil Hindus by several hundred million.
So even by crude democracy arguments, your
case would be untenable. ( This is not my
argument, just intended to show the falsehood
of yours. )

RS

Suresh Rajan

unread,

Sep 20, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/20/96

to

In article <51ug3t$l...@hpindda.cup.hp.com>, sesh...@cup.hp.com (Raghu

An individual is free to adopt any practice in his/her own home. However,
when it comes to public worship, the wishes of the majority should
prevail.

So who gets to decide on behalf of the unwashed masses? An elite
oligarchy?
A prophet who claims to receive messages from on high? You? Me?

Non-Tamil hindus are free to adopt whatever they wish in their own
temples.
Tamil hindus should be free to adopt whatever they wish in temples in TN.

Suresh

Venkat Devarajan

unread,

Sep 20, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/20/96

to

In article <96261.140...@uicvm.uic.edu>
Shyamala Parameswaran <U15...@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:

> While Tamil can and should be a medium, I feel there is no need
> for the opposition that has been constructed i.e. Tamil versus
> Samskritam, or the comparative measure of one being better.

My suspicion is that a lot of non-brahmin Tamils view Sanskrit
as a faintly surviving symbol of the brahmin hegemony of the
past. One of the ways brahmins of the past appear to have
established their pre-eminent position in the society was to
become proficient in the devabhasha and preventing others from
doing the same. So, although on a one-on-one choice between
Tamil and any other language the majority would pick Tamil, when
it comes to Sanskrit versus Tamil, there is almost a
revolutionary zeal in the choosing.

[Surprisingly, Indians as a whole seem not to hold anything
against any British symbolisms. Their language, their sport etc.
of the most recent masters do not appear to evoke any sense of
abhorrence.]

A personal aside: I have fond memories, while in middle school,
of leading long processions of boys and girls, every Friday
evening, from the Desika Vinayagar Devasthanam school in
Nagercoil, to the Chetti Street Vinayagar kovil. We would loudly
recite "Seetha kaLava SenthAmaraippoom" (A Vinayagar thuthi)
followed by the entire ThiruVasagam ( I understood most of the
meaning ). Having gone through the Chetti street, we would enter
the majestic Vinayagar temple and go around the prAhAram and sit
down at the huge entrance hall in long rows - boys across from
the girls and recite many other Tamil devotional songs. The
highlight (for which many boys attended this event!) was the
distribution of copiuos amounts of hot Sundal and one piece of
Vadai at the conclusion which we would store in our "knicker"
pockets and eat one sundal at a time on the way home! Later I
found no conflict in reciting "Igiri Nandini (the alliteration
in this astounding!)" or "Mahesthestu Mahamaye" (I understood
most of it) at home from my grand father. Much later, my father
taught me several Thevarams in a huge ragamalika which to this
day I enjoy singing. My own preference, having studied both the
languages is to treat each with the deference and respect that
each deserves. But then again, my ancestors were not treated
badly either.

Incidentally, I see nothing wrong in bringing up any of these
brahmin versus non-brahmin issues for discussion if it is done
with compassion and understanding and if it will help with the
reconciliation and healing process.

Venkat Devarajan

unread,

Sep 20, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/20/96

to

Reposting article removed by rogue canceller. See news.admin.net-abuse.announce
for further information.

shivram(shiv)

unread,

Sep 23, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/23/96

to

Suresh Rajan wrote:

> An individual is free to adopt any practice in his/her own home. However,
> when it comes to public worship, the wishes of the majority should
> prevail.

As far as public worship is concerned I think 'poosai' in tamil is warranted but with some
reservations. A very good argument is that most people don't understand sanskrit and
hence poosai in sanskrit doesn't mean anything to them. While the poosari is chanting
mantras... or offering prayers in sanskrit most worshiphippers are saying their own
prayers maybe in a different language. In fact the two prayers may be completely
different. If I knew the prayer being said by the poosari I would also say the same
prayers. But while it is in sanskrit (which I don't understand) I have to say my own
prayers and frequently wonder if I have forgotten to pray for somebody or mention them in
my prayers. I don't know what prayer is being said by the poosari. [It has never affected
me personally]

For a long time latin was the language in churches but not anymore. It is more practical
to say prayers in the local language. And that is what happened. bUt not so in india.

The question of sanskrit or tamil arises only when public prayers are offered. So why not
use both languages. I think it makes sense. Or is there a law .. that says prayers can't
be said twice (cause' I would like to break it). I think that's the only place where such
a conflict exists.

One can request the prayer be said in a particular language as far as personal poosai's
..archanai's ... are concerned. Even here I think both languages would be warranted since
... by requesting the poosai in a particluar language one is making it painfully aware
which group the person belongs to or not....
And then we can argue about the next step... and say.. when I ask the poosari to say the
prayer in tamil... he does not hold the coconut right.. or he didn't break it correctly...
yadda! yadda!Yadda!

> Non-Tamil hindus are free to adopt whatever they wish in their own
> temples. Tamil hindus should be free to adopt whatever they wish in temples in TN.

Tamil hindus probably should adopt both languages in temples in TN. And sign language
also.

*******************************************************
If you didn't care what happened to me,
And I didn't care for you
We would zig zag our way
through the boredom and pain
Occasionally glancing up through the rain
Wondering which of the buggers to blame
And watching for pigs on the wing.

- Pigs on the Wing (Pink Floyd)
*******************************************************

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Sep 23, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/23/96

to

Suresh Rajan wrote:

: An individual is free to adopt any practice in his/her own home. However,
: when it comes to public worship, the wishes of the majority should
: prevail.

This is based on the assumption that
hindu temple worship is similar to
Christian congregational worship.
It is not. Temple worship is not
mass worship, it can be conceived of
as a series of individual prayers.
So, even in the temple, hindus pray
privately and they should be allowed
to pray in the manner of their
choosing, just like at home.

I have already presented my arguments
against majoritarianism, so I will
not repeat them.

: |> 2 In many areas, majority cannot settle anything.

: |> Can you establish who wrote the finest poetry,
: |> or who was the greatest artist by crude democracy
: |> arguments ? When the poet Bharati died, only
: |> about 2 dozen people showed up for the funeral,
: |> whereas when a cheap politician dies today,
: |> millions line the streets. Does this mean
: |> that el cheapo pols are greater than Bharati ?
: |> Majority means for very little in many areas
: |> of human judgment.

: So who gets to decide on behalf of the unwashed masses? An elite
: oligarchy?
: A prophet who claims to receive messages from on high? You? Me?

A religion is not a democracy, any more
than a university is, or the art world is.
A few inspired men and women set the
practices going, and tradition and
other situational dynamics take care of
the rest. To bring in mob rule in this
area is as appropriate as offering
Nobel Prizes by mass vote.

: Non-Tamil hindus are free to adopt whatever they wish in their own
: temples.

You mean that temples in TN cannot be
considered their own temples by non-Tamils,
even if they are hindus ? Why not ?

By your argument, atheists in TN can consider
hindu temples "our temples" whereas devout
hindus across the state line cannot. Nothing
could be more absurd. For thousands of years,
pilgrimage to distant holy sites has
been a strong hindu tradition. The temples,
no matter where they are located, belong
to all hindus. Srirangam or Kanchi belong
to all hindus, just as Kashi and Haridwar
and Dwaraka belong to all hindus. This
narrow minded differentiation is untenable.

: Tamil hindus should be free to adopt whatever they wish in temples in TN.

Yes, tamil hindus' needs should be catered
to, but not by ignoring totally the
needs of the majority non-tamil hindus,
and above all, atheists, anti-hindu
"rationalists" etc do not represent
tamil hindu needs.

RS

Thathachari

unread,

Sep 23, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/23/96

to

Suresh Rajan wrote:
> In article <323C58...@utxsvs.cc.utexas.edu>, Thathachari
> <tha...@utxsvs.cc.utexas.edu> writes:
> |> Comrade Suresh. Would you say that all prayers are equal and some
> |> prayers are more equal than others?

> Herr Thaths, the validity of any religious practice lies in the eyes of
> the

> practitioner. If a commom relegious practice is to be adopted, then it

> should
> be decided on the basis of the preference of the majority of the devotees.
> This concept is called democracy, in case you are unfamiliar with it.

Doktor Suresh, if the validity of the prayer lies on the eyes of the
participant then why should it matter to you whether it reaches the ears
of a god / godess? You initially were arguing for the usage of Tamil in
prayers and in the same post (I don't know why) said that the whole idea
that hymns of Ganapathi hOmam reaching gods unbelieveable. My point
was if there is doubt whether the prayers will reach their intended
recipient in the first place does it really matter what language the
prayer was in?

The problem with third world democracies is that too much emphasis is
laid on the 'cracy' (rule) part than the 'demo' (people) part. We will
soon have our menu be dictated by popular mandate.

[SNIP]

Thaths

Kathiravan

unread,

Sep 23, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/23/96

to

In article <51ug3t$l...@hpindda.cup.hp.com>, sesh...@cup.hp.com (Raghu Seshadri) writes:
|> Suresh Rajan wrote:
|>

|> : Herr Thaths, the validity of any religious practice lies in the eyes of
|> : the practitioner.
|>

|> 2 In many areas, majority cannot settle anything.
|> Can you establish who wrote the finest poetry,
|> or who was the greatest artist by crude democracy
|> arguments ? When the poet Bharati died, only
|> about 2 dozen people showed up for the funeral,
|> whereas when a cheap politician dies today,
|> millions line the streets. Does this mean
|> that el cheapo pols are greater than Bharati ?
|> Majority means for very little in many areas
|> of human judgment.

Bharathi was not a popular person or
considered a great person then. None of the
top Indian National Congress people of those
days was associated in a big way with him.

Popularity or Greatness needs a political
backing.

|> 3 The group that is currently involved are the
|> Hindus, not the Tamils. Non-tamil hindus outnumber
|> Tamil Hindus by several hundred million.
|> So even by crude democracy arguments, your
|> case would be untenable. ( This is not my
|> argument, just intended to show the falsehood
|> of yours. )

As I said before you BIGOT-HINDUTVAS have nothing to
fool around with Tamils and their wishes.
If you want your feudal rule and not democracy
have your own brahmansthan with whatever you
wish for anything. But in a democratic society
learn to respect the wishes of majority.

|> RS

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Sep 23, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/23/96

to

Suresh Rajan writes -

: I was replying to the original post which said that "common folk may offer

: prayers like 'Amma/Appa Kaapaathu' in Tamil while using Sanskrit for more
: effective prayers like the Ganapathi hOmam. I fail to see how a hOmam can
: be considered a more effective prayer.

I agree with you here; I too fail to see
how one prayer can be more effective
than the other.

But I suggest that we should allow people
to believe whatever they wish, as long as
it is harmless, and not try to impose our
own ideas on them.

: In fact, prayer should be personal

: and from the heart. Hence, IMO, a prayer like "Amma/Appa
: Kaapaathu" is preferrable to a hOmam or for that matter, any
: organized prayer like hOmams, Mass, etc.

How do you know the homam-practitioner
is not doing it from the heart ?

: What is the point of having somebody else recite the prayer for you?

Now I sort of understand what your
objection is. Why do we need priests
to officiate, is that it ?

This is too large a topic to be gone
over here. Perhaps, later.

: The "it" in the "it will automatically reach the gods" phrase in my post

: refers to the offerings that people put into the fire and not the prayer
: itself. Isn't the principle of hOmams that if you say the correct words

: and put offerings (food, clothes, etc.) into the fire (mouth of Agni), it will
: automatically reach the gods? Personally, I don't buy the idea of Agni

: being some sort of celestial UPS guy. However, you are free to believe
: otherwise.

I don't think anyone is childish enough
to believe this literally. You have taken
a metaphorical thing and taken it
way too literally.

RS

Shyamala Parameswaran

unread,

Sep 23, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/23/96

to

On 20 Sep 1996, Suresh Rajan wrote:

Later, srajan says: (my reply to the lines above deleted as read)

>
> The default language for archanais is still Sanskrit. A devotee has to
> specifically ask for a Tamil archanai if that is his/her preference. The
> last time I went to a temple in India, I did not notice a temple
> administrator
> standing in the sanctum sanctorum monitoring the priest's choice of
> language
> for archanais. I also fail to see how the TN govt. (under Kazhagam rule,
> as
> you point out) would go about punishing errant priests. It's not like they
> can be transferred to a "thanni illaatha kaadu".
>
> Suresh
>
> PS : Welcome back. Why the long silence? We were feeling abandoned.

The second quote, above, from you contradicts what you said
earlier.

Either, your earlier statement 'something like close to 90 percent
of the archanais are performed in Tamil' (with the attendant clause
of a "choice" factor involved in the switch over from Samskritam to
Tamil, by worshippers) is true, OR, the line that the 'default
language for archanais is Sanskrit is true. (in which case there
must be some evidence that 90 percent archanais are being asked to
be conducted in Tamil, by the public. Such evidence is not clear.)

Or, I may have misunderstood you. If you mean that since the kazhagam
days (and HRCE notification), the public has a choice between archanais
to be conducted in Tamil and Samskritam, then you are on the mark and my
apologies for the misunderstanding.

On the new point of the default language being Samskritam and that
devotees have to ask for archanai in Tamil: this is because most
pundits/poosaaries have had their training in Samskritam and my guess
is, not all would have retrained sufficiently well in Tamil to do the
archanais with ease, in Tamil. There is also the choice of the poosari
involved in this comfort-level. Also. a lot of the naamavaLis,
stotramalas may not have appropriate translations/Tamil versions yet
athough there are several cases of Tamil stotrams too. Suprabhadam,
is an example, where Tamil versions have been made available but this
is atypical, I think.

I personally feel one language should not kill the other and that
both Samskritam and Tamil can be worked into the system, without
hostility. Vishnusahasranamam in Samskritam is a simple chanting
of names in praise, very musical and poetic; a listing of the
attributes and omniscience, with the accent on the transcendental
qualities of the Lord, for the spiritually inclined. All we need is
to understand the meaning of the names, limited as we are in our
understanding of anything divine. This applies to any language
in use. Still, I would agree that rituals need to be minimal and
that simple devotion with even simpler chanting is the key in bhakti
in this KaLi yugam.

P.S. Thanks for the welcome. Just keeping busy, trying to stay
away from the inevitable seruppu-adi and catching up with my own
self-realization, that's all. Life's short. :-<

Shyamala

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Sep 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/24/96

to

From: kkri...@bnr.ca (Kathiravan)

|> 2 In many areas, majority cannot settle anything.
|> Can you establish who wrote the finest poetry,
|> or who was the greatest artist by crude democracy
|> arguments ? When the poet Bharati died, only
|> about 2 dozen people showed up for the funeral,
|> whereas when a cheap politician dies today,
|> millions line the streets. Does this mean
|> that el cheapo pols are greater than Bharati ?
|> Majority means for very little in many areas
|> of human judgment.

-Bharathi was not a popular person or
-considered a great person then. None of the
-top Indian National Congress people of those
-days was associated in a big way with him.

Thanks for proving my point. Bharati
was not popular then, you say, and
none of the top guys associated with
him. Only about 2 dozen people showed
up for his funeral. So by popularity,
majority counts, he should not be
considered a great person. This proves
the shallowness of judging solely by
majority counts.

Sometimes you surprise me by
actually understanding what I am
trying to say.

|> 3 The group that is currently involved are the
|> Hindus, not the Tamils. Non-tamil hindus outnumber
|> Tamil Hindus by several hundred million.
|> So even by crude democracy arguments, your
|> case would be untenable. ( This is not my
|> argument, just intended to show the falsehood
|> of yours. )

-As I said before you BIGOT-HINDUTVAS have nothing to
-fool around with Tamils and their wishes.

Well, may be I spoke too soon,
Mr RAW agent and hindutva clown Kathiravan !
You bigot-hindutvas have nothing to
fool around with sane people and
their wishes.

Didn't I already show that you are
actually a RAW agent and a hindutva
fifth columnist posing as a holy
Tamil ?

-If you want your feudal rule and not democracy
-have your own brahmansthan with whatever you
-wish for anything. But in a democratic society
-learn to respect the wishes of majority.

If you want your insane and clownish rule,
have you own RAW-sthan and hindutvasthan.
But in a sane society, you have to respect
the wishes of the sane.

I was having a decent discussion with
a sensible person who argues his
position with reasonableness, and
suddenly this clown has to barge in
and spoil everything.

RS

Kathiravan

unread,

Sep 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/24/96

to

Bharathi was not popular. Popularity
means public following. Bharathi could not
even meet Gandhi. Bharathi's political views
were never consistent. He left many ideological
confusions in his work. He apologized profusely
to get out of Jail. He came out of Jail after
he offered a written letter of apology to
the English Ejaman. Bharathi sang one thing
(achachamillai, nmadippu swadeshi etc). He
could not stand up to what he wrote. There
are other reasons for Bharathi being a low
profile personality.

i
You are one insane Hindutva as you have
demonstrated repeatedly for being feudal.
Democracy is respecting the wishes of majority.
You fellows cook up false propaganda and survived
just by fooling kings. Now your social order,
inhuman values and hegemony is under ??? by
many people. Now you guys are desperate.

Tamil is not holy. Don't distort. I did
not claim holiness to Tamil. But you fellows
should bugger off to wishes of Tamils and not
adopt filthy tactics. I mean you RSS spologists
will have no place in a democratic society.
You can happily take your bigotry to brahmanasthan.

Venkat Devarajan

unread,

Sep 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/24/96

to

In article <96261.140...@uicvm.uic.edu>
Shyamala Parameswaran <U15...@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:

> While Tamil can and should be a medium, I feel there is no need
> for the opposition that has been constructed i.e. Tamil versus
> Samskritam, or the comparative measure of one being better.

My suspicion is that a lot of non-brahmin Tamils view Sanskrit
as a faintly surviving symbol of the brahmin hegemony of the
past. One of the ways brahmins of the past appear to have
established their pre-eminent position in the society was to
become proficient in the "devabhasha" and preventing others from
doing the same. So, although on a one-on-one choice between
Tamil and any other language the majority would pick Tamil, when
it comes to Sanskrit versus Tamil, there is almost a
revolutionary zeal in the choosing.

[Surprisingly, Indians as a whole seem not to hold anything

against any British symbolisms. The language, the sport etc. of

the most recent masters do not appear to evoke any sense of
abhorrence.]

A personal aside: I have fond memories, while in middle school,
of leading long processions of boys and girls, every Friday
evening, from the Desika Vinayagar Devasthanam school in
Nagercoil, to the Chetti Street Vinayagar kovil. We would loudly
recite "Seetha kaLava SenthAmaraippoom" (A Vinayagar thuthi)

followed by the entire ThiruVasagam. Having gone through the

Chetti street, we would enter the majestic Vinayagar temple and
go around the prAhAram and sit down at the huge entrance hall in
long rows - boys across from the girls and recite many other
Tamil devotional songs. The highlight (for which many boys
attended this event!) was the distribution of copiuos amounts of
hot Sundal and one piece of Vadai at the conclusion which we
would store in our "knicker" pockets and eat one sundal at a

time on the way home! Later, I felt no conflict in reciting
"Igiri Nandini (the alliteration in this is astounding!)" or
"Mahesthestu Mahamaye" (this is now one of the official prayer
slokas at the D/FW Hindu temple) at home from my grand father.

Much later, my father taught me several Thevarams in a huge

ragamalika which, to this day, I enjoy singing. My own

preference, having studied both the languages is to treat each

with the deference and respect that it deserves. But then again,

Ravi Krishna

unread,

Sep 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/24/96

to

Kathiravan (kkri...@bnr.ca) wrote:
: Democracy is respecting the wishes of majority.

Hey you dravida idiot , by the same concept of democracy tamils should accept
hindi as the national language and learn it. Don't twist the definition of
democracy to your advantage.

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Sep 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/25/96

to

From: kkri...@bnr.ca (Kathiravan)

-Bharathi was not popular.

Mr RAW agent, this point of yours
is not under dispute. So there is no need
to go on and on about it.

-You are one insane Hindutva as you have
-demonstrated repeatedly for being feudal.

And you are another insane RAW hindutva
as you have demonstrated repeatedly by
being silly.

-Democracy is respecting the wishes of majority.

And harassing the minority apparently.

-You fellows cook up false propaganda and survived
-just by fooling kings. Now your social order,
-inhuman values and hegemony is under ??? by
-many people. Now you guys are desperate.

Who is "you fellows" ? I have never
even met a king, let alone fool kings.
Wait, that is not true. I have played
cards and there are 4 kings there I have
met. But they were too clever for me,
I couldn't fool them.

I didn't even know I had a social order,
I have received a few money orders when
I was in college, but social order , no.
I also am not aware of any inhuman values,
except one - making fun of RAW agents,
and hindutva clowns. Perhaps I should
develop compassion for these creatures,
but all in good time.

True, I am desperate, but not for hegemony.
I let superpowers and such have
hegemony, I am content simply with
money.

I am desperate for the time when you will
write like a sane man. Something tells
me, however, that I should not long
for the impossible.

- Tamil is not holy. Don't distort. I did
-not claim holiness to Tamil.

Yes, you did, you clever hindutva agent.

-But you fellows
-should bugger off to wishes of Tamils and not
-adopt filthy tactics.

As this is not English, I can't
quite grasp what you are babbling.

I notice that again you are addressing
me in plural. Only royalty is addressed
in plural. First you said I fooled kings and now
you are saying I am a king myself.

Next I expect you to say that I will
be sending a money order to myself.
You RAW agents are so clever.

-I mean you RSS spologists
-will have no place in a democratic society.
-You can happily take your bigotry to brahmanasthan.

"You RSS " ? Why am I an RSS apologist ?
Oh, I get it, as I have exposed your
RAW ties, you have to accuse me of
another 3 letter organization , is that it ?
Why didn't you pick CIA ? or IBM ?

Seriously ...

You have a funny idea of what a
democratic society is. A democratic
society is more tolerant than
a fascist society. In a democratic
society, all sorts of people and
organizations have a place. SO it
is nonsensical to say that a democratic
society has no place for this or
that group.

So realize that you are a fascist,
not a democrat. In spite of your
bigotry and insanity, you will
still have a place in our democracy.
In a lunatic asylum one of these
days, but certainly still part of
our society.

Holy RAW, KKK man !

RS

Ps - Looking forward to more insanity ..
This is fun, don't you agree, RAW agent ?

Badrinarayanan Seshadri

unread,

Sep 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/25/96

to

Kathiravan (kkri...@bnr.ca) wrote:

[much snipped]

* Bharathi's political views
* were never consistent. He left many ideological
* confusions in his work.

This is very interesting. May I request you to present
some sort of - any sort of - evidence... say excerpts
from his works etc., to support this thesis?

Any reference to a scholarly (or other) work on this
subject will also be appreciated.

* He apologized profusely
* to get out of Jail. He came out of Jail after
* he offered a written letter of apology to
* the English Ejaman. Bharathi sang one thing
* (achachamillai, nmadippu swadeshi etc). He
* could not stand up to what he wrote.

Very strong words.

I wonder if I can ever be courageous enough to say
something like this about bhaarathiyaar.

I have heard people say several things about him.
A crazy man, a drug addict, a man who never cared
about his family, a casteist(!) even, but this is
the first time I hear about him being a coward and
a hypocrite.

I wish bhaarathidhaasan was here to refute some of
these rather serious charges!

* There
* are other reasons for Bharathi being a low
* profile personality.

I am interested in hearing more on this.

Thanks.
--badri

--
--------------------------------------------------
Badri Seshadri
Graduate Student
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
Cornell University
--------------------------------------------------

Vendan Muruganandan

unread,

Sep 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/25/96

to

cup.hp.com> <51urs1$c...@murrow.corp.sgi.com> <3246A6...@intelsat.int>
Distribution:

shivram(shiv) (Shivra...@intelsat.int) wrote:

: Suresh Rajan wrote:
:
: > An individual is free to adopt any practice in his/her own home. However,
: > when it comes to public worship, the wishes of the majority should
: > prevail.

: *******************************************************

: If you didn't care what happened to me,
: And I didn't care for you
: We would zig zag our way
: through the boredom and pain
: Occasionally glancing up through the rain
: Wondering which of the buggers to blame
: And watching for pigs on the wing.

: - Pigs on the Wing (Pink Floyd)
: *******************************************************

This is a religious issue, not an issue where periyarists have a
say. If hinduism says that sanskrit is the language of poosaikal, then it
should not be doctored with. What i have noticed is, people who have no
love for hinduism are dictating what hindus should do/say. How many temple
going hindus have come up with this plan?? the answer is none.. All of
them who are against sanskrit poosaikal are against hindus also.
Will any jew/muslim/christian compromise his religion for petty
politics? The answer is no... i dont think there is a need for hindus to
fall prey to cheap nationalism here. If tommorow, tamil hindus agree for
tamil poosaikal and follow tamil nayanaars/aalwars, we will have more
clowns finding fault with those scriptures. Some of them will say..this
nayanaar is a brahmin..as such he cannot be acknowledged and other
reasons. Can we build a temple without AAGAMAS just because those
scriptures are in sanskrit? If we take out sanskrit from our religion,
almost nothing will be left of it. The very beauty of hinduism is the
intermixing of many different cultures. My friends tell me.. things like
"mookku-kutchi"(the nose-ring), sari, etc..have their origins in
maharastra. even the thaali-kodi is probably not tamil in origin.
So guys.. those who want to be hindus can be hindus..but dont dictate to
hindus what they should do..we can look after ourselves.
-vendan
http://www.au.ac.th/~u3716274

"god is like capello, he doesnt give everyone the same chance"
-Marco Simone

Kathiravan

unread,

Sep 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/25/96

to

I shall post excerpts of some of
Bharathiar's works.

His letter to Ejaman to get out of jail is
just oppsoite in tone and meaning to what he
sang. This does not take away the punch and
impact that his songs still have on a common
man.

I shall post more on this from a rather
scholarly work with references.

Kathiravan

Suresh Vaidyanathan

unread,

Sep 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/25/96

to

In article <3246A6...@intelsat.int>,

shivram(shiv) <Shivra...@intelsat.int> wrote:
>
>Tamil hindus probably should adopt both languages in temples in TN. And sign language
>also.
>

Yep! The Madras hindu priests should use the Madras accent
( Yov Saami! Inna bejaar panre... ) and the Coimbatore hindu
priests should use the Coimbatore accent.

Suresh Vaidyanathan

unread,

Sep 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/25/96

to

In article <526rgi$b...@bmerhc5e.bnr.ca>, Kathiravan <kkri...@bnr.ca> wrote:
>
> Bharathi was not a popular person or

>considered a great person then. None of the

>top Indian National Congress people of those

>days was associated in a big way with him.

Bharathi's contribution to tamil poetry is
just as significant as his contribution to the
national freedom movement. So just on his contribution
to tamil alone, he should have drawn great
support for the populus.

BTW, thanks for not spelling his name as parathi.

>As I said before you BIGOT-HINDUTVAS have nothing to

>fool around with Tamils

I do not know why you resort to this name calling even
when RS is most polite and debates the topic intelligently.

>But in a democratic society learn to respect the wishes of majority.

Will you make up your mind on minority rights vs. majority rule?

When it comes to hindi in schools you champion minority rights and
when it is sanskrit in temples it is majority rule. I gather your
love for tamil but you cannot speak through both sides of your mouth.

BTW, there are many temples where the priests recite the prayers
mostly in Tamil. In fact I am sure that this is the case with the
temples you visit most frequently.

Suresh Vaidyanathan

unread,

Sep 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/25/96

to

In article <529lt7$i...@news.uta.edu>, Venkat Devarajan <ven...@uta.edu> wrote:

> My own preference, having studied both the languages is to treat
> each with the deference and respect that it deserves.

Shouldn't that be something all of us must practice?

> But then again, my ancestors were not treated badly either.

No reason to be apologetic. You have an eclectic outlook you
should be proud of. And an outlook that is worthy even to the
"descendents of the oppressed".

Kumar Soundrapandian

unread,

Sep 26, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/26/96

to

kkri...@bnr.ca (Kathiravan) wrote:
>
>
>
> Bharathi was not popular. Popularity
>means public following. Bharathi could not
>even meet Gandhi. Bharathi's political views

>were never consistent. He left many ideological

>confusions in his work. He apologized profusely

>to get out of Jail. He came out of Jail after

>he offered a written letter of apology to

>the English Ejaman. Bharathi sang one thing

>(achachamillai, nmadippu swadeshi etc). He

>could not stand up to what he wrote. There

>are other reasons for Bharathi being a low

>profile personality.
>

Bharathi may not have gained appreciation, he right fully deserved,
during his time but his contributions to the Tamil world are ever lasting
and indisputable.

I have been an ardent enthusiast of his invigorating poems on patriotism,
women emancipation, Tamil language, Kannama songs, and above all, Kuyil
Pattu that never failed to enchant me. Who could have written lines like
=93Thani Oru Manithanuku unavillai yenil Jagathinai azhithidivOm=94.

I am, consequently, a little perturbed by your sweeping statements (
accusations) about his character. Do some justice, at least, by pointing
out your source.

S.V.Kumar

Venkata Subramonyam

unread,

Sep 26, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/26/96

to

Kumar Soundrapandian <sou...@worldnet.att.net> writes:

>kkri...@bnr.ca (Kathiravan) wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Bharathi was not popular. Popularity
>>means public following. Bharathi could not
>>even meet Gandhi. Bharathi's political views
>>were never consistent. He left many ideological

>I am, consequently, a little perturbed by your sweeping statements (

>accusations) about his character. Do some justice, at least, by pointing
>out your source.

The source would in all likelihood be DK & co's
brainwashing anti-B rubbish. Since Bs are anti-Tamil, how can
there be a B-tamil poet? :-)

The story abt Gandhi is interesting. My version (that
I read in a school book) is that Bharathi went to meet Gandhi
when Gandhi was in Madras. Bharathi didnt have an appointment
and Rajaji (iyyae, another B :-) who was with Gandhi was reluctant
to let him in. Bharathi went straight to Gandhi who was in
a discussion and asked him whether he can address a meeting in
the beach that evening. Gandhi looked up his schedule and said
he was busy that day. Bharathi wished him best of luck in his
endeavours and walked out. After Bharathi left Gandhi was
supposed to have said to the others "take care of him,
he is a great man".

>S.V.Kumar

Satyanad Kichenassamy

unread,

Sep 26, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/26/96

to

On 24 Sep 1996, Kathiravan wrote:

>
[...]

>
> Bharathi was not popular. Popularity
> means public following. Bharathi could not
> even meet Gandhi. Bharathi's political views
> were never consistent. He left many ideological

> confusions in his work. He apologized profusely
> to get out of Jail. He came out of Jail after
> he offered a written letter of apology to
> the English Ejaman. Bharathi sang one thing
> (achachamillai, nmadippu swadeshi etc). He
> could not stand up to what he wrote. There
> are other reasons for Bharathi being a low
> profile personality.
>

I was deeply saddened to read such allegations on this newsgroup.
From what each of us has verified with our own eyes, I would
respectfully request each and everyone of us to ask him/herself
the following questions:

1) Have I done more for Tamil culture, for the Tamil people
irrespective of caste, sex, creed,..., for India as a whole,
than S. Bharati?

2) Would he have not taken my defense if I were to suffer injustice?
(Again, irrespective of class, caste,...)?

3) What have I done for the causes he worked for?

4) Am I a more courageous man/woman than Bharati?

Bharati is perhaps the greatest friend of the Tamil people, in its
entirety, that this people had in this century; he lived intensely and
passionately, and was too great a man to put forward an ideology. Haven't
we still learned that `consistent ideologies' are but the rationalization
of oppression? He was sometimes betrayed and in one such occasion he sang
impromptu `pakaivanukku aruLvAy n^an nen~cE...'.

Hasn't he suffered enough? Why is it that some Tamils enjoy putting down
their own great men?

Satyanad Kichenassamy
School of Mathematics
U. of Minnesota
kich...@math.umn.edu

PS: Bharati did give many examples of how to worship in pure modern Tamil.
Let everyone worship as they see fit. Still, I do not understand why
Bharati is vilified, rather than acclaimed, by those who favor
`thamizhil vazhipATu.'

Kathiravan

unread,

Sep 26, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/26/96

to

In article <52chg5$r...@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net>, Kumar Soundrapandian <sou...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
|> kkri...@bnr.ca (Kathiravan) wrote:
|> >
|> >
|> >

|> Bharathi may not have gained appreciation, he right fully deserved,
|> during his time but his contributions to the Tamil world are ever lasting
|> and indisputable.
|>
|> I have been an ardent enthusiast of his invigorating poems on patriotism,
|> women emancipation, Tamil language, Kannama songs, and above all, Kuyil
|> Pattu that never failed to enchant me. Who could have written lines like
|> =93Thani Oru Manithanuku unavillai yenil Jagathinai azhithidivOm=94.
|>

|> I am, consequently, a little perturbed by your sweeping statements (
|> accusations) about his character. Do some justice, at least, by pointing
|> out your source.
|>

|> S.V.Kumar
|>
|>

I shall post Bharathi's letter written to
the English Dorai for his release from Jail.
So many people spent years in Jail during
freedom movement. It is something to sing
and a different matter to practice. When you
are influenced by pOthai you enter a state
of elation and a illusion. In reality the
poet was a coward. He surrendered meekly
all the ideologies that we associate him
with by reading his poetry.

I have the references. I shall
post them. Take my word.

Kathiravan

unread,

Sep 26, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/26/96

to

In article <52c5kt$f...@bird.printrak.com>, sur...@bird.printrak.com (Suresh Vaidyanathan) writes:
|> In article <526rgi$b...@bmerhc5e.bnr.ca>, Kathiravan <kkri...@bnr.ca> wrote:
|> >
|> > Bharathi was not a popular person or
|> >considered a great person then. None of the
|>

|> >But in a democratic society learn to respect the wishes of majority.
|>
|> Will you make up your mind on minority rights vs. majority rule?

My mind is clear. Some of you fellows who argue
against Tamil worship are stuck
in mire and mud when they defend the illusion called
Hinduism. Hinduism is a myth created in the past
100 years for vested interests. None of our own
Tamil saints talks about Hindusm. Gurupdesh has explained
this Hindu myth in clear terms.

RS uses greatness for Noble prize decided by
a committee anaology to Sanskrit worship.
You may have the same stand and consider that
`intelligent' discussion. Nobel prize is a private
prize. It has nothing to with a group of people.
All that says is `we feudal God-agents are like the
committee that decide which is the best for majority
of worshippers'.

There is no ground for comparison when you
mix private and public affairs.

|> When it comes to hindi in schools you champion minority rights and
|> when it is sanskrit in temples it is majority rule. I gather your
|> love for tamil but you cannot speak through both sides of your mouth.

No Hindi apologist. I am talking about Tamil temples
and Tamil poosai. Both have to be done to the collective
wishes of Tamils. Hindi is a language in some other region.
Tamils as a `people' have rejected Hindi being
imposed on them. This was even before a country called
India was born. This was in 1930's when Rajaji (a feudal
brahmanist) did not even heed to his fellow Tamil
Congressmen imposed Hindi in Madras Presidency.

You bring an mythical entity as wishes
of people. Can fool people for sometime but not all the
time.

I am against any imposition. I am not asking
you to say Gayathri Japam in Tamil. It is your private
activity. But when you stick your nose into the public
sphere it is nice to know that it is no more feudal
set-up that that you work
an arrangement with a king and carry out your wishes.
It will take a long time for brahmanists to ever realize
democracy and rights of people.

|> BTW, there are many temples where the priests recite the prayers
|> mostly in Tamil. In fact I am sure that this is the case with the
|> temples you visit most frequently.

I am sorry. It is not the case in most of the
places I have been to. Tamil Vaisnava
Temples right. But not in other temples.

Badrinarayanan Seshadri

unread,

Sep 26, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/26/96

to

Kathiravan (kkri...@bnr.ca) wrote:

* I shall post Bharathi's letter written to
* the English Dorai for his release from Jail.
* So many people spent years in Jail during
* freedom movement. It is something to sing
* and a different matter to practice.

You are being extremely unkind to Bharathi here. For any
mass movement to sustain, it needs leaders who can lead,
fiery orators who can deliver the speeches and move the
masses to action, writers to write about the movement and
disseminate information, and cunning strategists to plan
and defeat the enemy. It is ridiculous to expect everyone
to go to the jail.

Bharathi did more to the freedom movement through his
writings than any leader who merely went to jail. He
inspired a few million to drop everything - their entire
life - to fight the British imperialism and go to jail!

If what you say is true, that indeed he wrote a letter to
the British to get himself out of the jail, it was more of
a tactical manouvre to run away from the British territory
to go to the French territory to fight the "war" through
his writings.

* When you
* are influenced by pOthai you enter a state
* of elation and a illusion. In reality the
* poet was a coward. He surrendered meekly
* all the ideologies that we associate him
* with by reading his poetry.

As Satyanad pointed out, I too am saddened by your
categorical rejection of Bharathi's contribution to the
Indian freedom movement and the Indian society as mere
blatherings of a cowardly drug addict.

From the standpoint of literary achievements, some may
feel that Bharathi has not done as much as some others.
But in terms of instilling national pride, in terms of
changing a person's life completely, in talking about
social equality, about women's freedom and a million other
things, I am yet to see a person as great as Bharathi.

There are plenty of instances from his documented life to
show that he lived by the words he wrote. I would be glad
to provide them.

* I have the references. I shall
* post them. Take my word.

I could have easily asked you what qualities you possess
to make a judgement on Bharathi being a coward and
hypocrite. But that would be meaningless, as you and I and
a thousand other people in this forum happily dole out our
views on great men, left and right. I therefore request
you to make the references (and excerpts) known before
alleging that Bharathi is a coward and a hypocrite.

Not even one among us knew Bharathi personally. But
several respected people (such as the great Dravidian poet
Bharathidasan) knew him personally and were deeply
inspired by him. If Bharathi was a man of no convictions,
it would say a whole lot about those great men who
followed him.

Anyway, I am waiting to read the excerpts you are going to
provide.

Kathiravan

unread,

Sep 26, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/26/96

to

In article <52ea3j$7...@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu>, ba...@sofia.mae.cornell.edu (Badrinarayanan Seshadri) writes:
|> Kathiravan (kkri...@bnr.ca) wrote:
|>
|> * I shall post Bharathi's letter written to
|> * the English Dorai for his release from Jail.
|> * So many people spent years in Jail during
|> * freedom movement. It is something to sing
|> * and a different matter to practice.
|>
|> You are being extremely unkind to Bharathi here. For any
|> mass movement to sustain, it needs leaders who can lead,
|> fiery orators who can deliver the speeches and move the
|> masses to action, writers to write about the movement and
|> disseminate information, and cunning strategists to plan
|> and defeat the enemy. It is ridiculous to expect everyone
|> to go to the jail.
|>
|> Bharathi did more to the freedom movement through his
|> writings than any leader who merely went to jail. He
|> inspired a few million to drop everything - their entire
|> life - to fight the British imperialism and go to jail!
|>
|> If what you say is true, that indeed he wrote a letter to
|> the British to get himself out of the jail, it was more of
|> a tactical manouvre to run away from the British territory
|> to go to the French territory to fight the "war" through
|> his writings.

Good explanation. He promised not to write
against them from that point of time. I read the
letter that appeared in SinthanaiyALan. People
have the right to dismiss this.

To write one and to practice one is hypocrisy.
Will that reject his contribution to struggle
I have mentioned that some of lines themselves
instill passion for freedom even now. I was
replying to Maybe why only a few turned up
at his funeral. Great leaders had followers.
The followers believed that the leaders stood
by something and practiced what they told.
If Bharathi had been one Indian people
would have flocked his funeral.
He died as a result of accident.

|>
|> * I have the references. I shall
|> * post them. Take my word.
|>
|> I could have easily asked you what qualities you possess
|> to make a judgement on Bharathi being a coward and
|> hypocrite. But that would be meaningless, as you and I and
|> a thousand other people in this forum happily dole out our
|> views on great men, left and right. I therefore request
|> you to make the references (and excerpts) known before
|> alleging that Bharathi is a coward and a hypocrite.

Do people have to possess qualities to
have critical views. Who assign and
qualifies these qualities? Is it not a right.
Stop this scaring tactics Badri. Regarding
S. Kichensamy's article. he can call me
a pahaivan for he thinks about pahaivan-naNban
based on his idolising views.

The God who gave him the grace to pray for pahaivan
would he not give the grace not to invent pahaivans
based on some differences.

Thathachari

unread,

Sep 27, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/27/96

to

Kathiravan wrote:
> I shall post Bharathi's letter written to

> the English Dorai for his release from Jail.

Would you also site the source when you post it? As you hav so often
said in this forum, many "sources" of information are just vehicles of
propoganda. You siting the source whould help th4e readers to decide
for themselves the authenticity of information.

> So many people spent years in Jail during

> freedom movement. It is something to sing

> and a different matter to practice. When you

What you are saying is similar to saying that applied research is better
than theoretical research.

> are influenced by pOthai you enter a state

> of elation and a illusion. In reality the

> poet was a coward. He surrendered meekly

> all the ideologies that we associate him

> with by reading his poetry.

Assuming for the moment that Bharathi indeed wrote such a letter (which
is hard for me to do), don't you think that Bharathi achieved much more
by writing inspiring (even by todays standards) verses than he would
have achieved by being in a jail for a few years?

> I have the references. I shall

> post them. Take my word.

Why the 'Take my word' bit? Do you think we don't usually take your
words? ;-)

Thaths

Shyamala Parameswaran

unread,

Sep 27, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/27/96

to

In article <52fdpf$c...@crl3.crl.com>,
kku...@crl.com (Kumar Kumarappan) says:
>
[...]

>
>The real question is, do you believe that a Tamil could genuinely be
>motivated to want the religious services in Tamil for all the right
>reasons, and not necessarily in a competitive spirit against Sanskrit.

"Religious services" are not straightforward and simple in
Hindu traditions (note the plural). The phrase suggests a
certain uniformity of practices and textual content, such
as found in mosques and churches, which of course, is quite
absent in the Hindu context, if you get beyond the basic
symbolic acts.

Religious services within Vaishnavism or Saivism are
themelves divided into public and private forms of worship.
So although temples are public, they are in a sense
private in many of the actual worship modes and rites
that are conducted. For those familiar with temple
activities, you may know what I mean. To understand
religious services and the present use of structure
in Samskritam (as "default language") is to understand
the purpose and meaning of worship. It is not, as one nettor
not too long ago put it, merely to stick a piece of camphor,
chant something, wave the hand around and then further,
stick the plate under the worshipper's nose and say,
Poi va!

The Agamic principles followed in most Vaishnava and
Saiva temples, prescribe a series of rites (with the
how and the why) aiding the transferrence of Divine Grace
from the Deity through that of the officiating priest,
to the worshipper himself. This is embodied in private
worship or arcana in temples, where the common
person seeks to be a beneficiary. In such arcanais,
there are ashtottirams or namavalis chanted (108).
These, in Samskritam or Tamil (if translated for
all the different kinds that exist), are different
names in praise of the Lord encapsulating various
qualities (as I noted in an earlier post). Would
the names in Tamil, assuming all nammavalis have
appropriate translations and that officiating priests
have committed these to memory as well, be actually
understandable and more meaningful in the real
sense? Would these be more meaningful, any more than
Samskritam name-chanting would be? I ask a real question
here. Please give a considered reply, consider the
speed and the innumerous repetitious arcanais the
priests perform, often for scores of people at a time.
Please also consider that the arcanai in tamil would
be highly textual and as non common-use of the
language. Can one expect the average person in
TN to understand this arcanai simply because
he is a native Tamil speaker?

The 308 and 1008 arcanais are even more specialized
and in such requests, and the same question applies,
Are there appropriate translations for the
sahasranamams and the 308 version? Are these
understandable? My point: They will have to
be learnt and understood under special
guidance for the average Tamil speaker,
just as one would have to do the same in
the Samskritam use. Why is this point not
being heard?

Has Tamil developed an elaborare translation for
all of the murai in public worship in temples,
and other rites? These range from prayers in consecration,
waking the deity, bathing the deity (abhisekham),
alankaram, offering neyvediam/prasadam and other
obeisances to the deity, putting the deity to rest,
as well as special occasion requirements and key
festival poosais (such Cittirai, Vasanta in Vaikaci, Uncal
in Ani, Avani Mula, Tirukkartikkai, Teppa in Tai,
Maci Mantala) and more special festivals for separate
deities, such as Meenaksi.

As Fuller says, devotionalism arising from the
days of the Azhwars and Nayanmars closely
allied itself with ritual performances in
Madurai. Other authors have said ottuvar singing,
devotionalism and chanting are features in
worship that arose in reaction to high ritualization.
The devotionalism or Bhakti singing (of Thevarams
and so on..) is almost entirely in in tamil.

The various ceremonial prayers in Samskritam have
Vedic origins, predicated on the belief that sound
is primordial and primeaval, of essence and that
phonetic and sound vibrations are essential in
transcending the earthly and bodily platform.
To this end, Samskritam is both highly structured
and meticulously developed as facilitating
language in meditation and sound in jnana yoga.
The repetition and chanting of the same phrases
or words, whether in Bhakti singing (in Tamil or other)
or specialized manthirams (which really have no
equivalent given their unique sound meditational
vibration effects) is seen as special communion
on the spiritual platform.

One can chose to appreciate (and learn and maybe
understand) the greatness in both distinct usages
of language that have survived centuries, not without
reason, I would think.

Shyamala

Venkat Devarajan

unread,

Sep 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/30/96

to

In article <52fdpf$c...@crl3.crl.com>
kku...@crl.com (Kumar Kumarappan) writes:

> Venkat Devarajan (ven...@uta.edu) wrote:
>
> : My suspicion is that a lot of non-brahmin Tamils view Sanskrit

> : as a faintly surviving symbol of the brahmin hegemony of the

> : past. .......[snip] [Thus] when

> : it comes to Sanskrit versus Tamil, there is almost a
> : revolutionary zeal in the choosing.
>

> The real question is, do you believe that a Tamil could genuinely be
> motivated to want the religious services in Tamil for all the right
> reasons, and not necessarily in a competitive spirit against Sanskrit.

> I sincerely believe so.

In general, the vast majority of the Tamil devotees (common,
decent folks from the villages) appear to have no problems with
worship in any language. They are too busy offering heart-felt,
teary-eyed and very personal and simple prayers.It is the
educated elite that appears to have a strong anti-sanskrit bias
based on somewhat out-dated hegemony issues cited above.

[snip]
> Raghu's reasoning was because we need a thread of unity
> among Hindus. I do not buy his reasoning as this is the wrong place
> to emphasize unity for Hinduism, while in pursuit of unencumbered
> spirituality

I thought Raghu's argument was rather persuasive. You don't say
why you don't agree with it. I noticed, during a recent visit to
Rameswaram that an overwhelming majority of the devotees in the
temple (at that time) were North Indians - there was no doubt
they were Hindus :-). One guess on what language they would
prefer their archanai in:-) KK's brushing aside Raghu's point by
saying there is no common concept of Hinduism across India
(because no one mentions it as such in ancient Tamil
literature!) is rather puzzling.

>
>I want Tamil as the default medium and Sanskrit and other language services > should be there for the asking.

This is reasonable enough. So we don't have an argument (shame,
since you are such a gentleman in your mode of argument..we will
just have to find other things to hotly disagree on:-))

> My experience now is that Sanskrit is the default medium of
> service and I have a hard time if I choose to have the services in
> Tamil. And that is my main gripe.

You should not have had any problem at any of the major temples
like Meenakshi temple in Madurai, but I can see how you would
have problems in local community-owned temples.

I said:
> : Incidentally, I see nothing wrong in bringing up any of these

> : brahmin versus non-brahmin issues for discussion if it is done
> : with compassion and understanding and if it will help with the
> : reconciliation and healing process.

Kumar replied:
> I whole heartedly agree here. But I often see views from both ends of
> the spectrum being presented in such provocative manner as to
> deepen the divide. [snip] I always
> reconcile myself that this is part and parcel of evolving, and perhaps
> soon we will evolve into a mature community.

Exactly! I have also noticed that if you keep your cool and
continuosly post reasonable arguments without calling anyone's
parentage in question, pretty soon you have a few threads that
you can almost enjoy:-)

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Sep 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM9/30/96

to

From: kkri...@bnr.ca (Kathiravan)

-My mind is clear.

:-)

"I am not a crook" - Richard Nixon.

Look at the way you avoid answering
the question - why is it that you
want the minority to bow down and
accept whatever the majority wants,
within Tamil Nadu,
but the moment we talk about India,
suddenly you are all for minority
rights and against majority rule ?

If you want Tamil in hindu temples
in Tamil Nadu because Tamils are
a majority there, then you CANNOT
be against Hindi imposition, because
Hindi speakers are in a majority
in India.

Can hindi-wallahs use your argument
too - you can use Tamil in your
own home, but in public activities
like school and jobs, majority ie
hindi should prevail ?

If not, why not ?

-Hinduism is a myth created in the past
-100 years for vested interests.

Someone forgot to tell this to
the census man, who reports that
there are ~800 million hindus
in India.

Some myth !

Btw, Tamil Nadu was created only
in the 1960s, which is not even
50 years. Was it for vested interests
too ?

-None of our own
-Tamil saints talks about Hindusm.

They don't talk about Brahmin-hatred,
bad language, abusive talk etc
either. Hasn't stopped you from practising
it, has it ?

-Gurupdesh has explained
-this Hindu myth in clear terms.

Btw your dear friend Gurupdesh has written
an article recently claiming that
Aryans ( whom he equates with Punjabis )
contributed all the culture in india
and the Dravidians just copied them !

If your mind was really as clear as
you claim, you wouldn't be cheering
such people on.

-RS uses greatness for Noble prize decided by
-a committee anaology to Sanskrit worship.
-You may have the same stand and consider that
-`intelligent' discussion. Nobel prize is a private
-prize. It has nothing to with a group of people.
-All that says is `we feudal God-agents are like the
-committee that decide which is the best for majority
-of worshippers'.

As your comprehension is rather poor,
you should stick to things you understand.
If you wish to read my posts, read only those
addressed to you, because I deliberately
write more simply for you.

- No Hindi apologist. I am talking about Tamil temples
-and Tamil poosai.

There is no such thing as
a Tamil temple.

-Both have to be done to the collective
-wishes of Tamils. Hindi is a language in some other region.

By this argument, all pujas in North America
have to be conducted in English, the majority
language.

-Tamils as a `people' have rejected Hindi being
-imposed on them. This was even before a country called
-India was born. This was in 1930's when Rajaji (a feudal
-brahmanist) did not even heed to his fellow Tamil
-Congressmen imposed Hindi in Madras Presidency.

As no one other than you is talking
about hindi puja, you are obviously
talking to yourself. Another sign of
insanity.

-Can fool people for sometime but not all the
-time.

Then why are you trying it ?

-It will take a long time for brahmanists to ever realize
-democracy and rights of people.

There is no evidence you have understood
democracy either as you equate it with
dumb mob rule - ergo, you must be a
Brahminist.

RS

Shivram

unread,

Oct 1, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/1/96

to

Subject: Re: "thamizhil poosai" - why not use both ?
From: sur...@bird.printrak.com (Suresh Vaidyanathan)
Date: 1996/09/25
Message-Id: <52c4kb$e...@bird.printrak.com>
References: <501eni$o...@netnews.upenn.edu> <51ug3t$l...@hpindda.cup.hp.com>
<51urs1$c...@murrow.corp.sgi.com> <3246A6...@intelsat.int>
Organization: Printrak Intl
Newsgroups: soc.culture.tamil

sur...@bird.printrak.com (Suresh Vaidyanathan) wrote..

shivram(shiv) <Shivra...@intelsat.int> wrote:

>> Tamil hindus probably should adopt both languages in temples in TN. And sign >> language also.

> Yep! The Madras hindu priests should use the Madras accent
> ( Yov Saami! Inna bejaar panre... ) and the Coimbatore hindu
> priests should use the Coimbatore accent.

Yup! In coimbatore... it involves a number of accents/dialects. (Imagine kovai sarala
saying) Yaanungo, Goille, chamiyaaru illeengo. chapptu pottu vaaruvarunungo. Appuro
boojai pannikilamungo. now imagine .. mr. Poosari saying prayers in that dialect. Cool
aye!

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Oct 1, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/1/96

to

If Kathiravan was the only person who shows
ignorance of the basic ideas of democracy,
I'd have said "so what is new ?' and
left it at that.

But even other men whom I respect,
who show a lot of reasonableness,
seem to misunderstand what a democracy
means. Hence this post ..

If democracy is simply forcing the
preferences of the majority on
a minority, it wouldn't be called
a civilized system. That would simply
be mob rule. You don't need to dignify
this with the word "system". It is
what happens by default in uncivilized
societies.

In Rwanda, the majority is
slaughtering the minority. In Bihar trains,
the ticketless majority intimidates
the ticket buying minority into
giving up their seats. Before the
southerners protested, the hindi wallahs
tried to use their majority to push
Hindi down the throats of the minorities.

Except for Kathiravan, I am sure all
the others agree that this is not
democracy - this is merely mob rule.

No intellectual would have sung the
praises of democracy if this sort of
thing is what you can expect from
a democracy. What distinguishes a
democracy from mob rule, among many
other things, is -

1 Respect for minority rights
2 Obedience to the rule of law by everyone,
majority or minority
3 Equality of everyone under the law
4 The ability of the common man to
challenge autocratic behavior by the
ruling class, by recourse to Law.

In other words, in a democracy,
numbers don't win all the time.

This, as far as the basics go. Quite
apart from the legal aspect, there
are many areas in a cultured society where
head count alone does not decide
things.

You wouldn't elect the Fellow of the
Institution of Electrical Engrs by
mass vote - the great majority of the
public which is ignorant of engineering
should not have any say in the matter.

This is not a principle of democracy -
it is merely common sense.

Similarly in the world of art, in
poetry, in literature .. the criterion
for what is desirable is not
how popular the artist is in any
given moment - the artist should
appeal to the ages, not just the present.

Michael Jackson appeals to a lot
more people that Shakespeare ever could,
or Keats or Shelley or Blake or
Tagore or Bharati. Thus crude head
count arguments will end up killing
culture.

A third point, and very relevant to the
present debate - only concerned people
can have a say in any topic. Temple
worship is for temple worshipping
bhaktas, not every man in the street.
If you are not a temple worshipping
bhakta, you cannot have a voice in this
topic. I see a number of people who
claim that they are not hindus, or
as Kathiravan rants, there is no
hinduism; others say they are agnostics;
yet others who say they never visit
temples. These people cannot proffer
any opinions on the subject. It is
none of their concern. Only Christians
may have a voice on the affairs of
the church. So with Islam, buddhism,
jainism and yes, hinduism as well.

I see people who don't exhibit the
slightest virtue that one associates
with bhakti - no humility, no
sweetness, no love, no humanitarianism,
on the contrary, fellows like
Kathiravan have a lot of hate and
inability to stick to truth and
rotten language and jealousy and
other ugly characteristics. How can such
men legislate what should happen
inside holy temples, which are places
where virtue is to be fostered ?

It is laughable that guys with such
huge flaws are preaching to others
about high matters like how a
worshipper is to commune with his
Self and the innermost recesses
of his heart :-)

Why is it that the least qualified
in any subject is always the one
with the loudest voice and the
sharpest tongue ? :-)

Kathiravan needs 10 lifetimes just to
clear his mind of hate and other
dirt - perhaps in his 11th life he
will acquire the qualification to
preach to others.

As I said, this post is for those
reasonable men who have exhibited
some confusion about what a democratic
society is. Given this, we can
now properly debate this issue
without confusion in principle and
terminology.

RS

M.Ranganathan

unread,

Oct 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/2/96

to

In article <52e3jr$k...@bmerhc5e.bnr.ca>, Kathiravan <kkri...@bnr.ca> wrote:
>
>
> My mind is clear. Some of you fellows who argue
>against Tamil worship are stuck
>in mire and mud when they defend the illusion called
>Hinduism. Hinduism is a myth created in the past
>100 years for vested interests. None of our own
>Tamil saints talks about Hindusm. Gurupdesh has explained

>this Hindu myth in clear terms.

Dear Mr. Kathirist,

I think I am getting hoarse explaining this to you. It does
not matter what Tamil Saints have written about Hinduism.
Hinduism exists because many millions of people consider themselves
Hindu. Are you going to tell them what they should call themselves,
Mr. Kathirist ?

Regarding temple worship, I am all for people worshipping in the
language of their choice if they wish. In fact I think it is important
so that people can appreciate prayers better. I have seen tamil prayers
recited in numerous temples. All the poems of Andaal are in Tamil. We
recite these poems in our worship. Are you going to say Tamil
Vaishnavas like myself are not Hindu ?

However, if people feel comfortable with Sanskrit thats OK too. Why do
you have a problem with that ? After all you are not hindu right ? So
why do you care ? Do you have similar problems with church services
being held in English ? Are you about to complain loudly about the use
of Latin (an esoteric language which few understand) in Catholic church
services ?

> RS uses greatness for Noble prize decided by

Nobel, Mr. Kathirist.

>a committee anaology to Sanskrit worship.

>You may have the same stand and consider that

>`intelligent' discussion. Nobel prize is a private

>prize. It has nothing to with a group of people.

Religion is a private matter.

>All that says is `we feudal God-agents are like the

>committee that decide which is the best for majority

>of worshippers'.

So dont show up at the temple. Tell me, do you know of any
rule that forces Hindus to go to a temple.

>
> There is no ground for comparison when you
>mix private and public affairs.

Again religion is a private affair. Why do you feel obliged to
comment about it? For example, lets talk about Mariammanism for
a while shall we. There are certain things I find unacceptable
about Mariammanism. First, according to your own axioms, it
is a myth. Second..... We could go on but then I would be
like you (shudder).

>It will take a long time for brahmanists to ever realize

>democracy and rights of people.

You have an absolute right to stay away from any temple you wish.

Ranga.

Kumar Soundrapandian

unread,

Oct 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/2/96

to

Raghu Seshadri wrote:
>
(Most stuffs deleted to save bandwidth)

> If democracy is simply forcing the
> preferences of the majority on
> a minority, it wouldn't be called
> a civilized system. That would simply
> be mob rule. You don't need to dignify
> this with the word "system". It is
> what happens by default in uncivilized
> societies.

Lets forget about Asian countries. If you consider western countries
like America, Britain as Democratic, dont you see that the majority
rules the minority in every aspect of life. I would not, unlike you,
conclude this as a mob rule but rather a defective system that needs to
be fixed.

Democracy that I have seen so far is winners take all, losers lose
everything.

>
> In Rwanda, the majority is
> slaughtering the minority. In Bihar trains,

This genocide is the outcome of minority ruling the majority for
decades.

> 1 Respect for minority rights

You made me laugh, here. Tell me, which democratic country respect
minority rights. Is it just respect ONLY but not allowed to exercise
their rights.

> 2 Obedience to the rule of law by everyone,
> majority or minority
> 3 Equality of everyone under the law
> 4 The ability of the common man to
> challenge autocratic behavior by the
> ruling class, by recourse to Law.

>

> A third point, and very relevant to the
> present debate - only concerned people
> can have a say in any topic. Temple
> worship is for temple worshipping
> bhaktas, not every man in the street.
> If you are not a temple worshipping
> bhakta, you cannot have a voice in this
> topic. I see a number of people who
> claim that they are not hindus, or
> as Kathiravan rants, there is no
> hinduism; others say they are agnostics;
> yet others who say they never visit
> temples. These people cannot proffer
> any opinions on the subject. It is
> none of their concern. Only Christians
> may have a voice on the affairs of
> the church. So with Islam, buddhism,
> jainism and yes, hinduism as well.

Catholics deny priesthood for women. Is it wrong for me, as a Hindu, to
condemn and preach against such a policy, when I strongly believe it as
an injustice to women. By your logic, even Protestant Christians cannot
protest because they are not Catholics. Do I have to be a Muslim to
criticise some of their practices?

Anyone should be free to comment on any subject, why do you want to
restrict their freedom of expression? Let the readers make their
judgement.

S.V.Kumar

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,

Oct 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/2/96

to

In article <52fdpf$c...@crl3.crl.com>, Kumar Kumarappan <kku...@crl.com> wrote:
>Venkat Devarajan (ven...@uta.edu) wrote:
>: In article <96261.140...@uicvm.uic.edu>

>: Shyamala Parameswaran <U15...@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>
>: > While Tamil can and should be a medium, I feel there is no need
>: > for the opposition that has been constructed i.e. Tamil versus
>: > Samskritam, or the comparative measure of one being better.
>

>: My suspicion is that a lot of non-brahmin Tamils view Sanskrit
>: as a faintly surviving symbol of the brahmin hegemony of the

>: past. One of the ways brahmins of the past appear to have

>: established their pre-eminent position in the society was to
>: become proficient in the "devabhasha" and preventing others from
>: doing the same. So, although on a one-on-one choice between

>: Tamil and any other language the majority would pick Tamil, when

>: it comes to Sanskrit versus Tamil, there is almost a
>: revolutionary zeal in the choosing.
>
>The real question is, do you believe that a Tamil could genuinely be
>motivated to want the religious services in Tamil for all the right
>reasons, and not necessarily in a competitive spirit against Sanskrit.

>I sincerely believe so. I think that is the logical position (wanting
>religious services in Tamil) for a Tamil who does not understand
>Sanskrit, and the predominant majority of the Tamils dont understand
>Sanskrit. (Please dont tell me that the problem will be solved if I
>learnt Sanskrit). On the other hand the onus is on the person
>advocating Sanskrit as the default medium, to convince us why it
>should be so, when the predominant majority does not understand
>Sanskrit. Raghu's reasoning was because we need a thread of unity

>among Hindus. I do not buy his reasoning as this is the wrong place
>to emphasize unity for Hinduism, while in pursuit of unencumbered

>spirituality. (I do realize that Raghu did not buy my counter reasonings
>either, and we just have to agree to disagree). My question to you is, if
>you have an opinion as to what the logical choice of medium should be in
>the religious arena for an average Tamil, who does not understand
>Sanskrit. If your answer is TamiI, I don’t have a debate with you. If
>your answer is Sanskrit, I would like to know the reasoning behind it.
>
>I think my position is clear that I want Tamil as the default medium

>and Sanskrit and other language services should be there for the

>asking. My experience now is that Sanskrit is the default medium of

>service and I have a hard time if I choose to have the services in
>Tamil. And that is my main gripe.
>
>

>: [Surprisingly, Indians as a whole seem not to hold anything

>: against any British symbolisms. The language, the sport etc. of
>: the most recent masters do not appear to evoke any sense of
>: abhorrence.]
>

>Reasonings point to a different set of issues. English is the necessary
>window to the world and people flock to it on their own for the
>economical benefits. There are no passionate promoters on behalf of
>English, as there are for the Indian languages. Yet since English has
>crossed that critical mass stage, nobody can stop it from dominating
>the world stage even if they wanted to. English still has not touched
>certain aspects of Indian life. Actually it is not that big a part for the
>majority, the urban areas being the exception. But who knows, as
>K.Srinivasan observed, perhaps in a couple of centuries the default
>medium for services in TN temples could be English. Atleast, it would
>be because the majority wanting it on their own.
>
>
><snip>

>
>: Incidentally, I see nothing wrong in bringing up any of these
>: brahmin versus non-brahmin issues for discussion if it is done
>: with compassion and understanding and if it will help with the
>: reconciliation and healing process.
>

>I whole heartedly agree here. But I often see views from both ends of
>the spectrum being presented in such provocative manner as to

>deepen the divide. This at times makes me wonder if this is the right
>forum to discuss such sensitive issues, and if somehow this forum
>does not exaggerate the issue without the proper context. I always

>reconcile myself that this is part and parcel of evolving, and perhaps
>soon we will evolve into a mature community.
>

>--kumAr
>
>
>
>

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,

Oct 2, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/2/96

to

In one of my posts I said

@ Your attempt to equate tamil thEvaaram-thruvaasagam and Sanskrit
@ mantras ( saying both are not understandable and hence you favor
@ Sanskrit poojai) is without a sound basis. For a Tamil, eventhough
@ a few tamil words are not familiar, there are far more number of words
@ that he/she understands and most importantly, the tamil context helps
@ him/her, and further he/she is moved by intmate tamil form
@ ( consider the thEvaaram lines like 'ammaiyE appaa, oppilaa maNiyE')
@ As far as I know there are not any Sanskrit Mantras in the same class
@ as thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam ( by 'class' I mean same 'genre').
@

My last sentence above, as I suspected, needs clarification
at least for some.
Sanskrit spiritual/philosophical works are generally
acknowledged to be more or less intellectual discussions
expounding various theories and the degree of corroboration with
what is said in Vedas or in the Sanskrit Puranas and
other Sanskrit Sastras whereas Tamil spiritual/ philosophical works
such as thEvaaram, thiruvaasagam and aazhvaar
paadalakaL are acknowledged to be of a 'bakthi' type.
Bakthi ( correct tamil word is paththi < paRRuvathu paththi,
muRRuvathu muththi ) is an *enlightened emotion* and not some mundane
or superficial 'attachement'. The thEvaaram, thiruvaasagam songs and
the aazhvaarkaL paadalkaL are unique blends of deeply moving,
love-filled, songs which are supremely aRivu-inspiring. They are also
musical gems. Bakthi path is all about that. It is not just the words,
talking about bakthi or theorizing its efficacy etc. but
it is about the intimacy(in spiritual sense) and
the *liveness of the process*. It is one thing say

"tvadiyas-tvadbhrtyas-tava parijanas-tvadgatir-aham prapannaScaivam"

(= I am Thine, Thy servant and Thy attendant; Thou art my goal,
and I am one who has surrendered myself to Thee)

( from Stotraratna)

or

"thvamEva maathaa, cha pithaa thvamEva
thvamEva bhanduscha sakhaa thvamEva
thvamEva vidhyaa, dhraviNam thvamEva
thvamEva sarvam, ma ma dhEva dhEva"

-- SaraNaagathi gadhyam by Sri Rmanauja

(as cited by Mr. Dileepan Parthasarathi)

( aside, there are some doubts as to whether these 'gadhyams' are
really written by Sri Ramanujar or not )

and another to 'feel' like nammaazhvaar says

aadi aadi akam karaindhu isaip
paadip paadi kaNNeer malgi engum
naadi naadi narasingaa venRu
vaadi vaadum iv vaaL nuthalE

".. ...uLLam
uga urugi ninRuLLuLLE.."

"uLLuL aavi ularndhu ularndhu.."

"sikkenac ciRidhOridam
puRappadaath thannuLLE"

or the words like

'uyarvaRa uyarnalam udaiyavan..
..
thuyar aRu *sudaradi* thozhuthezhan mananE'

'neRRiyuL ninRennai aaLum.."

"thuRavic cudar viLakkam thalaip peyvaam"

'pugai poovE'

'pulan aindhum mEyum poRi aindhum neengi
nalam andham illathOr naadu puguveer'

'yaanE ennai aRiyaki laathE
yaanE en thanathE enRu irundhEn
yaanE nee en udaimaiyum neeyE
vaanE Eththum em vaanavar ERE'

are not just mundane statements.

Sanskrit works say 'what is God', 'what are His/Her attributes' etc.
whereas Azhvaars songs, thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam songs
say what *happens*.

Sanskrit authors might have tried to imitate Azhvaars songs,
but the the genre of thEvaaram, thiruvaasagam and aazhvaarkaL
paadal are very different and I don't think there is any Sanskrit work
in the same class. This is not to be interepreted as some kind of
'intrinsic capability' of a language, but rather about the nature of
literature and traditions that exist in each language.
The tamil approach and spiritual idiom and the
pointers of 'aazh aRivu-anbu' are very different from
the sanskrit traditions and practices.

selvaa

Kumar Kumarappan

unread,

Oct 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/3/96

to

Shyamala Parameswaran (U15...@uicvm.uic.edu) wrote:
: In article <52fdpf$c...@crl3.crl.com>,
: kku...@crl.com (Kumar Kumarappan) says:

: >The real question is, do you believe that a Tamil could genuinely be

: >motivated to want the religious services in Tamil for all the right
: >reasons, and not necessarily in a competitive spirit against Sanskrit.

: "Religious services" are not straightforward and simple in
: Hindu traditions (note the plural). The phrase suggests a
: certain uniformity of practices and textual content, such
: as found in mosques and churches, which of course, is quite
: absent in the Hindu context, if you get beyond the basic
: symbolic acts.

'Religious services' - To me this is an elastic term (to fit the religious
need of the subject in question) and does not suggest or demand any
uniformity. If it does, in some perspective, I would like to clarify that
the intent here was quite the opposite. As I have stated earlier in
another post, demand for uniformity is a step towards entrenching
the religion in a institutionalized framework, and moving it a step
closer to the concept of a codified religion. 'Religious services'
should be a meaningful experience and blend in well with other
spheres of the subjects life, and that is why I advocate local
vernaculars of the region to play a dominant part (the assumption
here is that the predominant majority does not understand Sanskrit
and the local vernaculars are more reflective of the local culture).
True, this alone is not going to transform the subject into a spiritual
being, but it enhances the possibility. Hence my belief that a Tamil

could genuinely be motivated to want the religious services in Tamil

for all the right reasons. I did not see you answer my question
directly, but if I read your implications right, looks like we have a
disagreement.

[.....]
: The Agamic principles followed in most Vaishnava and

: Saiva temples, prescribe a series of rites (with the
: how and the why) aiding the transferrence of Divine Grace
: from the Deity through that of the officiating priest,
: to the worshipper himself. This is embodied in private
: worship or arcana in temples, where the common
: person seeks to be a beneficiary. In such arcanais,
: there are ashtottirams or namavalis chanted (108).
: These, in Samskritam or Tamil (if translated for
: all the different kinds that exist), are different
: names in praise of the Lord encapsulating various
: qualities (as I noted in an earlier post). Would
: the names in Tamil, assuming all nammavalis have
: appropriate translations and that officiating priests
: have committed these to memory as well, be actually
: understandable and more meaningful in the real
: sense? Would these be more meaningful, any more than
: Samskritam name-chanting would be? I ask a real question
: here. Please give a considered reply, consider the
: speed and the innumerous repetitious arcanais the
: priests perform, often for scores of people at a time.

I am attempting a thoughtful and honest reply. In my opinion it is not
a requirement for the current arcanai chantings to be translated
verbatim to make Tamil vazhipadu effective. As you had
acknowledged in the earlier sections of your posts there can be
multiple traditions and why would you want to enforce uniformity in
practice. Much of the rest of your post is based on the assumption
that much has to be translated from Sanskrit to Tamil and perhaps
herein lies the basis for the difference in our approach. I do not see a
need for that. There is enough source material in Tamil that one would
personally relate and respond well to.

[.....]
: One can chose to appreciate (and learn and maybe

: understand) the greatness in both distinct usages
: of language that have survived centuries, not without
: reason, I would think.

I have no disagreement here and perhaps I should close with this
chord of agreement. And thanks for a detailed post.

--kumAr

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Oct 3, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/3/96

to

Kumar writes -

: If you consider western countries

: like America, Britain as Democratic, dont you see that the majority
: rules the minority in every aspect of life. I would not, unlike you,
: conclude this as a mob rule but rather a defective system that needs to
: be fixed.

I don't quite know what you are trying to say
here.

: > In Rwanda, the majority is

: > slaughtering the minority. In Bihar trains,

: This genocide is the outcome of minority ruling the majority for
: decades.

Yes, but lets not miss the point.
Is what is happening in Rwanda
democracy ?

: > 1 Respect for minority rights

: You made me laugh, here. Tell me, which democratic country respect
: minority rights. Is it just respect ONLY but not allowed to exercise
: their rights.

You made me laugh here. Which democratic
country does NOT respect minority rights ?

: Catholics deny priesthood for women. Is it wrong for me, as a Hindu, to

: condemn and preach against such a policy, when I strongly believe it as
: an injustice to women. By your logic, even Protestant Christians cannot
: protest because they are not Catholics. Do I have to be a Muslim to
: criticise some of their practices?
: Anyone should be free to comment on any subject, why do you want to
: restrict their freedom of expression? Let the readers make their
: judgement.

I see. Can I criticize your choice of job,
of hobbies, of friends , then ?

About your examples - in general, yes,
no non-Muslim should criticize Muslim
ways of worship, their choice of Arabic
alone as the language of worship no matter
whether they live in Indonesia or Alaska,
their dress and marriage customs etc etc.
The only time non-members can criticize
the rituals of an organization is when
some violation of justice occurs, and
this violation should be so blatant,
so outrageous that it becomes a grand
human rights question. Otherwise non-members
should butt out.

In other words, the general principle
should be non-interference barring very
few exceptions. You are recommending
that everyone has a right to poke his
nose in other peoples' affairs. That
would lead to an intolerant, unjust
society.

RS

Parthasarati Dileepan

unread,

Oct 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/4/96

to

selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) wrote:
>
>
> The tamil approach and spiritual idiom and the
> pointers of 'aazh aRivu-anbu' are very different from
> the sanskrit traditions and practices.
>

When it comes to Bhakthi, there is a tradition of Bhakthi, not a Tamil tradition, not
a Sanskrit tradition. No doubt the roots of Sri Vaishnava branch of Bhakthi tradition
can be traced to the Azhvaars, and the authors of Paripaadal. But then the Azhvaars and
the authors of Paripaadal themselves repeatedly state, without any ambiguity, that it is
the Sanskrit Vedas from which they draw their spiritual inspiration. On the other hand,
those who wrote in Sanskrit, like Alavandhaar, Sri Ramanuja, who wrote primarily in
Sanskrit, and Vedantha Desika who wrote equally in Tamil and Sanskrit, are widely viewed
as having been inspired by the Tamil aruLichcheyalgaL of the Azhvaars. It is these
great souls who kept the Tamil paasurams from disapperaing. For them what mattered was
Bhakthi. For them there was no such thing as "Tamil Bhakthi" and Sanskrit Bhakthi". I
submit that one would be hard pressed to cleanly separate "Tamil" and "Sanskrit"
practices and traditions as claimed by Prof. C.R. Selvakumar above. I don't know how
anyone who finds Azhvaar's words to be inspiring can indulge in such a mundane and
pointless exercise.

-- Dileepan

Kumar Soundrapandian

unread,

Oct 4, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/4/96

to

Raghu Seshadri wrote:
>

>
> : > In Rwanda, the majority is
> : > slaughtering the minority. In Bihar trains,
>
> : This genocide is the outcome of minority ruling the majority for
> : decades.
>
> Yes, but lets not miss the point.
> Is what is happening in Rwanda
> democracy ?

Certainly not.

>
> : > 1 Respect for minority rights
>
> : You made me laugh, here. Tell me, which democratic country respect
> : minority rights. Is it just respect ONLY but not allowed to exercise
> : their rights.
>
> You made me laugh here. Which democratic
> country does NOT respect minority rights ?
>

Throwing back the question to me. Well, I can answer that. In Singapore
and Malaysia the majority decides on all major policies. Since
independence, minority rights have been systematically eroded. There
would not be a war in Sri Lanka, if minority Tamils rights had been
respected. So as Indonesia, which does not respect East Timor
inhabitants rights.

I see lots of post on the violation of minority rights in Pakistan and
Bangladesh. Needless to mention, India. All the countries, I mentioned,
have democratically(?) elected government.

The majority, in California, voted in favor of preposition 187,
denying children of illegal immigrants the fundamental rights of health
care and education. What respect does democratic America dispenses for
innocent, defenseless minority children?

Bottom line, in democracy majority rules minority. It doent matter even
if the victory is by a single vote. I find this, a serious flaw.

> : Catholics deny priesthood for women. Is it wrong for me, as a Hindu, to
> : condemn and preach against such a policy, when I strongly believe it as
> : an injustice to women. By your logic, even Protestant Christians cannot
> : protest because they are not Catholics. Do I have to be a Muslim to
> : criticise some of their practices?
> : Anyone should be free to comment on any subject, why do you want to
> : restrict their freedom of expression? Let the readers make their
> : judgement.
>
> I see. Can I criticize your choice of job,
> of hobbies, of friends , then ?

Yes, in a democratic society, you have the freedom to do so. But, at the
same time, I have the freedom not to read, not to respond. If it
irritates me much, I have the choice to kill your post.

>
> About your examples - in general, yes,
> no non-Muslim should criticize Muslim
> ways of worship, their choice of Arabic
> alone as the language of worship no matter
> whether they live in Indonesia or Alaska,
> their dress and marriage customs etc etc.
> The only time non-members can criticize
> the rituals of an organization is when
> some violation of justice occurs, and
> this violation should be so blatant,
> so outrageous that it becomes a grand
> human rights question. Otherwise non-members
> should butt out.
>
> In other words, the general principle
> should be non-interference barring very
> few exceptions. You are recommending
> that everyone has a right to poke his
> nose in other peoples' affairs. That
> would lead to an intolerant, unjust
> society.

I never meant that anyone can meddle in other peoples private matters.
I totally agree that there must be tolerance among different religious
groups. How you pray at home is your business.

A private temple, even though, belongs to the members, anyone has the
right to interfere when the issue turns into PUBLIC interest. If the
temple authority decides to change the number of times circling the
temple from 5 to 10, I can leave that as a private matter. But if they
pour gallons of milk on a statue when millions of children starving,
hei! I have a problem with that.

On the temple prayers, all along the contention was that Sanskrit is
GODS language and Tamil will not an be effective medium. Naturally, the
issue is of public interest for all Tamil loving people where the
dignity of Tamil language is involved, irrespective of whether they are
agnostic or whatever.

S.V.Kumar

>
> RS

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Oct 7, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/7/96

to

Sri Kumar writes -

: > Yes, but lets not miss the point.

: > Is what is happening in Rwanda
: > democracy ?

: Certainly not.

Thanks. So democracy is not simply the
majority throwing its weight about.

: > You made me laugh here. Which democratic

: > country does NOT respect minority rights ?

: Throwing back the question to me. Well, I can answer that. In Singapore
: and Malaysia the majority decides on all major policies. Since
: independence, minority rights have been systematically eroded. There
: would not be a war in Sri Lanka, if minority Tamils rights had been
: respected. So as Indonesia, which does not respect East Timor
: inhabitants rights.
: I see lots of post on the violation of minority rights in Pakistan and
: Bangladesh. Needless to mention, India. All the countries, I mentioned,
: have democratically(?) elected government.

I know you will probably disagree, but
except for India, I don't consider any
of these countries democratic. God knows
India is imperfect enough, but these
countries only follow the outer form of democracy,
it is an empty shell, the spirit is
lacking. Merely holding elections does
not make a democracy. Without respecting
minority rights, a democracy cannot
exist.

: The majority, in California, voted in favor of preposition 187,

: denying children of illegal immigrants the fundamental rights of health
: care and education. What respect does democratic America dispenses for
: innocent, defenseless minority children?

This is a hard question, but please understand
that a country's govt only needs to worry about
its own citizens, not non-citizens who manage
to sneak in. How can any one country care for
the whole world. It should not be expected to.

: Bottom line, in democracy majority rules minority. It doent matter even

: if the victory is by a single vote. I find this, a serious flaw.

I agree that all systems need further
improvement, but it is not true that
in a democracy majority rules over
minority all the time. YOu have not
shown this at all. Malaysia et al are
hardly representative of real democracies.

: > : Anyone should be free to comment on any subject, why do you want to

: > : restrict their freedom of expression? Let the readers make their
: > : judgement.
: >
: > I see. Can I criticize your choice of job,
: > of hobbies, of friends , then ?

: Yes, in a democratic society, you have the freedom to do so. But, at the
: same time, I have the freedom not to read, not to respond. If it
: irritates me much, I have the choice to kill your post.

I am sorry, I and most other people will
vehemently disagree with this. Your life
is your own, and I have no right to
comment on it. You should not be subject to
interference from other busybodies who
cannot mind their own business. This is
a fundamental principle of civilized
existence.

In all democracies a right to privacy is
well recognized and you can sue someone
for interfering with your private life.

Are you really asserting that anyone can
comment on your life, criticize your private
affairs, tell you whom to marry, how many
children to have and what kind of clothes
you should wear ? Is Afghanistan your
idea of an ideal society ? I am quite shocked.

: > In other words, the general principle

: > should be non-interference barring very
: > few exceptions. You are recommending
: > that everyone has a right to poke his
: > nose in other peoples' affairs. That
: > would lead to an intolerant, unjust
: > society.

: I never meant that anyone can meddle in other peoples private matters.
: I totally agree that there must be tolerance among different religious
: groups. How you pray at home is your business.

Thank goodness.

: A private temple, even though, belongs to the members, anyone has the

: right to interfere when the issue turns into PUBLIC interest. If the

OK, lets see what your idea of public interest
is.

: temple authority decides to change the number of times circling the

: temple from 5 to 10, I can leave that as a private matter. But if they

:-)

: pour gallons of milk on a statue when millions of children starving,

: hei! I have a problem with that.

See, this is a legitimate point for
comment by outsiders, I agree you can
comment on this. But only comment, mind you,
the ultimate decision has to rest with
the members only. As long as they don't
steal the milk, legally they can do
what they want with their milk.

: On the temple prayers, all along the contention was that Sanskrit is

: GODS language and Tamil will not an be effective medium. Naturally, the
: issue is of public interest for all Tamil loving people where the
: dignity of Tamil language is involved, irrespective of whether they are
: agnostic or whatever.

I have no quarrel with your interest, have
all the interest you want, but I am questioning
the right of people who do not belong in
a club to interfere with the affairs of the
club. I am very much interested in the
cricket matches organized by the MCC, but
do I have the right to tell that cricket
club to conduct their business in Sanskrit ?
That is the issue.

RS

ps - I appreciate the reasonable and gentle
tenor of my debate with you.

Kumar Soundrapandian

unread,

Oct 10, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/10/96

to

Though a Hindu, I abhor Hindu fundamentalism. It is erratic and
unimaginable for me to think, Taliban's extreme interpretation of Islam
and their imposition of Islamic rule, with total disregard for human
rights, as an IDEAL society.

What Taliban does is putting a gun on womens head and ordering her to
wear purdah. Terrorizing men to grow beard. Where do I advocate such
coercion, violence? Of course, anyone who believes in democracy knows
growing beard and what cloths to wear are inborn rights of individual.

However, assuming Taliban were to exist in America, they are free to
preach their moral values peacefully. Infect, they can stand outside
your home, at a distance, carry placard and shout "Seshadri ! Grow
beard". What can you do? Their action can be insane to you and me but
freedom of expression is guaranteed in democracy. The men in Afghanistan
have no choice but to grow beard, if not they can be shot. But, you in
America have the choice to IGNORE.

On privacy. Yes, you can sue for invasion of privacy. Nobody likes their
private affairs be made public but they do like other peoples affairs.
Again, the question is what is private? What is public interest? Can
Bill Clinton sue media for disclosing his private affairs ?

On the issue of respect for minority rights and the majority should not
rule the minority all the time, I have complete agreement with you as
long as you dont attribute these as the functions of democracy for what
I see in the present world is to the contrary. I believe in settling
issues, that divides communities sharply, be done by dialog and
persuasion.

I rest my case....for time being.

S.V.Kumar

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,

Oct 11, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/11/96

to

In article <5331tb$4...@news.campus.mci.net>,

Parthasarati Dileepan <pdil...@cecasun.utc.edu> wrote:
>selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) wrote:
>>
>>
>> The tamil approach and spiritual idiom and the
>> pointers of 'aazh aRivu-anbu' are very different from
>> the sanskrit traditions and practices.
>>
>
>
>When it comes to Bhakthi, there is a tradition of Bhakthi,
>not a Tamil tradition, not a Sanskrit tradition.

I don't think there is any merit in your assertion.
For example a person might be in love with another
and s/he might express it quite differently.
Say one might sing his love in a song and another might
choose to present his lover with a flower and so on..
In music for example there are many different styles
( Carnatic, Western Classical, Hindustani, Jazz..)
Paththi/Bhakthi traditions can be different. My point was-
the spiritual literature in Sanskrit has a different tradition
from that of Tamil and that Sanskrit does not have a genre of
literature like Azhvaar paadalkaL, thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam etc.
Some of the features of this genre are: songs are sung at
different geographical places but they point to spiritually-related
body-processes and inner experiences- utporuL seRindhathu; silEdai
niRaindhathu; spiritual experiences are described with
intimacy rather than presenting intellectual arguments
using logic etc.; expresses deeply moving love with
intricately woven spiritual wisdom; unique
spiritual terms and idioms and semantic cascades;
don't talk about rituals so much..
The spiritual literature of Sanskrit is of a different type,
and it does not emphasize 'enlightened, deeply moving love'
as in Tamil.

I don't think you understood what I said in my posting,
and by partially quoting my posting you're creating
misrepresentations. I've attached my posting at the end (except the
quotations from aazhvvar's works ) for those who may want to
review it.

>No doubt the roots of Sri Vaishnava branch of Bhakthi tradition
>can be traced to the Azhvaars, and the authors of Paripaadal.

Are you not contradicting here ?!

>But then the Azhvaars and the authors of Paripaadal themselves
>repeatedly state, without any ambiguity, that it is
>the Sanskrit Vedas from which they draw their spiritual inspiration.

I think this is the kind of Sanskrit-and-Veda-centric view
which has resulted in the serious misrepresentations of
indian traditions. First and foremost Vedas were not
accessible to the vast majority ( more than 95% of people).
Only recently through european efforts, do some of the
interested indians know to an extent what Vedas are about.
I'm aware of your claim in this ng that somehow 'ancient tamils' knew
of Sanskrit Vedas and I'll address it in a moment.
Secondly, even most of those who are supposed to 'know' it(Veda),
actually know only to recite certain parts.

Based on the recent hagiographies of saints like Sri RamaNa
Maharishi, it is possible to conjecture that when aazhvaars and
other realized souls were kind enough to converse and interact with
ordinary folks and scholars, they might have come across
statements of Vedas and other spiritual works in a variety of
possible situations like debates, seeking clarifications etc.
These realized souls can instantly *recognize*
the truth or falsity of what is said in an inspired saying
( be it Vedas or any other spiritual works) and
they might have concurred with some of the assertions of
Vedas. It does not mean they studied or were otherwise
inspired by it. Eventhough Sri Ramana Maharishi comes from a
family that is privileged to know Vedas, he doesn't seemed to have
studied Vedas in depth or inspired by it, but rather he was
moved by PeriyapuraaNam; even here the periyapuraaNam didn't
contribute to his enlightenment except probably to interest
him in spiritual path/matters. Only his inward looking that
was graced by Whatever-that-be that helped him self-realize.
His persistent 'thavam' and 'uL niRRal'( niRpathE niTTai) ensured his
permanent 'self-realized state'. Later on many persons
brought various spiritual works like Vedas, Rbu Gita etc.
to Sri Ramana Maharishi and he variously commented on these..

Further, VEdam in Tamil generally means only a spiritual work, and not
in every place does it refer to Sanskrit Veda ( although in some
places Sanskrit Vedas are specifically mentioned by name both in Azhvaar
PaadalkaL and thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam as they are also considered
to be spiritual works ). In Tamil Nadu Christians are called
Vedakkaaranga and the Christian Bible is called
Vedam and Veda-Agamam. Similarly, the expression 'naan maRai'
in Tamil does not generally mean the four Vedic-Sanskrit Vedaas.
In Tamil 'aRam' is considered the first of four maRai',
and expressions like 'aRam muthalaa an naangum'
'anRu aalin keezh aRam muthalaa..', 'kallaalin pudai amarndhu naan maRai'
etc. occur in thEvaaram and other works. In tamil, vEdam and maRai
are not same in general and there are thEvaaram expressions that
specifically mention both in the same line thus distinguishing.
Similarly comments apply to 'Oththu'.

In short, tamil expressions like 'vEdaththin utporuLE' etc. mean only
'Lord, thou art the ultimate meaning of all spiritual work', and
it does not mean that the Azhvaar or Naayanmaar refer to Sanskrit-Veda.
In tamil, the very word 'poruL' means 'God' meaning 'ultimate
meaning of life is God; it is the ultimate goal'.

In any case, the knowledge of Vedic-Sanskrit Veda is
not of much help and it is considered to be a LOWER kind of Knowledge
( in the sense that it can not lead to Self-Realization),
even according to Veda itself ( Upanishads are
claimed to be Vedas or Vedaantham).

Here is what Mundaka Upanishad says in slokam 1-5:

"tatra apara rkvEdO, yajurvEda, saamavEdO adarvavEda,
siksha, kalpO, vyaakaraNam, nruktaNY, sandO, jyOthishamati | "

[ rough translation: ( an earlier slokam, 1-4, says there are
two kinds of knowledge, namely 'higher and lower' (='parasaivaapara'))

"This lower(knowledge) is rkvEda, yajur vEda, saama vEda, atharva vEda,
sikshai( learning, recitation), kalpam (knowledge of practical methods,
ritual), vyaakaraNam (grammar), nruktham (dance), sandam
(music ?), jyOtisham ( astrology)." ]

One can not 'learn' the para vidya ( the supereme art) from Vedas,
and puraaNaas etc. One can not 'learn' 'meyyaRivu' from
aazhvaars's works or from other tamil spiritual works either.
However, because Tamil spiritual works are not of the
vaRattu vEdaantham type, but rather they speak of deeply moving
love and devotion with which many ordinary folks can identify
( in our worldly way, at least to start with),
they prepare the ground, so to say, for sprouting spiritual wisdom.

>On the other hand, those who wrote in Sanskrit,
>like Alavandhaar, Sri Ramanuja, who wrote primarily in
>Sanskrit, and Vedantha Desika who wrote equally in Tamil and Sanskrit,
>are widely viewed as having been inspired by the Tamil
>aruLichcheyalgaL of the Azhvaars. It is these
>great souls who kept the Tamil paasurams from disapperaing.
>For them what mattered was Bhakthi.
>For them there was no such thing as "Tamil Bhakthi" and Sanskrit Bhakthi".
>I submit that one would be hard pressed to cleanly
>separate "Tamil" and "Sanskrit" practices and traditions
>as claimed by Prof. C.R. Selvakumar above. I don't know how
>anyone who finds Azhvaar's words to be inspiring
>can indulge in such a mundane and pointless exercise.
>

It appears 'pointless exercise' to you, perhaps because
you did not care to 'listen'.

[ The following is not directed at Mr. Dileepan but
it is worthwhile to remember that in Tamil kEL means 'to listen' but
it also means 'with love' ! kEL = listen. kEL = anbu.
kELir means friends ( 'yaathum oorE, yaavarum kELir').
kEL > kENmai, friendship, love. nallOr kENami = friendship of good.
kELvi means among other things:
'wisdom', 'demand/transact/ask' ( enna kooli kEtkiRaan),
'question', 'pure musical note', 'education'.
kELvi in essense is 'love-listen-wisdom'.
The great philosopher J. Krishnamurthi
used to say 'Listen ! It is an _art_ to listen! That is Love !'
vaLLuvar says 'kaRRilan aayinum kEtka ' = even if you are not
a 'learned' one, listen! The Sanskrit word 'Sruti' refers to
'listening' and it is the sacred Veda! In Sanskrit, sruti points to
sacred wisdom, but it does not point to 'love'.
'uLLanbaal,uLLurugi, utkEttal kELvi']

>-- Dileepan

selvaa

-----------
My earlier posting follows:
---------------

Article 75511 of soc.culture.tamil:
Newsgroups: soc.culture.tamil
From: selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar)
Subject: Re: "thamizhil poosai"
Message-ID: <Dyo6v...@novice.uwaterloo.ca>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 22:38:21 GMT
References: <501eni$o...@netnews.upenn.edu> <529lt7$i...@news.uta.edu> <52fdpf$c...@crl3.crl.com> <Dynw2...@novice.uwaterloo.ca>
Nntp-Posting-Host: valluvar.uwaterloo.ca
Organization: University of Waterloo

( from Stotraratna)

or

and another to 'feel' like nammaazhvaar says ..

[..citations of aazhvaar's words deleted]

are not just mundane statements.

Sanskrit works say 'what is God', 'what are His/Her attributes' etc.
whereas Azhvaars songs, thEvaaram and thiruvaasagam songs
say what *happens*.

Sanskrit authors might have tried to imitate Azhvaars songs,
but the the genre of thEvaaram, thiruvaasagam and aazhvaarkaL
paadal are very different and I don't think there is any Sanskrit work
in the same class. This is not to be interepreted as some kind of
'intrinsic capability' of a language, but rather about the nature of
literature and traditions that exist in each language.

The tamil approach and spiritual idiom and the
pointers of 'aazh aRivu-anbu' are very different from
the sanskrit traditions and practices.

selvaa
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Parthasarati Dileepan

unread,

Oct 12, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/12/96

to

selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) wrote:
>
>>But then the Azhvaars and the authors of Paripaadal themselves
>>repeatedly state, without any ambiguity, that it is
>>the Sanskrit Vedas from which they draw their spiritual inspiration.
>
> I think this is the kind of Sanskrit-and-Veda-centric view
> which has resulted in the serious misrepresentations of
> indian traditions.

I have no desire to continue this pointless debate.
However, I ask the interested to take a look at
azhvaar paasurams and judge for themselves,
don't take my word for it. For starters take
a look at Thirumazhisai Azhvaar's Thiruchchandhaviruththam.

-- Dileepan

S. Prabaharan

unread,

Oct 12, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/12/96

to

Suresh Rajan wrote:

>
> IMO, Tamil should be the default language of worship and
> Sanskrit should be available as an option rather than the
> other way around.

Just do it!

SP

>
> Suresh

Suresh Rajan

unread,

Oct 13, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/13/96

to

Shyamala Parameswaran wrote:
>
> In article <52fdpf$c...@crl3.crl.com>,
> kku...@crl.com (Kumar Kumarappan) says:
> >

> [...]

>
> >
> >The real question is, do you believe that a Tamil could genuinely be
> >motivated to want the religious services in Tamil for all the right
> >reasons, and not necessarily in a competitive spirit against Sanskrit.
>
> "Religious services" are not straightforward and simple in
> Hindu traditions (note the plural). The phrase suggests a
> certain uniformity of practices and textual content, such
> as found in mosques and churches, which of course, is quite
> absent in the Hindu context, if you get beyond the basic
> symbolic acts.
>

> Religious services within Vaishnavism or Saivism are
> themelves divided into public and private forms of worship.
> So although temples are public, they are in a sense
> private in many of the actual worship modes and rites
> that are conducted. For those familiar with temple
> activities, you may know what I mean. To understand
> religious services and the present use of structure
> in Samskritam (as "default language") is to understand
> the purpose and meaning of worship. It is not, as one nettor
> not too long ago put it, merely to stick a piece of camphor,
> chant something, wave the hand around and then further,
> stick the plate under the worshipper's nose and say,
> Poi va!
>

> The Agamic principles followed in most Vaishnava and
> Saiva temples, prescribe a series of rites (with the
> how and the why) aiding the transferrence of Divine Grace
> from the Deity through that of the officiating priest,
> to the worshipper himself. This is embodied in private
> worship or arcana in temples, where the common
> person seeks to be a beneficiary. In such arcanais,
> there are ashtottirams or namavalis chanted (108).
> These, in Samskritam or Tamil (if translated for
> all the different kinds that exist), are different
> names in praise of the Lord encapsulating various
> qualities (as I noted in an earlier post). Would
> the names in Tamil, assuming all nammavalis have
> appropriate translations and that officiating priests
> have committed these to memory as well, be actually
> understandable and more meaningful in the real
> sense? Would these be more meaningful, any more than
> Samskritam name-chanting would be? I ask a real question
> here. Please give a considered reply, consider the
> speed and the innumerous repetitious arcanais the
> priests perform, often for scores of people at a time.

Dear nettor, you say above that rites like the chants
during archanai are meant to transfer divine grace
from God to the worshipper through the priest and
elsewhere in your post, you say that these chants have
to be said in the proper manner since sound is primordial.
Yet, you also concede that these chants are speeded up
to accomodate all the worshippers. Does this not mean that
these chants no longer facilitate the transfer of divine
grace?

> Please also consider that the arcanai in tamil would
> be highly textual and as non common-use of the
> language. Can one expect the average person in
> TN to understand this arcanai simply because
> he is a native Tamil speaker?

IMO, a person with an average command of English can
comprehend most of the King James version of the Bible
even though it was written 400 years ago and has many
words and phrases that are not part of modern usage.
Surely, wouldn't understanding 50% of an archanai be
better than understanding 5%?

> One can chose to appreciate (and learn and maybe
> understand) the greatness in both distinct usages
> of language that have survived centuries, not without
> reason, I would think.
>

> Shyamala

IMO, Tamil should be the default language of worship and
Sanskrit should be available as an option rather than the
other way around.

Suresh

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Oct 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/16/96

to

Sri Kumar writes -

: Though a Hindu, I abhor Hindu fundamentalism. It is erratic and

: unimaginable for me to think, Taliban's extreme interpretation of Islam
: and their imposition of Islamic rule, with total disregard for human
: rights, as an IDEAL society.
: What Taliban does is putting a gun on womens head and ordering her to
: wear purdah. Terrorizing men to grow beard. Where do I advocate such
: coercion, violence? Of course, anyone who believes in democracy knows
: growing beard and what cloths to wear are inborn rights of individual.
: However, assuming Taliban were to exist in America, they are free to
: preach their moral values peacefully. Infect, they can stand outside
: your home, at a distance, carry placard and shout "Seshadri ! Grow
: beard". What can you do? Their action can be insane to you and me but
: freedom of expression is guaranteed in democracy. The men in Afghanistan
: have no choice but to grow beard, if not they can be shot. But, you in
: America have the choice to IGNORE.

All this is very good.

: On privacy. Yes, you can sue for invasion of privacy. Nobody likes their

: private affairs be made public but they do like other peoples affairs.
: Again, the question is what is private? What is public interest? Can
: Bill Clinton sue media for disclosing his private affairs ?

The law in democratic countries makes a distinction
between private individuals and people in public
life. People in public life do not have as many
privacy rights as you and i do. They still have
some but not the rights you and I enjoy.

: On the issue of respect for minority rights and the majority should not

: rule the minority all the time, I have complete agreement with you as
: long as you dont attribute these as the functions of democracy for what
: I see in the present world is to the contrary. I believe in settling
: issues, that divides communities sharply, be done by dialog and
: persuasion.
: I rest my case....for time being.

A very nice posting. Thanks.

RS

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Oct 16, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/16/96

to

From: selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar)

>When it comes to Bhakthi, there is a tradition of Bhakthi,
>not a Tamil tradition, not a Sanskrit tradition.

-I don't think there is any merit in your assertion.
-For example a person might be in love with another
-and s/he might express it quite differently.
-Say one might sing his love in a song and another might
-choose to present his lover with a flower and so on..
...

Selva wrote, on the whole, a knowledge-filled
post full of very interesting info, quite
valuable too - but I fear he has missed
Sri Dileepan's simple point. To take Selva's own
example above, while 2 persons can express
love very differently, they are both expressing
the same emotion - love. This is ALL that
Sri Dileepan is saying.

Just as there is no flower-love which
is different from song-love, there can
be no tamil bhakti different from
english bhakti or sanskrit bhakti.
The underlying emotion is the same,
no matter the form of expression.

Is this that obscure a point ?

Just as it would be odd if a lover were
to give 100% attention to his flower
or his song to the extent that he forgets
his sweetheart - it would be odd if a
bhakta were to obsess over which language
he uses to express his love for God to
the extent that he forgets his God !

It is as if the Lord is less important
than the language one chooses to talk
to him !

I hope I don't offend Selva if I ask
him whether he worships God in Tamil,
or is Tamil itself the God that he worships ?

No matter how sublime the song or how
beautiful the flower, these cannot
overshadow the sweetheart, can they ?

Lets not keep harping on these
differences, when we have a 1000 year
tradition, beginning with the Azhwars,
where both these languages were used
simultaneously, and the traditions merged
so well that often the same persons were
authorities in both ...

Sure, lets agree with the literary points
that Selva makes. Selva's points will interest
academics and historians, to that extent it
is valuable. But it does not concern bhaktas.

The thing is, our great bhakti tradition
is comprised of both - the great bhaktas
practiced both - they transcended both
these traditions and have taught us to
value both - so lets emulate them and
get on with it. Enough of harping on
differences !

RS

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,

Oct 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/24/96

to

Parthasarati Dileepan <pdil...@cecasun.utc.edu> wrote:
@
@selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) wrote:
@>
@>>But then the Azhvaars and the authors of Paripaadal themselves
@>>repeatedly state, without any ambiguity, that it is
@>>the Sanskrit Vedas from which they draw their spiritual inspiration.
@>
@> I think this is the kind of Sanskrit-and-Veda-centric view
@> which has resulted in the serious misrepresentations of
@> indian traditions.
@
@
@I have no desire to continue this pointless debate.
@However, I ask the interested to take a look at
@azhvaar paasurams and judge for themselves,
@don't take my word for it. For starters take
@a look at Thirumazhisai Azhvaar's Thiruchchandhaviruththam.

Thirumazhisai Azhvaar says, in 'naan mugan thiruvandhaadhi'
(1) 'aazh poruLai sindhaamal koNmineer thErndhu' in the
very first song and he clearly goes on to say later
(2)'vithaiyaaga naRRamizhai viththi
en uLLaththai nee viLaiththaay' in song 81.

One of the meanings of (1) is 'after careful consideration,
please 'take in' the deep-meaning'. And, the meaning of
of (2) is (in rough translation)
'Oh Lord, you nurtured my heart with the seed of 'good-tamil'

These words should be taken into account when understanding
this Azhvaar.

Now, the Thiruchandhaviruththam ( TCV) which is a set of 120 songs,
has in 13 different songs a word relating to 'vEda-'.
What it means in each place has to be carefully understood ( as
Azhvaar urges). If the word means 'Sanskrit Veda'
let a knowlegeable person ( let us leave Mr. Dileepan for whom
all this is pointless) show

[1] Where in Vedic-Sanskrit Veda is said
'maadhu thangu kURan ERa thoordhi
enRu vEdha nool OdhukinRa thuNmai yalla thillai maRRuraikkilE'
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
( song 72) or where in Vedic-Sanskrit Veda
is said as Azhvaar says 'nachchu naagaNaik kidandha naathan
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
vEdha keethanE' ( song 117).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[2] What is the meaning of 'vEdavaaNar keetha vELviyaar' (song 8),
'vEdam naangumaagi ninRa' ( song 15),
'vEdamaagi vELviyaagi' ( song 34) etc. ??

First answer the first[1] and then take up answering [2].
What is meant in Tamil about 'vEda-', 'naal vEda',
vEda-naavar' etc are quite different. Tamil idiom is different.

Thirumazhisai Azhvaar, does refer to 'Saama vEda keethanaaya sakrapaaNi'
and 'iruk' but what is meant by these can be taken up after
'non'-starters' ( I mean who are not 'just starters' :-) )
answer [1] and [2].
Finally, we can consider what iS understood by the Azhvaar's
'paaTTum muRaiyum..' in 'naanmugan thiruvandhaadhi'. Did the Azhvaar
mean the cruel Manu Smrithi ? What is meant by manu in tamil ?
@
@
@-- Dileepan

selvaa

P.S. I've accepted new administrative responsibilities and other
additional duties in my profession and hence my responses
will be slow in coming but I'll try my best to post them
as soon as I can.

Shankar Iyer

unread,

Oct 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/24/96

to

In <Dzr80...@novice.uwaterloo.ca> selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca
(C.R. Selvakumar) writes:
>
>In article <5436c1$o...@hpindda.cup.hp.com>,
>Raghu Seshadri <sesh...@cup.hp.com> wrote:
>
>@>When it comes to Bhakthi, there is a tradition of Bhakthi,
>@>not a Tamil tradition, not a Sanskrit tradition.
>@
>@ -I don't think there is any merit in your assertion.
>@ -For example a person might be in love with another
>@ -and s/he might express it quite differently.
>@ -Say one might sing his love in a song and another might
>@ -choose to present his lover with a flower and so on..
>@ ...
>@
>@Selva wrote, on the whole, a knowledge-filled
>@post full of very interesting info, quite
>@valuable too - but I fear he has missed
>@Sri Dileepan's simple point. To take Selva's own
>@example above, while 2 persons can express
>@love very differently, they are both expressing
>@the same emotion - love. This is ALL that
>@Sri Dileepan is saying.
>
> Thanks for your complements, but your fear is
> quite unfounded. It was Mr. Dileepan who raised a strawman
> of Sanskrit-Bhakthi and Tamil Bhakthi, not I.
> I was talking about a *genre of literature* in Tamil and
> and the difference of literatures ( between Skt-Tamil) -
> not about 'bhakthi'.
> My point is there is no deeply moving songs like
> thEvaaram, thiruvaasagam and Aazhvaar PaadalkaL and
> such a class of literature in Sanskrit. Sanskrit literature
> does not express such an enlightened emotion. Sanskrit
> spiritual literature is mostly of the 'lemma' type and usually
> uses bland statements ( often heard from someone or as summary
> or abstract of the 'truth') and they don't have the immediacy
> and impact of tamil.
>--------------------------------------

SAIRAM. Are you equally familiar with the creations of all Tamil and
Sanskrit-speaking saints to assert thus? For example, IMHV, the
romantic/devotional songs of Saint Jayadeva (Ashta-padis in his
Gita-Govinda) are as much full of 'enlightened emotion' as AndAL's
TiruppAvai the joyous spiritual experiences described by the AzhvArs.
What is your view? Similarly, many of the shlokas in Adi Shankara's
Soundarya Lahari and Sivananda Lahiri are very emotionally powerful.
More recently, the massive NArAyanEyam of Bhattadri is so rich in the
devotional content, tradition has it that each shloka was personally
sanctioned by Lord GuruvAyurappan!

In any case, I believe we are all better off saying, 'this is good, and
so is this'. or 'this is good, but this works even better for me',
rather than 'this is good and that is bad'. IMHV, if praying to God
brings you comfort and joy, doing it in Tamil or Sanskrit (or for that
matter in any other language you feel like using to express your
devotion) will serve you well. SAIRAM SAI 10/24/96

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

>[deleted some parts]
>
>@
>@Sure, lets agree with the literary points
>@that Selva makes. Selva's points will interest
>@academics and historians, to that extent it
>@is valuable. But it does not concern bhaktas.
>@
>@The thing is, our great bhakti tradition
>@is comprised of both - the great bhaktas
>@practiced both - they transcended both
>@these traditions and have taught us to
>@value both - so lets emulate them and
>@get on with it. Enough of harping on
>@differences !
>
> The first thing a true seeker ( 'bhaktha' or not) should care for
> is truthfulness. Did you honestly enquire whether what I said
> is valid or not ?
>
> I at all mentioned this 'enlightened love' called
> 'paththi in Tamil and the genre of literature that exists,
> only because Tamil is not currently being used as the primary
> language of worship in 1000s of Tamil Nadu Temples, whereas it
should
> be used.
> The current situation is seriously unsatisfactory for tamils.
> If you look back you'll notice that to enter into Temples,
> people have to agitate; now to use tamil in tamil nadu temples,
> people have to agitate; but you give
> lectures about what is democracy ! Is denying the majority their
> basic right and aspiration democracy ?! Why don't you first
> honestly admit that Tamil should be the primary language of
> worship in Tamil Nadu. It will only increase the spiritual
awareness.
>
> My point was not 'academic', but to add to the sentiments made
> here that temple worship in Tamil Nadu should be in Tamil.
>
>@
>@RS
>
> selvaa

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,

Oct 24, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/24/96

to

[deleted some parts]

Parthasarati Dileepan

unread,

Oct 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/25/96

to

selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) wrote:

> Azhvaar urges). If the word means 'Sanskrit Veda'
> let a knowlegeable person ( let us leave Mr. Dileepan for whom
> all this is pointless) show

Making bhakthi into a comptetition between Tamil and Sanskrit which
is what you are making this out to be, is pointless. That is what I
said. Please look at the topic of this thread. That may give you
some clue.

>
> [1] Where in Vedic-Sanskrit Veda is said

It is impossible to wake up anyone who is simply pretending to sleep.
It is quite clear from Azhvaar's own words that they have drawn
spiritual inspiration from the Sanskrit Vedas, PuraaNaas, etc.
However much Prof. C.R. Selvakumar may dislike it, it is there
for everyone to see. Thirumazhisai Azhvaar goes into esoteric
and technical aspects of metaphysics whose source is in Sanskrit
writings. Of course the Azhvaar pays homage to Tamil. Sri Vasihnavas
revere Tamil as much as Sanskrit writings. Showing that the Azhvaar
pays homage to Tamil does not prove they did not draw inspiration
from Sanskrit Vedas, PuraaNaas, etc.. When the Azhvaars celebrate
the ten avathaars of Sriapathi where is the inspiration coming from?
When they celebrate the legend of Emperumaan teaching the Vedas to
Brahmma, what Vedas are they talking about? There are scores and
scores of these references from almost all the Azhvaars.

Tamil as well as Sanskrit writings served as inspiration for Azhvaars.
Claiming that the Azhvaars did not draw inspiration from Sanskrit
works, or claiming that they simply paid lip service out of some sort
of fear is nothing but distorting the truth. Doing this deliberately
reveals the malice in their hearts. So be it.

I may or may not find time to respond to this continuing campaign
to misrepresent Azhvaar's words. I urge the interested nettors
not to be swayed by a few selected quotes posted with an ulterior
agenda and misleading interpretation. If you are interested, please
read the Azhvaar's words for yourself.

-- Dileepan

Shyamala Parameswaran

unread,

Oct 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/25/96

to

In article <54ohkg$e...@sjx-ixn7.ix.netcom.com>, sai...@ix.netcom.com(Shankar Iyer) says:
>

other quotes deleted.

>
>SAIRAM. Are you equally familiar with the creations of all Tamil and
>Sanskrit-speaking saints to assert thus? For example, IMHV, the
>romantic/devotional songs of Saint Jayadeva (Ashta-padis in his
>Gita-Govinda) are as much full of 'enlightened emotion' as AndAL's
>TiruppAvai the joyous spiritual experiences described by the AzhvArs.
>What is your view? Similarly, many of the shlokas in Adi Shankara's
>Soundarya Lahari and Sivananda Lahiri are very emotionally powerful.
>More recently, the massive NArAyanEyam of Bhattadri is so rich in the
>devotional content, tradition has it that each shloka was personally
>sanctioned by Lord GuruvAyurappan!
>
>In any case, I believe we are all better off saying, 'this is good, and
>so is this'. or 'this is good, but this works even better for me',
>rather than 'this is good and that is bad'. IMHV, if praying to God
>brings you comfort and joy, doing it in Tamil or Sanskrit (or for that
>matter in any other language you feel like using to express your
>devotion) will serve you well. SAIRAM SAI 10/24/96

There are two ancient sutras additionally, for those interested.
The Narada-sutra which is an enquiry into the art of love/devotion
or bhakti-jinasa and the Sandilya Bhakti sutras.

Other than this there is Bhakti-Ratnamala occuring, (not sure)
maybe, Padma Purana (NOT of 16-19th century composition) and
the Bhakti-philosophy contained in the Bhaktikanda Upanishad.

Early S. Indian Krishna devotionalism (Azhwars) is referred
to as Viraha Bhakti and there is another text on this too.

Shyamala

Shyamala Parameswaran

unread,

Oct 25, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/25/96

to

In article <Dzr80...@novice.uwaterloo.ca>,

selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) says:
>
>In article <5436c1$o...@hpindda.cup.hp.com>,
>Raghu Seshadri <sesh...@cup.hp.com> wrote:
>
>@>When it comes to Bhakthi, there is a tradition of Bhakthi,
>@>not a Tamil tradition, not a Sanskrit tradition.
>@
>@ -I don't think there is any merit in your assertion.
>@ -For example a person might be in love with another
>@ -and s/he might express it quite differently.
>@ -Say one might sing his love in a song and another might
>@ -choose to present his lover with a flower and so on..
>@ ...
>@
>@Selva wrote, on the whole, a knowledge-filled
>@post full of very interesting info, quite
>@valuable too - but I fear he has missed
>@Sri Dileepan's simple point. To take Selva's own
>@example above, while 2 persons can express
>@love very differently, they are both expressing
>@the same emotion - love. This is ALL that
>@Sri Dileepan is saying.
>
> Thanks for your complements, but your fear is
> quite unfounded. It was Mr. Dileepan who raised a strawman

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> of Sanskrit-Bhakthi and Tamil Bhakthi, not I.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Here's what Dileepan said. I reproduce from your
own post, where the attribution to Dileepan is missing.
but can easily be checked against his original post.
Please tell us again if what you choose to understand is
correct?

***begin Dileepan's quote***

>@>When it comes to Bhakthi, there is a tradition of Bhakthi,
>@>not a Tamil tradition, not a Sanskrit tradition.

***end of Dileepan's quote***

> I was talking about a *genre of literature* in Tamil and
> and the difference of literatures ( between Skt-Tamil) -
> not about 'bhakthi'.
> My point is there is no deeply moving songs like
> thEvaaram, thiruvaasagam and Aazhvaar PaadalkaL and
> such a class of literature in Sanskrit. Sanskrit literature
> does not express such an enlightened emotion. Sanskrit
> spiritual literature is mostly of the 'lemma' type and usually
> uses bland statements ( often heard from someone or as summary
> or abstract of the 'truth') and they don't have the immediacy
> and impact of tamil.

From the above it seems you are saying,

Score: Enlightened emotion
Tamil=1
Sanskrit=0

If you think the above is correct, this score should make
you content. Why, then, so much in argument and so many
inaccuracies as well ? (please see my queries to you in
previous posts).

The "lemma" type assertion about Sanskrit literature
on spirituality shows that much in that field---
including the Bhagavat-Gita As It Is, the Srimad
Bhagavatam in the main --- is yet to be read by you.

For one who has read these with an open mind would not be
able to say what you have done. It is up to you to
keep making false assertions on this and a number of
other matters [such as puranas written in 16-19th CE
and your assertion on later additions to the GITA],
despite your call for truthfulness from others.

On the use of Tamil in temples, the case is just as
it is with use of regional lang. in other parts of India.
Regional languages and Sanskrit work together elsewhere.
Check out books on Chaitanya movement/Gaudiya Vaishnavism
with regard to Bengal/Orissa/Assam and U.P/North;
the Vallabharcharya or PusttiMarg in Gujarat,
Tukaram in Maharastra and so on...

You might also be interested in V. Subramaniam's chapter
on The Origins of Bhakti in TN and the Introduction in
G.M. Bailey and I. Kesarcodi-Watson's (eds.) book on
Bhakti Studies (1992). V. Subramaniam says Aham genre
of romantic traditions and Ahattinai eroticism provided
the base and momentum for the Azhwar Bhakti outpourings;
while the Attrupadi idiom of evocative-praise for the Lord
as patron King provided the impetus for the Nyanmar Bhakti
compositions.Incidentally, the same article also states
the acceptance of the Agamic heritageof Rajopachara in
serving deities. Although the chapter is on the unique
tamil contributions to Bhakti, it recognizes how Sanskrit
traditions and literature and Tamil have worked closely.

> The first thing a true seeker ( 'bhaktha' or not) should care for
> is truthfulness. Did you honestly enquire whether what I said

BTW, Selva, a seeker must be a bhakta, for without *true*
Bhakti one cannot be a seeker.

A seeker on spiritual matters, without bhakti, might as
well go on seeking, never to find anything, no matter
how much a "true seeker" he may be.

One must be respectful of those who care for Divinity and
spirituality, wouldn't you say, even in argument?

Shyamala

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,

Oct 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/28/96

to

In article <54ohkg$e...@sjx-ixn7.ix.netcom.com>,

Shankar Iyer <sai...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>SAIRAM. Are you equally familiar with the creations of all Tamil and
>Sanskrit-speaking saints to assert thus? For example, IMHV, the
>romantic/devotional songs of Saint Jayadeva (Ashta-padis in his
>Gita-Govinda) are as much full of 'enlightened emotion' as AndAL's
>TiruppAvai the joyous spiritual experiences described by the AzhvArs.
>What is your view? Similarly, many of the shlokas in Adi Shankara's
>Soundarya Lahari and Sivananda Lahiri are very emotionally powerful.
>More recently, the massive NArAyanEyam of Bhattadri is so rich in the
>devotional content, tradition has it that each shloka was personally
>sanctioned by Lord GuruvAyurappan!

No, Mr. Iyer, I'm not equally familiar with ALL Tamil
and Sanskrit speaking saints creations. If you are familiar with ALL
the works, sure we can discuss and I'll stand to gain from you.
From the familiarity I've
with parts of Vedas, Upanishads and some of the spiritual works
in Sanskrit, I get the impression that Sanskrit works are
one or more of the following:
'ritualistic, bland statements often as if they are
abstracts gleaned or heard from others, employment of logic etc. to
prove a point or to show that something is more in line with earlier
Vedas or works etc., classifications of one thing or another,
what is God, what are the properties of God etc. etc. and of course
puraanic stories'
Enlightened Love as in Tamil is not, IMO, found in Sanskrit.
I'm to some extent familiar with Sri Jayadeva's Ashta-padis in
Gita Govinda but I don't think it is in the same genre as
AndaaL's work or AzhvaarkaL PaadalkaL.
Sri Jayadeva was supposed to have visited Tamil Country and
impressed with what he saw and heard there.
Similarly Adi Sankarar's Soundarya Lahari is in a different class
'mandhiram' . Namakeertans and Mandhirams are different, they
are good for japam.

>
>In any case, I believe we are all better off saying, 'this is good, and
>so is this'. or 'this is good, but this works even better for me',
>rather than 'this is good and that is bad'. IMHV, if praying to God
>brings you comfort and joy, doing it in Tamil or Sanskrit (or for that
>matter in any other language you feel like using to express your
>devotion) will serve you well. SAIRAM SAI 10/24/96

Mr. Iyer, the original context was -Tamil should be used
in Temple worship and that it would appeal to Tamils immensely better.
Sanskrit is NOT understood by the vast majority of Tamils
and hence the main worship should be in Tamil instead.
I've said that Sanskrit, Kannda, Telugu, Hindi etc. can be used
to augment the main worship in Tamil. However, the main worship
should be conducted in Tamil. In this connection, the
immediate appeal of Tamil and how it can quickly reach Tamil's
inner heart and how the existence of a vast
tamil spiritual literature of a deeply moving kind
can help etc. were discussed. Please understand the context.
First admit, that Tamil should be the main language of worship
in Tamil Nadu and not Sanskrit. Why can't you understand some of
simple basics first !

selvaa

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,

Oct 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/28/96

to

In article <96299.171...@uicvm.uic.edu>,

Shyamala Parameswaran <U15...@uicvm.uic.edu> wrote:
>In article <54ohkg$e...@sjx-ixn7.ix.netcom.com>, sai...@ix.netcom.com(Shankar Iyer) says:
>>
>
>other quotes deleted.
>
>>

>>SAIRAM. Are you equally familiar with the creations of all Tamil and
>>Sanskrit-speaking saints to assert thus? For example, IMHV, the
>>romantic/devotional songs of Saint Jayadeva (Ashta-padis in his
>>Gita-Govinda) are as much full of 'enlightened emotion' as AndAL's
>>TiruppAvai the joyous spiritual experiences described by the AzhvArs.
>>What is your view? Similarly, many of the shlokas in Adi Shankara's
>>Soundarya Lahari and Sivananda Lahiri are very emotionally powerful.
>>More recently, the massive NArAyanEyam of Bhattadri is so rich in the
>>devotional content, tradition has it that each shloka was personally
>>sanctioned by Lord GuruvAyurappan!
>>
>>In any case, I believe we are all better off saying, 'this is good, and
>>so is this'. or 'this is good, but this works even better for me',
>>rather than 'this is good and that is bad'. IMHV, if praying to God
>>brings you comfort and joy, doing it in Tamil or Sanskrit (or for that
>>matter in any other language you feel like using to express your
>>devotion) will serve you well. SAIRAM SAI 10/24/96
>
>

>There are two ancient sutras additionally, for those interested.
>The Narada-sutra which is an enquiry into the art of love/devotion
>or bhakti-jinasa and the Sandilya Bhakti sutras.

Thats right, thats typical of Sanskrit authors! Classifiaction,
doctrinines of Bhakthi, Tenets of Bhakti. Rules of
Bhakthi.. I've read parts of Narada-sutra..

>
>Other than this there is Bhakti-Ratnamala occuring, (not sure)
>maybe, Padma Purana (NOT of 16-19th century composition) and
>the Bhakti-philosophy contained in the Bhaktikanda Upanishad.
>

Puranas are fanciful stories created, modified, augmented
at various times to satisfy some sectarian needs.
Some of them do contain some historical information
but in its own part-true-part-fancy way.
If you want to believe that they are *all* divine revelations,
of impeccable accuracy and potency, sure, go ahead.

Britanica says Puranas are probably
written in the period 400-1000 C.E. Some puraanas are
more recent. Some hold that Vaama Purana is betwee 1500-1600.
There are Upapuraaanams, Sthalapuraanams etc.

>Early S. Indian Krishna devotionalism (Azhwars) is referred
>to as Viraha Bhakti and there is another text on this too.

>
>Shyamala

selvaa

C.R. Selvakumar

unread,

Oct 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/28/96

to

In article <54qa3s$k...@news.campus.mci.net>,

Parthasarati Dileepan <pdil...@cecasun.utc.edu> wrote:
>selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) wrote:
>
>
>> Azhvaar urges). If the word means 'Sanskrit Veda'
>> let a knowlegeable person ( let us leave Mr. Dileepan for whom
>> all this is pointless) show
>
> Making bhakthi into a comptetition between Tamil and Sanskrit which
> is what you are making this out to be, is pointless. That is what I
> said. Please look at the topic of this thread. That may give you
> some clue.

Say honestly that *you* understand this as 'comptetition
between Tamil and Sanskrit'. I didn't mean it that way.
I made an observation about a certain genres of literature.
I think it is a valid one. If not I'll correct my opinion.

>>
>> [1] Where in Vedic-Sanskrit Veda is said
>
>
> It is impossible to wake up anyone who is simply pretending to sleep.
> It is quite clear from Azhvaar's own words that they have drawn
> spiritual inspiration from the Sanskrit Vedas, PuraaNaas, etc.
> However much Prof. C.R. Selvakumar may dislike it, it is there
> for everyone to see. Thirumazhisai Azhvaar goes into esoteric

If you or someone else can cite the original Sanskrit Veda for the
two cases I had asked for that would be a start.
I've many more such questions. It is common understanding
that AzhvaarkaL got their direct vision/experience of God by
their 'inward' looking and it is not gained by
'reading and understanding' either
Sanskrit Veda or Tamil Spiritual works. *AFTER* they
get a vital insight/experience, they can *recognize* and sing
all kinds spiritual sayings ( be it from Koran or Bible or whatever
else) and they can create scores of
spiritual works of their own if they want to.
They are not translating or parroting any sanskrit works.
But their references have tamil idioms.

If Chennai's Mayoral election is described in a Sanskrit Patrika
it does not mean that Murasoli or Thinamani or one of the
Tamil or English news papers got its story from the Sanskrit Patrika.
'Events' in Krishna's life are known in India and if a Tamil
work says that Krishna ate or is fond of eating
'veNNai' ( said to be butter), it is not necessarily
from reading Sanskrit Puraana. Sanskrit Purana also might say it.
Puraanas are only one of the versions of stories circulating in the
country though oftentimes showing some sectarian biases.
There is said to be a Tamil King who fed the warring sides of
MahaBharata ( perunchORRu uthiyan sEralaathan) and I don't know
whether there is any merit in this claim or not, but it should be
clear that many stories in India are known to various people and
some of them is recorded in Sanskrit as it is in Tamil. There is
said to be a Tamil Mahabharatam and a story of Rama in Sangam times
and I don't know whether they are valid claims or not, but that
the stories and episodes were known to tamils appears reasonable.
Tamil people need not have read from Sanskrit works and for all
one can guess, Sanskrit work might be just one version of the story.

More than anything else, AzhvaarkaL are not saying some mundane
stories. When they say eating veNNai, they don't necessarily
mean eating butter. When they say 'paaRkadal' it does not
merely mean ocean of milk ( in tamil).

> for everyone to see. Thirumazhisai Azhvaar goes into esoteric
> and technical aspects of metaphysics whose source is in Sanskrit
> writings. Of course the Azhvaar pays homage to Tamil. Sri Vasihnavas
> revere Tamil as much as Sanskrit writings. Showing that the Azhvaar
> pays homage to Tamil does not prove they did not draw inspiration
> from Sanskrit Vedas, PuraaNaas, etc.. When the Azhvaars celebrate

Azhvaar 'praises' this or 'pays homage to this' etc. are
the understanding of some. What is this 'praising' and 'paying
homage' ? These very words show the 'thinking at a distance' !

When certain pronouncements
found in Sanskrit works are pointed out to him, he might have
*recognized* and further qualified them as saints often do,
but it does not mean s/he was inspired ( or learned) from it.
What Azhvaar means when he refers to a popular story has to be
carefully looked into. Tamil idioms play when he makes such
references.

> the ten avathaars of Sriapathi where is the inspiration coming from?
> When they celebrate the legend of Emperumaan teaching the Vedas to
> Brahmma, what Vedas are they talking about? There are scores and
> scores of these references from almost all the Azhvaars.

How do you know that the ten avathaaras are from Sanskrit and not
from popular stories prevalent in India ? Would you accept that
Vedas are written down only in 1040 AD ( the earliest available)
and hence it is probably only that recent ? I'll answer this question
about Vedas ( Emperumaan teaching the Veda to Brahma),
once I get a satisfactory answer for my questions.

>
> Tamil as well as Sanskrit writings served as inspiration for Azhvaars.

Neither Tamil nor Sanskrit writings served as inspiration.
Thirumazhisai Azhvaar says his heart was nurtured by God by
sowing the Good Tamil. It does not mean Azhvaar read some tamil
works and boom he got his enlightenment. It is fair to assume that
he must have thought and deliberated in Tamil, but mere intellectual
enquiries can not lead to enlightenment. Deep 'transforming' and
transcending inner quest, with the Grace of God, can - according
to those who know.

> Claiming that the Azhvaars did not draw inspiration from Sanskrit
> works, or claiming that they simply paid lip service out of some sort
> of fear is nothing but distorting the truth. Doing this deliberately
> reveals the malice in their hearts. So be it.
>

Dr. Ganesan said that and for a good reason, though I
think it is not applicable to AzhvaarkaL or NaayanmaarkaL.
There are cases to prove his point and it shows the
sectarian attitude of some pro-sanskritists.
If you understand it as malice in their heart, thats fine.

> I may or may not find time to respond to this continuing campaign
> to misrepresent Azhvaar's words. I urge the interested nettors
> not to be swayed by a few selected quotes posted with an ulterior
> agenda and misleading interpretation. If you are interested, please
> read the Azhvaar's words for yourself.
>

Are those who write that 'Rg vEda saaram', 'yajur vEda saaram'
etc. for AzhvaarkaL PaadalkaL
and those who tell the meanings they understand from
AzhvaarkaL PaadalkaL do so without 'ulterior agenda' ?
If someone asks how it becomes 'ulterior agenda' ?

I asked where in Sanskrit Veda, the Azhvaar's words are
drawn from as claimed by Mr.Dileepan, and now he charges this as
'continuing campaign to misrepresent Azhvaar's words',
'ulterior agenda', 'misleading interpretation' !!
Mr. Dileepan is a 'non'-starter ( meaning 'not just a starter') and
and he is already cracking up like this ?! :-)

>
>
>-- Dileepan
>

selvaa

Shankar Iyer

unread,

Oct 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/28/96

to

In <DzypA...@novice.uwaterloo.ca> selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R.

Selvakumar) writes:
>
>In article <54ohkg$e...@sjx-ixn7.ix.netcom.com>,
>Shankar Iyer <sai...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>

>>SAIRAM. Are you equally familiar with the creations of all Tamil and
>>Sanskrit-speaking saints to assert thus? For example, IMHV, the
>>romantic/devotional songs of Saint Jayadeva (Ashta-padis in his
>>Gita-Govinda) are as much full of 'enlightened emotion' as AndAL's
>>TiruppAvai the joyous spiritual experiences described by the AzhvArs.
>>What is your view? Similarly, many of the shlokas in Adi Shankara's
>>Soundarya Lahari and Sivananda Lahiri are very emotionally powerful.
>>More recently, the massive NArAyanEyam of Bhattadri is so rich in the
>>devotional content, tradition has it that each shloka was personally
>>sanctioned by Lord GuruvAyurappan!
>
>

>>In any case, I believe we are all better off saying, 'this is good,
and
>>so is this'. or 'this is good, but this works even better for me',
>>rather than 'this is good and that is bad'. IMHV, if praying to God
>>brings you comfort and joy, doing it in Tamil or Sanskrit (or for that
>>matter in any other language you feel like using to express your
>>devotion) will serve you well. SAIRAM SAI 10/24/96
>
>

> Mr. Iyer, the original context was -Tamil should be used
> in Temple worship and that it would appeal to Tamils immensely
better.
> Sanskrit is NOT understood by the vast majority of Tamils
> and hence the main worship should be in Tamil instead.
> I've said that Sanskrit, Kannda, Telugu, Hindi etc. can be used
> to augment the main worship in Tamil. However, the main worship
> should be conducted in Tamil. In this connection, the
> immediate appeal of Tamil and how it can quickly reach Tamil's
> inner heart and how the existence of a vast
> tamil spiritual literature of a deeply moving kind
> can help etc. were discussed. Please understand the context.
> First admit, that Tamil should be the main language of worship
> in Tamil Nadu and not Sanskrit. Why can't you understand some of
> simple basics first !
>

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

SAIRAM, dear Shri Selvakumar. Many thanks for detailing your views. No,
I am not a scholar, and it is clear your views are formed on the basis
of your learning. I grew up to believe 'kaRRadu kaiman alavu' and it is
from this base that I find bold, sweeping assertions uncomfortable to
digest. That is why I joined this issue. My attempt is to merely inject
a greater sense of tolerence to the discussion. (However, I am not
manifest divinity that I can hope to be the shepherd boy that opened
AvvaiyAr's mind.)

Clearly, the spiritual benefits you seem to derive from worship in Tamil
are greater than what you derive when the worship is in Sanskrit. It is
quite possible that you are motivated by the spirit of 'yAn peRRa inbam
iv-vyiagamum peRa vEndum' and are being so normative relating to what
is best for the others. IMHV, the benefits derived may differ for
others.

All I have tried to articulate is the view that its better we have more
choices than fewer - which you seem to accept - and let us choose what
works for us for any given situation. (For example, I derive solace
from reciting Soundarya Lahari and feel SankarA's love and bliss: I
feel the same while reciting ThiruppAvai during Marghazi. I would like
to hear both in our temples. Similarly, SankarA's Subrahmanya Bhujangam
is as much a joy-inducer for me, as Arunagiri's Thiruppugazh. I would
like to hear both in our temples.)

Respectfully yours, SAIRAM. SAI 10/28/96

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Oct 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/28/96

to

From: selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar)

@Selva wrote, on the whole, a knowledge-filled
@post full of very interesting info, quite
@valuable too - but I fear he has missed
@Sri Dileepan's simple point. To take Selva's own
@example above, while 2 persons can express
@love very differently, they are both expressing
@the same emotion - love. This is ALL that
@Sri Dileepan is saying.

- Thanks for your complements, but your fear is
- quite unfounded. It was Mr. Dileepan who raised a strawman
- of Sanskrit-Bhakthi and Tamil Bhakthi, not I.

With all due respect, that is not
my recollection at all; -

but considering that
we are all now agreed that there is
only one bhakti - there is no sanskrit-bhakti
or tamil-bhakti or chinese-bhakti or cobol-bhakti -
let's celebrate this rare happy agreement in
a usenet argument :-)

- I was talking about a *genre of literature* in Tamil and
- and the difference of literatures ( between Skt-Tamil) -

- not about 'bhakthi'.

I understand that.

- My point is there is no deeply moving songs like
- thEvaaram, thiruvaasagam and Aazhvaar PaadalkaL and
- such a class of literature in Sanskrit. Sanskrit literature
- does not express such an enlightened emotion. Sanskrit

It must be obvious to a highly intelligent
person such as yourself that only people
who are well-versed in both languages can
make judgments of this type. And none of
the great scholars -I- know who are/were
pundits in both have done that at all.

- spiritual literature is mostly of the 'lemma' type and usually
- uses bland statements ( often heard from someone or as summary
- or abstract of the 'truth') and they don't have the immediacy
- and impact of tamil.

This only shows that you are a native tamil
speaker not at home in Sanskrit; for such
a person, nothing will have the impact of
tamil. I agree with that.

For people who are comfortable in Sanskrit,
Srimad Bhagavatam or the Vaishnava Padaavali
or Soundarya Lahari have the capacity to
bring bhakti's ecstasy too, you know.

Your statement is true, for yourself
and people similar to yourself. It is
not a universally true statement.

- The first thing a true seeker ( 'bhaktha' or not) should care for
- is truthfulness. Did you honestly enquire whether what I said
- is valid or not ?

It is valid, for you. It is not universally
valid.

I have more to say about your usage of
the word "honestly" below.

- The current situation is seriously unsatisfactory for tamils.
- If you look back you'll notice that to enter into Temples,
- people have to agitate; now to use tamil in tamil nadu temples,
- people have to agitate; but you give
- lectures about what is democracy !

Which lecture do you have
problems with ? Please cite it and I
will be happy to go over it.

Are you under the impression that head
count alone should decide EVERYTHING in a
democracy ? I have already explained the
problems with a mere-head-count argument.
Did you read them ?

- Is denying the majority their
- basic right and aspiration democracy ?!

I assume this is merely rhetorical.
Do you expect anyone to say anything
other than "no" to this question ?

- Why don't you first
- honestly admit that Tamil should be the primary language of
- worship in Tamil Nadu. It will only increase the spiritual awareness.

May I request you to avoid words like
"honestly" in your appeals ? I am sure
you don't mean to be insulting, but
it sounds that way, as if without
such cautions I will be dishonest.
ALL my writings reflect my HONEST
opinion, sincerely thought out. It is
not as if I know I am wrong but knowingly
writing lies for the fun of it.
If I can agree with you, I will,
and if I cannot, I won't, for what I
consider good reasons. Honestly.

I have already written my thoughts
on the subject. There are NO tamil temples
in Tamil Nadu, they are all Hindu temples.
People don't go there to worship
Tamil, they go there to worship hindu
deities. The temples don't "belong"
to tamils only, they are for ALL
hindus. The cause of Tamil can be
fought in other arenas; the temples are
for hinduism only, not tamilism
or sanskritism.

Spiritual awareness was very high in
the centuries past, even with Sanskrit
in the temples. Tinkering with
the archana langauge is not going to make
a spiritually blind person come to
bhakti. A bhakta can sing and worship in
Tamil even now to his heart's content.
The ONLY result of your demand will
be the disappearance of Sanskrit
from the temples, there will be no
other result. Did Sanskrit prevent the
Azhwars from writing their hymns, from
those hymns being revered, from the
bhaktas in TN progressing in bhakti ?
Ofcourse not. So this is a red herring.

- My point was not 'academic', but to add to the sentiments made
- here that temple worship in Tamil Nadu should be in Tamil.

I was already aware of the great
beauty in the Azhwar hymns, the
prabhandam, the devaram etc. They
are already being chanted in many
TN temples. So this point does not
add to the current topic; I know
=you= don't want to kick Sanskrit out,
but that will be the only result of
such demands. The cause of bhakti
will be just as precarious as it is
now, if not worse..

Let the few bhaktas now left in the
current generation not fritter away
their energies in diversionary
causes ( there are plenty of political
types for that ); let them focus
on ALL the ways bhakti can be practised,
instead of fighting over which
particular one. A famous tamil
praise of god goes that " you need
a crore eyes " to see him; similarly
you need all the languages to
sing his glory. Why limit ourselves ?

RS

Shyamala Parameswaran

unread,

Oct 28, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/28/96

to

In article <DzyuH...@novice.uwaterloo.ca>,
selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) says:
to Dileepan

> I've many more such questions. It is common understanding
> that AzhvaarkaL got their direct vision/experience of God by
> their 'inward' looking and it is not gained by
> 'reading and understanding' either
> Sanskrit Veda or Tamil Spiritual works.

Of course, introspection is the key in self-realization.
But a "vision" of God did not occur to the Azhwars one
fine day, or, boom (as you say, enjoyably), following
months/years of looking within. Indian kingdoms, in previous
centuries, has continuously transmitted ideas across
borders and the intelligentsia was always receptive and
absorbent of ideas, especially in the spiritual
area. We are indeed fortunate to have been
born in a land of intense spirituality and high
intellectualism. So much harm has been done by
British/Western type portrayals of a highly evolved
civilization, it is incredible. So giving credence
to those who have remained sincere to our traditions is
in our best interests, if we wish to restore a truly
outstanding heritage that is fast getting neglected
under limiting and misdirected "politics."

Just take a good look at people on subways and places
in "advanced" and "advancing" places. The "kaLai"
and happiness of a spiritual awakening is sorely
missing. Advancement in these times seems to more of
pettiness and pouting of the "my pee-wee is bigger
(or better, or whatever)" type arguments. That is,
in addition to a general indulgence in food, drink, smoke,
sex and mundane work-dollar enslavement.

I think scholars in ancient non-English influenced
India were brilliant as they made Sanskrit the link
language and created an environment to share. This, in
an India where people hold in common many aspects of
culture and yet are separated linguistically. It
was probably the result of some persevering "Sanskritists"
(many of whom were in Tamil lands, since Agastya) and
who wrote *without* petty provincial anthropocentric
limitedness. Thus, the "exporting" of ideas across
linguistically separated regions became feasible because
of visionaries. Elsehwere in the country, Sanskrit works
were quickly "imported" as it got translated into the
regional medium. There are innumerable examples.
I wish all Tamilians would read the Srimad Bhagavatam
in translated tamil (or, in English as I do) and enjoy its
opulence.

Read literature on Bhakti poets and saints *all over* India,
you will be amazed at how they travelled in those
centuries of no railways and bimaanams and how the
bhakti movement flourished in the vernacular all over and
simultaneously in Sanskrit, it is sparkling and exciting
as it is inspiring.

And yes, the truly learned of those days were neither
exempt nor hesitant to admit of pervasive influences.
Alberuni, who had no motives at all other than that
of a scholar (A Muslim one at that!), writes of the
widespread and pervasive influence of the BhGita and SB
in the 900 CE as found in his travels.

The influence of the Vedas seems to have been equally
potent for Azhwars, the pioneers of a Bhakti tradition
in the vernacular, which is not to say they copied from
it or parrotted it in anyway.

>
> Azhvaar 'praises' this or 'pays homage to this' etc. are
> the understanding of some. What is this 'praising' and 'paying
> homage' ? These very words show the 'thinking at a distance' !

Among Vaishanava Tamilians, of whom Dileepan, Raghu and
Vasudha Nayarayanan (The Way and the Goal: Expressions
of Devotion of an Early Sri Vaisanava Tradition, 1987)
are *some* of the many sincere adherents, the faith rests
on *how* they understand. This understanding is more
personal and direct for them. For a linguistic
analyst who merely wishes to tell them their understanding
(and faith!) is "thinking at a distance" while always
consistently putting down Sanskrit works, the connections
of how the adherents perceive and recognize the Vedas
in the Azhwar works will always remain an enigma.

BTW, even Sambandar and Appar refer more than metaphorically
to the Vedas and Sundaramurti refers to Bhima and Arjuna
(Aryans? or these Pandavas Dravidians?) This I fear to quote
because it is translated (even if it is by a non-brahmin Tamil,
a Christian Tamil, actually) version with the text providing
both the Tamil script and the English translations. I know
Selva will say the the Vedas, Vedangam or similar words
in these hymns do not refer to the "Aryan" or "Brahminical"
vedas! Or that I am trying to codify into tenets or rules
something that is not my business. So let me get out with
my tail and skin intact.

Shyamala

Parthasarati Dileepan

unread,

Oct 29, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/29/96

to

selv...@valluvar.uwaterloo.ca (C.R. Selvakumar) wrote:
>In article <54qa3s$k...@news.campus.mci.net>,
>Parthasarati Dileepan <pdil...@cecasun.utc.edu> wrote:

[..]

>>
>> Tamil as well as Sanskrit writings served as inspiration for Azhvaars.
>
> Neither Tamil nor Sanskrit writings served as inspiration.
> Thirumazhisai Azhvaar says his heart was nurtured by God by
> sowing the Good Tamil.

This is an interesting concept - the writings that
were already available did not serve as inspiration,
but the language Tamil, a mere collection of symbols,
and syntax did. I can't accept this. I submit that
when the Azhvaar says "vidhaiyaaga naRRamizhai" he
is not talking about kuRRiyalikaram and oRRaLapedai,
but about the writings that were available to him
such as Paripaadal and the first three thiruvandhaathees, etc.
Similarly, when he says "vEdhan^ool OdhukinRadhu uNmai,
allathillai maRRu uraikkilE," he is talking about
the Sanskrit vEdhaas.

> It does not mean Azhvaar read some tamil
> works and boom he got his enlightenment. It is fair to assume that
> he must have thought and deliberated in Tamil,

What did he deliberate in Tamil? If it is something totally
abstract and nothing to do with what had already been written
in Sanskrit and Tamil, how come he is talking about "Narayana",
"ainthum ainthum ainthumaay," "aaRumaaRumaaRumaay", etc. If
what had already been written did not play any role, why did
not the Azhvaar come up with something entirely new. Is it
a total coincidence that 12 aazhvaars with close to 4000 verses
just happen to think of the same things that were written
in Tamil and Sanskrit before them?

If the source of inspiration is strictly from within, then it
is hard to explain why the Azhvaars sang about the Lord praised
in Tamil literature of earlier time period, such as Paripadal, and
Sanskrit puraaNaas such as Vishnu puraaNam. No one is suggesting
that the Azhvaars were simply parroting Vedic ideas. They
clearly gave it a sublime dravidian flavor. But somehow it is
very difficult for Professor C.R. Selvakumar to see that the object
of their veneration was an entity that was glorified in both Tamil
and Sanskrit literature from which the Azhvaars drew inspiration and
started a wave of bhakthi tradition that lives to this day, not
only in the land of Tamils, but over the entire world.

[...]

>> I may or may not find time to respond to this continuing campaign
>> to misrepresent Azhvaar's words. I urge the interested nettors
>> not to be swayed by a few selected quotes posted with an ulterior
>> agenda and misleading interpretation. If you are interested, please
>> read the Azhvaar's words for yourself.
>>
>
> Are those who write that 'Rg vEda saaram', 'yajur vEda saaram'
> etc. for AzhvaarkaL PaadalkaL
> and those who tell the meanings they understand from
> AzhvaarkaL PaadalkaL do so without 'ulterior agenda' ?
> If someone asks how it becomes 'ulterior agenda' ?
>
> I asked where in Sanskrit Veda, the Azhvaar's words are
> drawn from as claimed by Mr.Dileepan, and now he charges this as
> 'continuing campaign to misrepresent Azhvaar's words',
> 'ulterior agenda', 'misleading interpretation' !!
> Mr. Dileepan is a 'non'-starter ( meaning 'not just a starter') and
> and he is already cracking up like this ?! :-)
>

This is all well and good, but it is Professor C.R. Selvakumar
who is free with the charge of misrepresntation and distortion
whenever people take views that are not consistent with his own.
Be that as it may, from what the professor has written so far
on this subject I sincerely feel he is distorting the words of
Azhvaars.

-- Dileepan

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Oct 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/30/96

to

I said -

: Anyone who contradicts the authentic
: statement of a person about his
: own mental development runs the
: risk of looking silly - because
: we don't anyone's claim ofbeing a
: mindreader of dead persons seriously.

That should have been " we don't TAKE
anyone's claim ... "

RS

Raghu Seshadri

unread,

Oct 30, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/30/96

to

Selva writes -

: I've many more such questions. It is common understanding

: that AzhvaarkaL got their direct vision/experience of God by
: their 'inward' looking and it is not gained by
: 'reading and understanding' either
: Sanskrit Veda or Tamil Spiritual works. *AFTER* they
: get a vital insight/experience, they can *recognize* and sing
: all kinds spiritual sayings ( be it from Koran or Bible or whatever
: else) and they can create scores of
: spiritual works of their own if they want to.

We are not discussing what they CAN;
we are discussing what they DID.

They CAN recognize truth in the
Koran or Bible or Startrek dialogs.
But they DIDN'T. Lets not waste
time discussing what they CAN.

Here we have a set of people who
have given their own personal
testimony to their intellectual
and spiritual background; 8 centuries
later a scholar shows up who
says that it didn't happen that way
and he knows better :-)

How is it that you know better
than the Azhwars themselves, dear Selva ?

: They are not translating or parroting any sanskrit works.

: But their references have tamil idioms.

Ofcourse. If their mother tongue was
Chinese, it would have Chinese idioms.

If you read Chinese buddhist works,
they have a lot of Chinese idioms.
Is that proof that the Buddha was
Chinese ? :-)

: If Chennai's Mayoral election is described in a Sanskrit Patrika

: it does not mean that Murasoli or Thinamani or one of the
: Tamil or English news papers got its story from the Sanskrit Patrika.
: 'Events' in Krishna's life are known in India and if a Tamil
: work says that Krishna ate or is fond of eating
: 'veNNai' ( said to be butter), it is not necessarily
: from reading Sanskrit Puraana. Sanskrit Purana also might say it.

Even if the concerned Azhwar EXPLICITLY
states that his source is the Purana ?

Why do you doubt the honesty of the
Azhwars so much ?

: Tamil people need not have read from Sanskrit works and for all

: one can guess, Sanskrit work might be just one version of the story.

You can guess all you want, but
the moment your guess contradicts
the explicit statement of one
of the Azhwars, you have to stop
guessing :-)

We can guess all we want about the
identity of the person who had the
biggest influence on Hemingway,
but the moment we read in his
autobiography that it was Mark Twain,
we can stop guessing and accept it.

Anyone who contradicts the authentic
statement of a person about his
own mental development runs the
risk of looking silly - because
we don't anyone's claim ofbeing a
mindreader of dead persons seriously.

: When certain pronouncements

: found in Sanskrit works are pointed out to him, he might have
: *recognized* and further qualified them as saints often do,
: but it does not mean s/he was inspired ( or learned) from it.

Even if he says so ?

How did you become a greater authority
on the spritual development of the Azhwars
than the Azhwars themselves ?
I mean no disrespect by this
question. I'd like to know how
you achieved this rare state.

: How do you know that the ten avathaaras are from Sanskrit and not

: from popular stories prevalent in India ? Would you accept that

How do you know they are not ?

RS

Rajah Skandarajah

unread,

Oct 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/31/96

to

Shyamala Parameswaran wrote:

> BTW, even Sambandar and Appar refer more than metaphorically
> to the Vedas and Sundaramurti refers to Bhima and Arjuna

Yes, but they were strict Shaivites, not Vaishnavites.

Rajah.

Shankar Iyer

unread,

Oct 31, 1996, 3:00:00 AM10/31/96

to

In <3278CD...@skule.ecf.toronto.edu> Rajah Skandarajah
<ska...@skule.ecf.toronto.edu> writes:

>
>Shyamala Parameswaran wrote:
>
>> BTW, Selva, a seeker must be a bhakta, for without *true*
>> Bhakti one cannot be a seeker.
>

>Why can't a seeker be a Jnani?

>
>> A seeker on spiritual matters, without bhakti, might as
>> well go on seeking, never to find anything, no matter
>> how much a "true seeker" he may be.
>

>Nope, sincerity is what a "true seeker" needs, be he
>a Bhakta or Jnani or anything for that matter.
>
> Rajah.
---------------------------------------------

SAIRAM. In the gItA, Lord Krishna tells Arjuna that there are four
kinds of worshippers:

'chatur-vidhA bhajantE mAm janAhA su-krutinaha arjuna
Arthaha, jignyAsuhu, arthArthi jnAni cha bharata-rishaba'

Arjuna, there are four kinds of virtuous people who worship Me.
O bellwether of BharatAs, they are: the distressed, the seeker
of knowledge, the seeker of wealth, and the wise.

(Bhagavad-gItA Chapter 7, verse 16)

From this, we can charitable grant that jnAnis and all the others above
are bhaktAs (worshippers). SAIRAM. SAI 10/31/96