[racchabanda] What did Bharatamuni actually write?

[Akkiraju Bhattiprolu]

Here is a review/report on the recent women writers conference happened in
Hyderabad. There are many interesting comments that writers have
apparently made in the conference. I want to see anyone have any comments
on this whole affair.

http://www.andhrajyothy.com/editshow.asp?qry=/2005/feb/14vividha2

Let me drive your attentioin to one specific remark on BharatuDu, the
creator of Bharata nAtyaM. It goes like... స్త్రీని అంగాంగ వర్ణనలు
చేసీన్ భరతుడు.....

What did BharatuDu actually write? The little I know, he is a creator of
the specific dance form. Did he write any kAvyAs besides this? Or the
comment is about the art form itself?

Thanks
-Akki







To Post a message, send it to: racch...@yahoogroups.com

This message is converted into Telugu script by Ramarao Kanneganti's program

[Sreenivas Paruchuri]

> http://www.andhrajyothy.com/editshow.asp?qry=/2005/feb/14vividha2
>
> Let me drive your attentioin to one specific remark on BharatuDu, the
> creator of Bharata nAtyaM. It goes like... స్త్రీని అంగాంగ వర్ణనలు
> చేసీన్ భరతుడు.....
>
> What did BharatuDu actually write? The little I know, he is a creator

In fact I wanted to attend that seminar, but could reach Hyderabad only on
30th morning and by the time I reached Ravindrabharati they were about to
wind up the last session.

Well, I donot want to comment neither on Satyavati-gaaru's above writeup,
nor Volga-gaaru's earlier review of same seminar.

re: నాట్యశాస్త్ర attributed to "bharata", this is what "Encyclopaedia
Britannica" says: "[...] a detailed treatise and handbook on dramatic art
that deals with all aspects of the classical Sanskrit theatre. It is
believed to have been written before the 3rd century by the mythic Brahman
sage and priest Bharata. Its many chapters contain detailed treatment of all
the diverse arts that are embodied in the classical Indian concept of the
drama, including dance, […]

That should answer your question, without going into interpretations and
insights provided by mRNaalini gaaru.

Incidentally it was maanavalli raamakRshNakavi, who first critically edited
the text, popularly known as MR Kavi's Baroda edition.

Regards,
Sreenivas

--
Lassen Sie Ihren Gedanken freien Lauf... z.B. per FreeSMS
GMX bietet bis zu 100 FreeSMS/Monat: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/mail

[J. K. Mohana Rao]

--- Sreenivas Paruchuri <sre...@gmx.de> wrote:


> Incidentally it was maanavalli raamakRshNakavi, who first critically edited
> the text, popularly known as MR Kavi's Baroda edition.
>

This book in Sanskrit is available in the Million Book
Project. Besides being a treatise on dancing, the
book also is one of the first books on Chandas SAstra,
after agnipurANa.

Regards! - J K Mohana Rao





__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

[J. K. Mohana Rao]

--- Akkiraju Bhattiprolu <pr...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Let me drive your attentioin to one specific remark on BharatuDu, the
> creator of Bharata nAtyaM. It goes like... స్త్రీని అంగాంగ వర్ణనలు
> చేసీన్ భరతుడు.....
>

Is there any telugu or Sanskrit classic without the
అంగాంగ వర్ణనలు? kAlidAsa did it even for the
mother of goddesses pArvati. That was the vogue
of those days. One must not judge a different
bygone era from the standards and mores of the
present one.

Regards! - mOhana






__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

[Sreenivas Paruchuri]

> book also is one of the first books on Chandas SAstra,
> after agnipurANa.

For ChandO-inclined Mohanarao-gaaru :-) its one of the first books on
prosody, and for poetics-inclined me :-) its one of the first books on
poetics. As you see, its a text not just on "dance".

JMR-gaaru, why is there such a big gap between pingaLa's first (?) treatise
on prosody and అగ్నిపురాణ? Or, are there other texts dealing with prosody
between these two?

Regards,
Sreenivas

--
DSL Komplett von GMX +++ Supergünstig und stressfrei einsteigen!
AKTION "Kein Einrichtungspreis" nutzen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl

[Viplav Reddy]

> In fact I wanted to attend that seminar, but could reach Hyderabad only on
> 30th morning and

is there any event in literary circles that does not get to the notice
of Sri Paruchuri?

can i make a specific request, as and when he gets a note on any
future events and details, can he post it on the groups calender or
just alert the group? I was not planning on attending any but atleast
some significant events such as above would be covered as we take
notice as a group, I could be wrong, but no harm done in trying, I
hope.

The article reads & quotes Navanita Devasena saying, holding a
literary meet exclusively for women literature by women is a departure
in the thinking of sahitya akademi -- conveys the impression that this
is a first -- can anyone confirm that?

I think in the current era, feminist writers are the first among those
describing womens aMgaaMga varNanalu, is that not what was said about
some from Tamilnadu? And, may the future writers smile on this bygone
era --

rgds, viplav

[sree...@ghantasala.info]

Indeed! I was surprised to find this varNana even in religious works like
Soundarya Lahari (I was idly looking through a translation once).

Personally, I think the British conquest imposed Victorian ideals of morality on
India, which then lived on permanently here, while the rest of the world moved
on. The "ancients" were far more liberated than us, it seems.

- Sreenadh

Quoting "J. K. Mohana Rao" <jkm...@yahoo.com>:

> Is there any telugu or Sanskrit classic without the
> అంగాంగ వర్ణనలు? kAlidAsa did it even for the
> mother of goddesses pArvati. That was the vogue
> of those days. One must not judge a different
> bygone era from the standards and mores of the
> present one.

[Sreenivas Paruchuri]

> Personally, I think the British conquest imposed Victorian ideals of
> morality on
> India, which then lived on permanently here, while the rest of the world
> moved
> on. The "ancients" were far more liberated than us, it seems.

First, here is some సొంత డబ్బా. This is what I once posted on RMIM irt
above
topic.

http://tinyurl.com/6cbp7

(http://groups.google.com/groupsq=Sreenivas+Victorian&hl=de&lr=&selm=7fnpep%242d%241%40news.uni-paderborn.de&rnum=1
)

Viplav gaaru asked:

> literary meet exclusively for women literature by women is a departure
> in the thinking of sahitya akademi -- conveys the impression that this
> is a first -- can anyone confirm that?

I did attend a literary meet, *exclusively* for women writers, in Summer
2000, organized by *Sahitya Akademi*. I may be wrong about the
year.(Akkiraju and/or Suresh, who were also there, could correct me.) It was
a 2-3 day event and was conducted in Telugu university campus, in Public
Gardens. and vividly rememr meeting Jnanapeeth award winner Indira Goswamy
(thanks to Prof. Bh. Krishnamurti for kindly introducing her) there. I don't
remember under what 'title' did the 2000 meet in Hyderabad run, but the
latest one is certainly not the 'first for women'.

Regards,
Sreenivas

--
DSL Komplett von GMX +++ Supergünstig und stressfrei einsteigen!
AKTION "Kein Einrichtungspreis" nutzen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl

[J. K. Mohana Rao]

--- sree...@ghantasala.info wrote:

>
> Indeed! I was surprised to find this varNana even in religious works like
> Soundarya Lahari (I was idly looking through a translation once).
>

The topic you raise always puzzled me in the sense
that the authors of such books were
సన్యాసులు, that too as బ్రహ్మచారులు. On one
hand, they were supposed to lead a celibate life.
On the other hand they wrote poems describing
అంగాంగ వర్ణన. How do these two go together?

This message is in not written to belittle the
ఇంద్రియనిగ్రహ of the saints and seers.

Regards! - mOhana


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Hemantha Kumar Pamarthy]

I think it is only natural. Mind yearns for more of what is prohibited. Isn=
't it? :-))

Best wishes
Hemantha Kumar =A0

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 JK.Mohana Rao wrote :
>The topic you raise always puzzled me in the sense
>that the authors of such books were
>సన్యాసులు, that too as బ్రహ్మచారులు. On one
>hand, they were supposed to lead a celibate life.
>On the other hand they wrote poems describing
>అంగాంగ వర్ణన. How do these two go together?

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[s_pamarty]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "J. K. Mohana Rao" <jkmrao@y...>
wrote:

----

> The topic you raise always puzzled me in the sense
> that the authors of such books were
> సన్యాసులు, that too as బ్రహ్మచారులు. On one
> hand, they were supposed to lead a celibate life.
> On the other hand they wrote poems describing
> అంగాంగ వర్ణన. How do these two go together?

----

mOhana rAvu gAru:

I know answering this is like showing a candle to the sun. Please
forgive me if I overstepped.

సదృశం చేష్టతే స్వస్యాః
ప్రకృతేర్జ్ఞానవానపి
ప్రకృతిం యాంతి భూతాని
నిగ్రహః కిం కరిష్యతి? -- భగవద్గీత 3:33

ఎంతటి జ్ఞానవంతుడైననూ తన ప్రకృతి కనురూపముగనే వర్తించును.
ప్రాణులన్నియూ తమతమ ప్రకృతి ననుగమించెడివే. అట్టి యెడ నిగ్రహమేమి
చేయగలదు?

In Indian mythology too, Indra wouldn't have had his way all the time
if they both didn't go together. He seems to have successfully
utilised the services of raMBhA, UrvaSI, mEnakA, tilOttamA etc. at all
times.

Just as familiarity breeds contempt, perhaps abstinence breeds craving
too. :-)

With best wishes

Satya

[Viplav Reddy]

Hemantha Kumar wrote:

> I think it is only natural. Mind yearns for more of what is prohibited. Isn't
> it? :-))

I think the point was it (such descriptions/speaking openly) was not
prohibited (before the so-called victorian influence).

How do you explain it now, having said, mind explored more of what was
prohibited.

I plead ignorance, but muni's don't mean celibate, unmarried etc., it
is again may very well be a glorification of an identity the latter
day saints tried to project :-)?

Just thinking aloud, kanchi peeThaM seems to be more in line with the
ancient times, now it is to be seen in the right spirit. We have come
full circle & I hope in future (a thousand years from now) we do not
see celibacy or brahmacharyaM as a litmus test for sanyaasulu --

regards, viplav

[J. K. Mohana Rao]

--- Viplav Reddy <vipla...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Hemantha Kumar wrote:
>
> I plead ignorance, but muni's don't mean celibate, unmarried etc., it
> is again may very well be a glorification of an identity the latter
> day saints tried to project :-)?
>

It is true that Rshis like vasishTha were married.
My question pertained to the author of
sauMdaryalahari and such other mathAdhipatis.
From time immemorial it is the custom of piThas
like that to initiate only brahmachAris as
swamis to head the respective maths. The only
exception seems to be (as far as I know) the
Raghavendra Math. rAghavEMdrasvAmi was
married when he took sanyAsa. At the time
of sanyAsa he took తమలపాకులు from his
wife sarasvatI across a గడాప. That is
why handing over things across the doorstep
to a spouse is prohibited in certain communities.

Did people like sauMdaryalahari's author get the said
knowledge by reading other classics? Or did they just
describe all that anatomy in a matter-of-fact
fashion like a surgeon making an incision on
a human body leaving all emotions aside?

Regards! - J K Mohana Rao

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?

Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

[J. K. Mohana Rao]

--- Sreenivas Paruchuri <sre...@gmx.de> wrote:

> why is there such a big gap between pingaLa's first (?) treatise
> on prosody and అగ్నిపురాణ? Or, are there other texts dealing with prosody
> between these two?
>

Certain vRttas like SArdUlavikrIDita, vasaMtatilaka
were in use since the time Sanskrit kAvyAs came
into being. Mostly vEdic Chandas was used in
Vedas and purANAs. Even Bhasa, probabaly the first
drmatist used these vRttas. piMgala seems to have
established a sort of theoretical foundation and
extended it to name new vRttas. Again, fortunately
or unfortunately, even in Sanskrit, only a few
vRttas were used in kAvyAs. Most of the new
vRttas occur only in dramas. In kAvyAs like
kumArasaMbhava, only one vRtta is used in a
canto, except for the beginning and the end.

piMgala's seems to be the first detailed text on
prosody. The metres in prAkRta and apabhraMSa
were more of the mAtra-based variety. These
are gathered in prAkRta-piMgala. But even before
that these were there in Bharata's nATyaSAstra.
These generally go by the name gAtha (poem).
jAnASrayI, a later book on prosody mentions some
of these. People would remember my recent article
on jAnASraI where a new system of gaNas was presented.

Regards! - J K Mohana Rao




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?

The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
http://my.yahoo.com

[Srinivas Nagulapalli]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Sri J. K. Mohana Rao gAru wrote:

> --- sreenadh@g... wrote:
> >
> > Indeed! I was surprised to find this varNana even in religious
works like
> > Soundarya Lahari (I was idly looking through a translation once).
> >
> The topic you raise always puzzled me in the sense
> that the authors of such books were
> సన్యాసులు, that too as బ్రహ్మచారులు. On one
> hand, they were supposed to lead a celibate life.
> On the other hand they wrote poems describing
> అంగాంగ వర్ణన. How do these two go together?

I am not sure I see the dichotomy. It was only a rushi
who could write a classic compendium on kamasUtra too:-)
Also, it is my understanding, that the so called gotras
which people have are all names of rushis- who had progeny.
And they quote Janaka as one of the greatest sanyaasins and
j~nAnis, yet he was a king.

On a related note, I recall a humorous repartee given by MADugula
Nagaphani Sarma gAru in an AvadhanaM. Some one asked in అప్రస్తుత
ప్రసంగం the difference between సన్యాసి and సన్నాసి.
I am paraphrasing and it was something like:
లోకం నాకు వద్దు అని లోకాన్ని వదిలివేసినవాడు సన్యాసి.
లోకం మాకు వద్దు అని లోకంచే వదిలివేయబడినవాడు సన్నాసి

Regards
-Srinivas

[Raj P]

>>One must not judge a different
bygone era from the standards and mores of the
present one<<<

Thats True. But arent we still trying to preach the ideals set by those bygone eras?

We used to recite a prayer every day at school:

"kshOni talambunan nuduru sOkaga mrOkki nutintu saikata SrONiki.."

We used to get puzzled about these peoms. Why, pOtana had to describe the body of goddess saraswati? Or was(is) there no expression possible other than that, to express bhakti? and why we still hang on to thousands yrs old of values? There are many questions and may be many more possible answers. I guess these different cultural invasions, victorian influences, left us much more confused. Just a random thought.

- Saleem

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Srinivas Nagulapalli]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Raj P <rajpalla@y...> wrote:
>
> We used to get puzzled about these peoms. Why, pOtana had to
> describe the body of goddess saraswati? Or was(is) there no
> expression possible other than that, to express bhakti?

To ask why Pothana wrote the way he wrote is like asking
why Baapu draws the way he does and why Lata sings the way
she does, or even why you and I write the way we do!
Because, one wants to! Of course, the very opening
of Bhagavatam gives the purpose of Pothana's writing in his
own words as శ్రీ కైవల్యపదంబు చేరుటకునై.

It is hard enough to even define love, let alone bhakti,
and it is harder still to determine the best way to express.

> and why we still hang on to thousands yrs old of values?
> There are many questions and may be many more possible answers. I
> guess these different cultural invasions, victorian influences,
> left us much more confused. Just a random thought.

Also, regarding hanging on to thousand yrs old values, first of
all I do not know which set of values we hang on to. Also, despite
amazing strides man made, are we that drastically different from
thousand year old ancestors? Does human behavior, with all its
emotions/cravings/desires changed that much?

I agree there are many more ways to look at things. And all
these cultural invasions, influences and scientific progress
provide, more and not less, data and we may be at a uniquely
placed vantage point, to see and understand human progression
better, with lesser confusion and greater clarity, than ever
before, with all the available data. Just my own thoughts.

Regards
-Srinivas

[Kamesh]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "Srinivas Nagulapalli"

<srini_nagul@y...> wrote:
> --- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Raj P <rajpalla@y...> wrote:
> >
> > We used to get puzzled about these peoms. Why, pOtana had to
> > describe the body of goddess saraswati? Or was(is) there no
> > expression possible other than that, to express bhakti?
>
> To ask why Pothana wrote the way he wrote is like asking
> why Baapu draws the way he does and why Lata sings the way
> she does, or even why you and I write the way we do!
> Because, one wants to! Of course, the very opening
> of Bhagavatam gives the purpose of Pothana's writing in his
> own words as శ్రీ కైవల్యపదంబు చేరుటకునై.

Questioning the poetic values in (or purpose of) describing the body
of goddess saraswathi is very valid, IMO. We have సాహిత్య విమర్శ
(old or new, western or indian) whose purpose is precisely to ask
such questions and find answers.

> > and why we still hang on to thousands yrs old of values?
> > There are many questions and may be many more possible answers. I
> > guess these different cultural invasions, victorian influences,
> > left us much more confused. Just a random thought.
>
> Also, regarding hanging on to thousand yrs old values, first of
> all I do not know which set of values we hang on to. Also,

At the surface, this question seems to be related to literature. But
going into details of it would only be violating the charter of the
group, I guess.

regards,
Kameswara Rao.

[Narasimham Paranandi]

Srinivas Nagulapalli <srini...@yahoo.com> wrote:


>I am not sure I see the dichotomy. It was only a rushi
>who could write a classic compendium on kamasUtra too:-)
>Also, it is my understanding, that the so called gotras
>which people have are all names of rushis- who had progeny.
>And they quote Janaka as one of the greatest sanyaasins and
>j~nAnis, yet he was a king.

Could someone please explain in detail the TAXONOMIC classification of బావాజీ, సాధు, సన్యాసి, ముని, ఋషి and link those to బ్రహ్మచారి? How many of these Rshis were married or else .......of Viswamitra type? Was Vatsayana married or else? I agree the గోత్రములు that the upper castes inherited originated from Rshis. What about the గోత్రములు of the lower castes? Do you think the later also originated from Rshis? What is గోత్రము by definition? Why did that originate? ఋషులకు సంబధించిన/చెందిన ఆవుల మందలను కాపాడే వాళ్ళా?

>On a related note, I recall a humorous repartee given by >MADugula Nagaphani Sarma gAru in an AvadhanaM. Some one >asked in అప్రస్తుత ప్రసంగం the difference between >సన్యాసి and సన్నాసి.I am paraphrasing and it was >something like: లోకం నాకు వద్దు అని లోకాన్ని >వదిలివేసినవాడు సన్యాసి.లోకం మాకు వద్దు అని లోకంచే >వదిలివేయబడినవాడు సన్నాసి

అది అప్రస్తుత ప్రసంగీకునికి మాత్రమే సరీఇన జవాబు. అందులో గొప్పతనమేమీ లేదు మహాశయా! ప్రకృతి వికృతాలు మాత్రమే! మీకు తెలుసు, నాకు తెలుసు.

--పాలన



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Srinivas Nagulapalli]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, SrI pAlana wrote:

Thanks to pAlana gAru for writing after long time. Hope to see
you share your thoughts more.

> Could someone please explain in detail the TAXONOMIC classification
> of బావాజీ, సాధు, సన్యాసి, ముని, ఋషి and link those to
> బ్రహ్మచారి? How many of these Rshis were married or
> else .......of Viswamitra type? Was Vatsayana married or else? I
>agree the గోత్రములు that the upper castes inherited originated
>from Rshis. What about the గోత్రములు of the lower castes? Do you
>think the later also originated from Rshis? What is గోత్రము by
>definition? Why did that originate? ఋషులకు సంబధించిన/చెందిన
>ఆవుల మందలను కాపాడే వాళ్ళా?

I do not even know if such Taxonomy exists and doubt if any
so called sanyAsi/muni/whatever, would even care to see/comply even
if theorized. Reg. గోత్రములు my knowledge is limited to what
I read and I do not remember reading about distinctions
of upper/lower castes when it is said those are named after Rshis.
Actually, I am not clear about the contempt/regards for
lower/upper castes all the time, way past. Why? Because of some
poems like వ్యాసుడే కులమందు వాసిగా జన్మించె, విదురుడే కులమందు
వృద్ధి నొందె.

I get your point if గోత్రములు or any way related to గో-వులు.
Also, I found it helpful for my own edification to think of
బ్రహ్మచారి with its literal connotation- బ్రహ్మని చరంతి-
which simplifies (or complicates?) it from other dependencies.

These are just my thoughts and I would love to know and if in
error, stand corrected.

Regards
-Srinivas

[Srinivas Nagulapalli]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, SrI Kameswara Rao gAru wrote:
>
> Questioning the poetic values in (or purpose of) describing the
> body of goddess saraswathi is very valid, IMO. We have సాహిత్య
> విమర్శ (old or new, western or indian) whose purpose is precisely
> to ask such questions and find answers.

It is hard to argue against any questioning. But, I believe,
there are different kinds. Where exactly సాహిత్య విమర్శ end
and motive-hunting begins is a dilemma to me. Or are they both
same? Also, if questioning poetic value in describing body of
goddess Saraswathi is very valid, I do not know what poetic values
exist in descriptions of body of earth or sun-rise/sun set.
Isn't it true anymore కాదేదీ కవిత కనర్హం

Regards
-Srinivas

[Savithri Machiraju]

> Here is a review/report on the recent women writers conference happened in
> Hyderabad. There are many interesting comments that writers have
> apparently made in the conference. I want to see anyone have any comments
> on this whole affair.
>
> http://www.andhrajyothy.com/editshow.asp?qry=/2005/feb/14vividha2
>
> Let me drive your attentioin to one specific remark on BharatuDu, the
> creator of Bharata nAtyaM. It goes like... స్త్రీని అంగాంగ వర్ణనలు
> చేసీన్ భరతుడు.....
>
> What did BharatuDu actually write? The little I know, he is a creator of
> the specific dance form. Did he write any kAvyAs besides this? Or the
> comment is about the art form itself?
>
> Thanks
> -Akki

I read Natyasastra by Bharata muni over thirty years ago, so my memory of it
is not so fresh. However, what I chiefly remember from it, because it is
what chiefly struck me at the time, was his discussion of drama, and the
correct presentation of its various components. It was unlike the dramatic
theories of any other culture that I knew at the time, or that I have
learned since then. I certainly don't remember any అంగాంగ వర్ణనలు, or
even any dismay about any such descriptions. And when I read this, the
current feminist movement was in its heyday, at least in North America, so
if there were such things, they would have struck me, don't you think? I
seriously wonder if the speaker in question actually read the Natya Sastra,
or was referring to a different work, or to a different writer. Certainly,
from the summary, all it says is that as soon as the speaker said "Bharata
muni" everyone laughed. So maybe there was some inside joke that I'm not
aware of.

On the topic of అంగాంగ వర్ణన generally, I wonder why people always
focus on it as applied to women. I mean, it was applied to male characters,
too. There is certainly plenty of అంగాంగ వర్ణన of Rama and Krishna,
and even of the major "villain" characters. Is there any villain, for
example, who is not described as having రక్తారుణ నేత్రాలు? So maybe it's
just that people don't notice these descriptions because they don't
correlate with what they have been taught to think of as sexual description?
Because it strikes them as a "manly" description connoting strength?

So that brings up the topic of what exactly is a description of a sexual
nature. And here I very much think that the entire discussion has become
skewed and distorted past recognition by being viewed through a foreign,
non-Hindu lens. This is exemplified by comments such as "even in a
religious text ..." Now what is so special about a religious text, and
specifically, where did the idea come from that religion and sexuality don't
mix? Certainly not from Hinduism, one of whose unique strengths is that it
celebrates sexuality, both on the human and divine plane, and specifically
mentions sexual union as one way to experience union with God. I don't know
much about Islam, but this is certainly 180 degrees from the Christian
perspective, and why so many Christians are at a loss to understand Hinduism
or the art and literature that are inspired by it. On top of this there is
the confusion between the symbolic and literal both in religious and
artistic works. Someone is bothered about the description of Saraswati?
But what exactly is bothersome? Does it really bother anyone to hear her
arms compared to lotus flower stalks, her nose to a సంపంగి, or any of
the other standard poetical descriptions? So I'm guessing it is probably
the description of her breasts. But who is Saraswati? She is
జగన్మాత -- the universal mother. And what symbolizes motherhood, and
especially the nurturing that is associated with it, and that the devotee is
usually seeking from the goddess? It is the breast, from whose milk
everyone imbibes at the beginning of life (or used to, in the days before
Nestle!), and of which everyone has fond memories. So round, full breasts
are not meant as a sign of voluptuousness, or to arouse the male reader, but
to recall and celebrate the bountiful nurturing provided by the mother. It
is only recently, and only in certain industrialized societies, that the
female breast has been seen exclusively as a sexual stimulant in the male,
quite divorced from its primary purpose. In such societies (and not all
"western" societies fall into this rubric), we have the situation of nursing
mothers being arrested for "exposing themselves" in public, or asked to
leave public establishments because they are "offending" the other patrons
by their wanton behavior. That Indians should adopt such attitudes
unquestioningly and wholesale is very sad.

Which brings me to the topic of feminism as I see it discussed in the
summary. Every time I hear (or read) so-called feminists from India, I get
not only a profound sense of deja vu (because they are recycling or
proclaiming attitudes or protests that were in vogue twenty or thirty years
ago in the west), but also a sense that they are quoting verbatim from some
article they have read in English, without pausing to consider how
applicable it is to Indian circumstances. So the keynote speaker was
offended that the invitation to the conference was printed on pink paper?
But the very notion of associating pink with feminine is a western import.
It is not a part of Indian culture, which is why hunky heroes of film wear
pink shirts, and even pink suits, without a second thought -- only to be
labeled as homosexuals by western viewers unfamiliar with India's freedom in
this aspect, and unable to break out of their own cultural rigidity. Most
of the rest of the feminist arguments as presented also struck me in this
same tired way.

It seems to me that "feminism" is defined in a very rigid way. Satyavati
garu expresses her extreme disappointment (not to say annoyance) at the
chair of the third day, for questioning whether women's freedom means they
must give up their happiness as mothers and members of a family. But these
are very valid questions, and are ones that millions of women all over the
world are struggling with every day. What makes them inappropriate?
Satyavati garu also objects to some speakers calling themselves "humanist"
rather than feminist, and sees this as a betrayal of feminism. But the
whole motivation for the start of the feminist movement was that women were
not being treated as human. Is not the final goal of feminism to see that
all people are treated as human beings, and, as such, is not "humanism" the
logical outcome and ultimate goal of feminism? So perhaps the writers who
described themselves this way have grown past the confining definitions of
gender, and see all people as one. To apply this criticism to a writer like
Shashi Deshpande, who has been writing such brilliant observations of the
human condition for so long, is particularly mind boggling for me. By this
criterion, writers like Chalam and Ranganayakamma cannot be called feminist,
since they never put that label on themselves (the fact that they were
writing about feminist issues long before the birth of feminism not
withstanding). I seriously wish Indian feminists would first learn about
their own history, before parroting the pronouncements of foreign feminists.

I've gone a long way from Bharata muni, but maybe others can weigh in on
what they think of these other issues.

Savithri Machiraju

[s_pamarty]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "J. K. Mohana Rao" <jkmrao@y...>
wrote:

----

> My question pertained to the author of

> sauMdaryalahari ...
...
...

> Did people like sauMdaryalahari's author get the said
> knowledge by reading other classics?

----

mOhana rAvu gAru:

They say the authorship can easily be found out from the writing style
of a person.

As a poet and a poetry analyst, do you think that the author of works
like the vivEkacUDAmaNi, commentaries on brahma sUtras and the
BhagavadgIta, could have also been easily the author of the various
hymns attributed to him? Is there anything in writing style, usage of
expressions etc. to ascertain an absolute connection without doubt?

I look forward to your clearing this doubt for me.

Thanks and best wishes

Satya

[Bhaskar T.L.S.]

...I agree the గోత్రములు that the upper castes inherited originated
from Rshis...

Narasimham garu...

There are many issues you have raised through your post,not limiting
jsut to the issue of Gothram and Rishi.

Well, I belong to the Vysya community of Vizianagaram. I inform this
as part of our discussion here. Well, our history is mostly known
through Kanyaka Puranamu, and we worship Kanyaka Parameshwari goddess.
I recollect my visit to Penugonda where we have our diety temple, and
the history of our caste (i have my own doubts on this term). It says
we have originated from 108 Rishis (I dont know if they are Vysyas
too...there in we can bring a difference between a caste and a varna-
where as a varna is pre vedic in origin, caste is post vedic one
where rules were standardised in terms of occupation, body color etc)

Well, there are many gothrams under each of the 108 Rishis mentioned.
The Gothram tree and cooresponding rishis are drawn on a tree map in
the Penugonda temple.I forgot my Rishi name but gothram is nabilla...
My mother's side Rishi is Bharadwaja,and mother's side gothram was
the same name...We also have this like, people from same gothram do
not marry at all...and they check this for seven generations. In our
case, we have our family tree for last seven generations. If
interested I can give details of all Rishi names and Gothramulu at a
later point of time.

Interesting topic...does every caste has this gothram concept? Any
scientific observations?

Bhaskar
http://www.telugudiaspora.com

[j_sreenadh]

Dear Savithri garu,

You seem to be making two slightly different arguments at once. (1)
Sexuality was never taboo in Hinduism until recently and (2) The
descriptions in sauMdaryalaharI et.al. are not really meant to be
sexual anyway.

I agree fully with (1). (2) is harder to defend, except by resorting
to mysticism or symbolism. In my copy of Soundaryalahari, which I can
quote if necessary, the poet does not stop with descriptions of full
breasts. He goes on to describe the goddess's రోమావళీ which
apparently is the "line of hair above the navel", her navel, her hips
etc., This is well beyond the Mother image that you're trying to imply.

Sincerely

Sreenadh

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "Savithri Machiraju"

<savithri@i...> wrote:


> non-Hindu lens. This is exemplified by comments such as "even in a
> religious text ..." Now what is so special about a religious text, and
> specifically, where did the idea come from that religion and
sexuality don't
> mix? Certainly not from Hinduism, one of whose unique strengths is
that it
> celebrates sexuality, both on the human and divine plane, and
specifically
> mentions sexual union as one way to experience union with God.

> the other standard poetical descriptions? So I'm guessing it is
probably
> the description of her breasts. But who is Saraswati? She is
> జగన్మాత -- the universal mother. And what symbolizes
motherhood, and
> especially the nurturing that is associated with it, and that the
devotee is
> usually seeking from the goddess? It is the breast, from whose milk
> everyone imbibes at the beginning of life (or used to, in the days
before
> Nestle!), and of which everyone has fond memories. So round, full
breasts
> are not meant as a sign of voluptuousness, or to arouse the male
reader,

[madd...@wayne.edu]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "Savithri Machiraju" <savithri@i...> wrote:

> withstanding). I seriously wish Indian feminists would first learn about
> their own history, before parroting the pronouncements of foreign feminists.

Thanks Savitri garu for a thought provoking post.

Another item in the that made me pause is the statement from the keynote speaker is
that everyone is coming forward to write about women, women's issues, and offering
solutions essentially to hijack them.

Unfortunately, this is not the first time I heard that only women should write about
women's issues, Dalits about theirs, and so on. While I agree that a writer's
perspective is more in tune with reality when she/he had experienced it personally, it
is not impossible to be empathetic enough with the issue to write realistically about
it. Instead of looking at what is written and analyze the merits or demerits of the
piece, why prejudge the author just because of the name and issue blanket
statements like that? What would they do if everyone writes under an assumed name?

I know this is an old topic that was discussed beffore.

I was equally frustrated at the statement about the pink color for the invitations. If
they did it in red, they would have yelled at them for making them communists, green
for environmentalists, white for pacifists, and there is no end. Couldn't a keynote
speaker be more objective and substantive than that?

Krishna "another 'man' who doesn't get it" Rao.

[Ramarao Kanneganti]

My criticism if any is about there are no good descriptions of women in our
religious and irreligious texts.

Look at this way: Every women is "padma mukhi" or "chandra mukhi". How about
"dOsa ginja" type face? How about a nose that curves funnily at the end? How
about the shade of dark that shimmers in the sunsets? How about the eyes
that not particularly close, but have a sparkling look? Were they blind to
all the infinite beauty that almost makes us cry for being born?

I don't buy that the description is always non-sexual. There are enough
sexual contexts in the books that still do bad descriptions.

Even before committing crimes against feminism, they committed crimes
against good taste, and perhaps even more importantly plagiarism, I would
say.

--
Rama

[Hemantha Kumar Pamarthy]

As per the movie "Utsav", Vatsyaayana (or is it simple Vaatsaayana?) was a =
great voyeur and such being the case took more pleasure in ogling and recor=
ding.

So it might not matter=A0whether he was married or not. Or does it? :-)))

Best wishes
Hemantha Kumar


On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 Srinivas Nagulapalli wrote :
>
<snip>
Was Vatsayana married or else?=20

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Hemantha Kumar Pamarthy]

The way things are going regarding Kanchi Mutt, everyday the plot thickens =
and could very well be a potboiler {or should it be a plot boiler?:-)}. A l=
ot of allegations made against the mutt and the seers seems to be baseless =
or on shaky base. So any moment any turn may take place. =A0

Under these circumstances, the point I wish to make here is that the compar=
ison might not be apt since the case is going on and so does the intrigue, =
and we may well be in for more surprises. Just let us be glued to the news.=
=20


Best wishes
Hemantha Kumar

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 Viplav Reddy wrote :
>
Just thinking aloud, kanchi peeThaM seems to be more in line with the
>ancient times, now it is to be seen in the right spirit. We have come
>full circle & I hope in future (a thousand years from now) we do not
>see celibacy or brahmacharyaM as a litmus test for sanyaasulu --

[Hemantha Kumar Pamarthy]

I surrender. The quoted sentence was from Mr.Viplav Reddy and not from me. =
I dare not take charge of them :-))))))

Best wishes
Hemantha Kumar =A0

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 JK.Mohana Rao wrote :
>
>--- Viplav Reddy <vipla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hemantha Kumar wrote:
> >
> > I plead ignorance, but muni's don't mean celibate, unmarried etc., it
> > is again may very well be a glorification of an identity the latter
> > day saints tried to project :-)?

[DVP Rao]

Can anyone explain the word "singi naadam"
I think it is a "vikruti" version of the original Sanskrit word.
actual meaning and proper usage in conversation....

I know the word exists but I lost the details .....
Thank you
DVP

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Ram Vishnubhotla]

namastE!

DVP Rao <dvp...@hotmail.com> wrote:


Can anyone explain the word "singi naadam"

I heard a story about సింగి నాదం loooooong ago.

In the olden days, the merchants used to sell the spices (ల్వంగాలు, ఏలకులు, మిరియాలు, జీలకర్ర) from village to village in boats (పడవలు). After reaching a village, they used to play a కొమ్ము బూరా to let the villagers know about their arrival. The sound of the కొమ్ము బూరా is known as సృంగ నాదము and became సింగి నాదం.

Does it sound like a dialouge in జంధ్యాల movie?? :-))

I heard a similiar story for గాడిద గుడ్డు కమ్కర పీచు.



Regards,

Ramanna


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.

[vemurione]

Yes, I heard this explanation before for "siMginAdaM". But this is
only half the story.

The complete expression is "siMginAdaM, jIlakarra".

Q1. What is the meaning of the whole expression? Does a "SRMganAdaM"
mean that jIlakarra is available?

Q2. I heard that the above expression is used while referring to
something trivial and useless. How did this happen to get this
interpretattion?

Rao Vemuri


--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Ram Vishnubhotla

<Ramvish66@y...> wrote:

> In the olden days, the merchants used to sell the spices
(ల్వంగాలు, ఏలకులు, మిరియాలు, జీలకర్ర) from village to village
in boats (పడవలు). After reaching a village, they used to play a
కొమ్ము బూరా to let the villagers know about their arrival. The
sound of the కొమ్ము బూరా is known as సృంగ నాదము and became
సింగి నాదం.

[Ram Vishnubhotla]

namastE!


vemurione <vemu...@yahoo.com> wrote:

I used the word జీలకర్ర in my msg but did not add it to సింగినాదం. I'll try to answer both of your questions.

Q1. What is the meaning of the whole expression? Does a "SRMganAdaM" mean that jIlakarra is available?

Yes. The సృంగనాదం is just an indication to the villagers that the స్పిచెస్ are available.

Q2. I heard that the above expression is used while referring to something trivial and useless. How did this happen to get this interpretattion?

That is correct again. The usage is ఆ వాడు చెప్పేది కొత్తగా ఏముంటుంది జీలకర్రా - సింగినాదం. 'No new information can be obtained'.

I hope I answered your question.

Thanks & Regards,

Ramanna





---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?

Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Kamesh]

> It is hard to argue against any questioning. But, I believe,
> there are different kinds. Where exactly సాహిత్య విమర్శ end
> and motive-hunting begins is a dilemma to me. Or are they both
> same? Also, if questioning poetic value in describing body of
> goddess Saraswathi is very valid, I do not know what poetic
values
> exist in descriptions of body of earth or sun-rise/sun set.
> Isn't it true anymore కాదేదీ కవిత కనర్హం

The question is not whether such description should be done or should
not be done. The question is whether it is appropriate to the
context. Again, that description bothers me only if it seems to be
out of context and not serving any purpose. For example in Potana's
another well known poem, "తల్లీ నిన్ను దలంచి...", there are these
adjectives to Saraswati "ఫుల్లాభాక్షి" and "పూర్ణేందు బింబాననా".
I could not figure out the appropriateness of these adjectives untill
I read Sri Viswanatha's explanation about it. Whether one believes or
accepts that explanation or not is a different matter. But it is a
meaningful/plausible explanation. So I accept and appreciate those
adjectives.
I don't see a similar explanation (Viswanatha explained about
this "kshONi talaMbu" poem also in his book Sahitya surabhi) for the
adjectives of "సైకత శ్రోణి" and "చంచరీకచయ సుందర వేణి" in
the poem in question. So I question their use until I get some
plausible answer.
Regarding SavitrigAri thoughts on description of female body in our
ancient works, as Ramarao garu already pointed out, the descriptions
do not stop with breasts. And we cannot assume that they are always
ment to be non-sexual. I agree to her point that sexuality in
literature was never percieved to be wrong in olden India, but still
I would question the appropriateness of such descriptions.
అంగామ్గ వర్ణనలు of godesses do baffle me. I cannot understand
their purpose or appropriatenes, except in a few cases. As far as I
know, no where in our literature a son describes his mother in such a
manner. The only exception is by Nannayya. In his bharatam,
GarutmantuDu refers to her mother as "payOruhAnanA". And this got
critized by many stalwarts like vETUri prabhAkara SAstri.

regards,
Kameswara Rao.

[lylayer]

nqqKmq@


--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "j_sreenadh" <sreenadh@g...>
wrote:

> Dear Savithri garu,
>
> You seem to be making two slightly different arguments at once. (1)
> Sexuality was never taboo in Hinduism until recently and (2) The
> descriptions in sauMdaryalaharI et.al. are not really meant to be
> sexual anyway.

In my copy of Soundaryalahari, which I can
> quote if necessary, the poet does not stop with descriptions of
full> breasts.

talking about అంగాంగ వర్ణనలు sexuality, may be feminism and
other stuff

లూక్ అత్ అ ఫ్య్సిచల్ ఎక్షం పర్త్ ఒఫ్ అ డొచ్తొర్ధస్్ొతె ఫొర్ ఇన్స్తంచె:

50 య్ర్ ఒల్ద్ ఈందీన్ తెలుగు ఫెమలె వ్హొ లూక్స్ ముచ్ ఒల్దెర్ థన్ హెర్ స్తతెద్
అగె, హీద్ షౌస్ అలొపెచీ (హైర్ లొస్స్- చౌల్ద్ బె ఫ్రొం చెమొథెరప్య్,
చౌల్ద్ బె ఫ్రొం విసితింగ్ టిరుపతి - బొథ్ ఎకష్పెరిఎంచెస్ బ్రింగ్ యౌ థత్
ముచ్ చ్లొసెర్ తొ ఘొద్) ఎయెస్ :-బొథ్ పుపిల్స్ ఎఊల్ ఇన్ సిజె, రీచ్తింగ్ తొ
లిఘ్త్. ంఒవెమెంత్స్ నొర్మల్. ఈర్ నొసె థ్రోత్:- నెగతివె. ణెచ్క్ :- నొ
ఎన్లర్గెద్ థ్య్రొఇద్. ణొ ల్య్ఫదెనొపథ్య్.
బ్రీస్త్స్:- వెర్య్ లర్గె, పెందులౌస్ ఒవెర్ల్యింగ్ థె అబ్దొమెన్ ( సిమిలర్
సితూతిఒన్ వ్హిచ్ లెద్ అ బ్లచ్క్ హుస్బంద్ వ్హొ విషెద్ తొ షూత్ హిస్ బ్లచ్క్
విఫె థ్రు థె హీర్త్ అంద్ వస్ తొల్ద్ ఈర్లిఎర్ బ్య్ అ ఫ్రిఎంద్, హీర్త్ ఇస్
దిరెచ్త్ల్య్ ఉందెర్ థె లెఫ్త్ బ్రీస్త్ ,షూత్ హిస్ విఫె థ్రు థె స్ప్లీన్.- అ
లిత్త్లె బ్లచ్క్ హుమొర్, ఒన్ థె సిదె.)
ఈన్ థె ఉప్పెర్ ఔతెర్ ఊద్రంత్ ఒఫ్ థె లెఫ్త్ బ్రీస్త్ ఇస్ అ మస్స్ మీసురింగ్
అబౌత్ 4చ్ం ఇన్ సిజె చ్లొసె తొ థె నిప్ప్లె అరెఒలర్ చొంప్లెకష్. ఠె స్కిన్ ఒవెర్
థె మస్స్ షౌస్ దింప్లింగ్. థె నిప్ప్లె షౌస్ దర్కిష్ దిస్చొల్రతిఒన్ అంద్
షౌస్ రెత్రచ్తిఒన్, బుత్ థెరె ఇస్ నొ....

హౌ ఇస్ థె రీదెర్స్ సెన్సితివిత్య్ సొ ఫర్?
ఈ హవె తకెన్ యౌ ఒన్ల్య్ థ్రు అ మినిమల్ల్య్ థ్రీతెనింగ్, పర్తీల్ల్య్
చొంప్లెతెద్ చ్లినిచల్ ఎక్షం ఒఫ్ అ బ్రీస్త్ చంచెర్ పతిఎంత్.

వ్హ్య్ దిద్ ఈ ఎవెన్ బ్రింగ్ ఇత్ ఉప్.
ఠెరె అరె మన్య్ మన్య్ చొమ్ఫొర్త్ లెవెల్స్ ఇన్ ఔర్ ఉందెర్స్తందింగ్ ఒఫ్ హుమన్
బొద్య్, అంద్ మింద్ - దెపెందింగ్ ఒన్ ఔర్ అగె, సెకష్, ఫమిల్య్, చుల్తురె, పెరిఒద్,
హీల్థ్ స్తతుస్, వీల్థ్ స్తతుస్,ఎదుచతిఒన్,ఎకష్పెరిఎంచె,త్రైనింగ్, పెర్సొనల్
గ్రౌథ్ ఎత్చ్.

ఈన్ లితెరర్య్ వొర్ల్ద్- ఈ సీ నొ ఇన్సుల్త్ తొ ఐథెర్ సెకష్ ఇఫ్ సొమె ఒనె తకెస్
థె త్రౌబ్లె తొ దెస్చ్రిబె బీఉతిఫుల్ ఒర్ నొత్ సొ బీఉతిఫుల్ ఫెమలె ఒర్ మలె
బొద్య్. శమె గోస్ విథ్ అర్త్ వొర్ల్ద్. ఈఫ్ ఘెఒర్గీ ఓధీఫె పైంత్స్ ఫ్లౌఎర్స్
అంద్ మకె థెం ఎరొతిచ్, ఇ హవె నొ ప్రొబ్లెం ఎంజొయింగ్ థత్ అర్త్ వొర్క్.
శిమిలర్ల్య్ థె స్చుల్ప్తురె ఒన్ వరిఔస్ ఈందీన్ తెంప్లెస్. ఠెయ్ అరె
గొర్గెఔస్. ఠెరె ఇస్ సెక్షూలిత్య్ అంద్ సెన్సూలిత్య్ ఎవెర్య్ వ్హెరె ఇన్ థె
చ్రీతిఒన్.
ట్రౌబ్లె సొమె తిమెస్ ఇ హవె ఇస్ వ్హెన్ పెఒప్లె థింక్ ఇత్ ఇస్ బూతు (వ్హత్
దోస్ థత్ మీన్ చుర్రెంత్ల్య్?)- ఇఫ్ థెరె ఇస్ అ దెస్చ్రిప్తొన్ ఒఫ్ బ్రీస్త్స్ ఒర్
గెనితలీ ఒర్ అ తెందెర్ లొవె స్చెనె ఒర్ అ వొలుప్తుఔస్ సెక్షూల్ స్చెనె ఇన్ అ
బూక్ - అంద్ థెన్ హవె తొ జుస్తిఫ్య్ ఇత్ బ్య్ సయింగ్ ఇత్ ఇస్ అ ఘొద్దెస్స్ -
మొథెర్- మొథెర్ధస్్బ్రీస్త్ అంద్ మొథెర్ధస్్ిల్క్ అంద్ ఇత్ ఇస్ మెతఫొరిచల్.

ంఎతఫొరిచల్ మ్య్ ఫూత్. ఠత్ దోస్ నొత్ సిత్ వెల్ల్ విథ్ మె అత్ అల్ల్.
భెచౌసె నొ గ్రౌన్ మన్ ఒర్ వొమన్ విల్ల్ థింక్ ఒఫ్ మొథెర్స్ బ్రీస్త్స్ ఒర్ మిల్క్.
ఈన్ ఫచ్త్ గ్రౌన్ పెఒప్లె హవె గ్రీత్ దిఫ్ఫిచుల్త్య్ అస్సొచీతింగ్ సెకష్ విథ్
థైర్ పరెంత్స్. ఈ అం చొన్ఫిదెంత్ ఇఫ్ యౌ తకె అ సుర్వెయ్ ఫ్రొం గ్రౌన్ ఉప్స్ ఇన్
అన్య్ చుల్తురె అత్ ప్రెసెంత్ అంద్ పొసె థిస్ ఉఎస్తిఒన్ - దొ యౌ హవె ఫొంద్
మెమొర్య్ ఒఫ్ యౌర్ మొథెర్ధస్్బ్రీస్త్స్ అంద్ హౌ యౌ ప్లయెద్ విథ్ హెర్ బ్రీస్త్స్-
థెయ్ విల్ల్ థ్రౌ థె పపెర్ అత్ యౌ అంద్ వల్క్ ఔత్, అంద్ థెన్ ప్రొబబ్ల్య్
థ్రౌ ఉప్ అంద్ మయ్ రెఫ్రైన్ ఫ్రొం లూకింగ్ అత్ గిర్ల్స్ ఫొర్ అన్ యీర్ ఒర్ లొంగెర్.

టొ మె థత్ కింద్ ఒఫ్ జుస్తిఫిచతిఒన్ గివింగ్ మ్య్థొలొగిచల్ చొంతెకష్త్స్ అంద్
సయింగ్ వె అరె అల్ల్ లిత్త్లె కిద్స్ ప్లయింగ్ ఇన్ థె లప్ ఒఫ్ సొమె ఘొద్దెస్స్ ఇస్
దౌన్ రిఘ్త్ సిల్ల్య్ అంద్ ప్స్య్చొలొగిచల్ల్య్ అంద్ బిఒలొగిచల్ల్య్ ఉనచ్చెప్తబ్లె.
ఈ వౌల్ద్ నొత్ సయ్ ఇత్ ఇస్ హ్య్పొచ్ర్య్తిచల్. ఈత్ ఇస్ జుస్త్ అ ప్స్య్చొలొగిచల్ దిత్చ్
థత్ సొమె పెఒప్లె అరె ఉనబ్లె తొ లీప్, ఎవెన్ అస్ థెయ్ అరె మకింగ్ గ్రీత్
స్త్రిదెస్ ఇన్ ఒథెర్ అరీస్. ఝుస్త్ లిత్త్లె ఫొల్ద్స్ ఇన్ థైర్ థింకింగ్, వ్హిచ్
థెయ్ ఫొర్గెత్ తొ ఇరొన్ ఔత్.
ఈ వౌల్ద్ రెస్పెచ్త్ అన్య్ మన్ వ్హొ వౌల్ద్ వల్క్ ఉప్ తొ అ వొమన్ అంద్ తెల్ల్ హెర్
యౌ హవె గొర్గెఔస్ బ్రీస్త్స్ అస్ ఒప్పొసెద్ తొ తెల్లింగ్ హెర్ యౌర్ బ్రీస్త్స్
రెమింద్ మె ఒఫ్ మటా పార్వతీధస్్బ్రీస్త్స్ విథ్ వ్హొం వినాయక ప్లయెద్ వ్హిలె
హిస్ ఫథెర్ శివ లూకెద్ ఒన్..., ఇన్ హిస్ వ్రితింగ్ ఒర్ ఒథెర్విసె.
మొరె అబౌత్ మొరె మ్య్థొలొగిచల్ హుర్ద్లెస్ ఒఫ్ ఫెమినిస్త్ ఒర్ వొమెన్ వ్రితెర్స్,ఒర్
తెలుగు వ్రితెర్స్ పెర్ సె,
ఇఫ్ ర్బ్ విల్లింగ్
థంక్స్
ల్య్ల.













టొ ఫొస్త్ అ మెస్సగె, సెంద్ ఇత్ తొ: రచ్చబందయహూగ్రౌప్స్.చొం

[J. K. Mohana Rao]

--- Kamesh <kame...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> The only exception is by Nannayya. In his bharatam,
> GarutmantuDu refers to her mother as "payOruhAnanA".
>

పయోరుహానన అనగా పద్మముఖి అని అర్థము. ఇందులో
తప్పేమో నాకు తెలియలేదు.

My original question is still unanswered.
Poets are married and so are Rshis. But people like
the author of sauMdaryalahari took to saMnyAsa straight
from brahmacharya without passing through gRhasthASrama.
How can such people make descriptions that are beyond
their ken? Is it because they read such passages in
other's works, or is it just an operating room type
description? One must not forget that the author
though primarily a religious preceptor is indeed a
great poet. One can count on fingers such religious
greats who were also good poets. Vedantadesikan and
Vadirajayati come readily to my mind besides Sankara.

On the other hand, the SRMgAra in bhartRhari's SRMgAra
Satakam is more poignant. There are several layers
to it- passion, detachment, dislike, etc.

Regards! - J K Mohana Rao








__________________________________

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

[ASLKRAO]

mana daeSaanni aanglaeyulu paripaalistunna kottaloa bayaTanunci noukalu
vaccaevi vyaapaara nimittamai.

aa vidaeSeeyulu mana nundi jeelakarra konukkunae vaaru.

alaa noukalu vaccinappuDu aa raaka teliyacaestoo SRnganaadam (kommu booraa)
oodae vaaru.

singinaadham (SRnganaadam laeka kommu booraa) vaccindi, jeelakarra ammudaam
padanDi ani prajalu samudrapu oDDuku veLLaevaaru.

alaa singinadam jeelakarra anna naanuDi modalayyindi.

bhavadeeyuDu

A.S.L.Kameswara rao
Scientific Officer - G
IGCAR
kalpakkam-603102
17/02/05

[viplavreddy]

>--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "lylayer" <lylayfl@a...> wrote:
>
> How is the readers sensitivity so far?
> I have taken you only thru a minimally threatening, partially
> completed clinical exam of a breast cancer patient.

I don't want to encourage you to post about a rectal exam you may
have done.

It has been my experience that most physicians are comfortable in
speaking about human bodies. It is apparant they may not have any
trouble for poets or artists in describing the same bodies in
whatever way - including someone wanting to make virgin out of
elephant dung and put it in a museum -

-(un)fortunately they are only a tenth-of-a-percent of the total
population.

regards, viplav

To Post a message, send it to: racch...@yahoogroups.com

[Srinivas Nagulapalli]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, SrI Kameswara Rao gAru wrote:

> The question is not whether such description should be done or
> should not be done. The question is whether it is appropriate to
> the context. Again, that description bothers me only if it seems to
> be out of context and not serving any purpose. For example in
> Potana's another well known poem, "తల్లీ నిన్ను దలంచి...", there
> are these adjectives to Saraswati "ఫుల్లాభాక్షి" and "పూర్ణేందు
> బింబాననా". I could not figure out the appropriateness of these
> adjectives untill I read Sri Viswanatha's explanation about it.
> Whether one believes or accepts that explanation or not is a
> different matter. But it is a meaningful/plausible explanation. So
> I accept and appreciate those adjectives.

Firstly, thanks to you on many counts. I was able to read that
ViswanAtha gAri explanation only because of your kind posting
of it in Chandassu group, way back.

Actually, to be honest, I like the straight forward meaning
of those words a lot better than Viswanatha gAri interpretations.
I do enjoy the meanings he gave for ఫుల్లాబ్జాక్షి and
పూర్ణేందుబింబాననా, but the direct, straight forward meanings of
వికసించిన నేత్రాలు, నిండుచంద్రుని వంటి ముఖము appeals
to me more! I can enjoy ViswnAtha gAri interpretations too, but
it only adds and heightens the depth of connotations, but
importantly does not replace the straight forward meanings to me.
Actually the straight forward meanings those words convey,
never bothered me and it never occurred to me they needed some
other explanations to justify their usage/appropriateness.

> I don't see a similar explanation (Viswanatha explained about
> this "kshONi talaMbu" poem also in his book Sahitya surabhi) for
> the adjectives of "సైకత శ్రోణి" and "చంచరీకచయ సుందర
> వేణి" in the poem in question. So I question their use until I get
> some plausible answer.

I take this occasion to request you to kindly post ViswanAtha gAri
explanation about that padyaM too! Now that you mentioned, I
believe I am not the only one curious, I guess :-) Anyway,
I can understand the question regarding సైకత శ్రోణి, I admit.
But, I am not sure about చంచరీకచయ సుందర వేణి. First, kindly
correct me and elaborate its meaning. My understanding is it
describes జడ and I do not see anything inappropriate in this
one, yet.

Actually, this padyaM looks like it uses సంస్కృత పదాలు more
than తెలుగు పదాలు in contrast to the famous అమ్మల గన్న యమ్మ
padyaM. I see it as deliberate attempt to write using both styles
to kind of justify his statement somewhere
కొందరికి తెనుగు గుణమగు, కొందరికి సంస్కృతంబు గుణమగు రెండున్
కొందరికి గుణములగు నే నందఝి మెప్పింతు కృతుల నయ్యెడలన్.
My limited (possibly erroneous) understanding is that this padyaM
uses the ణ letter-containing-words for rhythmical beauty
and for the ప్రాస purpose, the contentional-word (శ్రోణి) was
pulled in to complete the remaining pattern క్షోణి, శ్రేణి, వాణి !
Merely because I am novice, I may be projecting my lacking
on మహాకవి- may I be forgiven.

> As far as I know, no where in our literature a son describes his
> mother in such a manner. The only exception is by Nannayya. In his
> bharatam, GarutmantuDu refers to her mother as "payOruhAnanA". And
> this got critized by many stalwarts like vETUri prabhAkara SAstri.

I admit having some cloudiness in my mind about the previous
padyaM, but I have no tinge of hesitation about that Nannayya
padyaM. May be prabhAkara SAstri gAru criticized it, but I like the
explanation of divAkarla vEMkaTAvadhAni gAru and G.V.SubrahmanyaM
gAru very much. What they said makes lot of sense to me. I quote
what they wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------------
తల్లిని "పయోరుహాననా" అని సంబోధించటం ఉచితం కాదని
కొందరంటారు. అయితే, ఇక్కడ అవయవార్థం అవివక్షితమని
గ్రహించాలి. ఇటువంటిది ఈ ఆశ్వాసంలోనే మరొకటి ఉన్నది.
వాసుకి తన చెల్లెలైన జరత్కారువును "అంబుజనేత్రా" (2.216)
అని సంబోధిస్తాడు. ఇవి కావ్య భాషలో గౌరవాన్ని తెలిపే
సంబుద్ధులుగా పరిగణింపబడతాయి. ఇందులో కొందరు భావించినట్లు
అనౌచిత్యం లేదు.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Needless to say, I find criticising such things as
రంద్రాణ్వేషణ and not any great సాహిత్య విమర్శ.

I even think it does disservice to gloss over the direct meanings
conveyed for words like ఫుల్లాబ్జాక్షి or అంబుజనేత్ర or
సరసిజనయన. I always enjoyed and found it reverential,
whenever I hear the SlOkaM,
సరసిజ నయనే, సరోజ హస్తే ధవల తరాంశుక గంధమాల్యశోభే
భగవతీ, హరివల్లభే మనోజ్ఞే త్రిభువన భూతికరీ ప్రసీద
మహ్యం.

ఎత్తుగడలోనే అమ్మవారిని "సరసిజ నయనే" అని సంబోధించడం
నన్నిప్పటివరకూ ఎప్పుడూ ఇబ్బంది పెట్టలేదు, అమ్మవారి సాక్షిగా!

This is my understanding and are some thoughts. And I look forward
to being corrected for any errors.

With best regards
-Srinivas

[Srinivas Nagulapalli]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, SrI "J. K. Mohana Rao" gAru wrote:

> My original question is still unanswered.
> Poets are married and so are Rshis. But people like
> the author of sauMdaryalahari took to saMnyAsa straight
> from brahmacharya without passing through gRhasthASrama.
> How can such people make descriptions that are beyond
> their ken?

I thought SrI pAmarti satyanArAyaNa gAru already addressed it.
How sure are we regarding its author being SaMkara?
It is very natural to attribute any/every work to a
famous and already revered personality to gain quick
credibility. I totally agree with Satya gAru in doubting,
that some one who wrote VivekacUDAmaNi, bhAshyAs on
Bhagavadgita, and also BhajagoviMdaM would find the temperament to
pen such imagery.

On this note, I also want to add that it is very common human
trait to add myths (as if they are in short supply) to glorify
anything. The story of పరకాయ ప్రవేశం of SaMkara is also
exactly that. For a genius who could reconcile numerous sects and
bring a holistic approach by sheer intellectual (and spiritual
prowess), it is utterly unflattering and not glorifying, to spin
out story that he needed to experience carnal pleasures in person
to understand! Of course, the story is narrated with all due
devotion and respect- but it fails to stand/support the stature of
Sankara. Worse, the stature of SaMkara does not need such stories
to showcase the innate greatness! And surely the sensational aspect
of it gives it tremendous impact as a telling tale and no doubt
other writers and film producers magnify and dwell on such things
when made into books/movies. And it sells too! And it circulates
even more and the cycle continues.

Just my thoughts.

With best regards
-Srinivas

[NaChaKi]

Thanks Ramanna gaarU, for the explanation of సింగినాదం. Can someone
explain the usage శునకానందం? Is that the original word, or is it
a variation of క్షణికానందం? Or does it mean "feeling happy for
trivial issues, like a dog feels happy even with a pat from its
master"?

I heard this expression particularly after I went to Bapatla to study,
and only from those from coastal regions of Andhra Pradesh. Is it
specific to those regions?

Thanks in advance,
NaChaKi.



__________________________________

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more.

http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

[Akkiraju Bhattiprolu]

> Poets are married and so are Rshis. But people like
> the author of sauMdaryalahari took to saMnyAsa straight
> from brahmacharya without passing through gRhasthASrama.

Here is my homegrown theory. May be brahmacharya does not mean "not
having sex". It may simply meant to say that he is not married and
hasn't yet entered the hRhsthASrama. As everyone has been pointing
out, looks like there are many avenues those days to... you know
what. Like today's US society where "not married" does not
necessarily imply "does not know sex". (Let me think again, does
it in India today? Should it?)

P.S: Needless to say, I am following the thread with great interest.
Time perimitting, I will jump in with my some of my own theories :-)
Don't jump off the boat!

Thanks
-Akki

[Akkiraju Bhattiprolu]

Moderator's note:

> explain the usage శునకానందం? Is that the original word

This word has బూతు connotation. It is a slip on our part that this
appeared on the forum. Please consider the thread discussing this
word closed.

The original discussion on SinginadaM may continue as it is.

-Akkiraju Bhattiprolu
(On behalf of moderators)

[Hemantha Kumar Pamarthy]

Yes, almost all the children would be weaned away from mother's milk by the=
time they achieve an age from where they could remember happenings. In my =
opinion it would be impossible for a person to remember seeing his/her moth=
er's breasts when he/she had played around or suckled milk. Maybe they woul=
d have seen when their younger siblings were suckling but their own sucklin=
g, impossible to remember.

Again yes, those stray cases where the children could have suckled upto an =
age of three or slightly above. In those cases, such mothers ought to be re=
ally worshipped.

Best wishes
Hemantha Kumar =A0

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 lylayer wrote :
<snip>

>Because no grown man or woman will think of mothers breasts or milk.
>In fact grown people have great difficulty associating sex with
>their parents. I am confident if you take a survey from grown ups in
>any culture at present and pose this question - do you have fond
>memory of your mother's breasts and how you played with her breasts-

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Avineny N. Bhaskar]

I can't refrain anymore posting my views on this topic.

1. I really do not know what Bharatamuni wrote. There are no written
biography of the Rushis and Sanyaasis how their personal life was. Why
bother about it? How does it matter to the listener if the writer of
చిటపట చినుకులు పడుతూ ఉంటె... has got two wives or he was a
bachelor with one lover? I like the expressions(భావం) of the
songs. I can really relate myself to situation of romantic walk in the
rain with my lover.

2. Next thing is about అంగాంగ వర్ణన. Why so much of fuss on such
a simple topic? What's wrong with the అంగాంగ వర్ణన?

ఏ జీవి బ్రతుకుకైనా మూలకారణం, తన వంశాన్ని ఈ మట్టిలో నిలిపి
పోవుటయే. ఇందులో ఆడ, మగా ఇద్దరికి ఈ ఒక్కటే కర్తవ్యమూ. పనులు
మాత్రమే వేరువేరుకాని, ధ్యేయం ఒకటే.

As per the Natural Selection Theory, the man gives first preference to
the woman who has got big breasts and wide hip to ensure a healthy baby.

ఈ అంగ వర్ణనలొ తప్పేముందో నాకు అర్థం కావడంలేదు. కాలాని
తగ్గట్టు సాహిత్యము కూడా కొత్త అవతారమెత్తుతుంది. నిన్నటి కవులు
వాళ్ళ యుగ ధర్మాన్ని పాటించి వర్ణనలు చేశారు. ఈ రోజుకు
తగ్గట్టుగ రాస్తున్నారు ఇప్పటి కవులు. మనసుకు సొంపుగ వున్న వాటిని
ప్రజలు ఆదరిస్తారు. మిగతావాటిని తీసిపడేస్తారు. ఆ రోజు నుంచి
ఈ రోజు వరకు గొప్పగ చదువుకుంటు వస్తున్నారంటే వాటిలో ఇబ్బంది
కలిగించేలాంటి వర్ణనలు లేవేమో.



Regards,
Bhaskar.

[J. K. Mohana Rao]

--- Srinivas Nagulapalli <srini...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> I thought SrI pAmarti satyanArAyaNa gAru already addressed it.
> How sure are we regarding its author being SaMkara?
> It is very natural to attribute any/every work to a
> famous and already revered personality to gain quick
> credibility. I totally agree with Satya gAru in doubting,
> that some one who wrote VivekacUDAmaNi, bhAshyAs on
> Bhagavadgita, and also BhajagoviMdaM would find the temperament to
> pen such imagery.
>

Sorry, no! I am reminded of the story of appakavi.

తెలుగు ఛందస్సులో యతి ప్రకరణములో అఖండయతి అను
ఒక యతి గలదు. ఇది సంధి ద్వార వచ్చును. ఉదాహరణ-

నీవు + అడుగ = నీవడుగ (వ-కైనను, అ-కైనను యతి చెల్లును)
సుధా + అర్ణవము = సుధార్ణవము (ధా-కు, ఆ-కు యతి చెల్లును)

ఈ అచ్చులతో సంధి వచ్చినప్పుడు సంధిని అఖండముగా
(అనగా విఝువక) భావించి యతిని వ్యంజనాక్షరముతో
చెల్లించుట. కాని అచ్చుతో యతి పాటించిన సుందరముగా
నుండును. కావున నన్న్నయాది కవులు ఎక్కువగా అచ్చుతో
యతి పాటించిరి. అప్పకవికి కూడ ఇదియే ఇష్టము.
అతనికి హల్లుతో యతి పట్టదు. కావున అతడు
కవుల పద్యములలో అచ్చుకు యతి చెల్లునట్లు మార్పులను
చేసెను. దానిని లేఖకుల తలపై పెట్టెను.

అదే విధముగా శంకరులపై కొందఝు ఒక సిద్ధాంతమును
ఉంచుకొని అతని కొన్ని కావ్యములు ఈ మూసలో నుందనప్పుడు
వారు ఆ కావ్యములనే వ్రాయలేదు, వేరెవరో వ్రాసిరి
అనుచున్నారు. ఆది శంకరులు వ్రాసిన అత్యుత్తమ స్తోత్రములలో
సౌందర్యలహరి ఒకటి. కాంచీకామకోటి పీఠాధిపతియైన
చంద్రశేఖర సరస్వతుల వారు దీనిపై వ్యాఖ్యానములను
కూడ చేసిరి. అట్టి మహనీయులే ఈ కావ్యము శంకరులదని
భావించునప్పుడు My theory is correct, your experiment is
wrong అని చెప్పుట సరియేనా?

The sauMdaryalahari sataka IS by Sankara. We have to
argue from this premises. We must not say that he did
not write the book and so there is no place for any
argument!

With kind regards! - J K Mohana Rao




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com

[sreeniparuchuri]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "J. K. Mohana Rao" <jkmrao@y...>
wrote:

> The sauMdaryalahari sataka IS by Sankara. We have to

*************
Aha! I am reminded of what VNR said on "authorship" i.r.t Indian
texts. Title of one of his oft-cited papers reads: "Texts without
authors and authors without texts".

Regards,
Sreenivas

[Srinivas Nagulapalli]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, SrI J. K. Mohana Rao gAru wrote:

> My theory is correct, your experiment is wrong అని చెప్పుట
> సరియేనా?
> The sauMdaryalahari sataka IS by Sankara. We have to
> argue from this premises. We must not say that he did
> not write the book and so there is no place for any
> argument!

I don't think I disagreed, but I am sorry, I may not have been
clear. In fact the title itself follows the other famous one
శివానందలహరి. What I am not sure and would like to get clarity
is, does this mean all the imagery in it flowed from SaMkara's pen.
Our texts are notorious for many ప్రక్షిప్త padyAlu. My attempt
is to examine if there is any discernable differences in style/flow
that makes it a plausible case for questioning authorship about
such imagery.

And I also want to add, it does not matter much to me if SaMkara
wrote it completely or not. Whoever composed it envisioned the
chosen idol/goddess even if the similies are very earthly. They say
upAsana is to see ఉత్కృష్ట భావం in నికృష్ట వస్తు. And I dare
not say/judge any thing as even remotely as నికృష్ట వస్తు!
But, this may be an exxagerated instance of seeing ఉత్కృష్ట
భావం in శృంగార వస్తు.

Furthermore, with all the sensual depictions and sculptures,
outside many temples, I don't think it is terribly difficult
for any perceptive mind, let alone SaMkara, to figure all this
without in the least handicapped by the lack of direct self
experience!

I do not have any more to add on this, as this is where my
knowledge ends (and ignorance begins!). I am open for being
corrected and would be grateful too.

With best regards
-Srinivas

[Viplav Reddy]

Srini Paruchuri:

I just want a random question answered -- without considering any
arguments, to the factual extent as possible (say, with your critical
touch of expertise/memory bank):

When did women get into Temples? OR were they outcast at any point
along the history, where men scooped up enough time to build their own
sanctuaries and called them Temples -- showing all kinds of depictions
& possibly leading those writers around them as well? (it has been
long since I read taapii dharmaa raavu, if that or other references
are shown, may be it will give me enough of an incentive to look for
those).

What was the time period where women were not allowed to take up
dance? Was it true just for Kuchipudi or Bharatanatyam as well? The
17th Century kuchipudi reference takes us to 8th Century Nattuvamela
(courtesy: google) & I was curious if there was no gender equality
then wrt to dance!?

I think in order to understand why women were described in classical
texts the way they were, it helps to know what the entire setting was,
connecting the dots, if you will. I am not sure if someone can dare
use "telugu words" (not sanskrit) to describe a goddess or any woman
for that matter at this time without it being judged as a pornography.
Again, some writers in 80's did go into semi-porn but they were
hardly writers let alone poets.

Hope to see atleast a couple of references and an engaging discussion
on the early years than applying it to current days -- we do not seem
to understand the history enough to judge it whether thru' then morals
or current ones.

regards, Viplav
PS. it goes without saying, addressing to Paruchuri does not mean
other knowledgeable folks can not jump in.

[Subrahmanyam W]

> My original question is still unanswered.

> Poets are married and so are Rshis. But people like
> the author of sauMdaryalahari took to saMnyAsa straight
> from brahmacharya without passing through gRhasthASrama.

> How can such people make descriptions that are beyond
> their ken?

I remember reading a 'story' where Sankara had to study 'Srungara
Shaastram' ( or something to that effect..) to defeat a 'Gruhastu'
philosopher in a debate.. Can somebody elaborate on this? or is
everybody assuming that this is just another story.

Mani.

[Srinivas Nagulapalli]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Subrahmanyam W

<subrahmanyam.w@g...> wrote:
>
>
> I remember reading a 'story' where Sankara had to study 'Srungara
> Shaastram' ( or something to that effect..) to defeat a 'Gruhastu'
> philosopher in a debate.. Can somebody elaborate on this? or is
> everybody assuming that this is just another story.

Mani gAru,
To my mind, it is just another story- an interesting & imaginative
one I would add. I do not believe it needs much for a perceptive
and incisive mind to figure it all, let alone studying deeply,
with all the visual aids of sculptures on Temple exteriors and what
not. Just my opinion!

Regards
-Srinivas

[lylayer]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "Savithri Machiraju"
<savithri@i...> wrote:
>

రెండు మూడు సంవత్సరాల క్రితం ఒక సాహితీ సదస్సు లో మీ
ఉపన్యాసము విన్నాను. మరువనే లేదు నేను మీ మధుర భాషణము.

Pleasure saying Hi to you again! Savithri!

> Satyavati garu also objects to some speakers calling
themselves "humanist" rather than feminist, and sees this as a
betrayal of feminism. But the whole motivation for the start of the
feminist movement was that women were not being treated as human.
Is not the final goal of feminism to see that all people are treated
as human beings, and, as such, is not "humanism" the logical outcome
and ultimate goal of feminism?

I like that.

> So perhaps the writers who described themselves this way have
grown past the confining definitions of gender, and see all people
as one.

I like that.

>I seriously wish Indian feminists would first learn about
> their own history, before parroting the pronouncements of foreign
feminists.

How is that? Does that mean Indian women humans have different
humanism than foreign women humans? If so how is it different? In
what ways should Indian feminists' thinking be different than
foreign feminists?

The writers crossing the gender confinements is good. Why not cross
the geographic confinements too, at the same time? Why should Indian
feminists know their own history first?

Thanks. Any other rbites, if so inclined please chip in or chirp in.

regards
lyla.:-)

[Kamesh]

> I take this occasion to request you to kindly post ViswanAtha gAri
> explanation about that padyaM too! Now that you mentioned, I
> believe I am not the only one curious, I guess :-) Anyway,
> I can understand the question regarding సైకత శ్రోణి, I admit.
> But, I am not sure about చంచరీకచయ సుందర వేణి. First,
kindly
> correct me and elaborate its meaning. My understanding is it
> describes జడ and I do not see anything inappropriate in this
> one, yet.

The explanation to this poem does not contain much stuff in it except
highlighting the SabdAlaMkAranu in it as on of the Potana's బాణీ.
One thing I want to rietrate is that the అంగాంగ వర్ణనలు bother
me not because I feel they are immoral or something like that but
because I cannot see any purpose that they are serving to the context
and in most cases are jarring. Let us take the same example of this
poem. Both సైకత శ్రోణి and చంచరీకచయ సుందరవేణి bother me
equally. Becasue, what poet seem to do in this poem is "క్షోణితల్ంబు
నెన్నుదురు సోకగ సరస్వతిని మ్రొక్కడం". Immediately he describes
her as సైకత శ్రోణి and చంచరీకచయ సుందరవేణి. So it appears
to me as if Saraswati is turning her back on the poet when he is
praying her! That is what bothers me! If you say that the adjectives
are just there without any real meaning behind them, or just for the
SabdAlaMkAraM, then I consider it as a bad poetry. And so it bothers
me again!

> -------------------------------------------------------------
> తల్లిని "పయోరుహాననా" అని సంబోధించటం ఉచితం కాదని
> కొందరంటారు. అయితే, ఇక్కడ అవయవార్థం అవివక్షితమని
> గ్రహించాలి. ఇటువంటిది ఈ ఆశ్వాసంలోనే మరొకటి ఉన్నది.
> వాసుకి తన చెల్లెలైన జరత్కారువును "అంబుజనేత్రా" (2.216)
> అని సంబోధిస్తాడు. ఇవి కావ్య భాషలో గౌరవాన్ని తెలిపే
> సంబుద్ధులుగా పరిగణింపబడతాయి. ఇందులో కొందరు భావించినట్లు
> అనౌచిత్యం లేదు.
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Needless to say, I find criticising such things as
> రంద్రాణ్వేషణ and not any great సాహిత్య విమర్శ.
>

I do not think it is రంద్రాణ్వేషణ. If I am immersed into the
story, the characters and how they talk to each other, and there
suddenly the son calls her mother "payOruhAnanA", it would certainly
distract me. That is because it is not లోక సహజము, at any point
of time. I do not know any reason to believe that these kind of
adjectives are used to show respect. A brother calling his sister
అంబుజనేత్ర, IMO, is not a correct comparison. Again I want to
reitrate here that it does not bother me because it is immoral or any
such thing, but because it is very artificial (correct word in telugu
is ఎబ్బెట్టుగా ఉండడం).

regards,
Kamesh.

[s_pamarty]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "J. K. Mohana Rao" <jkmrao@y...>
wrote:

----

> The sauMdaryalahari sataka IS by Sankara. We have to
> argue from this premises. We must not say that he did
> not write the book and so there is no place for any
> argument!

----

Dear mOhana rAvu gAru:

My original question was whether you could throw some light on the
writing style and link the hymns to SrI SaMkara categorically and
without doubt.

I was confused with your earlier question. You repeatedly asked how
the "author" could have known about human anatomy instead of
mentioning SrI SaMkara's name in your first two posts. May be, I
thought, you shared the doubt that I had about the "author" not being
SrI SaMkara.

I was always thinking that SrI SaMkara may not be the author, and that
it was only attributed to him just as it is always stated. Now, I am
confused because you say with enough confidence that "IT" was SaMkara.

I am naturally assuming that you have enough proof behind your
emphasis. I would be happy if you can share it.

My aim in asking is to only know without ambiguity if SrI Adi SaMkarA
was indeed the author without resorting to any assumptions. :-) If it
was indeed SaMkara, I confess that I will have to realign a few
things. This, therefore, is important for me to know. Oh! from the
view of an advaitin, on second thoughts, may be it's not important!

However, for the record, my doubt was based on the following:

1. As a lay man, I could feel a palpable difference in the content in
his other works and the hymns attributed to him. For instance, in his
other works, he comes across as a proponent of జ్ఞాన and not
భక్తి. In my own ignorant understanding, these two are not the
same. I wanted to know from you if you could find something palpably
different in style as well as content.

2. How could SaMkara (if he was the author), as a person who gave
absolute importance to wisdom, and also as one who showed wisdom in
the theory that he stated, pen such imagery (while he was showing such
staunch opposition to giving in to the iMdriyas)? I therefore assumed
that it may not be him.

3. Not only me, there seem to have been other people who doubted the
authorship of the hymns attributed to him. Professor W. Norman Brown
of Harvard University seems to have questioned it in his 43rd volume
of the Harvard Oriental Series. I haven't read this book, but would
gladly do so if I can lay my hands on it. It appears that Sir John
Woodroffe who is an authority on tAMtric literature also held such a view.

4. I also read somewhere about a view that the authors of the first
and last parts of saundarya lahari were not the same and also about a
myth being associated with it.

This information on the last two points was obtained from the internet
of course. :-)

I would be happy if you, or anyone else, can categorically clear this
confusion backed with concrete evidence. I would be glad to know the
truth. Until then, I will continue to believe that the great SaMkara
is not the author of the hymns that are attributed to him.

However, if we assume that it was indeed SaMkara that wrote the hymn,
your question remains.

SrI SaMkara hailed from the area that we call kEraLa today. The dress
code in this part of our country was very liberal (by modern
standards) even till the middle of the last century. What were the
womens' dressing fashions in these parts in those days?.

May be, if we safely assume that they were not giving prominence to
covering themselves up too much (unlike the situation of today?), it
would have been easily possible for even a person who was practicing
celibacy to know human anatomy without a problem.

Besides, most tribals in the madhya pradES and north Eastern regions
went around in the buff till about 30 years ago. SaMkara travelled all
around the country. It may not have been necessary in those days to
remove the clothes on a person to know what's beneath like we have to
do today. And, he seems to have debated a lot with Jains and Buddhists
(some of who could have been naked anyway). Any light on the dressing
habits of those people at that time?

Also, SaMkara did mention about the five kOSAs in the human body
elsewhere in his works. May be, he did study human anatomy thoroughly
before he emphatically stated his advaita philosophy.

He should have been an authority in anatomy in his time to have stated
those things. In such a case, why wouldn't he have studied the anatomy
also closely from the point of view of a researcher in search of the
truth? What's surprising in his knowing it? Why should anyone look at
it from a vulgar angle?

Therefore, I have no problem at all if SaMkara was the author of the
hymns or not, even though I would like to believe he wasn't (for
philosophical reasons). :-)

I am hoping that I have been able to answer your question to your
satisfaction. I may please be forgiven if I made any mistake anywhere.

Thanks and best wishes

Satya

[Srinivas Nagulapalli]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, SrI Kameshwara Rao gAru wrote:

> Let us take the same example of this poem. Both సైకత శ్రోణి and
> చంచరీకచయ సుందరవేణి bother me equally. Becasue, what poet
> seem to do in this poem is "క్షోణితల్ంబు నెన్నుదురు సోకగ
> సరస్వతిని మ్రొక్కడం". Immediately he describes her as సైకత
> శ్రోణి and చంచరీకచయ సుందరవేణి. So it appears to me as if
> Saraswati is turning her back on the poet when he is praying her!
> That is what bothers me! If you say that the adjectives
> are just there without any real meaning behind them, or just for
> the SabdAlaMkAraM, then I consider it as a bad poetry. And so it
> bothers me again!

Thanks for the detailed explanation. I request you to kindly
bear with my impudence and possibly my ignorance.

I agree to everything about the two adjectives when viewed in
isolation. But when read in the context of the entire poem,
it gives a different image, atleast to my understanding. I see
it as an attempt to give physical dimension through words for
the act of మ్రొక్కడం.

The order of the words seems logical as if how Saraswathi would
appear when one begins to lift the head after prostrating. As the
gaze lifts from the ground క్షోణితలం upwards, one sees the
contentional-word శ్రోణి at the base as she is sitting, with her
long flowing hair వేణి, and by then seems to even hear heart-
conquering voice చిత్తవశీకరణైక వాణి and then, when the gaze
finally reaches upwards, beholds the image of her holding in her
beautiful hands రమ్య పాణి- the అక్షమాల, చిలుక, పద్మము,
మఝియు పుస్తకము. And every word serves to sculpt the contours
of the image viewed with an effect of shifting focus as the
eye lens of the gaze moves and also has శబ్దాలంకారం.

There are descriptions in the opposite order too starting from
head-to-toe, like కస్తూరి తిలకం, లలాట ఫలకే slOkaM.
But, this ground-up gaze description, I find charming and I am hard
pressed to see any gross inappropriateness in this, when read as a
whole. Am I not "seeing" something?

> > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > తల్లిని "పయోరుహాననా" అని సంబోధించటం ఉచితం కాదని
> > కొందరంటారు. అయితే, ఇక్కడ అవయవార్థం అవివక్షితమని
> > గ్రహించాలి. ఇటువంటిది ఈ ఆశ్వాసంలోనే మరొకటి ఉన్నది.
> > వాసుకి తన చెల్లెలైన జరత్కారువును "అంబుజనేత్రా" (2.216)
> > అని సంబోధిస్తాడు. ఇవి కావ్య భాషలో గౌరవాన్ని తెలిపే
> > సంబుద్ధులుగా పరిగణింపబడతాయి. ఇందులో కొందరు భావించినట్లు
> > అనౌచిత్యం లేదు.
> > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > Needless to say, I find criticising such things as
> > రంద్రాణ్వేషణ and not any great సాహిత్య విమర్శ.
> >
> I do not think it is రంద్రాణ్వేషణ. If I am immersed into the
> story, the characters and how they talk to each other, and there
> suddenly the son calls her mother "payOruhAnanA", it would
> certainly distract me. That is because it is not లోక సహజము,
> at any point of time. I do not know any reason to believe that
> these kind of adjectives are used to show respect. A brother
> calling his sister అంబుజనేత్ర, IMO, is not a correct comparison.
> Again I want to reitrate here that it does not bother me because it
> is immoral or any such thing, but because it is very artificial
> (correct word in telugu is ఎబ్బెట్టుగా ఉండడం).

I agree and would go further and say the entire poetry (with all
అలంకారాలు) as artificial to begin with. I wonder if any one
talks in poetical way లోక సహజము at any point of time. Much
so when the son is questioning indignantly his mother, about why
he has to serve the low-creatures of snakes. అసలు పద్య రూపంలో
మాట్లాడడమే ఎబ్బెట్టుగా ఉంటుందనుకుంటున్నాను. And I am trying with
difficulty to discern how calling lotus-eyed is that different
from calling lotus-faced - both seem equally artificial. I believe
criticising Nannayya by characterizing that one word as
inappropriate is unfair and unsubstantial.

May be "payOruhAnanA" is today's version of "nice mom"! I cannot
grasp the rationale and some how, cannot think highly of the
criticism. Whether it was vETUri prabhAkara SAstri gAru or
who ever, it seems more like they want to pick on Nannayya and
make it sensational- thats all. And poor Nannayya is not even
around to say a word. May be he wouldn't say a word even if he is
around.

I unabashedly, but honestly, expressed my thoughts and
understanding (and possibly ignorance). And I am totally open for
correction, and would be really grateful to find where I erred.

With best regards
-Srinivas

[Sreenadh Jonnavithula]

@

I'm sure there is an interesting discussion going on here, but I (and I
suppose several other ignorant people like me) am lost .. can you translate
unfamilar and unusual words, so that we learn as we are getting entertained
..

Thanks

Sreenadh

----- Original Message -----
From: "Srinivas Nagulapalli" <srini...@yahoo.com>

> > Let us take the same example of this poem. Both సైకత శ్రోణి and
> > చంచరీకచయ సుందరవేణి bother me equally. Becasue, what poet
> > seem to do in this poem is "క్షోణితల్ంబు నెన్నుదురు సోకగ
> > సరస్వతిని మ్రొక్కడం". Immediately he describes her as సైకత
> > శ్రోణి and చంచరీకచయ సుందరవేణి. So it appears to me as if

> > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > > తల్లిని "పయోరుహాననా" అని సంబోధించటం ఉచితం కాదని

టొ ఫొస్త్ అ మెస్సగె, సెంద్ ఇత్ తొ: రచ్చబందయహూగ్రౌప్స్.చొం

[DVP Rao]

My many many thanks to all ( Kameswara Rao garu, Ramanna garu, Vemuri garu , Nachaki garu ....) who responded with an answer.

On a closing note, I wonder if there are any compilation of such expressions in a book form or ....web site...

Thank you once again.
DVP Rao

alaa singinadam jeelakarra anna naanuDi modalayyindi.

A.S.L.Kameswara rao

That is correct again. The usage is ఆ వాడు చెప్పేది కొత్తగా ఏముంటుంది జీలకర్రా - సింగినాదం. 'No new information can be obtained'

Ramanna

[Srinivas Nagulapalli]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Sreenadh Jonnavithula wrote:
>
>.. can you translate unfamilar and unusual words, so that we learn
>as we are getting entertained

It is nice to know that this discussion is providing some
entertainment:-) I am afraid that wasn't exactly the motive of
anyone, but wouldn't complain!:-) Here is the quick run down of the
words, I guess you might be looking for, and to the extent I know
them.

Pothana's padyaM is:
క్షోణితలంబు నెన్నుదురు సోకగ మ్రొక్కి నుతింతు సైకత
శ్రోణికి జంచరీకచయ సుందరవేణికి రక్షితామర (or తానత)
శ్రేణికి దోయజాతభవ చిత్తవశీకరణైక వాణికిన్
వాణికి నక్షదామ శుక వారిజ పుస్తక రమ్య పాణికిన్

క్షోణితలము = నేల
నన్+ నుదురు(fore-head)
మ్రొక్కి, నుతింతు(praise)
సైకత = ఇసుక దిన్నెలు
శ్రోణి = పిఝుదులు
సుందర వేణి = సుందరమైన జడ
అక్షదామ = అక్షమాల
శుక = చిలుక
వారిజ = పద్మము
రమ్య పాణి = beautiful hand.

Obviously, the appropriateness of the usage of శ్రోణి and వేణి
is questioned.

>> తల్లిని "పయోరుహాననా" అని సంబోధించటం ఉచితం కాదని

This word పయోరుహాననా is from Nannayya's poem and its meaning
was already given by SrI Mohana Rao gAru as పద్మముఖీ
or lotus-faced. If there is interest, I can pull the poem,
(don't remember) and post it later.

Hope this helps.

Regards
-Srinivas

To Post a message, send it to: racch...@yahoogroups.com

[Hemantha Kumar Pamarthy]

....to follow the adage ఇంట గెలిచి రచ్చ గెలువు :-)

The comment is made on invitation.:-))

Best wishes
Hemantha Kumar =A0

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 lylayer wrote :
>
>The writers crossing the gender confinements is good. Why not cross
>the geographic confinements too, at the same time? Why should Indian
>feminists know their own history first?
>
>Thanks. Any other rbites, if so inclined please chip in or chirp in.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[ari_sitaramayya]

> > Satyavati garu also objects to some speakers calling
> themselves "humanist" rather than feminist, and sees this as a
> betrayal of feminism. But the whole motivation for the start of
the
> feminist movement was that women were not being treated as human.
> Is not the final goal of feminism to see that all people are
treated
> as human beings, and, as such, is not "humanism" the logical
outcome
> and ultimate goal of feminism?
>
> I like that.
>
> > So perhaps the writers who described themselves this way have
> grown past the confining definitions of gender, and see all people
> as one.
>
> I like that.

A while ago senator Hatch argued that affirmative action is a
hindrance to the achievment of a color blind society. One can
interpret from that that the sanator is a genuine egalitarian. On
the other hand one could also ask where was the senator when blacks
were being discriminated against left and right. Some uncharitable
crude guy like me could even suggest that the guy is simply a racist
and that he was only arguing for the end of affirmative action to
end the few opportunities it offers the black people.

Similar arguments can be made about people who are against
reservations for lower castes in India.

What has this got to do with humanism and feminism you ask. Humanism
is highly desirable, but you get there only when every section of
society has a measure of dignity and respect. When humanism becomes
a cover just to shy away from the feminist struggle or even to sneer
at it, its proponents, such as those at the conference reviewed by
Satyavati garu, are in the same league as the supporters of color
blind society.

Regards,
Ari Sitaramayya.

[lylayer]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "Ramarao Kanneganti" <rama@k...>
wrote:
>
> My criticism if any is about there are no good descriptions of
women in our religious and irreligious texts.
>
> Look at this way: Every women is "padma mukhi" or "chandra mukhi".
How about > "dOsa ginja" type face? How about a nose that curves
funnily at the end?

May be it is only one woman that has inspired all. May be they are
brain washed to think of only one woman:-) and write about only one
woman.:-)

>How about the shade of dark that shimmers in the sunsets? How about
the eyes that not particularly close, but have a sparkling look?
Were they blind to all the infinite beauty that almost makes us cry
for being born?
>

That you are an unbridled and unharnessed romantic spirit, thinker
and a writer and are a contemporary, is in itself a relief. Some
where out there, there is a loadstar.

Still remains an enigma how you can like కట్టే, కొట్టే, తెచ్చే
kuTumbarAo! But then there is the technical side of you which
requires clear and succint ( :-)even though wrong) instuctions.:-)

> I don't buy that the description is always non-sexual. There are
enough sexual contexts in the books that still do bad descriptions.

తెర తీయగరాదా, తిరుమల వేంకట రమణ.. !

> Even before committing crimes against feminism, they committed
crimes against good taste, and perhaps even more importantly
plagiarism, I would say.

Ramarao! It is not plagiarism. Who will want to copy one boring
description after the other, book after book ? It is conformity.
It is the need for endorsement,approval, and fear of estrangement,
that makes men think the same thoughts, say the same old thing.
The rational side of man wants to think and reason. the animal side
of man wants to imitate, move with the herd, return to the same
resting place at the end of the day.
From the herd's side, they got to keep the new writer in line . One
stray tendril thought peeping out of the veil , one new phrase. one
foreign expression, the herd bristles, listens, and attacks, and in
the stampede crushes the sprouting alien thought.
If some one asks you "Don't say it. If you want to say it, say it
this way." - What does that mean ? It means please say the same old
thing.
When man has to choose between boredom and freedom the animal man
chooses boredom.

I don't think the men writers are thinking of women as they wrote or
write . They are thinking of other men. Whom they need to impress.
imitate, Cow tow to. There is no Helen in Homer's Iliad even though
she is supposedly the reason for the Trojan war. There is really, no
Monica in Bill Clinton's Odyssey.

I am still thinking about what women writers are writing, and what
they are thinking while they are writing :-)....

regards
lyla

[lylayer]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "ari_sitaramayya" <ari@O...>
wrote:

>A while ago senator Hatch argued that affirmative action is a
>hindrance to the achievment of a color blind society.

>Some uncharitable crude guy like me could even suggest that the
>guy is simply a racist and that he was only arguing for the end of
>affirmative action to end the few opportunities it offers the black
>people.

Affirmative action while necessary can not last for ever for blacks
or others. Then you have to get into affirmative action for the
white people. you will be constantly rescuing one group or the other.

No race, no gender, no caste, no country etc should be obligated to
pay for their ancestors mistakes, for ever. Once the mistakes are
rectified, the hatchet need to be buried. The special assistance has
to stop. People should think and act on equal terms. There is no
need to point towards any group constantly and remind them of
atrocities commited towards them and humiliate them once again.
There is no need to look back constantly. what is the use of any
reform, if you don't recognize that change had already happened?
People who continue in the anger mode, and who are bent on blaming
or criticizing why and what went wrong years ago , slow down the
process of healing and repair.

> Similar arguments can be made about people who are against
> reservations for lower castes in India.

Which ones are the lower castes? Does one have to mention their sex,
caste for college or job applications in Andhra now a days?

Are new castes being created in Andhra by any chance? Who are
దళితులు. in Andhra? Is it a new caste, religion, or political or
writing group? We may be reading their writings in the book club so
I want to know. I have heard the communist party has like 7-8
divisions now. I wonder if new religions emerged even? If a new
group or caste is manufactured does it start at the lowest rung or
start at the highest? Which is more advantageous these days? It
looks like people are clamouring to be in the victim groups as
opposed to being in the elite groups. Is there such a trend? If
there is, is there a reason for such trend?

> What has this got to do with humanism and feminism you ask.
>Humanism is highly desirable, but you get there only when every
>section of society has a measure of dignity and respect.

I really don't see any issues exclusively feminine, in this 21st
century. I think men and women have same issues. Can you identify
any issue that effects only women and does not effect man or vice
versa?. A few examples will help.

The dignity and respect lies with each individual. it is
irrespective of gender, profession, caste, nationality etc. Society
does not provide or bestow dignity. A society, or community can
provide schools, roads, bridges etc. How can it provide respect?
Every one has to earn respect by their individual good work.

Ofcourse, these are some of my current beliefs, and thoughts.
But I have questions. Answers to those, or other convincing thoughts
or arguments out there may change my beliefs.

regards
lyla.

[Ramarao Kanneganti]

lylayer wrote:
> Affirmative action while necessary can not last for ever for blacks or
> others. Then you have to get into affirmative action for the white
> people. you will be constantly rescuing one group or the other.

Of course, that is the policy of most governments. Government, more than
anything else, is in the business of keeping a stable governing
structure. There is nothing worse than a disenfranchised segment that
causes instability.

If you say that today's privileged group will become tomorrow's
downtrodden, I agree with that. The policies are designed to keep a
dynamic equilibrium, one would hope.

> No race, no gender, no caste, no country etc should be obligated to pay
> for their ancestors mistakes, for ever. Once the mistakes are rectified,
> the hatchet need to be buried. The special assistance has to stop.

It is not about paying for the earlier mistakes. Or, even correcting
historical mistakes. It is about making the play even. Equality in law
looks magnificent, but can be cruel. As a French courtier said "The law
in its magnanimity prohibits rich and poor alike to sleep under the
bridge".

> People who continue in the anger mode,
> and who are bent on blaming or criticizing why and what went wrong years
> ago , slow down the process of healing and repair.

Agreed. In fact, any student of history should know that blaming the
ancestors is a futile endeavor.

> I wonder if
> new religions emerged even?

There are several new religions emerge. However, for a long while, they
will be called sects or even cults. Only time will tell whether they can
be considered a new religion or a branch, or even a sect. Consider the
different church groups here.

There are several new Gods that are being (re)discovered these days.
Shirdi baba and Santoshi Maa are discovered only this century. I do not
know if there are any discovered in the last few years.

> If a new group or caste is manufactured does
> it start at the lowest rung or start at the highest?

Typically, any small and cohesive group that organizes itself, organizes
around the some benefits it receives. In this country, they are based on
tax breaks. In our country, they are based on affirmative action. So, I
would say they would go for the a reserved status.

> I really don't see any issues exclusively feminine, in this 21st
> century.

I beg to differ. There are men-only issues -- male pattern baldness is
just some small issue (Looking at the spam I get, there are quite a few
of those). Seriously, there are women-only (almost exclusively) issues
as well. Spending most productive years in child rearing, and having a
deadline to have children can have repercussions in any society that
judges ability by the work you did before you are 30-35 can have adverse
effects.

> I think men and women have same issues. Can you identify any
> issue that effects only women and does not effect man or vice versa?. A
> few examples will help.
> The dignity and respect lies with each individual. it is irrespective of
> gender, profession, caste, nationality etc. Society does not provide or
> bestow dignity. A society, or community can provide schools, roads,
> bridges etc. How can it provide respect? Every one has to earn respect
> by their individual good work.

Refer to my French man's quotation. In any case, not all people are born
equal. We can say that everybody has to earn their dignity. However,
that kind of saying in a society that does let them earn their dignity
will lead to unstable societies. Needless to say that the French man's
quotation is a prelude to the French Revolution.

>
> regards
> lyla.


--
Rama

[j_sreenadh]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "lylayer" <lylayfl@a...> wrote:

>
> I really don't see any issues exclusively feminine, in this 21st
> century. I think men and women have same issues. Can you identify
> any issue that effects only women and does not effect man or vice
> versa?. A few examples will help.

Even in these days of PC, this is an extreme position; surely there
are women's issues, mens issues, and issues that affect both men and
women equally? Like it or not, pregnancy, say, is a women's issue; men
may have opinions on maternity, abortion, pre/extra marital sex, sex
trade etc., but it is a biological imperative for women. Perhaps what
Lyla garu means to say is that issues commonly thought of as feminine,
like job discrimination, are now "equal opportunity".

BTW, our ancestors appear to be very impartial in their literary
descriptions; A term like కమలలోచన could apply equally to male
and female characters (with allowances for grammatical endings). So to
extend Ramarao's rant, there are even fewer descriptions than he suggests.

> The dignity and respect lies with each individual. it is
> irrespective of gender, profession, caste, nationality etc. Society
> does not provide or bestow dignity. A society, or community can
> provide schools, roads, bridges etc. How can it provide respect?
> Every one has to earn respect by their individual good work.

While this is true in the long run, clearly, belonging to the right
whatever DOES confer instant respectability. Otherwise people wouldn't
fight so hard for equal opportunity to get into Harvard, or the
Augusta golf tournament. We have to look at the facts on the ground,
not idealizations ..

- Sreenadh

[lylayer]

qqqq@


--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "j_sreenadh" <sreenadh@g...>
wrote:

>
> Even in these days of PC, this is an extreme position; surely
there are women's issues, mens issues, and issues that affect both
men and women equally?
>Like it or not, pregnancy, say, is a women's issue; men
> may have opinions on maternity, abortion, pre/extra marital sex,
sex trade etc., but it is a biological imperative for women.

Like it or not! :-) :-)
Believe it or not - pregnancy is both man's and woman's issue.
unless it is immaculate conception or parthenogenesis or Madonna's
(not mother Mary but the rock star) pregnancy.

Men must have more than opinions. They have resposibilities and
rights. Every issue you mentioned above concerns woman and man.

kALidAsu's hero dushyaMta also thought SakuMtalA's pregnancy and
her child is her problem and not his. How does that telugu poem go?
Don't remember all of it.

విపరీత ప్రతిభాషలేమిటికి ఉర్వీ నాథ
నీ పుత్ర గాత్ర పరిష్వంగ సుఖంబు చేకొనుము...

I will translate it as - King! Cut the nonsensical dialogue, get up
and embrace your son. You will feel good. It gives you more comfort
than wearing pearl necklaces or sandalwood paste or some such cool
stuff. Telugu scholars may help me out. It is a nice poem.

Talking about abortion,etc. - yes, woman should have a choice but
that is giving man also the choice. Think about the plight of
Santana mahArAju who silently watched his wife ganga carry seven
pregnancies to term and drowning the new born, and finally put his
foot down and saved their eighth child, dEvavrata ( ashTama vasuvu )

ఫెర్హప్స్ వ్హత్
> ళ్య్ల గరు మీన్స్ తొ సయ్ ఇస్ థత్ ఇస్సుఎస్ చొమ్మొన్ల్య్ థౌఘ్త్ ఒఫ్ అస్
ఫెమినినె,
> లికె జొబ్ దిస్చ్రిమినతిఒన్, అరె నౌ "ఎఊల్ ఒప్పొర్తునిత్య్".

ంఎన్ అంద్ వొమెన్ అరె ఉఇచ్క్ తొ అచ్చెప్త్ థిస్ 'ఎఊల్ ఒప్పొర్తునిత్య్ధ్ిన్ జొబ్
అరెన బెచౌసె ఇత్ మీన్స్ అ సెచొంద్ పయ్ చెచ్క్ అంద్ థత్ ఇస్ అల్వయ్స్ నిచె తొ
హవె, బుత్ ఇత్ ఇస్ థె 'ఎఊల్ రెస్పొన్సిబిలిత్య్ధ్రీస్ వ్హెరె థెరె ఇస్
దిఫ్ఫిచుల్త్య్ ఫొర్ బొథ్ మెన్ అంద్ వొమెన్.

ఈ మైంతైన్ మ్య్ పొసితిఒన్, థత్ థెరె అరె నొ స్పెచిఫిచ్ ఫెమలె ఒర్ మలె
ఇస్సుఎస్, ఇన్ థిస్ చెంతుర్య్. ఆల్ల్ ఇస్సుఎస్ నీద్ తొ బె థౌఘ్త్ థ్రు అస్
ంఅణ్స్ (హుమన్)ఇస్సుఎస్.

రెగర్ద్స్
ల్య్ల.

ఫ్.శ్: ఈ షౌల్ద్ ప్రొబబ్ల్య్ స్తయ్ అవయ్ ఫ్రొం మ్య్థ్, వ్హెన్ దిస్చుస్సింగ్ రీల్
పెఒప్లె అంద్ చుర్రెంత్ ఇస్సుఎస్, బుత్ ఇత్ ఇస్ తూ ముచ్ ఫున్. డొణ్త్ మింద్
లొసింగ్ అన్య్ అర్గుమెంత్, బుత్ గొత్ తొ హవె ఫున్.:-)

టొ ఫొస్త్ అ మెస్సగె, సెంద్ ఇత్ తొ: రచ్చబందయహూగ్రౌప్స్.చొం

[sree...@ghantasala.info]

Quoting lylayer <lyl...@aol.com>:

> Like it or not! :-) :-)
> Believe it or not - pregnancy is both man's and woman's issue.
> unless it is immaculate conception or parthenogenesis or Madonna's
> (not mother Mary but the rock star) pregnancy.
>
> Men must have more than opinions. They have resposibilities and
> rights. Every issue you mentioned above concerns woman and man.

But surely, you must concede that there are differences in the applicability of
atleast this issue to men and women. To take another example from your favourite
field, Rama had the "responsibility" to take care of his children; but this is
merely a moral obligation, and it could be finessed by a perceived higher
obligation to keep his royal dignity unsullied. Seetha, on the other hand, had a
physical obligation. Like it or not (I know you love that phrase) the fetuses
(fetii?) were growing inside her, and she had to do something about it. So it is
squarely a woman's issue; we can hope that men accept responsibility for it, but
women have no choice in the matter.


> Men and women are quick to accept this 'equal opportunity' in job
> arena because it means a second pay check and that is always nice to
> have, but it is the 'equal responsibility' areas where there is
> difficulty for both men and women.

This is a slightly different issue, and in one sense, you're saying the same
thing that I am; which is, there is nothing inherent or natural (in the sense of
"subject to a law of nature") or inevitable about equal responsibility; Societal
and legal intervention is necessary to impose equal responsibility for issues
which assymmetrically affect men and women. IMHO, to deny that such issues exist
sets everything back to square one.

- Sreenadh







To Post a message, send it to: racch...@yahoogroups.com

[Sreenivas Paruchuri]

Since no one jumped in :) ...

Viplav Reddy wrote:

> When did women get into Temples? OR were they outcast at any point
> along the history, where men scooped up enough time to build their own

I am not aware that they were per se ever denied entry into temples.
There may be one or other exception like Ayyappa temple (but its a
'modern' creation! Right?) where only women of certain age groups are
permitted entry. On a related note, I wouldn't be surprized if there
exists a "for women only" temple in India :).

Let me know what you think of the following paper by a known Art
Historian specializing in South Asia:
http://faculty.sxu.edu/~rabe/khajuraho/

> What was the time period where women were not allowed to take up
> dance? Was it true just for Kuchipudi or Bharatanatyam as well? The

You mean so called 'classical dance' or any dance form; i.e., socalled
'folk'? If you meant
only classical dance, then I can give a very detailed answer. But,
before going into
details I 'll wait for your clarification.

Regards,
Sreenivas

[Viplav Reddy]

Srini paruchuri wrote:

> I am not aware that they were per se ever denied entry into temples.

Are you aware that they were allowed entry? Hopefully it is not
sounding trivial or rhetorical -- I am serious about the question
though. Is there a specific example, a writing or a text that is
credible enough to say that women were present in the premises of the
temples in ancient times?

I will try to get to the paper you cited in a day or two.

> You mean so called 'classical dance' or any dance form; i.e., socalled

not any dance form, but any dance form that existed in the early times
that was not considered disrespectiful; in other words, any dance form
that was performed in Temples by courtesans or any other artists.

Is there a reference where one could window in a period where the
respectful dance form took to the shape of disrespect and therefore,
women of repute would not be allowed to perform.

regards, viplav

[s_pamarty]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Viplav Reddy <viplavreddy@g...> wrote:

----

> Are you aware that they were allowed entry? Hopefully it is not
> sounding trivial or rhetorical -- I am serious about the question
> though. Is there a specific example, a writing or a text that is
> credible enough to say that women were present in the premises of the
> temples in ancient times?

----

viplav gAru:

Sorry for barging in. I don't know if it is credible enough, but in
rukmiNI kRshNa kalyANa katha, they say that rukmiNi came to the temple
of the mother goddess with her procession when kRshNa took (lifted?)
her in his chariot, and that rukmi the prince, gave them a hot chase.

With best wishes

Satya

[Avineny N. Bhaskar]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "s_pamarty" <pamarty@h...> wrote:

> in
> rukmiNI kRshNa kalyANa katha, they say that rukmiNi came to the temple
> of the mother goddess with her procession when kRshNa took (lifted?)
> her in his chariot, and that rukmi the prince, gave them a hot chase.

What a great elopement was it in those days? God himself had set an
example! But today the women of this country are afraid of running
away with the lover. Today's society didn't lay a right platform for
the lovers. We have materialised/corrupted the love for this
generation. We brain washed the daughters of the soil by saying things
like గ్రీను కారడు అబ్బాయి(America), తెల్ల కారడు అబ్బాయి(India),
etc :)


Regards,
Bhaskar.

[Bhaskar T.L.S.]

Srini paruchuri wrote:

I am not aware that they were per se ever denied entry into temples.
>
> Are you aware that they were allowed entry? Hopefully it is not
> sounding trivial or rhetorical -- I am serious about the question
> though.

Dalits for a long time were not allowed, right, includes Dalit
Women...

Bhaskar TLS

[Viplav Reddy]

Satya Pamarti wrote:

> Sorry for barging in. I don't know if it is credible enough, but in

> rukmiNI kRshNa kalyANa katha, they say that rukmiNi came to the temple
> of the mother goddess with her procession when kRshNa took (lifted?)

It would be relevant if you can come up with: the time period the
story was developed; whether it was a later-on folksy addition; the
parts of India this story might have come from.

Also consider, things related to Krishna may signify more of a
rebellion than the norm.

[s_pamarty]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Viplav Reddy <viplavreddy@g...> wrote:

> It would be relevant if you can come up with: the time period the
> story was developed; whether it was a later-on folksy addition; the
> parts of India this story might have come from.

>=20

> Also consider, things related to Krishna may signify more of a
> rebellion than the norm.

Dear viplav gAru:

As you might be aware, these things are all entangled in
controversies. There is very little we can say with certainty here.=20

However, the discovery of the lost city of dvAraka might be a help in
this matter. If we believe that the submerged city is indeed dvAraka
of yore and that kRshNa was its founder-ruler, then, we might have
something. The date that archaeologists give to the site is about 1520 BC.

So, the time period of the story could be close to that if we agree to
the above assumptions. I think it is in the SrImadBhAgavataM proper.
The parts in which this took place =E2=80" based on the above assumption =
=E2=80"
would be somewhere close to present day gujarAt.

Then, there are people who say that dvAraka would have been farther
westwards and that the time cannot be fixed. There are also people
that date the time to 3000 BC and some who fix it to beyond 5000 BC. :-)

Thanks and best wishes

Satya

[Viplav Reddy]

Satya Pamarti wrote:

> As you might be aware, these things are all entangled in
> controversies. There is very little we can say with certainty here.

in other words, we can not be sure of anything based on the story
here; such stories exist for the purpose of religion and not to
establish fact (if you were to read religion in the sense of a belief
system).

We might have a better start, say if we begin with knowns than unknowns.

We have kolanupaka jain temple built around 1104 AD;

Thousand pillars temple - 1163AD

A few of Khajuraho temples were built within that time period --
masons imported to some extent they say, now when they had the dieties
installed, did any of the kings ask their queens to enter these
temples? Reading Gayatri Devi autobiography 'A Princess Remembers'
gave me a feeling they (queens) were unwelcome to many places (even
though she would not explicitly say it).

Any idea when the original Tirumala Temple was built?

We know these physical structures exist. We know the time periods
these were built. We know in all likelihood, men built these (women
sthapatis perhaps did not exist, fair to say). Do we know if Rani
Rudramadevi entered a temple to perform a pUjaa or had their signature
act, what ever that would be, performed at a Temple, fro a fact?

Any evidence of any single stone inscription that says women were
present at an inauguration of a specific thing related to
Temple/religion or with a woman's name?

We seem to confuse too many times the datelines of when these stories
developed or fiction retold, regarding epics such as SrImadBhAgavataM,
with the actual places or the story dateline.

Also, men with freetime seem to have indulged just in sex and
religion. They might have woven their intoxicated dreams into stories
at times. On a connected note, Telugu TV is strikingly reliving the
past with religious programs and sexual (is it sensual?) /pornographic
songs and movies all day -

[lylayer]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, sreenadh@g... wrote:

> But surely, you must concede that there are differences in the
applicability of atleast this issue to men and women.

Concede! Did I hear concede!

but before we get into the agenda of the day, i.e -if pregnancy is
an exclusive issue of women, let the minutes show that you are the
one who kicked "bharatmuni" out of this thread. Let the court
reporter record it. let the forensic evidence show i am wearing
prada shoe size 6 with 6inch heel and Sreenadh is wearing
shoe ...and it is not my shoe mark on B.muni's butt.

Because i see bharat muni teeter totter towards a temple area where
viplav and parachuri are holding discussions on women and dance and
whether dance is respectful or what not and what if this muni goes
and tattles on me. And to boot, i hear he is an expert on dance.

(Personally, i have no objection and let us leave bharatmuni out of
it. because i have no idea who he is.)

Like it or not (I know you love that phrase) the fetuses
> (fetii?) were growing inside her, and she had to do something
about it. So it is> squarely a woman's issue; we can hope that men
accept responsibility for it, but > women have no choice in the
matter.

fetuses ,foetuses, foeti all are correct.
Let us also leave rama and sita out of it too, because rb will run
upto 600 posts again and it could be hard to handle.
Why not pick Michel Douglas and Catherine Zeta Jones. They seem to
be handling their careers, pregnancies and oscars well.

Think of all the good stuff associated with pregnancies. Think of
the parties, the baby showers, the massages, the prenatal clinics,
the whole society of Ob-GYN (many males) getting women thru one
trimester to the other, the maternity dresses the garment industry,
the diamonds men can give the roses that can be sent, the birthing
rooms, the many phone calls between America and India, the traveling
new G.P s, the air line tickets, the boosted travel industry - and
you say women are alone in their pregnancy? It is simply a woman's
issue?

IMHO, to deny that such issues exist
> sets everything back to square one.

No way! Nothing ever gets back to square one.

Really what is 40 weeks gestation period, in a life time, when men
and women are living into their nineties. That is 90 x 12 x 4 x 2=

You do the math and mean time there is golden sunshine here in this
gorgeous city and i am going to get my convertible out and be on
fifth ave and plank my easel and start painting.

Cheerio.
lyla.

[Ram Vishnubhotla]

namastE!

Viplav Reddy <vipla...@gmail.com> wrote:

Any idea when the original Tirumala Temple was built?

I hope I am not opening a new can of worms. Please read

http://www.ambedkar.org/Tirupati/Chap1.htm

Thanks & Regards,

Ramanna


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[sree...@ghantasala.info]

Without disagreeing with what you said, I don't quite see what would be
acceptable, then, as PROOF that women were allowed into temples.

Why is a stone inscription more authentic than a paper one? It too could have
been put in much after the fact, and writers in stone could have lied just as well.

Also, the lack of such an inscription is not proof that they weren't allowed
into temples either. For instance, it might simply mean that women's visits were
not important enough to record.

I guess you would have to find a contemporary writing, which can be dated
independantly of its content (eg. by carbon dating) which either mentions women
in temples, or states that they were not allowed to enter :)

- Sreenadh

Quoting Viplav Reddy <vipla...@gmail.com>:

> Any evidence of any single stone inscription that says women were
> present at an inauguration of a specific thing related to
> Temple/religion or with a woman's name?
>
> We seem to confuse too many times the datelines of when these stories
> developed or fiction retold, regarding epics such as SrImadBhAgavataM,
> with the actual places or the story dateline.

[Sreenivas Paruchuri]

Viplav Reddy wrote:

> though. Is there a specific example, a writing or a text that is
> credible enough to say that women were present in the premises of the
> temples in ancient times?

...

> It would be relevant if you can come up with: the time period the
> story was developed; whether it was a later-on folksy addition; the
> parts of India this story might have come from.

Before I invest lots of my time (Yes, I sincerely mean it!) and provide
you extensive bibliography/bibliographies on various subjects (since
last night you made me move half the books in my personal library :-) )
first lets me understand what is acceptable to you as 'proof/evidence'.
Please define who is an "author", what is a "text" etc. for you.

What is a "credible" text to you? Critical edition of Ramayana (Baroda
volumes)? Crit. ed.of mahaabhaarata (BORI, Poona)? naaTyaSaastra
(Maanavalli, Baroda)? innumerable Purana-s? bhaasa's (Oh, did he exist?)
plays? or kaaLidaasa's plays? ...

Or do you accept only "hard" evidence; i.e inscriptions on stone and
copper plates? Should I solely depend on EI (Epigraphica Indica), CII,
SII, multiple volumes of inscriptions from AP edited by Mallampalli,
Nelaturi, Parabrahma Sastry et al? Apropos "inscriptions", I would
highly recommend you to read Sanjay Subrahmanyam's essay "Whispers and
shouts: Some recent writings on medieval south India" reviewing Kenneth
Hall and Noboru Karashima's work in "The Indian Economic and Social
History Review" (IESHR, 38.4, 2001). Sanjay seriously questions the
(over) dependence on inscriptions.

> not any dance form, but any dance form that existed in the early times
> that was not considered disrespectiful; in other words, any dance form
> that was performed in Temples by courtesans or any other artists.

Start with writings of Saskia Kersenboom-Story. For e.g. her
"nityasumangaLi - Devadasi tradition in south India". A pioneering book
which kind of opened gates for innumerable studies on Devadasi tradition
in s. India. Also available as PB Indian edition from Motilal
Banarsidas.
Then you may like to check "From Sacred Servant to Profane Prostitute: A
History of the Changing Legal Status of the Devadasis in India” by Kay
Jordan. Again available as Indian PB edition from Munshiram Manoharlal,
if the western ed should be too expensive.

There are innumerable papers discussing the modern origins of
"bharatanaaTyam" (the name never existed before late-19th/early-20th
century), how Rukminidevi Arundale and her kaLaakshEtra "bowdlerized"
'traditional' Devadasi dance (a.k.a 'saadir'), what (negative) influence
did "reformers" like Dr.Muthulakshmi Reddy, Viresalingam et al "with
Victorian morals" enforce? How did Devadasi community, in front line
Bangalore Nagaratnamma and T. Baala saraswati (a.k.a. baala) react etc.
etc. etc. Check for Amrita Srinivasan's Cambridge thesis or her papers,
for e.g. in EPW, or Mathew Allen's (he studied under late T. viSwa,
brother of Baala, Brinda and Mukta and grandson of Dhanammal, at
Wesleyan) excellant paper in "The drama review" (1997), Fredereque
Marglin's monograph on Devadasis of Puri temple and so on. Can provide
you quite an extensive bibliography if you have access to good library.
If I had time and energy can send photocopies too, but copying 1500+
pages and shipping is no easy job for me.

> Also consider, things related to Krishna may signify more of a
> rebellion than the norm.

Is that right? However ... Check DD Kosambi's essay "The hisorical
Krishna", first published in Times of India annual, 1965 (pp. 27-36). I
think its reprinted in the recent collection of his Indological papers
published by OUP. A friend has borrowed my book. so, can't tell you for
sure. Have the original 1965 paper though.

If you are serious in going deeper, check the vast literature
'surrounding' భాగవతపురాణ.

> in other words, we can not be sure of anything based on the story
> here; such stories exist for the purpose of religion and not to
> establish fact (if you were to read religion in the sense of a belief system).

What did VNR say about "fact" and "fiction"? :-)

> temples? Reading Gayatri Devi autobiography 'A Princess Remembers'
> gave me a feeling they (queens) were unwelcome to many places (even
> though she would not explicitly say it).

No surprize! As VNR recently argued: "Castes that primarily share the
landed culture equate women with their land; own them as they own their
land, restrict their movement, control their sexuality and deny them
remarriage. Loyalty to one man (pativratya), which is generally
perceived as a value for all women in India, is primarily a landed caste
value. Landed culture values certain qualities in men, such as the
willingness to protect their women."

For complete discussion check his paper: "When Does Sita Cease To Be
Sita? Notes Toward a Cultural Grammar of Indian Narratives" published in
a volume of essays edited by Mandakranta Basu:
http://indologica.blogg.de/eintrag.php?id=231

> Any idea when the original Tirumala Temple was built?

Whcih "original"? The present one? its previous 'Hindu' version? the
Buddhist one? the Jaina one? Or the one before?

> Any evidence of any single stone inscription that says women were
> present at an inauguration of a specific thing related to
> Temple/religion or with a woman's name?

Check: Kakatiya inscriptions

Bhaskargaaru asked:

> Dalits for a long time were not allowed, right, includes Dalit Women...

Well, even "high-caste" women were also denied entry on the reasons of
'purity' for e.g. during menstruation period. The individual references
from literature are too numerous to list here. For e.g. see above cited
work from Marglin.

Satya Pamarthy wrote:

> Then, there are people who say that dvAraka would have been farther
> westwards and that the time cannot be fixed. There are also people
> that date the time to 3000 BC and some who fix it to beyond 5000 BC. :-)

Ah, long live S.R. Rao and archaeo-oceonography!! :-))

Regards,
Sreenivas

[Bhaskar T.L.S.]

> Bhaskargaaru asked:
>
> > Dalits for a long time were not allowed, right, includes Dalit
Women...
>
> Well, even "high-caste" women were also denied entry on the reasons
of
> 'purity' for e.g. during menstruation period.

The above two cases are entirely different. While one group were not
allowed (may be for three days) for physical reasons?, the other
group were never allowed at all due to social reasons. What was given
importance, physical or social purity?

Bhaskar

[sreeniparuchuri]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "Bhaskar T.L.S."

<pandajenny@y...> wrote:
> The above two cases are entirely different. While one group were
> not allowed (may be for three days) for physical reasons?, the
other
> group were never allowed at all due to social reasons. What was
given
> importance, physical or social purity?

I thought that anthropologically both cases are based on "purity"
concept and not on "physical/social" reasons, whether the
denial is day long or life long. Anyhow, you as a trained
Sociologist/Anthropologist know better. Most of my understanding on
this women's "purity" issue comes from reading three books;
1. already cited work of Marglin, 2. Thomas Buckley's (ed) Blood
magic : the anthropology of menstruation and 3. Carstairs' Twice-Born.

"Ill treatment of Dalits" is, IMO, a completely different thread.

Regards,
Sreenivas

[Viplav Reddy]

Srini paruchuri wrote a good note & It gives me pleasure to spend some
more time with the britannica-indica. I know no household names he
mentioned :) & I see no need to as long as such britannica's are
available. But I can attempt to clarify what I may be looking for --

> What is a "credible" text to you? Critical edition of Ramayana (Baroda
> volumes)? Crit. ed.of mahaabhaarata (BORI, Poona)? naaTyaSaastra
> (Maanavalli, Baroda)? innumerable Purana-s? bhaasa's (Oh, did he exist?)
> plays? or kaaLidaasa's plays? ...

None of them & all of those and more. Please allow me to explain.

Jury of my peers may want to see things related to these above, as
well as hard evidence. The amount of confidence placed on each of
them, especially puraaNaas diminishes with each time-period they are
written about vs. written in. Example: confidence placed on a story
related to dvaapara yugaM, written in kaliyugaM unfortunately can only
be called a belief. It does not count towrad evidence. Ramayana, the
same. It does provide evidence wrt to the time line it is written in
(if we are certain to narrow down the window like we can with molla or
other).

Substitute, those above yugaalu with timelines for hard evidence you
wish to ask me about. A copper plate or a stone inscription from 1200
AD need to be corroborated with other evidence from around the same
period from different parts that were covered under the same regime of
the time -- example, vijayanagara empire or kaakatiya rulers related
inscriptions need to be verified and cross checked for accuracy of
statements from the same time period from a different geographical
region, preferably ruled by the same dynasties -- for accuracy or
level of confidence will go up with each subsequent line of dots.

> Or do you accept only "hard" evidence; i.e inscriptions on stone and
> copper plates? Should I solely depend on EI (Epigraphica Indica), CII,
> SII, multiple volumes of inscriptions from AP edited by Mallampalli,
> Nelaturi, Parabrahma Sastry et al? Apropos "inscriptions", I would
> highly recommend you to read Sanjay Subrahmanyam's essay "Whispers and
> shouts: Some recent writings on medieval south India" reviewing Kenneth
> Hall and Noboru Karashima's work in "The Indian Economic and Social
> History Review" (IESHR, 38.4, 2001). Sanjay seriously questions the
> (over) dependence on inscriptions.

Why does Sanjay question the dependence on inscriptions? Is it because
he could not corroborate them with other hard evidence? Sounds like
my kind of guy.

Thanks for the everyday-household names and references on dance history below:).

>Start with writings of Saskia Kersenboom-Story. For e.g. her
>"nityasumangaLi - Devadasi tradition in south India". A pioneering book

>Then you may like to check "From Sacred Servant to Profane Prostitute: A
>History of the Changing Legal Status of the Devadasis in India" by Kay

>There are innumerable papers discussing the modern origins of
>"bharatanaaTyam" (the name never existed before late-19th/early-20th
>century), how Rukminidevi Arundale and her kaLaakshEtra "bowdlerized"

Is it modern orgins or orgins of modern naaTyaM? In any case, drawing
from Courtesan treatment is hardly an evidence of women being allowed
(I mean regular women) to taking up the dance.

Time for a story (those who can not see from afar back can come to the
front as the front seating is relatively empty & my eyesight is not
good these days):



ఊర్లో పెద్దలంతా కోతలయినాక కల్లు కుండలు కడుపు నిండా
పట్టించుకుని ఊళ్ళోకి అంతకు మునుపు రాత్రి దిగిన భోగం వాళ్ళ
కుటుంబాలు బస చేసిన మాలి పటేలు పెద్ద బంకులకు ఆనుకుని వేసిన
కొట్టానికి బయల్దేరి వెళ్ళినరు. ఆ రోజు పొద్దున్నే పంపిన వడ్లు,
పప్పులు అందినవో లేదోయని అడిగినారు (అసలు కారణం వేరే
ఉండవచ్చు).

పెద్ద కరణం మామూలుగా ఇటువంటి వాటికి లొంగడు. చిన్న
కరణానికీ ఆయన అంతకు క్రితం ఏడాది నుండీ ఉంచుకున్న ఒకావిడకూ
పుట్టిన తెల్లటి పిల్లవాణ్ణి చూసిన తరువాత ఈయనకు కూడా ఆశ
పుట్టినది. ఈ ట్రూపులో ఒక అమ్మాయి అంతవరకూ ఆ ఊళ్ళో ఎవరూ
లేనంత తెల్లటి తెలుపుతో చక్కటి వర్చస్సుతో ఉన్నదీ అంటే ముందుగా
తన మరదలిని పంపి చూసి రమ్మని తరువాత తను వీళ్ళతో కలిసి
వచ్చినాడు.

రెండు రోజుల తరువాత ఆ ట్రూపు ఊరు విడిచి వెళ్ళినది, ఆ ఒక్క
అమ్మాయినీ ఊళ్ళోనే పెద కరణపు పంచన వదిలిపెట్టి.

అట్లా అయిదేళ్ళు గడిచినవి, ఇద్దరు పిల్లలు కూడా పుట్టినారు, ఆ
అమ్మాయి అమ్మ అయింది, పెద కరణం భరణంగా ఊరికి ఒక ప్రక్కగా
యున్న ఎర్ర చెక్క నేల ఇరవై ఎకరాలు రాసినాడు.

ఆవిడా, ఊళ్ళో ఉన్న ఇద్దరు కరణాలూ మిగతా రెడ్డి కులస్తులూ ఒకే
చోట చేరి పేకాట ఆడటం, పచ్చీసు ఆడటం కాస్త ఖాళీగా
యున్నప్పుడు అంటే రోజంతా, చేసేవాళ్ళు. చిన్న కరణం లేక మాలి
పటేలు ఎన్నడైనా బూతు కూతలతో లేక అచ్చంగా పగలబడి
నవ్వేలా పేకలో రాణీ మీదనో, పచ్చీసులో పడ్డ పావుల మీదనో
జోకులేస్తే ఆవిడ కూడా విరగబడి నవ్వేది, జర్దా తిన్న
తమలపాకులు అందరితో పాటుగా నమిలిన ఎర్రటి నోటితో. అర్ధ
రాత్రిదాకా భాగోతాలు చూడ్డానికి వచ్చి నులకమంచం మీద
కాలుమీద కాలు వేసుకుని చూసినా, తెల్లారగానే కచ్చేరీలో ఈ
పెద్దల మధ్య నిలబడి మాట్లాడినా ఆవిడను ఎవరూ వింతగా
చూసేవారు కాదు. ఆవిడ మిగతా సమయాల్లో ఏం చేసినా గుళ్ళో
ప్రొద్దున పూజారికంటే మునుపే వచ్చి పూజకు సమాయత్తం చేసేది.

ఆవిడ ఎనభై ఏండ్లు బ్రతికినది. కరణాల పిల్లల సంతకంటే,
ఆవిడదే అతి పెద్ద కుటుంబముగా నిలిచినది.

ఆ పెద్ద కరణం భార్య, భర్త చనిపోయిన తదుపరి పెద్ద కూతురితో
కలిసి కచ్రాల బండిలో ఆ పిల్ల కాపురముండే పట్టణానికి వెళుతూ
ఉంటే కూరురే ఊర్లో కచ్చేరీని, ఊరి ముందట గుడినీ చూపించినది.
కచ్చేరీని చూసి ఇన్నాళ్ళూ ఇదేదో చాలా పెద్దగా ఉంటుందని
ఊహించుకున్నాను, ఈ మగాళ్ళంతా కలిసి రాసిన రాతలు ఇంత చిన్న
జాగాలోనా అనుకున్నదావిడ. ఆవిడ గుడి వైపు తల ఎత్తి కూడా
చూడలేదు.

(ఒక పేరు తెలియని ఊరు చరిత్ర పుటల నుండి.)

కథ సమాప్తి.


You can not accept or reject the evidence 'conclusively' from other
women present at Temples whether they were wives of workers or
courtesans. If the times lines are present that pin down the story
further, it will be just one more piece, ofcourse.

>No surprize! As VNR recently argued: "Castes that primarily share the
>landed culture equate women with their land; own them as they own their
>land, restrict their movement, control their sexuality and deny them
>remarriage. Loyalty to one man (pativratya), which is generally
>perceived as a value for all women in India, is primarily a landed caste
>value. Landed culture values certain qualities in men, such as the
>willingness to protect their women."

I guess VNR would argue in case of Israelites that men equated their
women with sheep. They owned both & therefore imposed monogamy on
women is a result of that practice. He makes a no-lose argument.
Hardly controversial, as long as you accept men have always imposed
their will, whether it is temples, courts or courtesans & managed to
find a reason whenever they looked for one. We are looking for
exceptions here. May be somewhat matriarchial place like Kerala has
some answers.

> >Any idea when the original Tirumala Temple was built?

>Whcih "original"? The present one? its previous 'Hindu' version? the
> Buddhist one? the Jaina one? Or the one before?

If it is like the 'jesus is black' argument, we will not go there. No
evidence, no concusion possible eitherway, within the short life span
we have --

I was interested in time line the inside of the present day temple was
built, the columns inside, where you make a right turn within the last
ten minutes of getting to the sanctum sanctorum. There seem to be a
few pornographic images on the columns (someone else can confirm
that). I wondered aloud if it could also be from the same period as
1000 AD or so.

We will save my experience in the forts of Jaisalmer & Jodhpur to a later date.

[Hemantha Kumar Pamarthy]

I am not sure whether women were allowed or not into temples. I still am of=
the opinion that it does not matter whether anyone is allowed into a templ=
e or not for that matter.

But just so that I too can partake in the argument, I have to say this. Man=
y of the ancient temples do show that there were/are Naatya Mandapams / Ran=
ga Mantapas / Gejje Mantapas in the centre of the temples (Be it in Belur, =
Halebid or in Ramappa or Ghanapuram-near Mulugu, Parakal) so that the dance=
s take place in front of sanctum sanctorum. Thes Mandapams are either sunke=
n or raised.=20

These go to say that women were certainly allowed into temples at least fro=
m, say, circa 7th century onwards?

Of course one can continue the argument that the dancers of Warangal might =
have been permitted courtesy Jaayapa Senaani if not Bharata Muni.:-)).

To borrow Lyla's oft said words, keep writing but do enjoy.

Best wishes
Hemantha Kumar =A0

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 lylayer wrote :
>
>--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, sreenadh@g... wrote:

<snip>

>Because i see bharat muni teeter totter towards a temple area where
>viplav and parachuri are holding discussions on women and dance and
>whether dance is respectful or what not and what if this muni goes
>and tattles on me. And to boot, i hear he is an expert on dance.
>
>(Personally, i have no objection and let us leave bharatmuni out of
>it. because i have no idea who he is.)

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[lylayer]

Thanks to Suresh garu, now that a lot of people can read telugu
directly on rb and looking forward to the day when we can freely
write using any computer,some soft ware from any corner of the
world, in Telugu and see its beautiful script, savor it's :-)'meeTi
meeTi bAtE', i feel like typing in a few random excerpts from one
page of one of the novels of Adivi bApirAju.

This man who has great appreciation of art and literature, love for
his native land and all the natives, love for human race , -this is
how he sees Andhra and its occupants at one point of time in history.


తల్లీ, ఆంధ్ర వసుంధరా! నువ్వు చంద్రకళా దేవివి!
ఆంధ్రమాతా! నీ రూపము స్నిగ్ధపూర్ణ కౌముదీ స్వచ్ఛము. నీ వామ
హస్తాన పుండరీకాలు శ్వేత కుముదాలు లీలాపుష్పాలఈ విలసిల్లుతున్నవి.
నువ్వు త్రిభంగి మూర్తివి, నీ అమ్రిత పయస్సులను గోదావరీ క్రిష్ణ
వేణ్ణా పినాకినీ నాగావళి తెలివాహ నదులలో ఆస్వాదిస్తున్నారు ఆంధ్రులు.

ఓ దివ్య సుందరీ! నీ తనయులు జగదేక సుందరులు. నీ సుతులు
లోకారాధ్యులైన ప్రజ్ఞావంతులు. కత్తి పట్టినా, గంటము పట్టినా,
కుంచె పట్టినా నీ పుత్రుల ఎదుట నిలువగలిగిన వారేరీ?
ఆంధ్ర దేవీ! నీ అనుగు కూతుళ్ళు పురుషులతో సమానంగా విద్యలూ, వీర
వ్యవసాయ దీక్షలూ లలిత కళా కౌశలమూ నేర్చిన వీర సతులూ, వీర
మాతలూ.
ఆనంద మూర్తీ! ఆంధ్ర మూర్తీ! నీ కన్నులలో లోకాల వెలిగించు వెలుగు, నీ
నవ్వులో దేశాల తేలించు ఆనందము, నీ నడకలో సీమ సీమల నాగరీకాలు
దిద్దే ఒయ్యారమూ.
ఆమ్ధ్రీ! నీ బిడ్డలు నిన్ను ప్రేమింతురు. నిన్ను పూజింతురు.
తెలుగు తల్లీ! నీకు ఏటికోళ్ళు.


In any book of bApirAju, I have not seen him awarding unequal
status, strengths or capabilities to men and women.

Such is his spirit. Such is his view point.
And I like it.

My heart is filled with gratitude and respect for this man, for
having such good feelings and good thoughts, and for taking the
trouble to write the good books he wrote.

enjoy

[Kamesh]

>
> తల్లీ, ఆంధ్ర వసుంధరా! నువ్వు చంద్రకళా దేవివి!
>
>

దేశభక్తి కవిత్వానికీ భావకవిత్వానికీ ఉన్న దగ్గర సంబంధాన్ని ఇది
చక్కగా నిరూపిస్తోంది!

Thanks for sharing it.

regards,
Kameswara Rao.

[Viplav Reddy]

I had a good night read & here are some thoughts on this paper. This
is a long note as I quote from this paper.

> http://faculty.sxu.edu/~rabe/khajuraho/

First off, thanks for the link. Send more this way if you have time.

To show what would be interesting, a few things (limited to nine) of
interest from this paper:

Key: "..." michael rabe's comment from the above paper;
{...} inscription he cites; --- my comment.

1.
"inscription, {rAjaVirindasamaye navasura-samAgame varastrInAM}

Of the VarastrIs on (the occasion of the) Navasura-samAgama in the
time of king Virinda.

--- definition of vaarastri seems of interest.

2.
"The great Arab historian al-Biruni, who accompanied MahmUd of Ghazni
to the siege of Kalanjar, reported matter of factly that Hindu kings
defrayed military budgets with revenues skimmed from temple
prostitution."

--- any other such observations from him or other foreign historian?

3.
"the site's most idiosyncratic motif is the varastrI/choice woman
provocatively shown in the act of dislodging a scorpion from her thigh
by removing her skirt."

--- the interpretations were quite interesting.

4.
Here it is relevant to note that the oldest architectural structure at
Khajuraho is a yogini precinct,51 its sixty-four niches devoid of
sculpture, I suggest, because originally live women may have figured
there in rites intended to augur military victories.52 Thus the
kharjUra/scorpion bearing attribute may have belonged to a local
manifestation of the preeminent goddess of victory, DurgA.

--- another reference to women present at the Temple site.

5.
All one can really do is amass collateral documents of the period and
test their relevance against careful reading of the monuments
themselves according to one's own best lights at any given moment.
Fortunately, the challenge to present day scholars is more one of
feast than famine. A great wealth of potentially relevant documents
have been identified, by T.P. Bhattacharya and Devangana Desai among
others, and their findings are more than sufficient to start (or,
rather, to continue) the winnowing process.

--- any references from these two researchers would be more telling, I
think. Any such work on Temples in South India/A.P.?

6.
"reminiscent of the pills Muslims also sought to acquire from sAdhus
still resident at KajjurA in the 14th century"

---that adds to the story (any factual accounts from any arab historian again?)

7.
"As noted earlier, for example, sculptures of beautiful women
(varaStrI) on the VizvanAth correspond implicitly with its
dedication's reference to the imprisoned wives king Dhanga had wrested
from other kings, defeated in battle."

--- another reference to women.

8.
"I reiterate the overwhelming preponderance of verses in dedicatory
inscriptions of the period that eulogize the king, by contrast to the
miniscule few that cover the obligatory nods to celestial deities for
whose residence the temple is being prepared. Deity is the subject of
only the first three out of 49 verses belonging to the LakSman
dedication; the final two identify poet and engraver--the remaining 44
pertain primarily to the king.

like it or not, the inscriptions and temple iconography speak mainly
of and for kings, their builders, and not only at Khajuraho, of
course."

---- kings, no doubt dictated how things went, how about his court?
any depictions of the court in general? any court scenes with women
present at temples?

9.
"Plate 20 represents an architectural fragment of untraced provenance,
now in the Cleveland Museum of Art. In style and subject matter--a
king disrobing some girl--it is clearly Candella, eloquently embodying
these sentiments of a late Candella inscription at Kalanjar:


{He [ParamArdi, c.1166-1202], the greatest of kings, having drunk,
like draughts of honey and curds, the shining fame of [other]kings,
his enemies..., like the wind of the Malaya mountain [king ParamArdi]
kisses sportively the lips of the maidens, red like the pomegranate,
seizes them by their beautiful tresses, removes the garments that
shine brightly on the high bosoms of the maidens, and easily dries the
perspirations occasioned by sport from the brows of the fair.}"

--- such an inscription is also telling of life around kings.

9.
"The harems of rAjAdhirAjas (paramount sovereigns) were not just
repositories of sexual booty, nor only pleasure grounds where heirs
essential to the regime's perpetuation might be conceived. Given the
feudal array of tributary states beholden to one man, harems also
functioned as virtual departments of state, destinations to which
vassals, not always under coercion, might wish to depute marriageable
daughters as sureties of allegiance to a suzerain. KanyopAyanadAna was
the term used for this means of cementing political alliances, often
negotiated in the terms of peace treaties following military
engagements! In such a system, with the polity so thoroughly dependent
upon the whim and vigor of single individuals, it is not improbable
that pleasures of the royal bed chamber seemed at times more like
work, bhoga more like yoga."

--- great! (to use Chowdary Jampala gaari words)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--- If you look at the whole thing with no preconceived notions, it
appears that Temples were indeed built for men and men only. Men were
free to practice whatever they wanted including allowing women of
their choice to those abodes. Those women may have been the wifes of
other kings captured or vaarakaanthas, or devadaasis, but never their
own.

--- Women were present at Temples not for their own salvation or to
practice their individual belief, but they were there at the mercy of
kings or other caretakers to offer pleasure of various kinds,
including dance --- folks like Bharatamuni did write based on their
experiments with their subjects, women at many times. To make matters
simplified later a poojaari system may have been invented -- who makes
the individual seeking a connection with divinity a middle(man's)
affair.

--- Given this perspective, it may not be true that women were denied
during certain periods or other times based on purity alone, it could
be because they were deemed to be unfit to participate in sex or to
conceive a child at those times. Any other evidence on animal or
human sacrifice during the same periods if practiced at the same
temples would be relevant in connection with rejecting purity as a
single reason/theme.

Now, before Srini Paruchuri makes a mess of his library by turning all
kinds of things, it would help to narrow down papers concentrating on
the medieval period, as relevant to inscriptions & attempting to
corroborate one with the other as Mr. Rabe tried --- when it is
possible for a foreigner to do that, it should be possible for us!
unless ofcourse, the curse of Kanneganti is true.

Happy reading. Viplav

[Suresh Kolichala]

Re: Men's/Women's issues, lylayer wrote:
>
>
> ఓ దివ్య సుందరీ! నీ తనయులు జగదేక సుందరులు. నీ సుతులు
> లోకారాధ్యులైన ప్రజ్ఞావంతులు.

My post has nothing to do with Men's/Women's issues, or books of
Adavi Bapiraju (I didn't read any of his books. would like to
though). But reading the above excerpt about telugu viirulu and all
that reminded me of a recently heard composition of
Balamuralikrishna, which I found to be very funny.


కన్నుల పండుగ రష్యా
ఇట కానరాదెందు ఈర్ష్యా
..
విశాల భావాలు
సువిశాల భవంతులు
విశ్వశాంతి కోరికలు
...
చలి గిలిగింతలు

వీరలు వీరులు
దృడకాయులు
కళాకారులు
ఇతరుల జోలికి పోరు
...


:-).

It clearly looks like an adhoc composition on a trip to Russia, but
does anyone know if that was a first foreign trip for Balamurali
Krishna? Certainly looks like that to me.

Thanks,
Suresh.

[J. K. Mohana Rao]

--- Suresh Kolichala <suresh_k...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> కన్నుల పండుగ రష్యా
> ఇట కానరాదెందు ఈర్ష్యా
>

Does MBK belong to vi.ra.saM :-)
Regards! - mOhana

[Sreenivas Paruchuri]

"J. K. Mohana Rao" wrote:
> > కన్నుల పండుగ రష్యా
> > ఇట కానరాదెందు ఈర్ష్యా
>
> Does MBK belong to vi.ra.saM :-)

You meant to say a.ra.sam!? vi.ra.saM and రష్యా don't go together
:).

Regards,
Sreenivas

[Narasimham Paranandi]

I think that MBK belongs to neither అరసం or విరసం but to సరసం.
సంగీత రసజ్ఞుల సంఘం
--pAlana

Sreenivas Paruchuri <sre...@gmx.de> wrote:

> "J. K. Mohana Rao" wrote:
> > Does MBK belong to vi.ra.saM :-)

> You meant to say a.ra.sam!? vi.ra.saM and రష్యా don't go together :).

[sreeniparuchuri]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Viplav Reddy <viplavreddy@g...>
wrote:

> "inscription, {rAjaVirindasamaye navasura-samAgame varastrInAM}

> --- definition of vaarastri seems of interest.

I am wondering *if* Rabe quoted the inscription wrong or was it a
typographical error on the website. I thought it should read
వారస్త్రీ. BTW, Ludwik Sternbach says that there are "more than
250 synonyms" for the word: 'prostitute' in Sanskrit literary works
(cf. L. Sternbach, vezyA; Synonyms and Aphorisms, Bombay, 1945),
and "38 synonyms for the word గణికా (and goes on to list them.).
His list contains, among others, following words: వారముఖ్యా,
వారవధూ, వారవనితా, వారవిలాసినీ, వారస్త్రీ and so on.

[Note: I follow Harvard Kyoto scheme for writing Sanskrit]

> 2. "The great Arab historian al-Biruni, who accompanied MahmUd of
Ghazni
> to the siege of Kalanjar, reported matter of factly that Hindu kings
> defrayed military budgets with revenues skimmed from temple
> prostitution."
>
> --- any other such observations from him or other foreign historian?

See: L. Sternbach; Legal position of prostitutes according to
kauTilya's arthazAstra; Journal of American Oriental Society (JAOS),
Vol. 71, 1951, pp.25-60. Esp. check p. 35 (*) and therein footnotes:
65-68, for more references. Check, Domingo Paes' account (in
appendix) in Robert Sewell's "Forgotten empire - Vijayanagara - A
contribution to the history of India". The book should be available
on-line. If I am not mistaken it was also put on eemaaTa once.

Theres so much to say, but am afraid that this thread should have
long shifted to lists like: Indology (Liverpool list) or RISA or H-
Asia. So, I better stop here.

Regards,
Sreenivas

(*) [...] the gaNikAdhykSa had to prepare a balance sheet for each
gaNikaa, or for all gaNikaa under his care, and to determine what was
the income received from all gaNikaa who were king's servants.
(arthazaastra 124. 6-7) In order to have this income(footnote 66),
which probably was considerable, (67) kauTilya organized a state
prostitution with public houses run by the State (king). He thought
that the income of the king from such enterprises would be higher
than by collecting taxes from all prostitutes. (68) [...]

[lylayer]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "sreeniparuchuri" <sreeni@g...>
wrote:

> --- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Viplav Reddy
<viplavreddy@g...>
> wrote:
>
> > "inscription, {rAjaVirindasamaye navasura-samAgame varastrInAM}
> > --- definition of vaarastri seems of interest.
>

> it should read
> వారస్త్రీ. BTW, Ludwik Sternbach says that there are "more than
> 250 synonyms" for the word: 'prostitute' in Sanskrit literary
works
> (cf. L. Sternbach, vezyA; Synonyms and Aphorisms, Bombay, 1945),
> and "38 synonyms for the word గణికా (and goes on to list
them.).
> His list contains, among others, following words: వారముఖ్యా,
> వారవధూ, వారవనితా, వారవిలాసినీ, వారస్త్రీ and so on.

Vow! And the male counterparts? Do we simply add 'Du" at the end like
vAravaruDu, vArapurushuDu, vAravilAsuDu etc. Or are they given
totally different names?
How about the names of male prostitutes? Are they totally different
and if so please let us know.

Plead total ignorance in the subject.

reported matter of factly that Hindu kings
> > defrayed military budgets with revenues skimmed from temple
> > prostitution."

Were male prostitutes also generating some revenues?
Were there women in military at that time? Were they taking male
prostitutes with them? If not were male prostitutes traveling in the
military for war time usage by male warriors?

> Theres so much to say, but am afraid that this thread should have
> long shifted to lists like: Indology (Liverpool list) or RISA or H-
> Asia. So, I better stop here.

But obviously, this discussion is about Andhra culture and it is
with in the charter. It is not listed as a topic with incendiary
potential. Why would you consider shifting it to another list?

kauTilya organized a state
> prostitution with public houses run by the State (king). He
thought
> that the income of the king from such enterprises would be higher
> than by collecting taxes from all prostitutes. (68) [...]

Does koutilya mean కుటిల బుద్ధి కలవాడు?
Is he a contemporary of 'Machiavelli' who wrote 'prince'?

thanks
lyla.

[vcjampala]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "lylayer" <lylayfl@a...> wrote:
> Vow! And the male counterparts? Do we simply add 'Du" at the end
like
> vAravaruDu, vArapurushuDu, vAravilAsuDu etc. Or are they given
> totally different names?

Lyla seems to have forgotten that in our pavitra aarshabhoomi and
dEvabhaasha, there can only be varapurushulu and there is no room for
vaarapurushulu.

> Plead total ignorance in the subject.

That would be at least two of us.

>
> reported matter of factly that Hindu kings
> > > defrayed military budgets with revenues skimmed from temple
> > > prostitution."
>
> Were male prostitutes also generating some revenues?
> Were there women in military at that time? Were they taking male
> prostitutes with them? If not were male prostitutes traveling in
the
> military for war time usage by male warriors?

Please refer to my first sentence in this note.

> > Theres so much to say, but am afraid that this thread should have
> > long shifted to lists like: Indology (Liverpool list) or RISA or
H-
> > Asia. So, I better stop here.
>
> But obviously, this discussion is about Andhra culture and it is
> with in the charter. It is not listed as a topic with incendiary
> potential. Why would you consider shifting it to another list?

Lyla does not seem to recognize that viplav and Sreenivas have long
ago left the borders of Andhra and were having fun in exotic locales.

> Does koutilya mean కుటిల బుద్ధి కలవాడు?
> Is he a contemporary of 'Machiavelli' who wrote 'prince'?

Lyla must be putting us on. Surely, she knows that all these
western political pundits are johnny come latelys when it comes to
statecraft.

But, just in case, Lyla did indeed not know it, kauTilya aka
chaaNakya, the rajaguru of king maurya chandragupta, is the author
of 'arthaSaastra', a political economic treatise. He is also a major
figure in the bhaasa classic mudraaraakshasaM, translation of which
was often a prescribed non-detailed Telugu text in Andhra University.

Regards -- V Chowdary Jampala

[Satyanarayana Pamarty]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "vcjampala" <cjampala@g...> wrote:

----

> --- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "lylayer" <lylayfl@a...> wrote:
> > Vow! And the male counterparts? Do we simply add 'Du" at the end
> like
> > vAravaruDu, vArapurushuDu, vAravilAsuDu etc. Or are they given
> > totally different names?
>
> Lyla seems to have forgotten that in our pavitra aarshabhoomi and
> dEvabhaasha, there can only be varapurushulu and there is no room for
> vaarapurushulu.

---

Hello doctor gArlU: :-)

Have we forgotten the telugu వారాలబ్బాయిలు or those who used to
perform/perform still యాయవారము? Who knows what disgraces these
guys went/go through! :-(

With best wishes

Satya

[Viplav Reddy]

>Theres so much to say, but am afraid that this thread should have
>long shifted to lists like: Indology (Liverpool list) or RISA or H-
>Asia. So, I better stop here.

Yes, there is so much to be said as always, but not much is being
heard or talked about again, as always.

Thanks & regards,
-viplav-
PS0. Needless to say, I leave Srinivas Paruchuri as well as the subject
alone for now.

PS1. Devangana Desai wrote back to me lastnight (almost instantly as I
asked her the same qn.) with a similar answer as Srini Paruchuri.
Here is her answer that is relevant to the thread I am abandoning.

I quote Ms. Desai, "I have not come across any reference prohibiting
kulastris or family women from attending temples. In fact, queens also
donated to temples of
Bhubaneswar, Pattadakal (Karnataka) and other places. In the Chandella
kingdom (associated with Khajuraho), queens donted to Brahmins and built
wells and resthouses for pilgrims."

I still do not have the answer, obviously.

[j_sreenadh]

So this poor muni's back in action again :)

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, "lylayer" <lylayfl@a...> wrote:

> Were male prostitutes also generating some revenues?
> Were there women in military at that time? Were they taking male
> prostitutes with them? If not were male prostitutes traveling in the
> military for war time usage by male warriors?

I don't know about Satya's mammoth, but it's interesting to see how
hard everyone is ignoring this elephant in the room :) Could it be -
horrors - that these unenlightened people of Bharatamuni or Koutilya's
time considered prostitution a women's problem :)??

- Sreenadh

[Avineny N. Bhaskar]

--- In racch...@yahoogroups.com, Viplav Reddy <viplavreddy@g...> wrote:

> 2.
> "The great Arab historian al-Biruni, who accompanied MahmUd of Ghazni
> to the siege of Kalanjar, reported matter of factly that Hindu kings
> defrayed military budgets with revenues skimmed from temple
> prostitution."

After reading so many postings on this topic I have few question.

It is highly disgusting that our ancient kings encouraged
prostitution. What respect did they had for women? Did they used women
as a sex machine? Were they not aware of the concepts like loyalty and
all?

I am finding "Unicode on IE..." thread better than this శంకర and
కోఉటిల్య :)

Regards.
Avineni N Bhaskar.