palam or palan what happened to your right finger dead? On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 at 14:38, Narayanaswamy Iyer <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Dear folks > > Regrettably, Sri Rajaram Krishnamurthy has suffered a relapse of his old > afflictions of leprosy and syphilis.. > > Accordingly, his left-hand ring finger is paralysed and he cannot access > the button for the letter "w". He therefore types:- > > *'...... the elephantine ignoramus capricious idiot detractor Sri " > NARAYANASAMY "......' * > > > If imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, the first six words > above are copied by him from my own earlier keyboard posting recently > on this web. But I am not flattered. > > *"கலி காலத்தில் கை மேலெ பலம்"* > > is a popular saying in the Kerala countryside. > > Sri Rajaram Krishnamurthy appears to have received his just deserts from > Goddess Sarasvathi whom he tried to hijack recently to serve his own vile > purposes. > > S Narayanaswamy Iyer > > > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 4:31 PM Sithamalli Balasubramanian < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I faced a problem long back when my son reached school going age. I was >> lucky to have had an influential friend. The choice was between a sober >> school run by a chrisitan mission and an Anglo-Indian 'public school'. I >> lacked one thing in my schooling; I did not know English swear words. I >> learnt the value of arse when my Parsi boss shouted at me, "Lift your >> bloody arse". I was sitting at his table when he entered the room. >> So I chose the Anglo-Indian school. My son is now endearingly calling me >> shit etc., >> I think I made a mistake. I should have chosen the Iyer group. He would >> have learnt the Indian version of swearing in English. >> The chat is excellent. Don't climb down either of you. We are learning a >> lot. Keep it up. >> Skb >> >> On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 at 11:07, Rajaram Krishnamurthy < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Pranam >>> 1 Q What the elephantine ignoramus does not know is that the 3rd >>> verse of the Brahma sooktham is a word-for-word reproduction of the last >>> four lines of T.B. 2.8.8.9 (sorry,* not T.B.2.8.8.2* as I earlier >>> inadvertently mistyped.) >>> KR Let the "elephantine ignoramus capricious idiot detractor Sri " >>> NARAYANASAMY joker does not know is all the sukthams are only extracted >>> from the Vedas and I am not such to deny it; how ever when KR types BG it >>> is a grave crime which some other loose nosy tongued fellow also shouted >>> while the same mistake if committed by narayanaswamy is " I earlier >>> inadvertently mistyped". Funny joker. Do you understand now? I am also >>> loudly making it clear to all those who are watching like Bhishma drona >>> kripa in the mahabharata watching the insult to pandavas at the end met the >>> fate for the crime. One who always tries to poke in it is not there, sits >>> silently; another does not open the mouth; another simply sys that thank >>> god I am not there; all are lders for this society!!. It is just to show >>> what an idiot can brag without substance. >>> Does those 4 lines speak that brahmins are by birth or something >>> else?. Even now the elephantine ignoramus pretend it is so; because many in >>> this forum either are interested to know or even if attempting does not >>> know the meaning; and this all the time makes the old to brag as he likes; >>> many in this forum are carried away either by clan-creed or envy of let him >>> die attitude, which GUNA is spoken in our scriptures. Then wgu many in this >>> society walk around as ashadabuthis? No where in any part of the vedic >>> scriptures Varna is defined as Jati by birth and the word Jati though >>> existed in sanskrit was entwined by the British to play the political game >>> which the dravidian parties today are adopting. When Krishna says "Four >>> varnas are created by me" it meant that as if TATA telling that the >>> profession in the steel industry waS CREATED BY ME; Just the work norm; if >>> birth is the criteria then where is Valmiki and Vyasa ?; and this idiot >>> also writes about the degradation of vyasa as chandala and yet calls >>> himself as Brahmin from the texts arranged by him without shame. Age does >>> not grant anything as Bhagavan Krishnar had said that even many yogis had >>> fallen down from the higher levels who had to come back to this earth. But >>> all must learn to practice rowthiram lest they lose the title elders to >>> teach the posterity. (part 1 contd) >>> >>> On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 at 11:03, Rajaram Krishnamurthy < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Pranam >>>> 1 Q What the elephantine ignoramus does not know is that the 3rd >>>> verse of the Brahma sooktham is a word-for-word reproduction of the last >>>> four lines of T.B. 2.8.8.9 (sorry,* not T.B.2.8.8.2* as I earlier >>>> inadvertently mistyped.) >>>> KR Let the "elephantine ignoramus capricious idiot detractor Sri " >>>> NARAYANASAMY joker does not know is all the sukthams are only extracted >>>> from the Vedas and I am not such to deny it; how ever when KR types BG it >>>> is a grave crime which some other loose nosy tongued fellow also shouted >>>> while the same mistake if committed by narayanaswamy is " I earlier >>>> inadvertently mistyped". Funny joker. Do you understand now? I am also >>>> loudly making it clear to all those who are watching like Bhishma drona >>>> kripa in the mahabharata watching the insult to pandavas at the end met the >>>> fate for the crime. One who always tries to poke in it is not there, sits >>>> silently; another does not open the mouth; another simply sys that thank >>>> god I am not there; all are lders for this society!!. It is just to show >>>> what an idiot can brag without substance. >>>> Does those 4 lines speak that brahmins are by birth or something >>>> else?. Even now the elephantine ignoramus pretend it is so; because many in >>>> this forum either are interested to know or even if attempting does not >>>> know the meaning; and this all the time makes the old to brag as he likes; >>>> many in this forum are carried away either by clan-creed or envy of let him >>>> die attitude, which GUNA is spoken in our scriptures. Then wgu many in this >>>> society walk around as ashadabuthis? No where in any part of the vedic >>>> scriptures Varna is defined as Jati by birth and the word Jati though >>>> existed in sanskrit was entwined by the British to play the political game >>>> which the dravidian parties today are adopting. When Krishna says "Four >>>> varnas are created by me" it meant that as if TATA telling that the >>>> profession in the steel industry waS CREATED BY ME; Just the work norm; if >>>> birth is the criteria then where is Valmiki and Vyasa ?; and this idiot >>>> also writes about the degradation of vyasa as chandala and yet calls >>>> himself as Brahmin from the texts arranged by him without shame. Age does >>>> not grant anything as Bhagavan Krishnar had said that even many yogis had >>>> fallen down from the higher levels who had to come back to this earth. But >>>> all must learn to practice rowthiram lest they lose the title elders to >>>> teach the posterity. >>>> This is TB the relevant part: 2.8.8.8,9 & 10 >>>> >>>> VERSE: 8 { 2.8.8.8} श्रद्धां मध्यंदिनं परि । श्रद्धाꣳ सूर्यस्य निम्रुचि >>>> । श्रद्धे श्रद्धापय_इह मा । श्रद्धा देवान् अधिवस्ते । श्रद्धा विश्वम् >>>> इदं जगत् । श्रद्धां { श्रद्धा} कामस्य मातरम् । हविषा वर्धयामसि । >>>> ब्रह्म जज्ञानं प्रथमं पुरस्तात् । वि सीमतः सुरुचो वेन आवः । स बुध्निया उपमा >>>> अस्य विष्ठाः । >>>> >>>> VERSE: 9 { 2.8.8.9} सतश् च योनिम् असतश् च विवः । पिता विराजाम् ऋषभो >>>> रयीणाम् । अन्तरिक्षं विश्वरूप आविवेश । तम् अर्कैर् अभ्यर्चन्ति वह्स्áम् >>>> । ब्रह्म सन्तं ब्रह्मणा वर्धयन्तः । ब्रह्म देवान् अजनयत् । ब्रह्म >>>> विश्वम् इदं जगत् । ब्रह्मणः क्षत्रं निर्मितम् । ब्रह्म ब्राह्मण आत्मना । >>>> अन्तर् >>>> अस्मिन्न् इमे लोकाः । >>>> >>>> VERSE: 10 { 2.8.8.10} अन्तर् विश्वम् इदं जगत् । ब्रह्म_एव भूतानां >>>> ज्येष्ठम् । तेन को ऽर्हति स्पर्धितुम् । ब्रह्मन् देवास् त्रयस्त्रिꣳशत् >>>> । ब्रह्मन्न् इन्द्रप्रजापती । ब्रह्मन् ह विश्वा भूतानि । नावि_इव_अन्तः >>>> समाहिता । चतस्र आशाः प्रचरन्त्व् अग्नयः । इमं नो यज्ञं नयतु प्रजानन् । घृतं >>>> पिन्वन्न् अजरं सुवीरम् । >>>> >>>> 2888 speaks of the creation done with the sraddha the >>>> concentration; Brahma jagnanam prathamam purastat// Brahma the creator who >>>> was ordained by the Brahmam taught him the vedas for the creation. The >>>> mantras on Brahma the Hiranya garbha read with the performing the soma >>>> yagnam as plainly translated by the west is attached below would indicate >>>> thus reciting about the soma yajna where starting from Brahma till virgin >>>> are sacrificed to the Brahman.Brahmin as per veda is one who does the >>>> duties assigned to him and not bending the rules or flex the muscles. >>>> Narayanaswamy had not answered why as a Brahmin did he cross the sea and >>>> how did he carry the agni brought in his birth which should go till death >>>> as AGNIHOTRAM was carried on on the flight or even by ship?. For those in >>>> doubt deivathin kural may be referred to. So Brahmin is one who does the >>>> qualified performance only hence only Valmiki the shudra and the Vyasa the >>>> shudra we worship as Brahmins though by birth as Narayanaswamy himself says >>>> so. It still has the inner meanings of yagna. But never ever it speaks of >>>> BY BIRTH. It is not RK but every one is a brahmin, shatriya ,vysta and >>>> shudra according to the acts performed and one who touches the satva guna >>>> crossing the thamas, and Rajas , the knowledgeable alone becomes Brahmin; >>>> one who knows the brahman bviz AHAM BRAHMASMI is the Brahmin; one who is >>>> cat calling others especially RK and all those watching around silently are >>>> never ever a brahmin satyam is missing WHICH IS THE PRIME QUALITY OF A >>>> BRAHMIN KR IRs 12121. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 at 09:13, Sithamalli Balasubramanian < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> This much bile is not necessary. It is just a meaningless debate. >>>>> I am thankful that I am out of it all. >>>>> Skb. >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 at 06:23, Narayanaswamy Iyer <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear folks >>>>>> >>>>>> "Stormy laughter" capricious idiot Sri Rajaram Krishnamurthy insists >>>>>> again and again that he is NOT a Braahmana by birth. He is entitled to >>>>>> say >>>>>> so, and I tend to agree with him. His innate nature (guna) and his overt >>>>>> actions (karma) only confirm this emphatic denial. >>>>>> >>>>>> Some time ago, I wrote the following (in another forum, now closed) >>>>>> in response to a post by our frequent contributor Si Gopala Krishnan:- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *"With uncanny prescience distressed Pandava warrior Arjuna in the >>>>>> Kurukshethra battlefield, before internecine fratricidal war starts, >>>>>> appeals to Bhagavaan Lord Sri Krishna, according to Bhagavad Geetha I 40, >>>>>> 41:-* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *kula-kshaye pranashyanthi kula-dharmaaa sanaathanaaha |* >>>>>> >>>>>> *dharme nashte kulam kruthsnam adharmam abhibhavathyutha ||* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *adharmaabhibhavaath krishna radushyathi kula-sthriyaha |* >>>>>> *shtreeshu dushtaasu vaarshneya jaayathe varnasamkaraha ||* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *"When a civilised enlightened community ceases to exist the vital >>>>>> principles and rules of honourable and pious conduct of that >>>>>> community (kula-dharmam) which have been handed down through countless >>>>>> generations are destroyed; when such principles and rules die, then the >>>>>> entire community is enveloped in chaos and social disorder.* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *"Oh Krishna born in the Vrishni tribe, because of and in the midst >>>>>> of such chaos and disorder the females (kula-sthree) born into that >>>>>> community become depraved, lose their discipline and virtue completely; >>>>>> because of such depravity irredeemable and permanent miscegenations, >>>>>> widespread illegitimacy and bastardy will prevail."* >>>>>> *"In Manusmrithi the children born out of varna-samkaranam are called >>>>>> chandaalas, especially where the female is of higher varna than the male. >>>>>> Children born of a Braahmana father and a vaishya mother are called >>>>>> nishaada or paarashava.* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *"The father of 'Veda'-Vyaasa, illegitimate father of >>>>>> Dhritharaashtra, Paandu, and Vidoora (of Mahaa-Bhaaratham fame) was a >>>>>> nishaada/paarashava. Vyaasa's mother Durganthi was born of a fish >>>>>> impregnated by a gandharva passer-by, and was brought up by a >>>>>> fisherman."* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In the present circumstances, if my detractor Sri Rajaram >>>>>> Krishnamurthy chooses to abide by his credo that he is NOT a Brahmin by >>>>>> birth, and elects to follow the Buddha's teaching that being born from a >>>>>> Braahmana womb does not make the infant a Braahmana, then by a process of >>>>>> elimination he is most likely a chandaala masquerading as a true >>>>>> blue-blooded Braahmana. >>>>>> >>>>>> My detractor gleefully gloats:- >>>>>> >>>>>> *"He (meaning me) asserted that what he quoted is fro Taitria >>>>>> brahmana 2.8.8.2) There is none as it is in T B. What he had written is >>>>>> the >>>>>> 3rd verse of the Brahma Suktham "* >>>>>> >>>>>> What the elephantine ignoramus does not know is that the 3rd verse of >>>>>> the Brahma sooktham is a word-for-word reproduction of the last >>>>>> four lines of T.B. 2.8.8.9 (sorry,* not T.B.2.8.8.2* as I earlier >>>>>> inadvertently mistyped.) >>>>>> >>>>>> The same elephantine ignoramus also does not know that the Bhaagya >>>>>> Sooktham is a word-for-word reproduction of the Yajur-veda Taittireeya >>>>>> Braahmanam T.B. 2.8.9.7 (lines 4 - 10),T.B.2.8.9.8 to end of >>>>>> T.B.2.8.9.9." >>>>>> >>>>>> The gleeful detractor is constrained to confess:- >>>>>> >>>>>> *"Brahma Suktam is a Vedic hymn." * >>>>>> >>>>>> This meek mea culpa comes after denying that its fons et origo is >>>>>> none other than the Yajur-veda Taittireeya Braahmanam as I had written! >>>>>> >>>>>> S Narayanaswamy Iyer >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 10:26 PM Rajaram Krishnamurthy < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Pranam >>>>>>> I could not stormy laughter. There is a person in our group who >>>>>>> is expert in Sanskrit and use to burst out if I write but watching out >>>>>>> from >>>>>>> the fence. Jokers are every where and the Gopatha brahmana vadhyars are >>>>>>> there as seen right in front. His ignorance is revealed day by day. >>>>>>> Nothing >>>>>>> more to add; Treragni is followed with the agni-hotram, who are not >>>>>>> supposed to cross the sea. In North India people (especially now in >>>>>>> Bhopal) >>>>>>> people call it as agni- hotram and I do not mean it. Some where else he >>>>>>> confuses the brahma and the brahmin and asserted that what he quoted is >>>>>>> fro >>>>>>> Taitriya brahmana 2.8.8.2) There is none as it is in T B. What he had >>>>>>> written is the 3rd verse of the Brahma Suktham; it is not about brahmin >>>>>>> but >>>>>>> about creation undertaken by Brahma or origin of Hiranya Garba. Those >>>>>>> who >>>>>>> knew Sanskrit can get the meaning or even write about it. Brahma >>>>>>> Suktam is a Vedic hymn that is chanted in praise of Lord Brahma, the >>>>>>> creator of the universe in Hindu mythology. It is often chanted along >>>>>>> with >>>>>>> Oushadi Suktam (sacred hymn for healing, good health, and redemption) as >>>>>>> Prayaschitham, meaning redemption or relief from past and future sins. >>>>>>> Brahma Suktam is mainly chanted for gaining knowledge from Brahma, the >>>>>>> creator of Vedas or sacred texts. Chanting or listening to this sacred >>>>>>> hymn >>>>>>> can help cleanse one’s self of internal impurities and sins. Let him >>>>>>> learn >>>>>>> Thank you K R IRS 11121 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 at 17:35, Narayanaswamy Iyer <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear folks >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The demented cat on hot bricks pitifully mews unintelligible >>>>>>>> gibberish in desperation at being totally exposed in his lack of >>>>>>>> intelligence. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Not surprisingly, he has concocted a "Purusha Medham" to give >>>>>>>> expression to his weird imaginings and his flights of fancy over the >>>>>>>> cuckoo's nest. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *"**As Ashva medha there is one Purusha medha," *solemnly intones >>>>>>>> the atheist, who (along with his invisible mentor Ambedkar) draws his >>>>>>>> inspiration from the Buddhists who not only reject all our >>>>>>>> scriptures and our divinities, but also deny that any legitimate birth >>>>>>>> given by a Braahmana woman is NOT a Braahmana infant. By >>>>>>>> necessary implication therefore, all he does is put on permanent >>>>>>>> record, >>>>>>>> publish and broadcast *his own personal illegitimacy*, whether he >>>>>>>> realises this or not! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> He tries to obfuscate the issue by claiming that, "The quoted (by >>>>>>>> him only) purusha medha simply......" does not say that brahmin is by >>>>>>>> birth. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well, well! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> He is not averse to dragging our revered Divinity of Learning >>>>>>>> Goddess Sarasvathi into the affray and trying to highjack our boundless >>>>>>>> adoration of Her as his unsubpoenaed and unwiling witness to his >>>>>>>> untruth. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The embarrassing (to him) fact is, the last verse of the popular >>>>>>>> Sarasvathi ashtakam is:- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "chathur-mukhasya jaayaa yaa >>>>>>>> chathur-veda svaroopini >>>>>>>> chathur bhuja cha saa vyovyaath >>>>>>>> *chathur varga sarasvathi."* >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The last line emphasises that the Goddess is the divinity of all >>>>>>>> the four varnas without distinction. It recalls the first line of the >>>>>>>> second verse of the ashtakam which is:- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *"varna samstaanga roopaaya"* >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Finally, he asks (rhetorically?):- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Is theer any one who does the agnihotram?" (His own misspelling) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, there is, my dear befuddled insane asylum resident and master >>>>>>>> of misrepresentation. If you were not incurably blind and deaf to my >>>>>>>> earlier postings, you would and could have noticed that I for one >>>>>>>> perform >>>>>>>> agnihothrams regularly. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So much so that you became unreasonably irritated and publicly >>>>>>>> castigated "All vaadhyars" and even insulted Brahmarishi Vasishta. >>>>>>>> Remember your 13 December 2020 rant:- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *"All vadhyars who assemble as Veda cultured only to represent the >>>>>>>> BRAHMA, as Purohit to do the task on behalf of the ejaman whether Kamya >>>>>>>> karya or not; no vadhyar has any power even if Vasishta."* >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Some swell-headed turbaned individuals in our midst strut about >>>>>>>> like fairyland emperors, not realising that they have no clothes on, >>>>>>>> not >>>>>>>> even a kaupeenam. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The poor pachyderm-skinned souls deserve our pity. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> S Narayanaswamy Iyer. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 1:56 PM Rajaram Krishnamurthy < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Very interesting! Not even showing the husk leave alone the tip of >>>>>>>>> the paddy. Bamboozling words of credits to me thank the aviveka. >>>>>>>>> avowed >>>>>>>>> taxman prostrating toy disciple. Any one can sense anything?. >>>>>>>>> Well he never did anything so for in getting that evidence. Anyone >>>>>>>>> who can >>>>>>>>> know his words may state the pros and cons over the quote of Purusha >>>>>>>>> medha. >>>>>>>>> As Ashva medha there is one Purusha medha; sacrifice is a word in >>>>>>>>> English rendering a wrong comprehension. All know only one thing for >>>>>>>>> sacrifice. It is not exactly meant as English meaning sacrifice; it is >>>>>>>>> yagnam; medha is intelligence attributed to Saraswathi; there is one >>>>>>>>> Medha >>>>>>>>> suktam attributed to Saraswathi. Ashva, Purusha medha are all yagnam. >>>>>>>>> Yagnam is a kind of work defined. The quoted purusha medha simply >>>>>>>>> says a >>>>>>>>> long list read with Shatapatha brahamana 13.6.2, stressing each do >>>>>>>>> your >>>>>>>>> work assigned to you and the list goes broadened. It does not say that >>>>>>>>> brahmin is by birth. >>>>>>>>> Alabhate is the root word; who is a brahmin?; one who knows the >>>>>>>>> Brahman is a Brahmin; so let brahmin keep in line with the Brahman; >>>>>>>>> kshatriya let him stay with the govt functions; " *THE >>>>>>>>> (SYMBOLICAL) VICTIMS OF THE PURUSHAMEDHA .* >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I. 1. To the priesthood (he consecrates) a Brâhma*n*a--2. To the >>>>>>>>> nobility a Kshatriya--3. To the Maruts a Vai*s*ya--4. To penance >>>>>>>>> (hardship, tapas) a *S*idra--5. To darkness a thief--6. To hell a >>>>>>>>> man-slayer--7. To evil a eunuch--8. To barter an unchaste woman >>>>>>>>> (ayobhû )--9. To desire a harlot (pu*msk*alû)--10. To the shriek >>>>>>>>> (atikrush*t*a) a minstrel (mâgadha)--11. To dancing a herald >>>>>>>>> (bard, sûta)--12. To singing an actor (*s*ailûsha)--13. To the >>>>>>>>> law a counsellor (sabhâ*k*ara)--14. To joking a timorous man--15. >>>>>>>>> To fun (narma) a chatterer--16. To laughter (hasa) an artizan (kâri,? >>>>>>>>> singer of praises)--17. To pleasure (ânanda) a woman's friend--18. To >>>>>>>>> enjoyment a maiden's son--19. To skill a wheelwright--20. To >>>>>>>>> perseverance a >>>>>>>>> carpenter--21. To heat (tapas) a potter--22. To craft a mechanic--23. >>>>>>>>> To >>>>>>>>> handsome form a jeweller--24. To beauty a barber 3 >>>>>>>>> <https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbr/sbe44/sbe44111.htm#fn_1074>--25. >>>>>>>>> To the arrow-shot an arrow-maker--26. To the weapon a bow-maker--27. >>>>>>>>> To >>>>>>>>> work a bowstring-maker--28. To fate a rope-maker--29. To death a >>>>>>>>> huntsman--30. To the end (antaka) a dog-keeper--31. To rivers a >>>>>>>>> fisherman >>>>>>>>> (pau*ñg*ish*th*a)--32. To the ogress (of waste lands) a Nishâda --33. >>>>>>>>> To the man-tiger (? werwolf) a mono-maniac--34. To the Gandharvas and >>>>>>>>> Apsaras a roving outcast (vrâtya)--35. To the teams (? prayu*g*) >>>>>>>>> a madman--36. To serpents and demons a blockhead (? apratipad)--37. >>>>>>>>> To dice >>>>>>>>> a gambler--38. To impassibility 2 >>>>>>>>> <https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbr/sbe44/sbe44111.htm#fn_1076> a >>>>>>>>> non-gambler--39. To the devils (pi*s*â*k*as) a female cane-worker >>>>>>>>> (basket-maker)--40. To the hobgoblins (yâtudhâna) a female worker in >>>>>>>>> thorns--41. To intercourse a gallant--42. To the house a >>>>>>>>> paramour--43. To >>>>>>>>> trouble an unmarried elder brother whose younger brother is >>>>>>>>> married--44. To >>>>>>>>> calamity a younger brother married before his elder brother--45. To >>>>>>>>> failure >>>>>>>>> 3 >>>>>>>>> <https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbr/sbe44/sbe44111.htm#fn_1077> the >>>>>>>>> husband of a younger sister whose elder sister is unmarried--46. To >>>>>>>>> reparation an artiste in embroidery--47. To agreement a female >>>>>>>>> practiser of >>>>>>>>> love-spells--48. To garrulity (prakâmodya) an attendant. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The list run so. who is who is the list. It is not just the >>>>>>>>> Taitriya Samhita alone but runs into satapataha , maha narayana and >>>>>>>>> so on. >>>>>>>>> Sir pl dont waste time especially yours. Gopatha Brahmana says(2.13) >>>>>>>>> नाना >>>>>>>>> प्रवचनानि ह व एतानि भुतानि भवन्ति ये चौवसोमपम् याजयन्ति ये च >>>>>>>>> सुरापम् ये च विच्छिन्नम् ब्राह्मनम्सोमयाजिनम् याजयन्ति॥ गो ब्र २ >>>>>>>>> १३ Those >>>>>>>>> persons becomes the targets of censure who for the performance of >>>>>>>>> their >>>>>>>>> yagnas engage such priests who are not worthy of partaking soma or who >>>>>>>>> resort to drinking wine or who are discarded from the vedic lore >>>>>>>>> (tradition). What dies it show? A priest who is a brahmin even in >>>>>>>>> that era >>>>>>>>> long ago were not considered brahmin even by birth. Purusha medha >>>>>>>>> says just >>>>>>>>> that. The same brahamana 2.23 says that A Brahmana who has not kept >>>>>>>>> ahavaniya agni at his house is not regarded worthy of receiving or >>>>>>>>> extending his blessings dhanam etc or procuring the fruits of deeds >>>>>>>>> studies >>>>>>>>> etc performed by him during the earlier births or earlier period of >>>>>>>>> his >>>>>>>>> life. Some time back Mr Sithamalli was talking about Pururavus >>>>>>>>> carrying >>>>>>>>> agbi to Gandhara ; that wa sreally where agni was given to him he >>>>>>>>> made it >>>>>>>>> into three and carried out; that is termed as TRERAGNI FOR A BRAHMIN; >>>>>>>>> birth, life and death are attached by agni to a brahmin. Is theer any >>>>>>>>> one >>>>>>>>> who does the agnihotram?. So it is not the tax officer who says so; >>>>>>>>> your >>>>>>>>> ancestors said so. K R IRS 11121 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 at 06:51, Narayanaswamy Subramanian < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear folks >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> My favourite obstreperous maverick and jejune genius, the >>>>>>>>>> all-knowing all-being Sri Rajaram Krishnamurthy I.R.S., once openly >>>>>>>>>> challenged me to quote the Vedic authority which declares >>>>>>>>>> unconditionally >>>>>>>>>> that the Braahmanas are so by birth. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> His very own ungrammatical and combative words on 23 Oct 2020:- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *"If NS can show me with the evidence form the sacred vedam >>>>>>>>>> that brahmin is by birth only well lets why let me become his >>>>>>>>>> disciple."* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> His own rock-hard illusion and delusion was that Lord Sree >>>>>>>>>> Krishna in the Bhagavath-Geetha denied so. His touted source: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *chathurvarnam mayaasrushtam gunakarmavibhaaga shah: |* >>>>>>>>>> *thasya karththaaramapi maam viddhyakarththaara mavyayam ||* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> (Bhagavath-Geetha Cap IV v 13) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The maverick-genius translated this minute extract from the >>>>>>>>>> miniscule (700 slokams) of the ithihaasa puraanam Mahaa-Bhaaratham as >>>>>>>>>> incontrovetibly asserting for all time and for all seasons that ONLY >>>>>>>>>> by >>>>>>>>>> innate nature (gunam) and overt acts (karmam) are Braahmanas >>>>>>>>>> identifiable. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> He chose deliberately to overlook and totally ignore the hidden >>>>>>>>>> pre-requisite that these two characteristic features are ADDITIONAL >>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>> birth, and not substitutes. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Certainly, I could have matched him, Puraanam to Puraanam, by >>>>>>>>>> quoting Sree Lalitha sahasra-naamam from Brahmaanda Puraanam:- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *varnaashrama vidhaayinye namaha*(naama no. 286). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> However, since he wanted "evidence form the sacred vedam" I >>>>>>>>>> quoted to him the Purusha Sooktham which clearly declares with >>>>>>>>>> unquestionable authority that Braahmanas were created from the >>>>>>>>>> "mukham" of >>>>>>>>>> the virad Purusha (and continued their uninterrupted descent from >>>>>>>>>> there to >>>>>>>>>> the present day). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Since I did not trust the chameleon in human skin, nor was I >>>>>>>>>> convinced of his integrity, I declined to accept the awowed taxman >>>>>>>>>> prostrating toy disciple. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Far from prostrating to and venerating the infallibility of our >>>>>>>>>> sacred vedams, he appeared (and still appears) to side with the >>>>>>>>>> atheist >>>>>>>>>> dissenting Buddhists whose founder pontificated that shoodra >>>>>>>>>> vaana-prasthaas were braahmanas and those born from Braahmana wombs >>>>>>>>>> were >>>>>>>>>> not: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> pamsukooladharam jantum kisam damanisanthatam >>>>>>>>>> ekam vanasmim jhaayantham tam aham broomi braahmanam (Dhammapada >>>>>>>>>> v 395) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> na cha aham braahmanam broooni yonijam mattisambhavam >>>>>>>>>> bhoovadi naama so hoti sa che hoti sakinchano >>>>>>>>>> akinchanam anaadaanam tam aham broomi braahmanam (Dhammapada v >>>>>>>>>> 396) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The maverick-genius has little if any acquaintance with, much >>>>>>>>>> less knowledge, of our Yajur-vedam. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> So, he is obviously unconscious of the Taittireeya Braahmanam >>>>>>>>>> which further reinforces and supports what already appears in the >>>>>>>>>> Purusha >>>>>>>>>> sooktham:- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *brahmane braahmanamaalabhathe |* >>>>>>>>>> *kshathraaya raajanyam |* >>>>>>>>>> *marudbhyo vaishyam |* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> (Yajurveda Taittireeya Braahmanam "Purusha medhaha" - T.B. >>>>>>>>>> 3.4.1.1.) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The above should hopefully put to rest any illegitimate doubts or >>>>>>>>>> misgivings implanted or aroused by the thoughtless peregrinations of >>>>>>>>>> an >>>>>>>>>> unprincipled adventurer into our sacred scriptures and traditions. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Namaskaarams to elders. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> S Narayanaswamy Iyer >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>>> Groups "iyer123" group. >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAL5XZorAGf%3DqAzSgv5Zn4bhTv2SR3VdLZPozq4VRr0-OJ8twVQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAL5XZorAGf%3DqAzSgv5Zn4bhTv2SR3VdLZPozq4VRr0-OJ8twVQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>> Groups "iyer123" group. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAL4idhOy5uX87-JfaxhQT8syobtukUs1yqs91WHuNfvNXDZrDw%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAL4idhOy5uX87-JfaxhQT8syobtukUs1yqs91WHuNfvNXDZrDw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "iyer123" group. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>> send an email to [email protected]. >>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAL5XZopAaMbw2SVYtG4__6aMQCUECx77WrWrDwHyH1wwt%2BS2KA%40mail.gmail.com >>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAL5XZopAaMbw2SVYtG4__6aMQCUECx77WrWrDwHyH1wwt%2BS2KA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "iyer123" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to [email protected]. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAOSW9Wuz%3DoaHdqieziHaCQoB3%3DxkQAMzepJ3FKZnBSC8zFPWVQ%40mail.gmail.com >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAOSW9Wuz%3DoaHdqieziHaCQoB3%3DxkQAMzepJ3FKZnBSC8zFPWVQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "iyer123" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAL5XZoqFdV28yqAYq1ceZRxO5d1koiG5Y4A6imVMXVrwk_fXDw%40mail.gmail.com >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CAL5XZoqFdV28yqAYq1ceZRxO5d1koiG5Y4A6imVMXVrwk_fXDw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZoq%2BbyTz5mJA8-LHtcexanTvRyfXB-A6Q3rei_kbAs_G-g%40mail.gmail.com.
