They would then be accused of being dyed-in-wool, hardcore Manu-*vaadis*.
Collectively, the Mutt Acharyas don’t want to be boxed into that
inconvenient corner. Why? Because the Acharyas are prepared to neither
publicly defend nor reject outright the oldest recorded scriptural code of
ethics of Sanatana Dharma viz. the *Manu Smriti*. It is all a very sad
reflection of the profound *Hamletian* dilemma that Sanatana Dharma faces
today viz. : “*to be or not to be what Manu had described Sanatana Dharma
to be… That is the question!”. *When even the *RSS* (*Rashtriya Svayam
Sevak*) has denounced the edifice of *Varna-Ashrama Dharma* on which Manu
Smriti is built, how can the Hindu seers and Acharyas take a contrarian,
fundamentalist position with regard to the basic tenets of Sanatana
Dharma?............................. Acharyas of the Hindu religion for
they are truly “d*amned if they do and damned if they don’t”*! *Sudarshan
Madabushi {ON DUSHYANT SRIDHAR}*
KR Collective data of BRI IMEECC is well taken and will be seen
somewhere in Nov when Mr Modi makes a review. In line with the progressive
elements the sanathana will also be reviewed after the SAMUDRAYON TO BEE
SENT, A SUBMARINE, 6 MILES DEEP IN THE SEA, MAY BE NEAR DWARAKA?
2 A midway analysis on the previous article of Madabushi, on Dushyant
defence, makes me unnerved. The division of Vaishna makes me think also
that is it misleading to offence? Madabushi may be a Vaishnavite but he is
an Indian only, so all analysis is to be read by an Indian as from an
Indian only.
3 Is Madabushi applying knowing fully well, the ethics of Manu,
dividing through the walls of Vaishnavism? Except that particular Jihadi
attitude once I saw regularly as a 11 year old kid, having recited Valmiki
and sengalipuram “tabinjus” varieties of slokas so loud, and exclaimed by
Mrs Parasara Iyengar my neibors, also used to prokshanam, whenever I was
there, in their home and left out. {This is what we are doing since 2019
after corona) My Mother used to say, when I asked what was that
Sampradayam, as “forget it Raja; they are only like that; they have an idea
that ayyangarism is superior to Ayyarism”. A few acts of indifferences
alone made me think, why that mami, who in the temple, takes the prasadam,
consume it, and then swipe in her saree (is that not pathu, even If
prasadam?) and wears only that saree, sprinkle holy water, when I leave
their home? Please do not mistake me as I have only a few reservations but
not a crossed opinion on Ramanuja and their Jeeyars as a couple of them I
knew closely and used to get bottles of oil after the pooja sent to my
house.
4 Madabushi is making a fun or Pun I cannot fathom when he says Manu
uttered some kind of Nonsense and how acharyas could defend-something like
a wrong intonation. When Ambedkar wrote volumes on Manu, I knew in spite of
his position, as many, I had seen in that category, those people always had
an inferiority complex of they are not being respected. They always thought
all the time calling the superiors whether SC or Aiyengar or Ayyar or
otherwise as SIR, is below par if we don’t address them as :”Mahaganam
porundiya Maanbumigu devareer avargale”-like that ,some kind of
addressing, which is not our mistakes. So I do not care whether Ambedkar,
EVR or KK or Stalin or Udayanidhi or veeramani when they speak ill of Manu.
But I cannot see Madabhushi interpreting Manu that way.
5 Manu never wrote anything out of the Vedas and Upanishads way in
inculcating a kind of Grihya sutra. Sitting in 2023 where so many men and
women show their physical culture exposing to sun and wind, and comparing
the Manu of 300 BCE is unchaste. Again, indicating Manu is as good as
indicting the Vedas. As a matter of fact, in spite of being a sanatanist,
Vaishnavite Sri Ramanujar and some others, went outside the Vedas in the
interpretations; and where they had to agree with the smartha, in treatise
like B G Brahma sutram etc, Sri Ramanujar, left out certain verses totally
and by passed. But it isa kind of Vaishnavite patriotism and I do not bring
it to focus as a grave crime. Even Sayana had simply repeated certain
verses of Vedas as such, as he might not have understood the hidden meaning
as so many even today are trying to decipher. But accusing Manu as against
caste, women, etc is immaturity after reading in full. Manu write up was
interpreted by so many as they like it -is a different issue. But the words
of Manu need not be defended at all as he was clear in his thinking. Manu
wrote only as varna, but the British wrote it as Jati. Manu spoke how a
respectable lady must be governed while also telling the duties of men and
women as well as the liberty and rights she had aplenty. Even today the
best liberator woman who had seen the all the aspects of sex, still wants
to get married and bear children only through the husband, was only because
of two things; one she knew that she needs a perfect protection; two, the
baby she desired must be legitimate; this is happening even if she is
foreigner with abundant liberties. Tiruvalluar who was neutral in defining
everything, still wrote in the Kamathupal, the word “PEEZHAI” (not pizhai
the mistake) IN 10 VERSES IN AN ADIKARAM. Women in spite of the highest
liberty are only like a flower or a reaper, who shall be patented and
guarded well by the society, for a good progeny. (Which again in BG Arjuna
describes the effect of war WHERE THE SOCIETY WOULD BECOME POLLUTED). Manu
said what the Vedas spoke about an illustrious family where men and women
were equal and where men by strength and knowledge governs along with her,
which are the manifestations of matured society. Manu never said Hinduism
and never said Sanatana is different from the Vedas. Had Madabushi were to
say (foolishly) as Justice Anand Venkatesan, “it is my personal opinion”,
having entered in a record, then how come it were to be said as personal?)
KR IRS 14 9 23
On Thu, 14 Sept 2023 at 08:45, Rangarajan T.N.C. <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> https://unknownsrivaishnava.in/2023/09/11/india-middle-east-europe-connectivity-corridor-paved-with-vishwa-guru-ambitions/
>
--
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/CAL5XZooJUx6FLyeTg-sn_wD4OCwkCzFj2Yy7Pp_bgpV_3zk0zQ%40mail.gmail.com.
