Respect & standards

Respect for fraud?

these examples acknowledge the mutual respects irrespective of differences. - @Tiruvadi

The original commenter is right, using terms like “fraud”, “degenerate” etc. makes it look like you are not ready to debate respectfully. - @ChipSqueax

There’s a clear difference between a respectful philosophical discussion and what comes across as personal attacks. - @prathamkare694

But what respect you want us to show to frauds? To the extant that they were flawed bhAgavata-s, yes I respect them. Not beyond that.

If we find our fellows faking quotes left and right (from shruti, venkaTanAtha, Apastamba etc.. ),
and promoting degeneracy based on that,
it is better that we admit their fault
and distance ourselves from them.
It would be worse if someone external needs to show us their mistakes.

Srinivasa Rajan on the other hand, did not have to use such words to put forth his opinion. - @ChipSqueax

Srinivasa Rajan did not address the alleged frauds at all (beyond showing vAsudevasaMhitA’s existence) -
and was infact was himself fooled by the fraudulent sachcharitra-raxA quote.

sampradAya standards

What remains immediately relevant, however, is the nature of the content being expressed and whether it aligns with the standards of conduct and reverence expected within the tradition. - @Tiruvadi

Our tradition does not tolerate forgery, or expect us to shower reverence on forgers.

अतो युष्मत्-कूटस्थ-पक्ष-पातिनां प्रक्षेपस् तथा स्याद् वा न वेति समीचीन-दृष्ट्या भावय ।

इति वेदान्तदेशिकः शतदूषण्याम्।

Your tradition requires you to tolerate and hide forgeries? That’s unfortunate. It’s telling that you are more concerned with “the tone” rather than the actual crime of forgery; and furthermore suggest the “influence, encouragement, or support—whether from missionaries, madrasas, communist ideologies”.

Atleast it might be better than 20th CE kAnchi aNNangarAchArya’s, who for example, has very cheaply maligned (with cheap expressions too) mahAparakAla yati in four languages without any valid evidence (https://youtu.be/cwlrsQ_KepA).

Even so, I vocally appreciate good qualities of such slanderers and people I otherwise disagree with.

विस्तारः (द्रष्टुं नोद्यम्)

I have offered my comments with the sincere intent of ensuring that apachārams are avoided and that a sense of balance and sanity is maintained in our discourse.

It is often said that certain tendencies are difficult to correct; however, it is indeed surprising to observe instances where conduct exceeds even such expectations. This is not stated in derision, but in concern over the direction and tone being adopted.

If such expressions are reflective of what has been received or understood from one’s teachers, it would be worthwhile to reflect deeply on whether they truly align with the spirit and discipline of the sampradāya. Ultimately, your words, your life, and your choices remain your own responsibility.

At the same time, if there is, in any manner, influence, encouragement, or support—whether from missionaries, madrasas, communist ideologies, or any external entities—driving the dissemination of such derogatory expressions, it would be a matter of serious concern and deep misfortune. Acting in a manner that deliberately demeans one’s own tradition, under any such influence, carries consequences that are not merely social but profoundly enduring.

What remains immediately relevant, however, is the nature of the content being expressed and whether it aligns with the standards of conduct and reverence expected within the tradition.

If you hold that there is a Supreme Being who stands as sākṣī, it is worth reflecting whether such expressions align with that awareness. If, however, one considers oneself the sole repository of knowledge, then the consequences of such a stance also rest entirely with the individual.

I end my posts here and will not engage further on this matter.

bhAgavatApachAra

It is purely Blasphemous to Discuss publicly in Youtube about Thenkalai and Vadakalai. Be careful. I warn you. - @sureshthesmartsmart

It is said to be a sin to find faults in Bhagavatas let alone Srivaishnavas. Whether intentional or not, this kind of content risks becoming bhagavata apacharam. - @prathamkare694

You’re wrong - vedAnta deshika, manavALa mAmuni, mahAparakAla-yati, all pointed out flaws in the arguments of others.

My intention is to serve bhAgavata-s by pointing out cases of attempts to fool and defraud them - so any incidental aspersions cast on the perpetrators is very much in service to bhAgavata-s in general.

Further, my responses should be considered as counters to bhAgavata-apachAra in light of the slander being dismissed, for example -

AchArya-nindA?

It’s so bad to see all learned achaaryas from all our three school of thoughts are maligning each other.. Shame.. criticize the Siddhanta but not the people.. The moola acharyas were never small minded as we followers are including you sir. The validity of those quotes from whatever acharyas were consequential (actions and reactions which we don’t know of) and only limited to that time when they existed. We keep quarreling quoting those makes no sense… Eye for an eye makes everyone blind.. We are so much behind showing off our wit or so called vidhwath we forgot about the path of righteous that our gurus have asked us to walk.. we all must apologize to the non-brahmin community for such repeated instances.. let’s stop this please.🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏 - @pdph3055

प्रणमामि। You should not be so sensitive. That’s my big message. Focus on the actual objections, rather than all incidental rhetoric (almost every major AchArya indulged in such).

Symmetry

Many of us consciously choose not to mock or belittle Vadakalai texts or practices not because we can’t - @prathamkare694

Yet some of you do belittle rival sects and practices. Still, you’re welcome to do so - if there is something worthy of being accepted and corrected, we will thank you for it.

Hatred against tenkalais?

vk s … hate Thenkalais - @piyu…1976

No. They’re against fraudsters and people denounced by bhagavAn. Aren’t you?

श्रुतिस् स्मृतिर् ममैवाज्ञा
यस् ताम् उल्लङ्घ्य वर्तते ।
आज्ञाच्छेदी मम द्रोही
मद्भक्तोऽपि न वैष्णवः । - वि। ध। ६।३१