"The problem was with Ravikrishna, who is the son of a Christian mother and thus presumed to be a non-Hindu.
As per the prescribed rites of the temple, we are supposed to carry out a punyaham when we know that a non-Hindu has entered the temple...."
Enforcement of rules is one thing. Arbitrariness should not be there. The tanthri equates "presumption of a fact" with "knowledge of a fact". That is the real and immediate problem. He is taking decisions based on assumptions and presumptions.
RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by Sriram Vangal on Jun 06, 2007 03:16 PM Permalink
No Anand, he is very clear. He concedes, many non hindus visit the temple everyday. But it goes un noticed. But when it comes to the notice of the tantri, he has to take purification steps. As an Iyer, I am sure you will have a bath, when u hear some relative has expored. You have to do it only when it comes to your knowledge. Any way, why should Ravikrishna visit the temple, when punyaham was performed after his marriage? It is only to try and gain some political milage
RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by Anand Iyer on Jun 06, 2007 03:20 PM Permalink
"As an Iyer, I am sure you will have a bath, when u hear some relative has expored." TRUE. But I wont presume that my relative has died and based oin such presumption take a bath.
RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by Sriram Vangal on Jun 06, 2007 03:22 PM Permalink
But it is a fact that Ravikrishna, son of a non hindu has visited the temple. He came to know of it from press reports and ordered punyaham. I don't find any anomaliy in that.
RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by Anand Iyer on Jun 06, 2007 03:25 PM Permalink
Who is the press to decide people's faith? He should have given Ravikrishna an opportunity to submit affidavit or for example swear sloemnly in front of the Lord that he is a hindu.
RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by prathibh on Jun 07, 2007 05:55 AM Permalink
@Senthil Gounder,
No Mr.Gaunder, religion is not acquired by birth. There is, and cannot be, any biological proof for that. It does not come thru your genes. You adopt your religion from your parents or someone else, at some stage in life. Sometimes the process is gradual and mostly involuntary. Sometimes it is a sudden decision, voluntary.
It is savarkar who held the view that Brahminism (which he mistakenly and deliberately equated to Hinduism)was biologically acquired. At the root of such views lies not merely ignorance, but the despicable evil of racism.
RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by Senthil Gounder on Jun 06, 2007 03:52 PM Permalink
Anand, Unlike other religions, hinduism is a culture that we acquire by birth. Just as we cannot suddenly change our motherhood, the same as with the religion.
In that case, Ravi's birth is considered for determining his faith.
Why are you so adamant on supporting Ravi.. Ravi should accept the fact that his son would not be discriminated because he is born to a hindu mother.. ie his hindu wife..
Since the rituals are prescribed by Adi shankara itself, the tantri is right & clear in his point.
Please understand the diff b/w christianity & hinduism.. Guruvayur is one part of larger hinduism, and it has its own tradition.
RE:RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by Sriram Vangal on Jun 06, 2007 03:31 PM Permalink
Anand, Ravikrishna got married at Guruvayoor, and a punyaham was done later for the same reason. My question is why should he go there again? The tantri is following the tradition after seeing photos of Ravi doing the ritual.
RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by Surya K on Jun 06, 2007 04:01 PM Permalink
Stop fighting,
keep it in that some of the caste groups are matrilinear till very late. The Temple till follows the same tradition. As this chaps mother is Christian (She has not converted her religion nor changed her name) and hence ha has to follow the Tradition.
RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by Dheeraj Akula on Jun 06, 2007 03:24 PM Permalink
It all depends on whether you consider Mr. Ravi Krishna to be a Christian or a Hindu.
I believe he is a Christian, because his mother is Christian.
Irrespective of what we believe, it is important what the temple believes. As per the religious rules there, the children inherit the religion of their mother, not father.
Finally, there is enough information there, that the family practises Christianity. Mr. Vayalar Ravi tried to cover it up in his interview yesterday, by saying that their family if "progressive and secular". Please read his interview published in Rediff yesterday.
RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by Sriram Vangal on Jun 06, 2007 03:26 PM Permalink
No Dheeraj. Ravi is an Ezhava, who are patriarchial as against Thiyyas of north Kerala, they are Matriarchial. Any way, knowing fully well what will follow, why should he go there? And cry later that he has been insulted.
RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by Dheeraj Akula on Jun 06, 2007 03:57 PM Permalink
OK, irrespective of whether they are patriarchal or matriarchal, it is a fact their family practises Christianity. In the interview published in Rediff yesterday, Mr. Vayalar Ravi tried to cover it up saying that they have "freedom at home" and their family is "progressive and secullar" (these are his words).
RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by Sriram Vangal on Jun 06, 2007 04:00 PM Permalink
As per Congress dictionery, Scecular = Anti Hindu or por minority. Ravi is a hardcore congress man. He did the ritual there only to rake up a contraversy and not for his devotion to god.
RE:RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by Dheeraj Akula on Jun 06, 2007 04:02 PM Permalink
Further, forget what the law says and whether their caste is patriarchal or matriarchal. To the extent that one of his parents is a Christian, he is not a Hindu.
Secondly, their family practises Christianity. It is a fact. They promote Christianity and they help organizations propagating Christianity. These are well-known facts.
Finally, this is not the first time Mr. Vayalar Ravi is involved in such controversies. It is his hobby.
RE:RE:The issue is arbitrariness of a particular individual
by Anand Iyer on Jun 06, 2007 03:27 PM Permalink
Dheeraj-These presumptiuons have an evil effect on hinbdu society. Becoz of such presumptions it becomes difficult to arrange matrimony within the hindu community. Therefore, what happens in many mixed marriages involving hindu is that child is brought up as a non-hindu (to avoid such problems). We should give Mr,. Ravi pluadits for having brought up his son, grandson etc as a hindu.
