• search
  • Live TV
ತ್ವರಿತ ಅಲರ್ಟ್ ಗಳಿಗಾಗಿ
ನೋಟಿಫಿಕೇಷನ್ ಅನುಮತಿಸಿ  
ತ್ವರಿತ ಅಲರ್ಟ್ ಗಳಿಗಾಗಿ
ನೋಟಿಫಿಕೇಷನ್ ಅನುಮತಿಸಿ  
For Daily Alerts

ಜಯಗೀತೆ ಹಾಡಿ, ಸುಖದಿಂದ ಕೂಡಿ ವಂದಿಪೆವು ಜನ್ಮದಾತೆ..ಜಯ

By Super
|

Hello,

When it comes to the discussion about Madhwacharya, I see that he beholds propositions when it comes to god,which is easily contradictable,but as far as his thought about classification of peoples classes are concerned,it is clear that he has not hurt anybody,it is a false implication,but our discussion here is,need to be only about his name inclusion in the Karnataka state song.

Here is my vision about it: It is important to include his name as he hails from Karnataka and moreover there are Shankara and Ramanujas name, who totally does not belong to Karnataka,when theirs name is included then why not Madhwacharyas? But here is a litigation, had Kuvempu really agreed for the change of his poem about Madhwas name or what? based on only upon this reality, depends the authority of else person to do it, but proper proof is required about the same,only then the decision can be done.

Secondly I see that Kuvempu has dipicted the poem by seeing in it, India as whole and Karnataka as a part of it,which is good. But an option of using a poem or a song which describes or glorifies just only Karnataka would be more important, when we today the state of Kannada language survival and also for another reason as the song or poem that is in for selection is and has to be for Karnataka state song, just like the song

JAYA KARNATAKA JAYA KARNATAKA JAYA KARNATAKA MATHE,

JAYA GEETHE HADI SUKADINDA KUDI ONDIPE HOO JANMA

DATTE, KOLARA CHEENA, MYSOORU CHEENA.....

so if there is an option of some other song or poem like the one examplified that can bring about this powerful change, it be so.

- CHETHAN.B.R.

USA

*

Dear Editor,

Its really disgusting to note that a great writer like Poornachandra tejaswi is speaking such nonsense about the great saint Madhwacharya.

His first point which says that Madhwas name cannot be included in the poem at this stage as it may give way for many people asking their religious leaders name in the poem is acceptable and sensible, but his second point that Madhwacharya descriminated dalits is baseless and Mr. Tejaswi has to tender apology for such an irresponsible statement. It was the followers of Madhwa (Sripadarajaru, Vyasarajaru, Vadirajaru, Purandara, Kanaka, Vijaya Dasaru, Jagnnatha)who brought the essance of vedas in the local language when the great pundits considered only sanskrit as the language for teaching and preaching religion. It was the great guru Vyasaraja who gave mantropadesha to a kuruba and made him as Kanakadasa and Vyasaraja was also the Rajaguru of the great Vijayanagara dynasty whose rajas were not brahmins. Saint Vadiraja has written lot of songs in Tulu language especially for the dalits of the south canara area, when so much evidence is there about Madhwa and his followers how Mr. Tejaswi classified Sri Madhwacharya in such a way. In fact the contribution of the Haridasas to kannada language is much more compared to any other modern poets. Finally I would like to tell that Madhwacharyas name is not required to be mentioned in the poem (which is sung only on Nov 1st) as his work is known to the entire world (he doesnt need a publicity).

Regards,

- Rajesh, Bangalore

*

Sir,

It is disgusting that we kannadigas are fighting within ourselves over the state anthem, most disgusting.

- Gajanana Deshpande

City?

*

Dear editor,

It pains to read the statement of Purnachandra Tejaswi and anti Madhwa statements by Sharma and Krishna Jois.

Sri Madhwas respect does not diminish by one iota by these ignorant peoples statements. They are neither scholars like Sri Bannanje Govindacharya nor fair minded. It is the jealousy of these outsiders who have made their homeland in Kannadanadu, that is Karnataka. Shastris speak Telugu, Iyengars speak Tamil at home and yet call themselves as Kannadigas.Ramanuja was chased out of Tamilnadu by the shaivate chola king and sought asylum in Karnataka. It is the generosity of Kannadigas that saved his life.His philosophy of Ananda Brahma i.e. identifying a human with Brahma in the ultimate state of Ananda is un relistic and not practical. Even Sri Ramakrishna who propagated Adwaitha and in final days of his life tried this Ananda stage of identifying himself with Parabrahman has stated that both Adwaitha and Vishitadwita is possible in theory only where as the Dwaitha as propagated by Sriman Madhwa is realistic and represents truth. Comparing Madhwa philosophy with Taliban is just as idiotic as comparing Shankara with Osama. This just shows the vulgar mentality of the persons who makes such statement. It is Sri Krishna who has said " Chathurvarnam maya srishnam guna karma vibagathah", not Shiva. As a great devotee of Sri Krishna, Madhwa has repeatedly said that Jathi means a varna. That varna is based on swabhava and deed. The individual should decide what varna he wants to be in. People like jois and sharma definitely qualifies to be in the lowest of the varnas even though they might have been born in the highest varna by bad mouthing the great acarya. As for the nadageethe, they should adopt the song "Udayavagali namma chaluva kannada nadu" by Huilgol Narayana Rao. There is no mention of the non kannadiga acaharyas nor singing their glory.As for Mr. Tejaswi, I think he is unworthy of being the son of Kuvempu, because of his stupid and untrue statement about Madhwacharya.

As sri Vyasaraja writes

"Sriman Madhwamate Hari Paratharah;

Sathyam Jagathtwatho;

Bedojeevaganaha Harenuchara Neechotha Bavangathah;

Mukthinejya sukanubhoothiramala

bhakthischa satsadhanam;

Hrukshadithrethyam pramanamakilamnyekavedyo Harih"

If Tejaswi, Sharma and Jois can understand the meaning of this satvakya, they dare not talk ill of Jagathguru Sriman Madhwacharya.

It is not Madhwa who is at a loss by non inclusion in the so called nadageethe, but it is people like Tejaswi and others who should be ashamed of by their ignorance of facts.

Udayavagali sadbhuddi namma kannadigaige,

- Nagaraja Rao,

Toronto, Canada

Dear Editor,

It is well evident from the very poem that it is an futile effort on the part of poet in bringing the true Kannada flavor to the so claimed poem, which now being considered for the provincial official status. It is evident from the fact that mentioning of non-Kannada figures such as Sri Shankara and Sri Ramanuja in the poem, although their contribution in the area of so called Kannada Saahittya is less to none. One may be very well consider this intent of poet as an effort to irrelevantly use the big names in Vedantic arena as an for his advantage to add a value to his poem, though such sited figures has nothing to do with the true spirit of Kannada.

In the same line, the poet has grossly ignored the true contribution to world of Kannada literature by great lineage of Hari Daasa of Sri Madhva school. If one finds any true Vedantic and Bhakti aspect in Kannada literature today, it is very much due to this great figures such as Sri Purandara Daasa, Sri Vijaya Daasa, Sri Kanaka Daasa to name few, of Hari Daasa movement. It is considered by both scholars and commons alike, that this Daasa literature is an Kannada equivalent of Vyasa literature.

On this occasion, one can recollect the same pattern of ignoring the deserved one and clinging on to the irrelevant aspect. The case in point is of national poem Janagana mana adinaayaka.... It is very well known that all the issue about who actually is so claimed adinaayaka and the rest.

Now, with respect to the issue of claims of Sri Poornachandra Tejashwi on Acharya Madhva, one can notice that his claim is uninformed and utter baseless. This is classical example of mixing up of ontological categories of sattva, rajO and tamO principles as cited in Madhva system with the social classes of cast system. This is the case of uninformed individual who is trying to mislead the masses for whatever worth, let alone confused himself. In fact , the very attitude (as himself mentioned in his statement) of unwillingness to accept the poet father, if there arises a circumstance of poet himself agrees to include Acharyas name, is very well be, an indication of the ontological character of tamoyogyaa as mentioned in VedAnta.

- Srinivas Kotekal,

Michigan, USA

*

Hi,

I am reading about critics and discussions going on Naadagite Jayabharatha jananiya tanujaate. First time in my life I felt sorry for being Kannadiga. Its really pathetic, its not important what Pu.Ch.Te said or how Madwacharya discriminated( so called).Important matter is what KUVEMPU said and its going to be our Naadageethe. Now the bottom line is both Kuvempu and Sri. Madwacharya are history, this song represents our state its not some political party to expel somebody, change or add. At any cost history can not be changed. Instead of fighting or abusing somebody or judging each other, think in broad sense and come into conclusion. That is practical, and works well too.

- Raviprakash, Uma

Sweden

*

Dear Editor,

"Jaya Bharata Jananiya Tanujaate" is quite a controversial choice with all this mess. Whatsoever, Kuvempu simply has shown more respect to outsiders (the achaaryas) than our own. With this

reality in my front, myself being a staunch Kannadiga, I totally reject it. I am sure most Kannadigas with commonsense will do the same.

- Vedprakash Bangalore

Manitoba, Canada

*

Hi,

Poornachandra does not know anything about Madhwa philosophy.He is not the right person to comment on Sriman Madhwacharya.First ask Poornachandra to read about Sri Madhwacharya and then talk about him.If he knows Kannada it does not mean he knows about all philospohies.Knowing a language does not make anyone great.He does not have any right to talk lightly about Madhwacharya.If he does not want to include Madhwacharyas name,fine.Because who cares about that Naada geethe which does not give any respect to Madhwas.Even I believe the names of Sangeetha Pitamaha "PurandaraDasaru" and many other dasa shreshtas names are missing.It is really disgusting....

It is shameful that the Naada Geethe does not include prominient names like Madhwacharya,Purandaradasaru,Sripadarajaru...Instead it includes names which r not/less important.

Hari Sarvothamma Vayu Jeevothama,

- Vadiraj

City?

(ಕರ್ನಾಟಕದ ನಾಡಗೀತೆ ಜಯಭಾರತ ಜನನಿಯ ತನುಜಾತೆ, ದ್ವೆತ ಸಿದ್ಧಾಂತದ ಹರಿಕಾರ ಶ್ರೀ ಮಧ್ವಾಚಾರ್ಯರು ಮತ್ತು ರಸಋಷಿ ಕುವೆಂಪು ಅವರ ಮಗ ಪಂಪ ಪ್ರಶಸ್ತಿ ವಿಜೇತ ಪೂರ್ಣಚಂದ್ರ ತೇಜಸ್ವಿ ಅವರ ಹೇಳಿಕೆಗೆ ನಮ್ಮ ಓದುಗರಿಂದ ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯೆಗಳ ಮಹಾಪೂರ ಪತ್ರ, ಲೇಖನ, ಕವನ ರೂಪದಲ್ಲಿ ಹರಿದು ಬರುತ್ತಿವೆ. ಮಾನ್ಯ ವಾಚಕರ ಬರಹಗಳು ಯಥಾವಕಾಶ ಬೆಳಕು ಕಾಣಲಿವೆ.

ಚರ್ಚೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಪಾಲ್ಗೊಳ್ಳುತ್ತಿರುವ ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ ಕಳಕಳಿಯ ನಮ್ಮ ಓದುಗ ಬಳಗಕ್ಕೆ ಶುಭಕಾಮನೆಗಳು- ಸಂಪಾದಕ)

ನಮ್ಮ ಓದುಗರೇನೂ ಕಮ್ಮಿ -1:

ಕನ್ನಡ ಮ್ಯಾಟ್ರಿಮೋನಿಯಲ್ಲಿ - ಉಚಿತ ನೋಂದಣಿ !

English summary
Controversy over Karnataka State anthem. Debate part 2. The anthem a poetical rendering by Jnanapheeta Award winner Kuvempu has omitted reference to sri Madvacharya. Followers of Madhwa philosophy are up in arms against Tejasvi, Kuvempus poetry and Government of Karnataka
ತಾಜಾ ಸುದ್ದಿ ತಕ್ಷಣ ಪಡೆಯಿರಿ
Enable
x
Notification Settings X
Time Settings
Done
Clear Notification X
Do you want to clear all the notifications from your inbox?
Settings X
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. This includes cookies from third party social media websites and ad networks. Such third party cookies may track your use on Oneindia sites for better rendering. Our partners use cookies to ensure we show you advertising that is relevant to you. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on Oneindia website. However, you can change your cookie settings at any time. Learn more