Re: Ignore Rashmun?

by charvaka Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:44 am

Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:Rashmun Method at work again! If you never started a single thread on the nature of DNA, does it mean that you had never heard of DNA until someone started a CH thread on it?

--> over a period of several years, you never initiated a single thread on Charvakas. you gave zero indication of any independent knowledge of Charvakas.

Over a period of several years, you never initiated a single thread on DNA. You gave zero inclination of any independent knowledge of DNA. So you had never heard of DNA until someone posted a CH thread on DNA. QED, thanks to the Rashmun Method.

by Merlot Daruwala Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:18 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:People with no original ability to think or express their views, have a tendency to borrow and live by others' views...

You mean, like copying stuff off the net and passing it off as their own, profound thoughts? Like that fellow Uppili used to on old CH??

by artood2 Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:28 pm

This forum has suddenly exploded into a number of fights after a period of mushfest. Enjoying my popcorn.

by Rekz Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:33 pm

this discussion is still on:?:

by Mr. T Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:34 pm

Rekz wrote: this discussion is still on:?:

What did you expect ? Get some pop corn like Artood and enjoy the show.

by Rekz Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:37 pm

Mr.T...where u from?
kids?

by Rekz Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:58 pm

Rekz wrote:Mr.T...where u from?
kids?

btw about myself...
1 hubby & 1 baby
Im right now in chennai Smile

by Mr. T Wed Jul 20, 2011 12:59 pm

Rekz wrote:
Rekz wrote:Mr.T...where u from?
kids?

btw about myself...
1 hubby & 1 baby
Im right now in chennai

1 hubby - how cute Razz

by .|Sublime|. Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:03 pm

by Impedimenta Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:04 pm

Rekz wrote:
Rekz wrote:Mr.T...where u from?
kids?

btw about myself...
1 hubby & 1 baby
Im right now in chennai

LOL @ 1 hubby. chennai? i was in chennai but no see anyone with 1 hubby and 1baby...just saying...

by Hellsangel Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:07 pm

.|Sublime|. wrote:

Ignore Rashmun? - Page 2 Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRNFCxeEpZwLchDh6S96swpSO6I9dERJ8NPtLWTAZD5JyOk3X9Qwg&t=1

by artood2 Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:11 pm

.|Sublime|. wrote:

May be it is just this

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0292113/

by Rekz Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:13 pm

Impedimenta wrote:
Rekz wrote:
Rekz wrote:Mr.T...where u from?
kids?

btw about myself...
1 hubby & 1 baby
Im right now in chennai

LOL @ 1 hubby. chennai? i was in chennai but no see anyone with 1 hubby and 1baby...just saying...

Maybe next

by Guest Wed Jul 20, 2011 1:50 pm

Rekz, look up Mr. T's profile on CH forum

by Guest Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:03 pm

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:Rashmun Method at work again! If you never started a single thread on the nature of DNA, does it mean that you had never heard of DNA until someone started a CH thread on it?

--> over a period of several years, you never initiated a single thread on Charvakas. you gave zero indication of any independent knowledge of Charvakas.
Over a period of several years, you never initiated a single thread on DNA. You gave zero inclination of any independent knowledge of DNA. So you had never heard of DNA until someone posted a CH thread on DNA. QED, thanks to the Rashmun Method.

--> i don't recall the scientific details of DNA being discussed--ever--on CH. When i wrote so many blogs and posts on Charvakas, it is natural that you would have made some original contribution in your various replies to my posts if you had really read anything about them. But nada.

--> i did not write on DNA on CH just as i do not write asking for advice on which laptop to buy on CH.

by charvaka Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:12 pm

Rashmun wrote:i don't recall the scientific details of DNA being discussed--ever--on CH.

http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aforums.sulekha.com+dna&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Rashmun wrote:When i wrote so many blogs and posts on Charvakas, it is natural that you would have made some original contribution in your various replies to my posts if you had really read anything about them. But nada.

I didn't have anything to add to what you said. That doesn't mean I hadn't heard of them before.

Like I said to you when you first made this claim: I am glad if you think I didn't know about Charvakas before you started posting about them. It's just not true, but it's not the most damaging untruth you believe in -- by far -- so it's all good.

by Guest Wed Jul 20, 2011 2:46 pm

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:i don't recall the scientific details of DNA being discussed--ever--on CH.
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aforums.sulekha.com+dna&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Rashmun wrote:When i wrote so many blogs and posts on Charvakas, it is natural that you would have made some original contribution in your various replies to my posts if you had really read anything about them. But nada.
I didn't have anything to add to what you said. That doesn't mean I hadn't heard of them before.

Like I said to you when you first made this claim: I am glad if you think I didn't know about Charvakas before you started posting about them. It's just not true, but it's not the most damaging untruth you believe in -- by far -- so it's all good.

1. you really expect me to respond to gyanputra's posts?

2. did you know anything at all about the charvaka view on consciousness? Or else, the charvaka view on inference? what exactly did you know about charvakas before i started posting about them on CH and as blogs? why did you not make any original contribution to your various replies to my charvaka posts?

by charvaka Wed Jul 20, 2011 3:55 pm

Rashmun wrote:did you know anything at all about the charvaka view on consciousness?

No.

Rashmun wrote:Or else, the charvaka view on inference?

No.

Rashmun wrote:what exactly did you know about charvakas before i started posting about them on CH and as blogs?

That they were atheists and materialists.

Rashmun wrote:why did you not make any original contribution to your various replies to my charvaka posts?

For the same reason you have not made any original contributions on Android phones or DNA!

by Guest Wed Jul 20, 2011 4:05 pm

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:did you know anything at all about the charvaka view on consciousness?
No.

Rashmun wrote:Or else, the charvaka view on inference?
No.

Rashmun wrote:what exactly did you know about charvakas before i started posting about them on CH and as blogs?
That they were atheists and materialists.

Rashmun wrote:why did you not make any original contribution to your various replies to my charvaka posts?
For the same reason you have not made any original contributions on Android phones or DNA!

--> i have not commented on Android phones or DNA. For technical discussions i post on other forums.

--> You have posted on the Charvakas. But the views you expressed simply consisted of consistently expressing your agreement with what i was saying on the Charvakas using the Rashmun Method.

--> So tell me: have you read a single book on Indian philosophy in your life?

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Jul 20, 2011 4:13 pm

Rashmun wrote:

--> So tell me: have you read a single book on Indian philosophy in your life?

i don't know if he has or hasn't, but if he hasn't i recommend it highly. best non-chemical cure to insomnia. i took a class as my final year humanities elective in college. nearly flunked it.

by Guest Wed Jul 20, 2011 4:37 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

--> So tell me: have you read a single book on Indian philosophy in your life?

i don't know if he has or hasn't, but if he hasn't i recommend it highly. best non-chemical cure to insomnia. i took a class as my final year humanities elective in college. nearly flunked it.

--> you probably had a bad teacher who killed your interest in the subject. how you teach philosophy, particularly indian philosophy, is terribly important.

--> i know i would have started hating the subject myself it was taught from the perspective that Advaita Vedanta is the greatest of all Indian philosophies. This indeed is the position of many scholars of Indian philosophy--that Vedanta, specifically Advaita Vedanta, is the greatest philosophical contribution of India to mankind. Personally i detest Advaita Vedanta--for philosophical reasons of course.

by SomeProfile Wed Jul 20, 2011 8:46 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Another Brick wrote:rashmun starts some good topics and a lot of discussion takes place on them. if it were not for him, we would not have had so much fun teasing d!ckvijay singh. i am somewhat disappointed in rashmun for not posting mongol art any longer. evwwwRRrrYYYvone loves mongol art here.

--> will you continue teasing Diggy Raja after he becomes a union cabinet minister in 2014?

Lol! Are you kidding? Piggy raja will give even more material for people to tease and criticize him, if he ever becomes a union minister. We will have more comedy material from him than from all other ministers put together.

Of course, it's a different matter that dickvijay will never get such a position.

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 1:45 am

Rashmun wrote:So tell me: have you read a single book on Indian philosophy in your life?

I have not, and I am quite happy with that status quo. I don't have much patience for books that pay too much obeisance to this deity or that; the off-putting thing about Indian philosophy is that it is mired in religion. So much to that Indians routinely confuse philosophy for religion.

You say you have read a lot of philosophy, including presumably political philosophy. Look what good
it has done you. You have become a partisan hack who willingly defends
unsavory characters like Diggy Raja no matter what he says or does. You
think the world comes in just two colors -- black and white -- with that static model can never change.

I don't have more to say about this sidetrack on when I first heard about the Charvaka school of philosophy. Suffice it to say that I first heard of the school -- and the loss of all of its actual works -- during the phase of inquiry and reading that I went through as a teenager that ended with my becoming an atheist. If you want to believe otherwise, honestly, I don't give a damn, and you are welcome to take credit for it. And for inventing the internet too, while you are at it!

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 1:46 am

SomeProfile wrote:Piggy raja

There's not winning this, is there? Because people came up with Dogvijay, Pigvijay and Dickvijay, Rashmun thought he'd refer to his hero as Diggy Raja. Now all this does is remind me of Cartman's "I'm a little piggy, oink, oink, oink!"

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 1:50 am

charvaka wrote:
SomeProfile wrote:Piggy raja
There's not winning this, is there? Because people came up with Dogvijay, Pigvijay and Dickvijay, Rashmun thought he'd refer to his hero as Diggy Raja. Now all this does is remind me of Cartman's "I'm a little piggy, oink, oink, oink!"

--> Diggy Raja is how he is known in Madhya Pradesh. His friends also call him Diggy.

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 1:52 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:So tell me: have you read a single book on Indian philosophy in your life?
I have not, and I am quite happy with that status quo. I don't have much patience for books that pay too much obeisance to this deity or that; the off-putting thing about Indian philosophy is that it is mired in religion. So much to that Indians routinely confuse philosophy for religion.

You say you have read a lot of philosophy, including presumably political philosophy. Look what good
it has done you. You have become a partisan hack who willingly defends
unsavory characters like Diggy Raja no matter what he says or does. You
think the world comes in just two colors -- black and white -- with that static model can never change.

I don't have more to say about this sidetrack on when I first heard about the Charvaka school of philosophy. Suffice it to say that I first heard of the school -- and the loss of all of its actual works -- during the phase of inquiry and reading that I went through as a teenager that ended with my becoming an atheist. If you want to believe otherwise, honestly, I don't give a damn, and you are welcome to take credit for it. And for inventing the internet too, while you are at it!

--> given a choice of congress and bjp, i prefer the congress even though i do not agree with everything the congress stands for. for instance, i am against caste based reservation and i am also for uniform civil code.

--> given a choice of digvijay singh and uma bharati, i prefer digivijay.

--> the fact remains that as of now there are only two choices in Indian national politics. its either going to be a congress govt. or a bjp govt. u can obfuscate and pussyfoot around this all you want to.

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 1:53 am

Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:
SomeProfile wrote:Piggy raja
There's not winning this, is there? Because people came up with Dogvijay, Pigvijay and Dickvijay, Rashmun thought he'd refer to his hero as Diggy Raja. Now all this does is remind me of Cartman's "I'm a little piggy, oink, oink, oink!"

--> Diggy Raja is how he is known in Madhya Pradesh. His friends also call him Diggy.

https://youtu.be/B45S6L20OJA

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 1:54 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:So tell me: have you read a single book on Indian philosophy in your life?
I have not, and I am quite happy with that status quo. I don't have much patience for books that pay too much obeisance to this deity or that; the off-putting thing about Indian philosophy is that it is mired in religion. So much to that Indians routinely confuse philosophy for religion.

--> But you were quite happy to read and praise and vigorously agree with my philosophy posts on CH which i was writing using the Rashmun Method. Correct?

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 1:55 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:
SomeProfile wrote:Piggy raja
There's not winning this, is there? Because people came up with Dogvijay, Pigvijay and Dickvijay, Rashmun thought he'd refer to his hero as Diggy Raja. Now all this does is remind me of Cartman's "I'm a little piggy, oink, oink, oink!"

--> Diggy Raja is how he is known in Madhya Pradesh. His friends also call him Diggy.
https://youtu.be/B45S6L20OJA

--> no wonder sandilya calls you juvenile!

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 1:56 am

Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:
SomeProfile wrote:Piggy raja
There's not winning this, is there? Because people came up with Dogvijay, Pigvijay and Dickvijay, Rashmun thought he'd refer to his hero as Diggy Raja. Now all this does is remind me of Cartman's "I'm a little piggy, oink, oink, oink!"

--> Diggy Raja is how he is known in Madhya Pradesh. His friends also call him Diggy.
https://youtu.be/B45S6L20OJA

--> no wonder sandilya calls you juvenile!

Is Sandilya now the authority on people's characteristics? Shall I recount the things he calls you? BTW, Lukeji also calls me juvenile, if that helps your position! lol!

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:00 am

Rashmun wrote:But you were quite happy to read and praise and vigorously agree with my philosophy posts on CH which i was writing

I am quite happy to read, praise and vigorously agree with anything anyone says that makes sense.

Rashmun wrote:using the Rashmun Method

In any of the arguments of yours that I agreed with, I don't recall you making arguments like "X said this. It must be true, and here is why: if it were not true, it is not likely X would have said what he said." That is the Rashmun Method.

This is a point on which I will actually be happy to be proved wrong (that you indeed used the Rashmun Method even then.) So go ahead and show me some examples of that line of reasoning, and I will be happy to change my opinion regarding your knowledge of Indian philosophy.

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:11 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:But you were quite happy to read and praise and vigorously agree with my philosophy posts on CH which i was writing
I am quite happy to read, praise and vigorously agree with anything anyone says that makes sense.

Rashmun wrote:using the Rashmun Method
In any of the arguments of yours that I agreed with, I don't recall you making arguments like "X said this. It must be true, and here is why: if it were not true, it is not likely X would have said what he said." That is the Rashmun Method.

This is a point on which I will actually be happy to be proved wrong (that you indeed used the Rashmun Method even then.) So go ahead and show me some examples of that line of reasoning, and I will be happy to change my opinion regarding your knowledge of Indian philosophy.

--> Are you claiming that all of my posts on Indian philosophy in which i was extensively quoting from traditional Indian philosophers and texts--and which you were whole heartedly approving and vigorously agreeing with-- were completely devoid of the Rashmun Method. Tut tut.

--> Btw, are you aware of the Pavan Spin (i refuse to call it Charvaka spin because i wish to honor the Charvakas as much as you do)? It consists of having zero knowledge about the things being discussed. And yet how one can manage to have a full blown argument with someone without any knowledge base about the subject under discussion is the beauty of Pavan spin. Pavan spin has been employed in the past extensively against Seva, in particular. It was not employed against me because you were busy agreeing with whatever i was saying using the Rashmun Method.

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:14 am

Rashmun wrote:Are you claiming that all of my posts on Indian philosophy were completely devoid of the Rashmun Method.

No, I am saying that if you want to say otherwise, I will be happy to revise my opinion of your knowledge of Indian philosophy.

Rashmun wrote:It consists of having zero knowledge about the things being discussed. And yet how one can manage to have a full blown argument with someone without any knowledge base about the subject under discussion is the beauty of Pavan spin. Pavan spin has been employed in the past extensively against Seva, in particular. It was not employed against me because you were busy agreeing with whatever i was saying using the Rashmun Method.

It doesn't take any subject matter expertise to spot basic logical flaws. Be it in your arguments or those of the venerable Sevaji.

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:18 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:There's not winning this, is there? Because people came up with Dogvijay, Pigvijay and Dickvijay, Rashmun thought he'd refer to his hero as Diggy Raja. Now all this does is remind me of Cartman's "I'm a little piggy, oink, oink, oink!"

--> Diggy Raja is how he is known in Madhya Pradesh. His friends also call him Diggy.
https://youtu.be/B45S6L20OJA

--> no wonder sandilya calls you juvenile!
Is Sandilya now the authority on people's characteristics? Shall I recount the things he calls you? BTW, Lukeji also calls me juvenile, if that helps your position!

--> sandilya has said a lot more about you than about me. also, sandilya claimed that you have a juvenile mindset and since you are now behaving like one it would appear that you have proven him right.

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:19 am

Rashmun wrote:the fact remains that as of now there are only two choices in Indian national politics.

That, quite simply, is not true. And it has not been true for about 20 years now.

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:21 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Are you claiming that all of my posts on Indian philosophy were completely devoid of the Rashmun Method.
No, I am saying that if you want to say otherwise, I will be happy to revise my opinion of your knowledge of Indian philosophy.

--> by doing so, you would only end up discrediting yourself.

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:It consists of having zero knowledge about the things being discussed. And yet how one can manage to have a full blown argument with someone without any knowledge base about the subject under discussion is the beauty of Pavan spin. Pavan spin has been employed in the past extensively against Seva, in particular. It was not employed against me because you were busy agreeing with whatever i was saying using the Rashmun Method.
It doesn't take any subject matter expertise to spot basic logical flaws. Be it in your arguments or those of the venerable Sevaji.

--> how strange that you were not able to detect even one logical flaw in my numerous posts on Indian philosophy on CH which i was writing using the Rashmun Method. Instead you were busy agreeing with me and praising my posts. Perhaps you need to take another Logic course?

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:22 am

Rashmun wrote:sandilya has said a lot more about you than about me.

I am quite pleased that that is the case. I do hope you say as much about me as he has; I love to be a thorn in the flesh for both sides of the Congress-BJP divide.

Rashmun wrote:also, sandilya claimed that you have a juvenile mindset and since you are now behaving like one it would appear that you have proven him right.

Be sure to let him know!

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:25 am

Rashmun wrote:how strange that you were not able to detect even one logical flaw in my numerous posts on Indian philosophy on CH which i was writing using the Rashmun Method.

Alice in Wonderland is one of my favorite books; your current line of argumentation strongly reminds me of the book!

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:25 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:the fact remains that as of now there are only two choices in Indian national politics.
That, quite simply, is not true. And it has not been true for about 20 years now.

--> even when Deve Gowda and Gujaral were in power they were enjoying Congress support from outside. V.P. Singh had the support of BJP. Looking forward there is no way anybody can form a govt. without the Congress or without BJP. And looking forward its going to be either a Congress led govt. a or a BJP led govt.

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:27 am

Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:the fact remains that as of now there are only two choices in Indian national politics.
That, quite simply, is not true. And it has not been true for about 20 years now.

--> even when Deve Gowda and Gujaral were in power they were enjoying Congress support from outside. V.P. Singh had the support of BJP. Looking forward there is no way anybody can form a govt. without the Congress or without BJP. And looking forward its going to be either a Congress led govt. a or a BJP led govt.

Despite all that, millions of people are making the (right) choice of voting for parties other than Congress or BJP in national elections. There are a few people who can only see black and white; but thankfully there are many more choices than that out there.

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:30 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:how strange that you were not able to detect even one logical flaw in my numerous posts on Indian philosophy on CH which i was writing using the Rashmun Method.
Alice in Wonderland is one of my favorite books; your current line of argumentation strongly reminds me of the book!

--> you may keep on pasting LOL's and making useless digressions but the fact remains that you never expressed a single disagreement with any of my posts on Indian philosophy on CH.

--> what has happened i think is that the humility and modesty which was one of your major assets has been replaced by arrogance and a Mr Know it All attitude for whatever reason.

--> Let me remind you that your knowledge is rather limited despite the high opinion you have of yourself. To give an example, you started arguing with me when i said Bibi Nancharama, one of the consorts of Lord Venkateshwara, was a muslim. Then when another telugu poster on CH said i was right, you recanted and if i recollect correctly said you would confirm this with your father when you would meet him.

--> This is what happens when someone who reads Alice in Wonderland and takes a course in logic starts discussing history and philosophy.

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:33 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:the fact remains that as of now there are only two choices in Indian national politics.
That, quite simply, is not true. And it has not been true for about 20 years now.

--> even when Deve Gowda and Gujaral were in power they were enjoying Congress support from outside. V.P. Singh had the support of BJP. Looking forward there is no way anybody can form a govt. without the Congress or without BJP. And looking forward its going to be either a Congress led govt. a or a BJP led govt.
Despite all that, millions of people are making the (right) choice of voting for parties other than Congress or BJP in national elections. There are a few people who can only see black and white; but thankfully there are many more choices than that out there.

--> You may keep dreaming of other alternatives but in the near future its going to be either a Congress led govt. or a BJP led govt.

--> There are some naive people in the U.S. who dream of Green Party and Reform Party winning the presidential elections. Even though everyone knows it'll be either the democrats or the republicans. how are you any different from such people? At best people like you will play the role of spoilers, like the supporters of Ralph Nader.

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:44 am

lauly thread.

aside: rashmunji, it is the age pf "coaliton dharma" (no, i did not first learn about this phrase from a charvaka post). remember congress was written off before they won their first term. it was sonia's copying the bjp's "coalition dharma" that led to congress or UPA's revival. it were the parties left out by bjp that automatically became congress' allies. and increasingly, whether you will come into power or not depends largely on how your allies perform. so 2 things: 1) it does not take time to cobble up a front to the congress (your assumption that there is no credible opposition is misplaced), 2) it is no longer strictly congress vs bjp; it is alliance vs alliance. and the alliances are amorphous.

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:50 am

Rashmun wrote:what has happened i think is that the humility and modesty which was one of your major assets has been replaced by arrogance and a Mr Know it All attitude for whatever reason.

Let me remind you that your knowledge is rather limited despite the high opinion you have of yourself. To give an example, you started arguing with me when i said Bibi Nancharama, one of the consorts of Lord Venkateshwara, was a muslim. Then when another telugu poster on CH said i was right, you recanted and if i recollect correctly said you would confirm this with your father when you would meet him.

This is a classic example of the Rashmun Method. This is what actually happened. You asked a question to Telugus. I answered your question with my limited knowledge. Someone else added more information. I thanked that poster. I had no exchange with you at all. From that, you conclude that "I started arguing with you"! With claims like this, you don't need HA starting polls about you; you will ruin whatever is left of your own credibility.

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/a-query-to-telugus.htm

A query to Telugus

started by
Rashmun 4 yrs ago

I
heard from a senior Telugu friend that Lord Venkateshwar, the deity of
Tirupati, has two wives and that one of his wives is a Muslim. This, he
told me, shows that Tirupati cannot be a very ancient religious site.
Could some Telugu please confirm whether one of the wives of Tirupati
Balaji is a Muslim? Should we hold Tirupati Balaji as a symbol of
Hindu-Muslim integration?-Rashmun

My response: I've never heard this before. His two wives are
Alivelumanga (also spelt Alamelumanga) and Padmavati. Neither of them
have an obviously Arabic, Persian or Turki name. Some people also say
that he had one wife, not two. Like he has many names, his wife,
according to these claims, has two names Alivelumanga and Padmavati.

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:51 am

Huzefa Kapasi wrote:no, i did not first learn about this phrase from a charvaka post.

But in all these years, did you post any thread about coalition dharma? I have used it a few times on CH, and you have responded to me many times. This convinces me that you had not heard of coalition dharma before I mentioned it. I am going to sue you for denial of credit, and pass the money on to Vajpayeeji.

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:54 am

Rashmun wrote:There are some naive people in the U.S.

Stop right there. There are some important differences between the Indian system and the US system. Let me point out the most obvious one. The people don't directly vote for the head of government in India; they do in the US. So our system is a lot more suitable to a diverse polity, which perfectly suits India's incredible diversity. Having just two parties in India would be like having just two flavors of ice-cream, or another of your favorites, one national language.

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 3:02 am

Huzefa Kapasi wrote:lauly thread.

aside: rashmunji, it is the age pf "coaliton dharma" (no, i did not first learn about this phrase from a charvaka post). remember congress was written off before they won their first term. it was sonia's copying the bjp's "coalition dharma" that led to congress or UPA's revival. it were the parties left out by bjp that automatically became congress' allies. and increasingly, whether you will come into power or not depends largely on how your allies perform. so 2 things: 1) it does not take time to cobble up a front to the congress (your assumption that there is no credible opposition is misplaced), 2) it is no longer strictly congress vs bjp; it is alliance vs alliance. and the alliances are amorphous.

--> Good point. My claim is not that its going to be a Congress only govt. or a BJP only govt. My claim is that its going to be a Congress + allies govt. ; or a BJP + allies govt.

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 3:04 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:what has happened i think is that the humility and modesty which was one of your major assets has been replaced by arrogance and a Mr Know it All attitude for whatever reason.

Let me remind you that your knowledge is rather limited despite the high opinion you have of yourself. To give an example, you started arguing with me when i said Bibi Nancharama, one of the consorts of Lord Venkateshwara, was a muslim. Then when another telugu poster on CH said i was right, you recanted and if i recollect correctly said you would confirm this with your father when you would meet him.

This is a classic example of the Rashmun Method. This is what actually happened. You asked a question to Telugus. I answered your question with my limited knowledge. Someone else added more information. I thanked that poster. I had no exchange with you at all. From that, you conclude that "I started arguing with you"! With claims like this, you don't need HA starting polls about you; you will ruin whatever is left of your own credibility.

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/a-query-to-telugus.htm

--> i am glad you're finding this exchange so funny. soon people will think that you will start laughing out loud even if you are punched in your face and kicked on your stomach.

--> anyways, the argument about Bibi Nancharamma was in a subsequent thread in which i pointed out to you that despite being a telugu you had not known that she was a muslim.

by Guest Thu Jul 21, 2011 3:07 am

charvaka wrote:
Rashmun wrote:There are some naive people in the U.S.
Stop right there. There are some important differences between the Indian system and the US system. Let me point out the most obvious one. The people don't directly vote for the head of government in India; they do in the US. So our system is a lot more suitable to a diverse polity, which perfectly suits India's incredible diversity. Having just two parties in India would be like having just two flavors of ice-cream, or another of your favorites, one national language.

--> keep dreaming. even green party members in the U.S. dream a lot. the choice is very clearly between BJP + allies; or Congress + allies; or dreams and more dreams.

by charvaka Thu Jul 21, 2011 3:15 am

Rashmun wrote:the argument about Bibi Nancharamma was in a subsequent thread in which i pointed out to you that despite being a telugu you had not known that she was a muslim.

Let's see if you can be honest. Did you, or did you not, speak a falsehood above about our first-ever exchange on Bibi Nancharamma? You claimed: "To give an example, you started arguing with me when i said Bibi Nancharama, one of the consorts of Lord Venkateshwara, was a muslim. Then when another telugu poster on CH said i was right, you recanted." I have conclusively proven that to be false. Don't you think you should acknowledge what is at best a really unreliable memory, and at worst an outright opportunistic lie? You say we had a subsequent argument about this exchange; all the more reason for you to remember it correctly. But you didn't! Or you did remember it, but chose to lie about it. Which is it?

by Sponsored content

Hitskin.com

Should we Ignore Rashmun?