Guest guest Posted July 11, 2002 Report Share Posted July 11, 2002 MUNRO’S VISIT TO MANTRALAYAM (revised) Deal all, In the 2nd part of this note there have been mistakes. Sorry. I am now repeating the corrected version with some modifications which please peruse. Thanks. 3. ABOUT MUNRO Born 1761. In India, from 1780 - Military career upto 1799. Collector of Canara 1800. From 1801-1806, Collector of ceded Dists (Kurnool, Ananthapur etc.). 1807-1814, in England. 1814-1821, worked for Land Revenue Commission. 1821 - Governer of Madras. Died 1827. Command over south Indian languages. Daily meetings with common folk, before breakfast and after lunch. When more people came, he would have his ‘Baithak’ outside the tent. Here are some of his views on Indian matters: (i) An average Indian clerk is more hardworking and honest, than his counter part in England. (Quoted in Tom Munro). (ii) India is the country that has been worst used. All her products ought to be imported into England upon paying the same duties, which British products get in India (Gleigg's Biography) (iii) He who loses his liberty loses half of his virtue (said with reference to Indians). He was personally against abject subjugation as such of our country (Gleigg's Biography). (iv) I have spent so much of my life in India. I am so well acquainted with the people, it’s climate so fine and its mountain scenery so wild and beautiful that I ALMST REGRET THAT IT IS NOT MY OWN COUNTRY (letter dated 18-10-1826). In short he was authoritative in his assignments, and fearless in his views. He respected and responded gracefully to Indian feelings. 4. Swamiji’s Darshan and his Speaking in English. The Gazetter says: ‘The Saint thereupon emerged from his tomb(!) and met him. They conversed together for sometime… Though the Saint was visible and audible to Munro.. none others who were there could either see him or hear what he said’. Mark the words “none could hear what he said”, if so where is the point in saying that he spoke in English? We say so just because Munro was an English–man. We can as well say that Swamiji explained to Muno in Kannada. Which language Munro thoroughly knew! Also note the words ‘conversed for some time'. Many devotees have seen Sri Raghavendra Swamiji; Yes! But only in ‘Swapna’; that too for a few seconds. His ‘Anugraha’ (Divine grace) is that much brief and invisible and it suffices! To go beyond this for Munro, where was the need? He is as much a commoner, as you and I, before Swamiji. Most of you have gone to Manthralayam and stood before the Brindavana. What is your feeling that time? Surrender! (Sharanagathi). And you are apt to feel his ‘kripa’ or the divine grace. Only last month, I had been to Manthralayam and at least I felt so. In the case of Munro also it might have happened as such. Being prone to Hindu religion and having earlier heard about our Swamiji, he might have felt his omni-presence and that’s it! There was no need for Swamiji to come out of Brindavan and ‘attempt to convince the English-man about land grants to the Matha. (This matter, some senior member of the Matha, might have explained.) Swamiji is much above than attending to this mundane affair. And speaking in English is too trivial a matter to attribute it to Swamiji. I am aware that my contention is conjectural. One may or may not agree. But I am against glorifying the divine grace of Swamiji in this superficial manner. And most unfortunately this is further extended in the recent book on ‘Shri Raghavendra SwamigaLu’ by Aralumallige Parthasarathy (1998). One member of VMS has strongly recommended it to me saying the book has enough proof over this Munro affair. A .P. says: “avanu (i.e. Munro) tanna eraDu kaigaLannu bogase mADi hiDida. Brindavanadinda avana kaige bogase tumbA MantrAkSate biddiddannu allidda samastharu noDidaru (p 142). Has any one in the past or now received ‘bogase tumbA manthrAkShathe’ directly from swamiji? Even the Gazetteer does not say so. He writes further: “I bagge Londonnininda tanna magaLige sudIrgha patra bareda… Governor huddegu idu Raghavendra swamigala anugrahave endu magaLige tilisida.” Where did A. P. find these letters ? If he had reproduced the same, that would have been the most conclusive proof in the matter. The fact is that Munro got married quite late i.e. in 1813 and his visit to Manthralayam was before 1806 or around 1820. And there is no indication in his biographies that he had a daughter. Even granting there was one, it means he wrote to a very minor girl at that! A classic example of ridiculous glorification. Regards, Dr. Shrinivasa Havanur Sign up for SBC Dial - First Month Free http://sbc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 15, 2002 Report Share Posted July 15, 2002 Namskara, " There was no need for Swamiji to come out of Brindavan and ‘attempt to convince the English-man about land grants to the Matha. (This matter, some senior member of the Matha,might have explained.) Swamiji is much above than attending to this mundane affair. And speaking in >English is too trivial a matter to attribute it to >Swamiji. " Reply: Even though this may be a mundane affair, but still it was for the welfare of the mutt and the devotees.Then why do many people go to mantralaya? They go to swamiji so that their day to day problems will be solved.It need not be problems related to spritual matters.When i showed ur mail to a close associate of the swamiji of Raghavendra Swami Mutt, he strongly condemned ur views. Sorry, if u feel my words are harsh. Vadiraj On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 Shrinivas Havanur wrote : >MUNRO’S VISIT TO MANTRALAYAM (revised) > >Deal all, > >In the 2nd part of this note there have been mistakes. >Sorry. I am now repeating the corrected version with >some modifications which please peruse. Thanks. > >3. ABOUT MUNRO > > Born 1761. In India, from 1780 - Military career >upto 1799. Collector of Canara 1800. From >1801-1806, Collector of ceded Dists (Kurnool, >Ananthapur etc.). 1807-1814, in England. >1814-1821, worked for Land Revenue Commission. 1821 - >Governer of Madras. Died 1827. > >Command over south Indian languages. Daily meetings >with common folk, before breakfast and after lunch. >When more people came, he would have his ‘Baithak’ >outside the tent. > > Here are some of his views on Indian matters: (i) >An average Indian clerk is more hardworking and >honest, than his counter part in England. (Quoted in >Tom Munro). (ii) India is the country that has been >worst used. All her products ought to be imported into >England upon paying the same duties, which British >products get in India (Gleigg's Biography) (iii) He >who loses his liberty loses half of his virtue (said >with reference to Indians). He was personally against >abject subjugation as such of our country (Gleigg's >Biography). (iv) I have spent so much of my life in >India. I am so well acquainted with the people, it’s >climate so fine and its mountain scenery so wild and >beautiful that I ALMST REGRET THAT IT IS NOT MY >OWN COUNTRY (letter dated 18-10-1826). > >In short he was authoritative in his assignments, and >fearless in his views. He respected and responded >gracefully to Indian feelings. > >4. Swamiji’s Darshan and his Speaking in >English. > >The Gazetter says: ‘The Saint thereupon emerged from >his tomb(!) and met him. They conversed together for >sometime… Though the Saint was visible and audible to >Munro.. none others who were there could either see >him or hear what he said’. > >Mark the words “none could hear what he said”, if so >where is the point in saying that he spoke in English? > We say so just because Munro was an English–man. We >can as well say that Swamiji explained to Muno in >Kannada. >Which language Munro thoroughly knew! Also note the >words ‘conversed for some time'. Many devotees have >seen Sri Raghavendra Swamiji; Yes! But only in >‘Swapna’; that too for a few seconds. His ‘Anugraha’ >(Divine grace) is that much brief and invisible and it >suffices! To go beyond this for Munro, where was the >need? He is as much a commoner, as you and I, before >Swamiji. > >Most of you have gone to Manthralayam and stood before >the Brindavana. What is your feeling that time? >Surrender! (Sharanagathi). And you are apt to feel his >‘kripa’ or the divine grace. Only last month, I had >been to Manthralayam and at least I felt so. In the >case of Munro also it might have happened as such. >Being prone to Hindu religion and having earlier heard >about our Swamiji, he might have felt his >omni-presence and that’s it! There was no need for >Swamiji to come out of Brindavan and ‘attempt to >convince the English-man about land grants to the >Matha. (This matter, some senior member of the Matha, >might have explained.) Swamiji is much above than >attending to this mundane affair. And speaking in >English is too trivial a matter to attribute it to >Swamiji. > >I am aware that my contention is conjectural. One may >or may not agree. But I am against glorifying the >divine grace of Swamiji in this superficial manner. >And most unfortunately this is further extended in the >recent book on ‘Shri Raghavendra SwamigaLu’ by >Aralumallige Parthasarathy (1998). One member of VMS >has strongly recommended it to me saying the book has >enough proof over this Munro affair. A .P. says: > >“avanu (i.e. Munro) tanna eraDu kaigaLannu bogase mADi >hiDida. Brindavanadinda avana kaige bogase tumbA >MantrAkSate biddiddannu allidda samastharu noDidaru (p >142). >Has any one in the past or now received ‘bogase tumbA >manthrAkShathe’ directly from swamiji? Even the >Gazetteer does not say so. He writes further: > >“I bagge Londonnininda tanna magaLige sudIrgha patra >bareda… Governor huddegu idu Raghavendra swamigala >anugrahave endu magaLige tilisida.” > >Where did A. P. find these letters ? If he had >reproduced the same, that would have been the most >conclusive proof in the matter. The fact is that Munro >got married quite late i.e. in 1813 and his visit to >Manthralayam was before 1806 or around 1820. And there >is no indication in his biographies that he had a >daughter. Even granting there was one, it means he >wrote to a very minor girl at that! A classic example >of ridiculous glorification. > >Regards, > >Dr. Shrinivasa Havanur > > > > > >Sign up for SBC Dial - First Month Free >http://sbc. > > >nAham kartA hariH kartA tatpUjA karmachaakhilam.h| >taThaapi matkR^itaa pUja tatprasaadhEna naanyaThaa| >tadbhakti tadphalam.h mahyam.h tatprasaadaat.h punaH punaH | >karmanyaasO harAvevam.h vishNOsthR^iptikaraH sadhA || > > " I am not the doer, shri Hari is the doer, all the actions that I do are His worship. Even then, the worship I do is through His grace and not otherwise. That devotion and the fruits of the actions that come to me are due to His recurring grace " >If one always practices to do actions with a dedicated spirit to Hari, in this way, it pleases Vishnu. > --- Quoted by Sri madhvAchArya in GitA tAtparya >-- >To send an empty E-mail (without subject and body info.) to - >-- >Visit VMS at http://www.madhva.org >View the latest events in the US by selecting the 'Events' link >-- > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 1, 2006 Report Share Posted August 1, 2006 Dear member's, Just browsing through the archeives and glanced upon this this thread. Upon further reading in the British Library London website, it appears that they have a whole treasure of information related to Private papers of Thomas Munro (in the India office collections), one of which has the Manuscript Number " Mss.Eur.F151/163 " . I believe it runs into about 202 pages. There are many other papers all the way from Nov 1780 – 1827 some of which are personal and financial, and some are revenue related. Some of the papers that evinced interest have the follwowing titles: " Raghavia Brahminai " - paper #163 " Rama " - paper #163 " Rangiah " - paper #159 " Angara... " - paper #104 (is there any relation to our Angara- Akshate customs??? ) " Kolhapur " - paper #70 " Vencatachellum " - paper #168. (possibly Venkatachalam !!) " Vencatapa " - paper #186. ( " Venkoba " paper #20. I contacted the library staff and they mentioned that unfortunately, there is no way to read the manuscripts online and only someone who has access to the library has to do it. It costs about $100 postage and shipping fees to have the library post the entire manuscripts in about three weeks to any international address. (outside of UK). Interested folks may further pursue this as applicable. Thanks and regards Rekha , " Vadiraj " <skvadiraj wrote: > > > > Namskara, > > " There was no need for Swamiji to come out of Brindavan and `attempt to convince the English-man about land grants to the Matha. (This matter, some senior member of the Matha,might have explained.) Swamiji is much above than attending to this mundane affair. And speaking in > >English is too trivial a matter to attribute it to > >Swamiji. " > > Reply: > Even though this may be a mundane affair, but still it was for the welfare of the mutt and the devotees.Then why do many people go to mantralaya? > They go to swamiji so that their day to day problems will be solved.It need not be problems related to spritual matters.When i showed ur mail to a close associate of the swamiji of Raghavendra Swami Mutt, he strongly condemned ur views. > > Sorry, if u feel my words are harsh. > > Vadiraj > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 Shrinivas Havanur wrote : > >MUNRO'S VISIT TO MANTRALAYAM (revised) > > > >Deal all, > > > >In the 2nd part of this note there have been mistakes. > >Sorry. I am now repeating the corrected version with > >some modifications which please peruse. Thanks. > > > >3. ABOUT MUNRO > > > > Born 1761. In India, from 1780 - Military career > >upto 1799. Collector of Canara 1800. From > >1801-1806, Collector of ceded Dists (Kurnool, > >Ananthapur etc.). 1807-1814, in England. > >1814-1821, worked for Land Revenue Commission. 1821 - > >Governer of Madras. Died 1827. > > > >Command over south Indian languages. Daily meetings > >with common folk, before breakfast and after lunch. > >When more people came, he would have his `Baithak' > >outside the tent. > > > > Here are some of his views on Indian matters: (i) > >An average Indian clerk is more hardworking and > >honest, than his counter part in England. (Quoted in > >Tom Munro). (ii) India is the country that has been > >worst used. All her products ought to be imported into > >England upon paying the same duties, which British > >products get in India (Gleigg's Biography) (iii) He > >who loses his liberty loses half of his virtue (said > >with reference to Indians). He was personally against > >abject subjugation as such of our country (Gleigg's > >Biography). (iv) I have spent so much of my life in > >India. I am so well acquainted with the people, it's > >climate so fine and its mountain scenery so wild and > >beautiful that I ALMST REGRET THAT IT IS NOT MY > >OWN COUNTRY (letter dated 18-10-1826). > > > >In short he was authoritative in his assignments, and > >fearless in his views. He respected and responded > >gracefully to Indian feelings. > > > >4. Swamiji's Darshan and his Speaking in > >English. > > > >The Gazetter says: `The Saint thereupon emerged from > >his tomb(!) and met him. They conversed together for > >sometime… Though the Saint was visible and audible to > >Munro.. none others who were there could either see > >him or hear what he said'. > > > >Mark the words " none could hear what he said " , if so > >where is the point in saying that he spoke in English? > > We say so just because Munro was an English–man. We > >can as well say that Swamiji explained to Muno in > >Kannada. > >Which language Munro thoroughly knew! Also note the > >words `conversed for some time'. Many devotees have > >seen Sri Raghavendra Swamiji; Yes! But only in > >`Swapna'; that too for a few seconds. His `Anugraha' > >(Divine grace) is that much brief and invisible and it > >suffices! To go beyond this for Munro, where was the > >need? He is as much a commoner, as you and I, before > >Swamiji. > > > >Most of you have gone to Manthralayam and stood before > >the Brindavana. What is your feeling that time? > >Surrender! (Sharanagathi). And you are apt to feel his > >`kripa' or the divine grace. Only last month, I had > >been to Manthralayam and at least I felt so. In the > >case of Munro also it might have happened as such. > >Being prone to Hindu religion and having earlier heard > >about our Swamiji, he might have felt his > >omni-presence and that's it! There was no need for > >Swamiji to come out of Brindavan and `attempt to > >convince the English-man about land grants to the > >Matha. (This matter, some senior member of the Matha, > >might have explained.) Swamiji is much above than > >attending to this mundane affair. And speaking in > >English is too trivial a matter to attribute it to > >Swamiji. > > > >I am aware that my contention is conjectural. One may > >or may not agree. But I am against glorifying the > >divine grace of Swamiji in this superficial manner. > >And most unfortunately this is further extended in the > >recent book on `Shri Raghavendra SwamigaLu' by > >Aralumallige Parthasarathy (1998). One member of VMS > >has strongly recommended it to me saying the book has > >enough proof over this Munro affair. A .P. says: > > > > " avanu (i.e. Munro) tanna eraDu kaigaLannu bogase mADi > >hiDida. Brindavanadinda avana kaige bogase tumbA > >MantrAkSate biddiddannu allidda samastharu noDidaru (p > >142). > >Has any one in the past or now received `bogase tumbA > >manthrAkShathe' directly from swamiji? Even the > >Gazetteer does not say so. He writes further: > > > > " I bagge Londonnininda tanna magaLige sudIrgha patra > >bareda… Governor huddegu idu Raghavendra swamigala > >anugrahave endu magaLige tilisida. " > > > >Where did A. P. find these letters ? If he had > >reproduced the same, that would have been the most > >conclusive proof in the matter. The fact is that Munro > >got married quite late i.e. in 1813 and his visit to > >Manthralayam was before 1806 or around 1820. And there > >is no indication in his biographies that he had a > >daughter. Even granting there was one, it means he > >wrote to a very minor girl at that! A classic example > >of ridiculous glorification. > > > >Regards, > > > >Dr. Shrinivasa Havanur > > > > > > > > > > > >Sign up for SBC Dial - First Month Free > >http://sbc. > > > > > >nAham kartA hariH kartA tatpUjA karmachaakhilam.h| > >taThaapi matkR^itaa pUja tatprasaadhEna naanyaThaa| > >tadbhakti tadphalam.h mahyam.h tatprasaadaat.h punaH punaH | > >karmanyaasO harAvevam.h vishNOsthR^iptikaraH sadhA || > > > > " I am not the doer, shri Hari is the doer, all the actions that I do are His worship. Even then, the worship I do is through His grace and not otherwise. That devotion and the fruits of the actions that come to me are due to His recurring grace " > >If one always practices to do actions with a dedicated spirit to Hari, in this way, it pleases Vishnu. > > --- Quoted by Sri madhvAchArya in GitA tAtparya > >-- > >To send an empty E-mail (without subject and body info.) to - > >-- > >Visit VMS at http://www.madhva.org > >View the latest events in the US by selecting the 'Events' link > >-- > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 4, 2006 Report Share Posted August 4, 2006 Dear members, Arvind Acharya has reserched through these papers in the library, 4 years ago and could not find more information about these. thanks Rajaram --- Rekha kulkarni <rrao1234 wrote: > Dear member's, > > I was just browsing through the older VMS archeives > and glanced upon this thread. Upon further reading > in > the British Library London website, it appears that > they have a whole treasure of information related to > Private papers of Thomas Munro (in the India office > collections), one of which has the Manuscript Number > " Mss.Eur.F151/163 " . I believe it runs into about > 202 > pages. > > There are many other papers all the way from Nov > 1780 > – 1827 some of which are personal and financial, and > some are revenue related. > > Some of the papers that evinced interest have the > follwowing titles: > > " Raghavia Brahminai " - paper #163 > " Rama " - paper #163 > > " Rangiah " - paper #159 > " Angara... " - paper #104 (is there any relation to > our Angara-Akshate customs??? ) > " Kolhapur " - paper #70 > > " Vencatachellum " - paper #168. (possibly > Venkatachalam > !!) > > " Vencatapa " - paper #186. ( > > " Venkoba " paper #20. > > I contacted the library staff and they mentioned > that > unfortunately, there is no way to read the > manuscripts > online and only someone who has access to the > library > has to do it. It costs about $100 postage and > shipping fees to have the library post the entire > manuscripts in about three weeks to any > international > address. (outside of UK). > > Interested folks may further pursue this as > applicable. > > Thanks and regards > Rekha > > > , " GOPALAKRISHNA.B > VARNA " > <bgkvarna> wrote: > > Do we have any further info about Munroe, like how > was his life > > style, was he practicing hindu life style, did he > consider this > > incident a turning point in his life, did this > incident had any > impact > > on his life style. > > An editorial in the " Tribune India " news paper at > > http://www.tribuneindia.com/99dec31/edit.htm#5 > > indicates Sir Monroe's opinon about India: > > " Sir Thomas Munroe, the British governor of Madras > Presidency, had > this to say about those who judged India wrongly — > " Foreign > conquerors have treated Indians with violence and > often with great > cruelty, but none has treated them with contempt and > so much scorn as > we " . That scorn has continued to our times. > > But no matter, India will triumph and very soon, for > the signs are > all there to see. Throughout the ages, India has > sought an inner > perfection, not so much the outward adornments, and > it > is for this > goal for inner perfection that the Western world is > turning to today. " > > It also appears that Sri Munroe helped many temples > in > Vijayanagar > and Cuddappah. Please see the following website: > > http://www.andhratoday.com/digit/dcuddapah3.htm > > > > Do we have any other reference about this incident > by any other > > contemporary authors or the then swamiji of > Mantralaya? Did any one > has > > done any detailed study of this incident? > > Although we have not seen any documentary evidence, > one of my close > friend has heard the following story about Sir > Munroe > from someone in > Manthralaya: > > Munro is believed to be a very pious and orthodox > brahmin in his > previous life. Having seen a lot of poverty in his > life (and not > having the equanimity of rAyaru to deal with it), he > prayed to > Sri Hari, Vayu and rayaru to give him a life of > wealth, comfort > and power. They granted this to him, but told him > that > at an > appropriate stage in his life he would see rAyaru in > person also. > > The flowers in the valley incident. I believe this > is > the > welcome arch that Sugriva put up for Lord > Ramachandra > and that it > exists even to this day, but in sUkshma form. > ANybody > who sees > that dies within a month. Because of his vast punya > from his > previous birth, Monroe had earned this privilege. > > It is up to the seekers to research this matter > further. > > Regards, > Murthy > > Hari Smarane mado Niranthara.. > > > > > Tired of spam? Mail has the best spam > protection around > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.