Guest guest Posted March 24, 2009 Report Share Posted March 24, 2009 In view of the violation of the List Policy, the Board of Moderators has agreed unanimously to give a 'Yellow Card', cautioning the member to desist from such actions in future, to : Antharyami <sathvatha (sd) Devanathan.J List policy: [ full document at: http://tinyurl.com/chwqwv ] 13. Derogatory remarks of any kind are not allowed. This will assist in maintaining the friendly atmosphere of the group. Moderators Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 25, 2009 Report Share Posted March 25, 2009 Dear Moderators, I felt really sad reading about Yellow card... I sincerely believe this is totally unnecessary to issue an Yellow card to Antharyami... What was so derogatory in Antharyami's message?! I am sure we are discussing Sri Anishankara's Advaitic position here, not some " Politically correct version " of Advaita which could warrant an Yellow card. Love & Light, Madhava advaitin , " advaitins " <advaitins wrote: > > > In view of the violation of the List Policy, the Board of Moderators has agreed unanimously to give a 'Yellow Card', cautioning the member to desist from such actions in future, to : > > Antharyami <sathvatha (sd) Devanathan.J > > > List policy: [ full document at: http://tinyurl.com/chwqwv ] > > 13. Derogatory remarks of any kind are not allowed. This will assist in maintaining the friendly atmosphere of the group. > > > Moderators > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 25, 2009 Report Share Posted March 25, 2009 --- On Wed, 3/25/09, Madhava Turumella <madhava wrote: PraNAms to all It is the responsibility of the moderators to maintain what they feel is the dignity of the list serve. When one becomes the member of this list, one has accepted the policies set by the moderators of the list. It is their responsibility in terms of decision making. If one has concerns about their decision, Please do not discuss this in the list serve. You can contact them as moderators. It is their prerogative to respond further. Please refrain from any discussion of this in the list. Hari Om! Sadananda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 26, 2009 Report Share Posted March 26, 2009 advaitin , " Madhava Turumella " <madhava wrote: > > Dear Moderators, > > I felt really sad reading about Yellow card... > > I sincerely believe this is totally unnecessary to issue an Yellow card to Antharyami... > > What was so derogatory in Antharyami's message?! I am sure we are discussing Sri Anishankara's Advaitic position here, not some " Politically correct version " of Advaita which could warrant an Yellow card. > > Love & Light, > Madhava Dear Madhava-ji, As Sada-ji has said, the matter of issue of yellow card cannot be taken up in this List. However, in order that there may be no feeling in the minds of the members that the writer has been penalized merely for expressing his opinion, I, as the Chief Moderator, wish to make the following clarification. Antaryami has made the following statement:-- Names and forms are not Vasudeva; for he is the transcendental reality. Names and forms exist due to Ajnana. Those who see Jesus and Allah are those who are deluded. They merely worship ignorance and nothing else. `Mudah' says Krsna categorically. The so-called forms which find no place in Vedas are `asuri-s' and are hallucinations of the mleccas who lack `daivi-sampat'. Here he refers to the worshippers of Jesus and Allah as mlecchas and the forms they worship as `asuri-s', i.e., of demoniac character. This is a clear slander of these two religions. Apart from the fact that such slander is totally out of place and not permitted under the Rules of this List, this statement amounts to a criminal offence under the Indian laws on the ground that it hurts the sensibilities of the members of two communities. I am writing this as a person familiar with the laws of this country. Access to this website is not confined to the members. Any one can have access to it. Moreover, some websites reproduce the statements in this List. Thus this is a public statement and will attract the penal provisions of the law. The writer may perhaps say that he is prepared to face the consequences, but the criminal liability is not confined to him. Just as the Editor of a newspaper is also held responsible for any objectionable matter in his newspaper, the owner of the present website can also be held responsible and proceeded against under the law for this statement. The writer has obviously not thought of all this while giving free rein to his feelings. It is only because of this very objectionable statement that an yellow card has been issued. Regards, S.N.Sastri 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.