Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Mudaliar-Venki123/Evidence

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Advice to the named parties 2 Few points (non-academic) 3 @Venki123 and others: Thaninayaka Mudali is Saiva Vellala and more 4 To @WeldingVeerasamy - counterpoints 5 Nayanar refers to Vellalas descended from Jains- From Thurston Book

[edit] Advice to the named parties

As someone who's been through the arbitration mill before, I recommend the following:

• Try some self-examination.
• Own up to your mistakes and take steps to correct them.
• Strike through statements that reflect poorly on your judgement.
• Enter the WP:ADOPT mentorship program.

Basically arbitration is about applying external controls over situations where one or more participants hasn't exercised enough self-control. Many arbitrations begin as this one has, with aggressive accusations on both sides. One question on my mind as a neutral observer is can either of these people edit at this article without outside intervention? Arbitrators probably ask themselves something similar. The evidence phase of ArbCom isn't too late to demonstrate some of the necessary maturity. Corrective steps carry weight with me, at least, and the sooner the better. Durova^Charge! 02:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Few points (non-academic)

My understanding is during Chola time, the main clans/Chiefs claimed loyalty to religious practices of the Chola Kings. Even the great Vaishnavite Saint Ramanuja was exiled during that time.

It goes without saying the Cholas were fanatical Saivites (not dissimilar to Jaffna tamils).

Vellalar chiefs who showed the same loyalty to the religious practices often consdiered themselves as original/native chiefs. This could be why they proudly called themselves Saiva - Vellala. Some of them may have become Vaishnavites later in India after the Vijayanagar empire came in. Today TMVs are both Saivas and Vaishnavas.

Remeber: Saiva was state religion of Cholas so it goes without saying at least during that time, prominent clans must have been Shaivites.

In Jaffna it is still customary to claim superiority of God Shiva, Chidambaram temple, Periya Puranam and dismiss anything else as foreign (non-native).

Another point is, Tamil society is Tribal and not Caste centred. Caste was brought in by Sanskritic policies but never took off in Tamil Nadu. I personally think it is wrong to say caste when you talk about Tamil society. It is more Tribe/Community/Clan. Except Brahmins, none of us fit into the Varna Shastra. Even our Kings didnt.

The reason I put the 13th century to Thaninayaka Mudali is if his 12th descendant lived during the Dutch time (17th Century) and his Immigration took place during the first kings of Jaffna's time. They both tally to around 13th Century. Its safe to put that sort of period for Thaninayaka Mudali. Besides there is a family tree. So the time period is definitely not 1600 AD. Because Dutch Records itself says 12th descendant lived during their time (The family tree, dutch records and royal records all tally).

There are numerous families in Jaffna made Mudaliyars by Dutch and British. They are not considered as real Mudaliars. The Sri Lankan Mudaliars page in wiki is based on that.

Some families like Thaninayaka claim to be Mudali clan/tribe from Thondai Nadu. That is my interest in this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Weldingveerasamy (talk • contribs).

I agree with you that nayagam is a common vellala name. As you said in the article page the "n"/"m" is silent when you say the full name. For example, Selvanayagam when combined with Mudaliyar, you would drop the "m" and say it as Selvanayaga Mudaliyar. Venki123 would split "Vinayagamoorthy Mudaliyar" and argue even that it is Nayak. Venki123's claims are hilarious. He says that the Mudali title did not refer to any particular group and all castes just started using it. According to this logic from tomorrow I'm gonna add "Lord" in front of my name and henceforth will be known as Lord Labakdas Mudaliar. Mudaliar 22:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it is more than coincidental when you consider the evidence beyond the seas. Two different countries, different kingdoms, different centuries, Thondai Nadu Vellala roots claim same heritage.

Mannadu Konda Mudali of Jaffna/Thondai Nadu is referred to as a Vellala chief whose ancestor rewarded Kamban for Erezhupathu. Erezhupathu speaks good of Vellala clans and mentions Sekkilars conduct. So there can be no ambiguity anymore. The connections are clear between Thondai Nadu, Vellala and Mudali as a clan denoter.

Nayagam is a very common name amongst Tamil Vellalas. It goes without saying.Weldingveerasamyweldingveerasamy

[edit] @Venki123 and others: Thaninayaka Mudali is Saiva Vellala and more

Sometime back I told you on the Mudaliar talk page in reply to your question:"if we've got any inscription", that there were numerous inscriptions with Mudaliar as last name and who were described as Nayanars. I aslo said that these were my people: Now check this out:

The Tamils in Early Ceylon By C. Sivaratnam, [1]

This explicity states that a Nayanar is a twelfth descendant of Thaninayaka Mudaliyar, a rich Saiva Vellala who emigrated to Ceylon...

Nayanar is not a title, it's a description of a saint as in (Alwars and Nayanars). Do you get it now? Do you want me to quote all the Nayanar inscriptions which have Mudaliyar as last name? In fact, even your reference abt Adondai Chakravarti(the very same page) clearly states Mudaliyar exclusively as an agricultural caste/ clan/ tribe who were already present in Tondaimandalam before the arrival Adondai Chakravarti. They were settled by Karikala Chola earlier and this is the original tribe/ clan/caste of of Mudaliyars. If you still continue to dispute you're clearly doing it out of spite.

[edit] To @WeldingVeerasamy - counterpoints

• In the same book, The Tamils in Early Ceylon By C. Sivaratnam, the author clearly states that Mudaliar is an official designation. See the evidence page.

• Nowhere in any book is it mentioned that TMSV were settled in Tondai-Nadu by King Karikala chola, before KKV were settled by Adondai Chakravarti. It says Kurumbars were occupying that country and they were defeated by Adondai Chakravarti. If I have missed the lines you are mentioning, copy and paste them as evidence. I'm not doing this out of spite, just give me the evidence that Karikala chola settled TMSV in Tondai-nadu. It is very simple.

• Please quote all the Nayanar inscriptions which have Mudaliyar as last name so that it is easier to evaluate them. Further add this to your history too so that we all can know that TMSV used Nayanar as title and not Mudali.

• As far as I know, description of a saint is Alwars and Nayanmars not Nayanars.

• My only position is show me the evidence and I'll consider it. So far there is not a single evidence stating that that Karikala chola settled TMSV in Tondai-nadu. If there is no evidence accept that fact and stop blaming me that I am doing this out of spite.

Venki 17:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Mudaliar is an agricultural caste. Other castes are not agricultural castes. End of story. Moreover you're lying blatantly. It clearly says that there were an agricultural caste called Mudaliyars who were already present under the Kurumbars and the Mudalis along with the royal troops destroyed the Kurumbars. Kaikolars are devadasis who renamed themselves as sengunthars and this process is called sanskritisation. Kaikolar women are still being dedicated as Devadasis in the 21st century. More references to be added in the article page.

[edit] Nayanar refers to Vellalas descended from Jains- From Thurston Book

See project page.