Prasanna Venkatesa Perumal #temple -Gunaseelam,Near Trichy,TN #Thread

Gunaseela Mahatmyam,a chapter of Bhavishyottara Purana describes greatness of this place.

Venkatachlapathi of Tirumala Tirupati appeared b4 Gunaseela Rishi here,so Gunaseelam is known as Ten(South)Tirupati

A #story from #Thiruvilayadal puranam-one of divine leelas of Bhagwan Shiva

#threadseries #Madurai

Story 9- it about how Shiva as Sundara Pandyan confluenced seven oceans in a pond/well in Madurai to fulfill wish of Kanchanamala
ஏழுகடல் அழைத்த படலம்

Bhagwan Shiva himself ruled Pandya Kingdom as Sundara Pandyan.Kingdom flourished well,all people there were happy.Many scholers,rishis visited Pandya kingdom to see Sundareswarar.Once Gouthama Rishi visited Madurai.After worshipping Sundareswarar,he went to meet Kanchanamala.

Kanchanamala,mother of Meenakshi devi welcomed Rishi Gouthama with all devotion&they were discussing about various things.She asked about ways& means to get rid of cycle of birth& re-birth.Gouthama rishi told her to be very fortunate&had done great penance in her previous births.

As a result, she has got Meenakshi devi as her daughter & Sundareswarar as her son-in-law in this birth.Rishi then told there are 3 types of Penance -namely Maanatham,Vaasikam & Kaayikam
Maanatham -involves doing charity,speaking truth,controlling senses&meditating Shiva namam.

Vaasikam -chanting Panchakshara matra-Om Na Ma Shi Va Ya,mantras from vedas, singing devotional songs/bhajans.

Kaayikam- doing daily pooja,going to temples,punya shetrams, helping physically in renovation &construction of temples,taking snan in ocean as all rivers merge there.

A #story from #Thiruvilayadal puranam- one of divine leelas of Bhagwan Shiva

#threadseries #madurai

Koodal Kaandam

Story 21 - it is about how stone elephant came to life and ate sugarcane - When Raja Abhisheka Pandyan met Ellam Valla Siddhar

கல்யானைக்கு கரும்பருத்திய படலம்

Raja Abhisheka Pandiyan went ahead to meet Ellam Valla Siddhar on the premises of the temple.On seeing the arrival of Raja, people surrounding Siddhar moved back. Abhisheka Pandiyan introduced himself to Siddhar &asked about his whereabouts.Also his purpose of visit to Madurai.

Raja asked why he performed magical acts, does he expect anything from him or people of Madurai.

Siddhar laughed & replied to Raja that he was from Kasi. He had heard a lot about Madurai in Kashi.Also told that this place is a Mukti Kshetram,so he had come to stay here.

Siddhar asked Raja if he has the capability &power to give anything that he asks for. Siddhar told King that he has power to do things even if he think of it.Siddhar asked King to ask whatever he wants & it would be provided, whatever these people had asked, they were granted.

Abhisheka Pandyan was shocked to receive such a reply from Siddhar,& he decided to test the power of this Siddhar. By that time, Raja saw a person in crowd having Sugarcane.

Raja took Sugarcane from that person.

One defining feature of many Christian men today is the effeminate practice of covert and evasive speech.

Even worse is the fact that this manner of speaking is widely seen as the moral, "charitable," and polite manner of speech, to be praised, encouraged, & emulated.
(Thread)

The essence of this effeminate style in the evangelical man is the strategic avoidance of taking personal responsibility for (or "owning") what he has to say.

This goal (the evasion of responsibility) is achieved through various tactics calculated against clarity & precision...

Rather than saying exactly what he means in a clear, and unequivocal, manner, the polite evangelical man will hint at his meaning through innuendo and implication––so as to alway maintain the plausible deniability that he didn't mean the controversial thing he meant...

Or, if he does speak clearly with unambiguous moral authority, he will be sure to leave the object of his criticism unclear. The object of his criticism––whether a person, or an idea––will always remain abstract, theoretical, and disconnected from any specifics or concretes...

By implementing the right degree of unclarity on either the nature of his criticism, or on the object of it, he ensures that the right people in his audience will be emboldened and endeared toward him, but that he will never have to defend or substantiate what he has said...

The Contingency Argument for God's existence, in simple language (thread):

When we look at the world around us, we see many things that change. For example, at one time a man may be standing, but at another time he may be sitting. Yet he is the same man. (1/)

Philosophers express this fact by saying that the man's posture is contingent, i.e. that it could be different than it is. Humans are contingent beings because they could be different than they are at any given moment. The same is true of everything we see in the universe. (2/)

Living things like people, animals, and plants all grow and develop. Inanimate things like your car, phone, or computer may be turned on or off. Even rocks and gems can be cut, polished, or moved from one place to another. (3/)

All the things in the physical world are contingent: they could be different than they are.

But is absolutely everything contingent? Let's consider a man who is standing. Why is he standing *now*? (4/)

This question can be answered in different ways. You might appeal to something in the future (he's standing to reach something on a shelf) or to something in the past (he just got out of bed), but we're not interested in these. Why is he standing *right now*? (5/)

@TalhaAhsanEsq It's a very good question, and a complicated one. For starters, the Islamic manuscript tradition is vast both in terms of timespan and geography. As Dr. Shamsy points out in his latest book, the Arabic manuscript tradition is the most vast of any language in the world.

Why are some things given more prioritisation for publication than others? Why are some aspects of the tradition more emphasised than others. There's no single cause behind it.

And there is not necessarily always a sinister motive behind the suppression of some things, but sometimes there is...

It is true that the Hanbalis and Ash'aris had a very contentious and at times acrimonious relationship for much of their history. In later centuries, a sort of truce was reached. Al-Zabidi has said similar in his sharh of Ihya about the identification of 3 groups as Ahl al-Sunna

It seems that these truce efforts also spawned a number of works seeking to mediate the Hanbali-Ash'ari dispute over the nature of Divine Speech, the most contentious of issues between the two camps. A couple of these have been recently published.

1/ Thought it was strange to see an ostensibly hard Left "No Pasaran" publisher come out with a "Jewish Pride" text so decided to do a little digging into the company.

2/ Not much detail on their Twitter other than the usual stuff plus being "against Left antisemitism"

3/ Website equally vague

4/ Noted the address and put it through Companies House to see who is really behind "No Pasaran media."

5/ Found the result. Time to click on "People."

I want to do a brief deep dive into my frequent assertion that Messianic "Jews" are, in fact, Christians and that Christians cannot be Jews. Every time this comes up a bunch of people - mostly Messianic "Jews" and appropriative Christians - show up to argue with me.

They assert that if a Jew converts to Christianity, they remain a Jew and therefore Jewish Christians are a thing. And *technically* this is true - "once a Jew, always a Jew" is a thing. *Technically* it would be more accurate to say that "Jewish Christians" are apostates.

But while it's more *technically* accurate, it's more misleading. Because unless you know that apostasy is a complicated thing in Judaism, and that there are different classes of apostate, and what the legal restrictions and status are for them, it creates a false impression.

Converts from Judaism to Christianity are meshumadim, as distinct from apikoros and koferim. There's ambiguity in the status of meshumadim going back at least as far as 100 CE, but there is a general consensus that they are treated as non-Jews in all aspects *except* familial.

What that means practically is that *except* for matters of marriage and parenthood, a meshumad is treated as a gentile. They cannot pray with Jews. They aren't mourned as Jews when they die. They aren't counted in a minyan, and they cannot receive Torah honors.