Guest guest Posted March 13, 1996 Report Share Posted March 13, 1996 On Wed, 13 Mar 1996 07:57:39 -0500 Vijayaraghavan Srinivasan said: > > >Our Acharya respected the traditional Brahmanic codes (classified under >shastras). But where Bhakti or love is overwhelming, these conventional rules >give way to exceptions. This will explain the position taken by our acharya >with regard to the partaking of left-overs from Thirukachhi nambigal, or his >leaning on shoulders of Urangavilli Daasar. I think intentions are more >important than the action itself. > > I think this was more than just a few exceptions. If one accepts the stories of 3000 and 6000 padi Guruparamabara as more than just exaggerations of a few star struck devotees of Sri Ramanuja we have no other option but to accept that a serious effort at opening up our institutions was under way. Just imagine Alavandhaar having an untouchable as a disciple along with caste brahmins such as ThirukkOshtiyoor nambi. Almost all through his life Sri Ramanuja attempted to overcome the objections of "high-born" and secure rights for the "low-born." He took Sri Vasihnavam to everyone. He climbed on top of the temple tower to spread his gospel. He sought out Urangavalli dhaasar and turned him into a great bhaktha. These are the reasons he is "perumpoothoor vandha VALLAL" not "perumpoothoor vandha muni" or something like that, I think. This is far from simply allowing some exceptions after someone has already proved himself worthy of inclusion by showing extraordinary bhakthi. The first jeeyar of Srimad Ahobila mutt was also known to have worked for the inclusion of adhivaasees. All these efforts may seem precious little by today's standards. But the precious little was the result of systematic effort, not exceptions, I think. In Sri Vaishnavam we are supposed to follow caste dictates only to the extent of who does what. For instance, perumaaL aaraadhanai can be performed only by a practicing vaidhikaa. Temple adminstration can be by any able bhaktha, need not be brahmin. Entrance into the temple, worship, mutual devotion, prapatti, for all of these, caste no bar. Please pardon me if my understanding is not fully supported by the texts. -- dhaasan parthasarati dileepan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 1996 Report Share Posted March 13, 1996 This is in response to Mani's interesting comments on the above subject. Incidentally, I like the way he questions. It challenges the readers. Perhaps as a clarification to his points, I wish to state that I have understood Ramanujacharya's position on orthodoxy this way: Our Acharya respected the traditional Brahmanic codes (classified under shastras). But where Bhakti or love is overwhelming, these conventional rules give way to exceptions. This will explain the position taken by our acharya with regard to the partaking of left-overs from Thirukachhi nambigal, or his leaning on shoulders of Urangavilli Daasar. I think intentions are more important than the action itself. Vijayaraghavan Srinivasan 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.