Shiva

[Guest guest]

On Tue, 19 Mar 1996 12:24:16 -0500 Krishna Praba said:

 

......... I was brought up in an environment

>where interdining among vadagalais and thengalais

>was prohibited and recall many thengalais not stepping

>into Ahobila-matams.

 

 

The thenkalai vs. vadakalai bickering is slowly

becoming a thing of the past. Last month's issue

of Sri NP reports an agreement that has been forged

between the two kalais with respect to the Kanchi

periya kOvil. The issue also includs a call for

early settlement of similar problems at Sri Rangam.

 

These problems in the past were misguided for sure.

PiLLai LOkaacharya and Swami Sri DhEsikan held each

other in the highest possible regard. The famous

Desika Prabhandam thaniyan "seeronru thoopul..."

was composed by PiLLai LOkaacharyaa. Swami Sri Desikan

himself has commented that there is no difference

among the followers of Sri Ramanuja, only some

differences of opinion.

 

However, when it comes to accepting other dhEvathaas as

equal to Sriman Narayana, all the acharyaas

are equal in their determination in rejecting

such a "broad-minded" approach. Anyone advocating

this "broad-minded" approach will be violating one of

the fundamental beliefs of our tradition. It is with

good reason that aazhvaars such as Thondaradippodi

have been quite harsh in their criticisms of other

claims for the hearts and minds of the people of

their time. I am afraid we have to understand these

circumstances ourself with the help of our achaaryaas.

No amount of explanations here will be considered sufficient.

 

 

-- pd

[Guest guest]

I took the last few bhakti reports home to read

more leisurely and was abashed at he vitriolic

comments on Shiva. I was brought up in an environment

where interdining among vadagalais and thengalais

was prohibited and recall many thengalais not stepping

into Ahobila-matams. May be that is the reason, I did

not come across Sri Vedanta Desikachariar's works. I

grew up to discern and reject such thoughts. Similarly,

I learnt to visit Siva temples with my close

Iyengar classmate, who grew in up in an Iyer

community. So it is a surprise to me to see such

antagonism. Of course one can quote the GITA,

"Sarva-deva Namskaram Keshavam Prathigachhati"

or "Ananyh-chintanatomam, yo janah Paryupasate".

The comment on Ardha-nari really was in bad taste.

It had made me proud that Hinduism accepted

Brahman as sexless. I think the origin of the

idol is traced to 7th century, if not earlier.

Ghandiji, much quoted here and compared to

Ramanuja, had extended the "Sarv-deva" concept

to Islam and Christianity in his daily prayers.

The fact we Hindus did not proseletize, was based

on the principle, that there are many paths to

salvation. Born in a Vaishanvite family, one can

easily adopt Narayana as the para-brahman.

Among the idols, both Krishna with the flute and

Nataraja as a cosmic dancer stand out, because they

manifest themselves without weapons.

Krishna Praba