The two schools

March 31, 1997

Mr. Keshava Prasad writes:

>I took the example of "Vadagalai" and

>"Thengalai" arguments only because they were currently taking place on this

`>forum and appeared to be a good example to make a case in point.

>Though there has been no known checks to

>interdining, intermarriage and social harmony at home and temple, when it comes

>to control of power in various aspects of society and affairs of the temples,

>the division has been perpetuated even today. Yes, a lot of good has come

>about with the division especially in the development of literature in both the

>languages. But the division raises its ugly head time and again causing

problems

>and mistrust among humans just like the distincton between North & South

>Indians, Northerners & Southerners in the U.S.

I would disagree with the level of division between our two schools as being

analagous to North and South divisions in India and the US. Such divisions

are the result of significant distinctions in food, language, history,

religion, and to some extent, race. None of these is the case between what

differentiates the our two noted schools of thought. While it is true that

the Kanchipuram scholars utilized Sanskrit more than their Srirangam

counterparts, it must be noted that both schools clearly agree that our

tradition is an ubhaya vedanta, a hybrid of Sanskrit philosophy and Tamil

mystical devotionalism. Western scholars such as Mumme have chosen to

compare the subtle distinctions between the two schools as being more

analogous to the divisions between the Catholic and Lutheran churches, two

churches worshipping the same God with differences as to the role of human

beings in salvation.

>The solution perhaps lies in bringing about some sort of integration in

thoughts

>and deeds among the divisions so that the concept that all men and women are

>created equal and we can totally dispense with the arguments about anyone's

>superiority over the other, whether humans or Gods and Goddesses. Such reforms,

>even if in a limited sense, not to hurt the progress of independent creative

>efforts but only to cause social harmony, could be be instituted only by our

>religious leaders in the past and can be tried by the religious leaders of the

>present, to be rewarded with any degree of success. It is upto us their

>followers, to bring the case to them. This was the point I was trying to make.

>

I would agree on this, to a point. If all would bear with me on this, I

would like to take the opportunity to reminisce (much of the conversation is

paraphrased from my memories): One of my most memorable lessons in my

"university days" came when I invited my Cultural Anthropology Professor to

a Deepavali function. As is the tradition in the Tamil community in Denver,

all of us had gathered together for the recitation of Sri Vishnu

Sahasranamam and Bhajans. The Tamil community was relatively small then,

and everyone could more or less sit comfortably in the small town home

community clubhouse that served as our regular gathering place. The Good

Professor sat next to me during most of the rituals and bhajans, and I was

rather proudly attempting to explain the significance of each. One of the

bhajans sung was the famous "Raghupati Raghava Raja Ram," and when the line

"Ishwara Allah Tere Naam" was sung, I, in my youthful idealism explained how

this verse had united the people of India under a common God. Professor Van

Arsdale smiled at me and said "Well, Gandhiji was quite the idealist and

charismatic leader. But are you sure that everyone here is truly believing

in such unity?" A little uncertain as to what he meant by this statement, I

did not reply.

After a few moments of silence, he looked around the roomful of people and

spoke, "But just look at the beauty in difference. A good student of

culture can see this even in one room. Look there, the devout are in front

donning their traditional dress and caste markings. And just next to them,

the religious but not so traditional wear more western attire but still

chant the verses. And over there are the faithful, who choose not to

participate but recognize the sacredness and watch with curiousity. And see

those two gentlemen there, they struggle with the words but still want to

try. And back there near the stove, the not so religious chat, hardly

paying attention to the goings on at the altar. Their participation is more

in line with supporting and belonging to the community rather than being

pious. One language group, one people, even one religion, and yet so many

different cultures. Unity in diversity. It applies to one room, it applies

to one world."

I have carried this lesson throughout since then. We cannot expect all

people, even of one culture to think the same. I believe that harmony comes

about from respecting each others' rights to having our differences as much

as unifying under similarities.

I hope my sentimental musings brought out this point without boring everyone.

Daasanu Daasan,

Mohan

bhattathiri · November 25, 2007

In the storm of life we struggle through myriads of stimuli of pressure, stress, and muti-problems that seek for a solution and answer. We are so suppressed by the routine of this every life style that most of us seem helpless. However, if we look closely to ancient techniques we shall discover the magnificent way to understand and realize the ones around us and mostly ourselves. If only we could stop for a moment and allow this to happen. May all beings be happy (Loka Samastha Sukhino Bhavanthu)

bhattathiri · November 25, 2007

Arjuna got mentally depressed when he saw his relatives with whom he has to fight.( Mental health has become a major international public health concern now). To motivate him the Bhagavad-Gita is preached in the battle field Kurukshetra by Lord Krishna to Arjuna as counseling to do his duty while multitudes of men stood by waiting. It has got all the management tactics to achieve the mental equilibrium and to overcome any crisis situation.