On worship - (Salagramam)

[Guest guest]

Vijay Srinivasan wrote:

> Our experience shows that any system that tolerates mistakes and

> imperfections, ultimately degenerates into nothing. I think sincerity of

> purpose and striving for excellence go together. An earnest aspirant will

> do his best not to compromise. For example - if we take the Vedas - but

> for the emphasis on right svaras and varnas it would not have been possible

> for a tradition that depended on oral transmission to preserve them intact

> for thousands of years.

 

Aspiring for excellence is itself a sign of spiritual

sincerity. Of this there is no doubt. But, with due

respect, this is not the question. We will always fall

short of the ideal, no matter how pure our mind may be. We

will almost always miss one Vedic svara during pArAyaNa, or

miss some aspect of the upacAra during worship. If done with

the sincerest of hearts and the purest of minds, will this

incur pApa? If done in the spirit of "kRshNArpaNam", are we

to suffer the same consequences as those who are doing this

for material benefit? I think not.

 

I recall being told a story of a poor, blind bhAgavata who

had his sAlagrAma in the same bag he kept his other fruits.

Thinking the sAlagrAma was a grape one day, he plopped it

into his mouth. Realizing at once his mistake, he took it

out, washed it, and put it back into his bag. Done in all

sincerity, this was not a sin at all.

 

The philosophy of Ramanuja strives to point out that the

Lord stands in the way whenever our inability causes us

to fail, provided we have the right state of mind. This

is why nAma-sankIrtana yields the same benefit as a Vedic

sacrifice, why prapatti yields the same fruit as bhakti-yoga,

and why we say at the end of any Vedic recitation:

 

yad akshara-pada-bhRshTam mAtrA-hinam tu yad bhavet |

tat sarvam kshamyatAm deva nArAyaNa namo'stu te ||

 

If there was any mistake in the pronounciation of

any syllable, sentence, or measure, forgive them all,

O Lord Narayana! None of this is for me, but only

for You.

 

This of course requires the participant to have the utmost

sincerity -- but that's all. The striving for excellence in

worship comes as part of the sincerity.

 

[...]

> On the question of worshipping for material benefits etc., I think it is

> perhaps easy for people like us (who have been blessed with considerable

> felicity) to say that it must be eschewed. While we all agree that

> paramaikantikatvam is the ultimate ideal, it is for too distant a goal for

> most people. The fact that only a minority of Sri Vaishnavas do not resort

> to Anya Devata worship (in some form or other) is a clear indication that

> people are not willing to ignore 'Ihaloka sukam' i.e. the needs of this

> world.

 

This is true. However, if we start accepting that paramaikAntikatva

is too far a goal to ever be achieved, then no one would ever aspire

for it. This is not the message of our acharyas or the shastra.

It is partially because Sri Vaishnavas have not prominently pointed

out how selfless action dedicated to God is the highest dharma,

that societal religion continues to decay. It is because other

religious sections loudly proclaim that worshipping for material

benefits is the primary (and implicitly best) reason to go to a

temple/pUja that our tradition itself find its adherents falling.

 

Mani

[Guest guest]

shrii.Mani writes:

> Vijay Srinivasan wrote:

> > Our experience shows that any system that tolerates mistakes and

> > imperfections, ultimately degenerates into nothing. I think sincerity of

> > purpose and striving for excellence go together. An earnest aspirant will

> > do his best not to compromise. For example - if we take the Vedas - but

> > for the emphasis on right svaras and varnas it would not have been possible

> > for a tradition that depended on oral transmission to preserve them intact

> > for thousands of years.

>

> [...]

> The philosophy of Ramanuja strives to point out that the

> Lord stands in the way whenever our inability causes us

> to fail, provided we have the right state of mind. This

> is why nAma-sankIrtana yields the same benefit as a Vedic

> sacrifice, why prapatti yields the same fruit as bhakti-yoga,

> and why we say at the end of any Vedic recitation:

>

> yad akshara-pada-bhRshTam mAtrA-hinam tu yad bhavet |

> tat sarvam kshamyatAm deva nArAyaNa namo'stu te ||

>

> If there was any mistake in the pronounciation of

> any syllable, sentence, or measure, forgive them all,

> O Lord Narayana! None of this is for me, but only

> for You.

>

> This of course requires the participant to have the utmost

> sincerity -- but that's all. The striving for excellence in

> worship comes as part of the sincerity.

> [...]

 

I fully agree with shrii.Mani.

 

I, though am not a vaidika scholar at all (obviously), cannot resist the

temptation to call members' attention to criticality of phonetically

correct recitation of shruti.

 

It is said that the following key text in kaTha-upanishhad:

"nityo nityaanaam cetanashcetanaam-eko bahuunaam yo vidadhaati kaamaan"

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

was interpreted differently:

 

"nityaanaam bahuunaam" (the several eternal souls) by shrii.raamaanuja

 

"anityaanaam cetanaam" (the many non-eternal souls) by shrii.sha~Nkara

[advaita scholars, please validate this.]

 

Would missing a maatra possibly contribute to such drastically different

ways of parsing ?

 

[ so an earnest bhakta could stay away from (difficult?) vedic recitation and

rather stick to simple means of worship like naama-sa~NkiirtanaM etc ?? ]

 

 

..Ram.

 

PS: vaishhNavas, please bear with my irresistible (and useless)

speculating tendency.