Ahimsa, Logic, and Changing with the times

[Guest guest]

On Ahimsa, Sri Mani Varadarajan quoted from a translation

of the original discourse by Tuladhara on non-violence

>

 

[...]

>

>These, O Jajali, are some of the wicked and dreadful practices

>that are current in the world. You practice them because they

>have been practiced by men from ancient times, and not because

>they agree with the dictates of your purified understanding.

>

>One should practice what one considers to be one's duty, guided

>by reason, instead of blindly following the practices of the

>world. Listen now, O Jajali, as to what my behavior is towards

>him that injures and him that praises me.

 

I have neither read the original nor the above translation

in any formal way. Therefore I am not qualified to offer

detailed comments on it. However, please note that the

quoted passage condemns gratuitous violence "not

sanctioned by the scriptures." As such there is no

automatic injunction against such violence as those that

lead to the production of sanctioned materials for use in

the course of Bhagavath Aradhanai. Sri Ramanuja says

that animals killed in the course of such violence go to

heaven. Therefore, Sri Ramanuja says, such violence is

actually good for the animals killed for this purpose.

 

The quoted passage also talks about "blindly following

the practices of the world." It is easy to _misinterpret_

this passage. We need to note that this is not a call for

abandoning tradition and reinterpreting scriptures as and

how it pleases each of one of us. This argument is not

new to this forum. Time and again we have had people

pleading for developing a critical understanding of our

Sampradayam. They beseech us not to blindly quote

poorvacharyas. They appeal to us to look at the true

meaning. Usually, these sentiments are expressed

whenever there is an article quoting our poorvacharyas

about sasthras, tradition, and the need to place at most

faith in our Acharyas. The underlying message is that

somehow, _trying_ to follow sasthras or placing supreme

faith in the words of Acharyas is equal to "blind" and

"uncritical" faith. We are admonished that God has

given us the faculty to think, and that we must use it.

 

In this context I urge the members to consider one of the

most important advice that our dear Sri Ramanuja gave to

all of us, "there is no mOksham without the grace of

Acharya". Please consider this. He did not say, "there is

no mOksham without critical questioning", or "there is

no mOksham if you don't change with the times."

 

By this I am not advocating abandoning logic and

 

reasoning. Neither am I proposing that we must resist

changes at all cost. What we need to realize is that

changes must happen only with the blessings of our

present day Acharyas, not otherwise.

 

When an Acharya is quoted in the course of a debate

some have taken that to be a call for unquestioning

obedience. That is simply not so. We should never be

afraid to ask questions. But at the same time we must

have ultimate faith that our Acharyas words will never

mislead us. If we take the time and effort to approach our

Acharays in the proper manner they will only be too

happy to answer our doubts. I also submit to you, that

after all the questioning and answering if we find a

conflict between our logic and the position described by

our Acharyas, it is our Acharya's words that must stand.

This is the faith that Sri Ramanuja commands us to

develop, not one that compels unquestioning obedience.

Such faith will help us overcome our logic that fails us at

some critical times. One of the prerequisites for

considering ourselves Ramanuja Dhasans is to

cultivate such a faith.

 

Regarding Changing with the times

------------------

We want may changes to take place in our Sampradayam.

But, we must also realize that not all of us are qualified to

propose these changes to a group of Sri Vaishnavas.

None of us will ever dare propose changes to widely

accepted theories and demand that the scientific

community accept them. We leave them up to the

experts to propose. But when it comes to spiritual

matters we all are experts. We want the spiritual tradition

to change with the times. Why should Srimad Azhagiya

 

Singar use only well water? Why can't they travel to

USA? Why are only men permitted to do this or that?

We must abandon the cruel Varnasrama dharma. So on

and so forth. Many of these are not without merit. But,

we must realize that only the spiritual leaders of our

Sampradyaam, namely, the Jeeyars and Andavans can

propose such changes, and they have. They have

instituted many changes. Not long ago Satari

(perumaaL's thiruvadi) was offered to only those with a

Shikai. These days women are routinely included in

Kalakshepam of rahasya granthas. During the 70th

birthday celebration of Srimad Azhagiya Singar, the

Jeeyar led a women only group for a special extended

dharsan of Thiruvengadavan. I am sure there are

many more examples.

 

Yes, for some of us these are too little too late. It is due

to the infinite mercy of our Acharyas these changes are

taking place and more will surely take place in the future.

What we need to realize is that these changes must come

only from the spiritual elite, not from those of us for

whom spiritual scholarship is a hobby outside of 9 to 5

job. Pardon me for saying this, but when we freely

advocate changes to traditional practices we are actually

trying to usurp the role of our Acharya. When this

happens it is a travesty as we have chosen, directly or

indirectly, a material life even though opportunities for

spiritual study and life that would inevitably be lot less

materially rewarding were and are available in plenty. If

we feel passionately enough about some changes, then

we need to first pay the dues by adopting a spiritual life

and gain scholarly access to our spiritual leaders. Then,

and only then, will we not be usurping spiritual authority

when we boldly call for changes to be adopted by a group

of Sri Vaishnavas. (Please note that I am not referring to

changes that we individually adopt in our own lives. The

question is to what extent are we qualified to propose

changes to a group of Sri Vaishnavs, for example, a group

such as this bhakthi list).

 

In summary, I would like to submit to this forum blessed

with many critical students of our Sampradayam, that

Acharya bhakthi and implicit faith in our tradition are not

necessarily in conflict with logic and critical thinking.

Neither does it mean that showing deference to our

Acharyas will keep us immersed in meaningless rituals of

the hoary past. Who can say reason be damned? Who

would dare argue that only blind faith is best? Yet, we

must accept the wisdom of our poorvacharyas and desist

advocating uniltaral changes to our tradition, and be

prepared to suspend logic when it comes in conflict

with our present day Acharya's teachings.

 

 

-- adiyEn ramaanuja dhaasan

[Guest guest]

Sri Dileepan wrote-

 

" Sri Ramanuja says

that animals killed in the course of such violence go to

heaven. Therefore, Sri Ramanuja says, such violence is

actually good for the animals killed for this purpose."

 

This argument was challenged by Buddhists while advocating non - violence in

its strictest interpretation (without understanding the rationale provided in

the Sastras) saying that if the sacrificed animals go to heaven, why not the

Yajamanas sacrifice their own parents and elders so that they could also

ascend to the very heaven !

 

Also, it may be noticed that for plucking the holy basil leaves for offering

to the Lord in Tiruvaradana that a prayer is uttered pleading to Tulasi Devi

to pardon us for the

' himsa ' perpetrated on her in the act of plucking and this is not without

reason (though we may not understand its significance)

 

Such is our tradition (not just Buddhist or Jain) to perform Prayaschittam for

accidental ' himsa' done while carrying out our daily chores to various living

creatures, which have been identified to take place in five contexts.

 

Such is also our tradition that as we wake up in the morning we are required

to beseech pardon of Bhumi Devi (Mother Earth) for having to tread on her.

 

As you rightly put it, any change ought to be advised by our Acharyas and

definitely not by folk like us having just some book knowledge and pet

conceptions.

 

Dasoham

Anbil Ramaswamy

[Guest guest]

shrii. Parthasarati Dileepan writes:

 

| On Ahimsa, Sri Mani Varadarajan quoted from a translation

| of the original discourse by Tuladhara on non-violence

| >

|

| [...]

| >

| >These, O Jajali, are some of the wicked and dreadful practices

| >that are current in the world. You practice them because they

| >have been practiced by men from ancient times, and not because

| >they agree with the dictates of your purified understanding.

| >

| >One should practice what one considers to be one's duty, guided

| >by reason, instead of blindly following the practices of the

| >world. Listen now, O Jajali, as to what my behavior is towards

| >him that injures and him that praises me.

|

| I have neither read the original nor the above translation

| in any formal way. Therefore I am not qualified to offer

| detailed comments on it. However, please note that the

| quoted passage condemns gratuitous violence "not

| sanctioned by the scriptures." As such there is no

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

| automatic injunction against such violence as those that

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

| lead to the production of sanctioned materials for use in

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

| the course of Bhagavath Aradhanai. Sri Ramanuja says

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

| that animals killed in the course of such violence go to

| heaven. Therefore, Sri Ramanuja says, such violence is

| actually good for the animals killed for this purpose.

|

 

Could reference be provided from shrii. raamaanujaacaarya's works?

 

-Ram