[ADMIN] nAdOpAsana topic closed

[Guest guest]

Dear Members,

 

Once again, we are seeing acrimony and unneeded emotion raising their

heads in postings to our list. I once again beg members to read and

re-read their posts before sending them to the list. Please realize

that we have over 600 members at this point, and you are reaching a

very large audience. Please be careful in what you say. We always

need vigorous discussion -- but argument for the sake of argument, or

arguments which are unnecessarily defensive, dogmatic, or which are

made without sympathetic understanding of the context of previous

remarks should be witheld from the list and conducted in private.

 

This being the case, I am declaring the nAdOpAsana topic and its

derivatives closed for the time being. Strangely enough, this topic

has further degenerated into acrimonious meta-discussions. Need we

really vehemently criticize one-off translations of a single sloka that

appeared in "Sri Ranganatha Paduka"? Similarly, need we really presume

that such a criticism is an attack on the entire institution that runs

that magazine?

 

I also find it strange that this whole controversy, if I may term

it that way, got started by an innocent post by Sri M.G. Vasudevan

which simply stated that concentration through music makes bhakti

easier. Perhaps it is presumptuous of me to say this, but the

effectiveness of music can only be disputed by those who have little

exposure to it, or those who cannot appreciate it. The songs of Tyagaraja,

Purandara Dasa, and other great vAggEyakAras cannot merely be dismissed

as "sAmAnya" or "common" bhakti, just because they didn't happen to be

born in Iyengar families. Who are we to judge the anubhavam of saints

such as these? Can we really deny that Sri Tyagaraja had sakshAtkAra of

Sri Rama, as he so beautifully describes in 'dorakunA iTuvaNTi seva'?

Are we so sure of our own knowledge and our own status in the eyes of

the Lord that we dare do this? (As a side note, I find that these

criticisms often come from our youngest members).

 

Of course, some will make doctrinaire arguments based solely on the

their literal understanding of shastra. It is of course obvious that

bhakti-yoga and prapatti are the only paths to brahma-prApti described

in the shastras. But to doggedly repeat this dictum without seeing

the plain fact that saints such as Tyagaraja had some sort of vision

of God is simply missing the point. *We* don't know all that has happened

in a saint's internal life, and it is foolhardly to question or label

these great personalities based on external symbols.

 

Or, as several eminent scholars of our sampradAya expressed to me recently,

the Lord chooses to take to Himself those whom He deems 'varaNIya', or worthy

of being chosen. One is 'varaNIya' by being extremely dear to the

Lord, i.e., by attaining the state of the 'jnAni' described in the

7th chapter of the Gita, where Vasudeva is his all (vAsudeva sarvam).

How an aspirant gets to that state of absolute disregard for anything

else other than the Lord is immaterial in the final analysis.

 

Some of our members maintain that Tyagaraja, et al, could not have been

true brahma-jnAnis because they strayed from conduct befitting a Sri Vaishnava.

The example I have seen cited by one of our members in the past is Tyagaraja's

taking of sannyAsa at the very end of his life. This so-called 'Apat-sannyAsa'

is

supposedly indicative of a lesser form of bhakti. Such statements strike me as

lacking any anubhavam, compassion, or understanding of human nature. In this

case,

to me it is clear that Tyagaraja was merely acting as anyone in his circumstance

would do. Before he left his earthly body, he had no doubt that Sri Rama

would take him to Vaikuntha. This is clear from his songs as well as his

life story. But, to please the Lord, he felt it was his duty to formally show

that he had no attachment to the world and take sannyAsa. That was his

understanding based on his tradition. I find this no different from a

Sri Vaishnava who, having done bhara-nyAsa as a youngster, in later days

adopts a kudumi, 12 thirumaN, etc., on a daily basis, merely as an expression

of his duty to God. I.e., Tyagaraja's sannyAsa was not out of fear of not

attaining the Lord, but an expression of his love for Rama and disregard for

all else, before he left this world.

 

Anyway, enough of this matter. I also notice on the other side members

wantonly quoting questionable scriptures in their zeal to back up nAdOpAsana

as a truly independent means of realizing God. To these people, I suggest

that they read the guidelines of this group carefully. It is not appropriate

to start writing expositions of scripture without properly studying them.

In this case, quotes the hamsOpanishad and amRta-bindu-upanishad are not to be

tossed around as pawns in a chess game. For all I know, these are questionable

"later" Upanishads. Certainly they are not accepted as a common standard

or shastra by the major scholars of Vedanta. And any study of the root

texts of the Sri Vaishnava tradition make it clearly obvious that the

only way to attain God are bhakti-yoga or accepting the Lord Himself

as the means (prapatti).

 

 

If anyone finds something new on this topic they feel absolutely deserves

public discussion, please contact me and we can first discuss it in private.

 

Thanks for your patience.

 

aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,

Mani