Swami Manavalamamunigal

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhagavathas,

My humble pranams.

Just while we were enjoying the excellent postings on Swami ManavalaMamunigal,

a controversy was created by Shri.Srinath disputing Swami Manavala Mamunigal

being Swami SriRamanujacharya's avatara, and making him a kalai specific

aacharya.

The only provocation it seems to have occurred when Shri.Venkatesh, while

appreciating Sri.Sadagopan's vivid and lucid presentation on Sri AdisEshan added

further - that - Sri Ananthan had the greatest privilege of all, by being the

AchAryan of Sriman nArAyaNan Himself, during ManavalaMamunigal avatara.

 

A lot has been subsequently said. Finally, I humbly would like to put forth to

the observations made by Shri. Mani in his posting which goes as follows-

:-I really do not think anyone wishes to "disprove"

:-Maamunigal's acharya-ship to the Lord. For that matter, it is not provable

either, and it carries no water with me. (What would it

:-mean for the sarvajna, the mass of knowledge Himself, to "learn"

:-from Maamunigal? In what way was he a sishya?

 

- I would only like to quote Sriman Chinnajeeyar's answer to the question asked

by a Bhagavatha sometime back.

Question -Shashikanth Hosur <shosur

Sriman Narayana,

Jeeyar Swami,

I had a few questions regarding the Guru tatvam and also regarding ArAdhana

performance. Please forgive me for any Apacharams which I might have done

unknowingly 1) Since Lord Narayana is the Lord of all Lords and all the

knowledge comes from Him and it is due to His grace that the knowledge flows

through different instruments of His choice. Why did he have to listen to the

discourse from Sri Mannavala Mahamuni as the Lord is Sarva Sheshi and Sarvagna.

Of course this incident teached me the regard the Lord gives to his Bhagavatas

and how one should treat His bhagavatas with utmost respect even above

Himself.

Jeeyar Swami's reply -

Priya Sriman Sasikanth!

Jai Srimannarayana!

We are happy for your 2 questions.

1.Lord Rangana:tha, heard Bhagavadvishayam from Sri Manava:la Ma:muni. Being

Omni-scient why should He listen from him? Here are a few reasons.

1)He loves that DivyaPrabandham.

2)The commentary presented by Sri Nambillai swamy, is still more lovely, and

hence Lord liked that.

3)The way Sri Manava:lama:muni explained was yet, par-excellence, for he was

VISADA VAK SIKHA:MANI (HE WAS THE GEM AMONG THE ORATORS, HIS WAY OF EXPLAINING

THE DEEPEST CONSEPTS WAS UNDERSTANDABLE EVEN TO KIDS)

4)Even for God, whenever He comes to this mundane abode, He has to follow the

rules of this land, which He Himself respects, as He chose Vasishta &

Viswamithra as His Guru during Ra:ma:vatha:ra. He chose Gargacharya &

Sa:ndi:pani as His gurus during Krishna Avatha:ra, so also Lord chose

Manava:lama:muni as His Guru during Rangana:tha Archa:vatha:ra. As He chose a

guru, He wanted to listen the concepts of Ve:da from that guru and He did so

while listening to Bhagavadvishayam.

5)He wanted to show to the world that He comes to people whom He likes, whenever

there will be a need.

6) He wanted to prove that Archa: vigraha is not just an idol made of some stone

or wood or alike, when it is consecrated by Vedic Hymns or it appears as Swayam

Vyaktha (self-incarnate as idol like in Sri:rangam/Tirumala/etc.,)He presents

Himself there, making that particular Mu:rthi as His Divine Body.

7)Lord Rangana:tha wanted to show a right A:cha:rya to the world of seekers,

who wanted to fufil the purpose of their lives, for reaching right goal,

ordained by Ve:das. Though there are still more reasons this is enough, we feel.

 

 

I earnestly hope Sriman Chinnajeeyar's explanation would be acceptable to one

and all, and people will not give any kalai specific angle to his explanations.

 

Finally, I think ( please forgive me if I am wrong?) Shri Srinath, further

wishes to prolong the controversy by some remarks ( I hope he does not mean it

though) he may have accidentally made during his last posting which goes as

follows:-

(2) It is unbecoming of individuals to cast aspersions on

the credibility of SriVaishnavam seen in others who do

not share their emotions and allegiances. After all,

it is not numbers that determine correctness - if that

were the case then we should all turn towards advaitam,

or even those ubiquitous babas who command such large

followings. Indeed if numbers make right, then perhaps

India's national animal - the tiger, should be replaced

by the rat which is so much more numerous.

 

The last two lines may perhaps be in response to Sri.Varadhan referring to a

small section of Srivaishnavas not accepting Swami ManavalaMamunigal. Perhaps

Shri.Srinath sitting in USA is not aware of facts nor have they made any attempt

to educate themselves. Before making such statements thought must be given to

repercussions. People like Shri. Srinath need to be educated about facts – it

was the forefathers of these rats who steadfastly protected the Divyadesams and

the Bhagavad Sampradayam, during Muslim invasion, suffering hardships and

facing great loss to life- especially in Srirangam, while the tigers were

hiding in remote villages or dancing to the tune of people in power. Only after

the British ushered in a period of security did the tigers come out of their

dens and started challenging the rats with the might of the wealth which they

had amassed, during the period of their hibernation. Again it will benefit

Shri.Srinath and others of his kind who propose sAtvika ahankAram (noble pride),

to come see and experience for themselves the reverence and passionate devotion

with which the Daasa Kula Bhagavathas have for SriRamanujacharya and swami

ManavalMamunigal at Srirangam and other places, which otherwise educated people

like us, those with sAtvika ahankAram (noble pride)!!!, feel ashamed and shy to

exhibit in open. Let us not commit Bhagavatha Apacharam, by an irrelevant rat -

tiger analogy.

Adiyen, beg to excuse me for any hurt which I may have caused.

Adiyen SriRamanujadaasan,

Srinivasan.

[Guest guest]

"venkat ramanujam srinivasan" <v_r_srinivasan wrote:

> Just while we were enjoying the excellent postings on Swami

> ManavalaMamunigal, a controversy was created by Shri.Srinath

> disputing Swami Manavala Mamunigal being Swami SriRamanujacharya's

> avatara, and making him a kalai specific aacharya.

 

Dear moderator and others, I ignored a similar statement made by

another member earlier but am left with no choice but to respond

this time. Sri ramanujam, please stop posting such rubbish and

refrain from mud-slinging allegations that have no basis in fact.

 

For your perusal (assuming you can understand written English),

I have reproduced my original message below so you may contrast

it with your baseless accusations above. In the future, kindly

make it a habit to read before you write, and think before you

hit <send>. My deep reverence for mamunigaL and his avatAra

vaibhavam is a personal matter and not the public property of

those itching for cheap fights.

 

I am thoroughly disappointed by the lack of maturity among such

list members - where a call for restraint from aitihyam is

misquoted and assigned all sorts of twisted meanings. It is

now clear to me - why there is such a dire shortage of writings

on this list about the actual contributions to srivaishnavam,

and the literary/devotional works of mamunigaL. It is because

energies are wasted in these meaningless pursuits.

 

If you don't have the capacity to write about your pUrvAchArya's

scholarly works and intellectual contributions, then do not

waste your own time and everyone else's in performing this kind

of slanderous "mariyadhai" to the AchAryan's legacy.

 

-Srinath C.

=================================== begin ====================

xsrinath@n...

Thu Nov 29, 2001 7:51 pm

Re: avatAras of rAmAnuja etc.

 

Sri Venkatesh and others with similar passionate dispositions:

adiyEn thinks it is unwise to get into kalai-specific anubhavams

about who represents the punar-avatAram of udayavar etc. Just

so you know, SriRangaRamanuja mahAdesikan (kOzhiyAlam swAmi) was

hailed as abhinava rAmAnuja during his time in bhoolokam during

the last century. Overlapping claims to udayavar's legacy abound,

and before asserting one's feelings so strongly one should stop

to think where the discussion is leading towards. This is not to

dispute any particular tradition but an attempt to show equal

respect to all without making mutually exclusive claims. We must

understand that even though there is AchArya paramparai which

attests to certain punar-avathArams, those kalakshepam traditions

are not uniformly accepted across SriVaishnavam and therefore we

must approach such controversial subjects with great caution.

==================================== end ========================

--

 

 

 

 

________________

Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience

the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape!

http://shopnow.netscape.com/

 

Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at

http://webmail.netscape.com/