The 'QUALITY ' of a Sri Vaishnavan/ Smt. Jayasree Sarnathan: Comment

[Guest guest]

/Shri rAmAnujasya caraNau SharaNam prapadyE

 

I agree with Smt. Jayasree Sarnathan that the question of how to live to be a

Sri /vaishNava is of great importance. She has addressed the question by

analyzing the quality of the word "quality" itself following a psychologist

Kano. In this very interesting analysis, she considers three levels of

quality which move progressively. The second and third levels are called

"must-be" qualities and "attractive qualities" respectively and they have

direct spiritual content and require effort.

 

The first one which deals with a beginner's initiation is called "Desirable

qualities". These have to do with the /panca samskAra, the first two being

the imprint of an external symbol like cakrA and nAmAm (pundram)

respectively. The remaining three deal with an introduction to worship of

/bhagavAn Shri VishNu,

 

Even though Smt. Jayasree captions the quality as "desirable", she tends to

make it obrigatory. Earlier Smt. Sumithra Varadarajan also has lamented that

the /puRac/cinnaGkaL" are not in vogue more. I did some search on the

Internet and there seems to be a strong opinion in its favor as a beginner's

introduction.

 

It seems to me that the emphasis on their use as an act of formal baptism is

counter-productive. The initiation into the name (nAmA), the mantrA and yAga

(deity worship) is necessary for the learning process and are first lessons

for bigger excursions. It seems to me that the external imprints

(purac/cinnaGkaL) are symbols of character and not of baptism.

 

Unlike the other three components, the imprints need not serve any purpose

for the initiate. On the other hand they proclaim to the community that this

person being a Shri vaishNava can be expected to demonstrate a certain

behavior. I do not think that this behavior is only restricted to his or her

concept of /mOzam. That is, by looking at this person I do not think that

this person is very interested in /mOzam and he or she is commited to

folllowing the ways of the AzvArs in this quest. I certainly do not think of

/mOzam when I see this person. On the contrary I expect this person not only

to have but to demonstrate a certain behavior under certain circumstances.

This behavior depends upon his or her means, family background, etc.

 

I know that this used to be so. I also know that it is a bit harder to have a

feeling today for that. So it seems to me that the problem that one faces is

to show that these imprints do have a meaning in behavior and to use them as

symbols of graduation rather than of baptism. Smt. Sumithra mentioned that a

doctor wears his/her apron, a lawyer wears his black dress etc. But they can

do so only after graduation.

 

I will try to explain with two examples:

 

1. King /kaTTapomman sought asylum with the rAja of Putuk/kOTTai. The latter

was apparently his friend. But the rAjA turned him over to the British who

had ransomed him. Let us say that we have a tradition, where the rAjA of

Putuk/kOTTai is a Shri vaishNava (I think he was not one) having the

imprints. Then he would have been obligated to abide by the sharaNA/gati

principle. Since he violated this principle, he would be deprived of the

right to wear the pundram for the rest of his life. Not that he would have

cared, but it might have acted as a deterrent. People still care for family

honor today.

 

2. This is not unusual. One of the 63 /nAyanmArs is /meyp/poruL nAyanAr. He

was a king who systematically defeated the war incursions of a neighbouring

king /mutta/nAtan not just once but several times. So mutta/nAtan assumed the

disguise of a civan/adiyAr and went to visit the king carying a kamadalam,

and a bag of books of pAdalkaL. As a civan/adiyAr he was received well. He

said he wanted to initiate the king to a new song or mantrA and sought

private audience. The king meyp/poruL was only too pleased to grant him one.

When in private, the king bowed at the feet of the false adiyAr, the enemy

king drew a sword which lay hidden in the bag and attacked the nAyanAr. The

servants heard the noise of nAyanAr's cry and rushed in and captured

mutta/nAtan. But the bleeding king said that as the killer was in the formal

dress of a civan/adiyAr he should not be mistreated in anyway. He ordered the

guards to safely escort the enemy out of his kingdom, as the people had

alaeady risen against the enemy after hearing the news.

 

After this the nAyanAr reached civa/patam.

 

The story indicates the strength of character the formal dress of a

civan/adiyAr carried in those days. This is but one among many such examples.

Even though it was misused in the story, and one can expect such misuse, the

story makes a point that is valid today.

 

It seems to me that the pundram is a trademark which carries with it a

warrarnty. Under the product warranty, I would have sued muttu/nAtan and

claimed compensation! I would have gotten a temple order [not from the

British :-) ], but from the local temple to ban the entry of the rAjA of

putuk/kOtTTai into the temple.

 

If we have such a law, (and why not?), we will build character. That is what

we need today. When I have character, my friends and family will pray for me

so much when I die that perumAL will have no choice. :-) Even civan will

have no choice. I will be doubly blessed.

 

We do not have to wait for America to pass such laws before we pass them.

 

Finally, I would like to address a question: We have had very little

discussion on: How does a Sri vaishNava handle non-vaishNavAs. I cannot

imagine a dossier of Sri vaishNavas that will omit such an important

question. The question is of special interest to teenagers and young people.

 

/vandanam.

 

Naha svIkurvaka asmAt krupAm: May He cause us to be endowed with Grace?

 

Visu

 

 

 

 

 

I