Fw: [meykandar] Fwd: Regarding Vallalar's Teaching

[Guest guest]

-

"Dr K.Ganesalingam" <kglingam

<meykandar>

Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:48 AM

Re: [meykandar] Fwd: Re: Regarding Vallalar's Teaching

 

> Mr.Ram Chandran's comments below appear to carry some mistakes and

> distortions.

>

> >advaitin, "Ram Chandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote:

> >Namaste:

> >

> >These comments are in addition to Sri Kathirasan's excellent remarks on

> >this topic.

> >The Saiva Siddhantam was orginated in Tamil Nadu with the emergence of 63

> >Nayanmars (Shiva worshipping sages).

>

> >> Saiva Siddhanta originated long before the advent of the 63 Nayanmars

> in Tamil Nadu. Saiva Agamas carrying Siddhanta views existed in Tamil

> Nadu before the Nayanmars. Tholkappiyam and the Sangam literatures have

> seeds of Saiva Siddhanta. Thirukkural has Saiva Siddhanta views. They all

> came before the Nayanmars.

>

> >The Bhakti movement (800 AD to 1700 AD) was quite extensive and consists

> >of Shiva, Vishnu and

> >other Ishtadevatas. The Shiva worship using the 28 agamas and Vishnu

> >orship with the adoptation of the (Nalayira DivyaPrabhandams -

> >fourthousands verses praising the glories of Narayana) are quite

> >significant. The agamas and Divyaprabhandams are considered as the 'Tamil

> >Vedas' by the Tamil Bhaktas.

>

> >> Saiva Tamil Baktas do not call the Agamas as 'Tamil Vedas'. Only the

> Thirumurais are called "Tamil Vedas" by them, because St. Sekilar referred

> to them as Tamil Vedas. I understand that Divyaprabhandams are refered to

> as 'Dravidian Vedas'. (Vaishnava friends may enlighten on this).

>

> >The greatest of the devotees of Shiva are called the Naynamars and they

> >are 63 in number and they are the authors to the agamas.

> >The famous ones are Taymanavar, Manickavasagar, Jnanasambandhar, etc.

>

> >> The Nayanmars are not authors of Agamas. Tayumanavar is not a Nayanar.

>

> > The great devotees of Vishnu are known as the Alwars who are the

> > authors of the prabhandams. Andal, Nammalvar, Periyalwar,

> > Kulasekaraalwar, etc are the most famous among the Alwars.

>

> >> No comments.

>

> >The agamas and prabhandams are respectively verses in praise of Shiva and

> >Vishnu respectively.

>

> >> Only Saiva Agamas speak of Saiva religion. They are not verses

praising

> Siva, like the Thirumurai works.

>

> >But these verses come from the hearts of the true devotees who totally

> >surrendered their ego. They are great Tamil

> >literary works greatly cherished by the Tamil scholars. Most of them

> >readily available in the Internet for interested readers. They are

> >all poems written in simple Tamil but with a great depth of devotion and

> >philosophy.

>

> >> Agamas are not Tamil works or Tamil literary works..

>

> >ThAyumAnavar postulated the hypothesis of "advaitha SitthAn^tham" which

> >he considered as was more universal and aimed at bridging the gap between

> >VEdhAn^tham and SitthAn^tham.

>

> >> Thayumanavar didn't postulate "advaita siddhantam" and bridged

> vedhantam and siddhantam. His verses are with Siddhanta views, but those

> who do not understand them try to find Vedhanta views in them. He spoke of

> Siddhas as those who find a synthesis between Vedhanta and Siddhanta.

>

> >Sage Tayumanavar was a respected scholar in both Sanskrit and Tamil,

> >Tayumanavar was minister to a king in Trichinopoly. When he became

> >god-minded, he went over to Rameswaram, and then from place to place,

> >preaching Saiva Siddhanta philosophy and Siva worship.

>

> >> This speaks of his adherence to Siddhanta philosophy.

>

> >His songs are full of the divine bliss which he enjoyed in abundance. The

> >songs, on the theme of the Atma craving for the union with the Paramatma,

> >are famous for their simplicity.

>

> >> No comments

>

> >He is also known for his unceasing emphasis on the unity of all paths to

> >God and of all religions, and in particular, on the unity of Vedanta and

> >Saiva Siddhanta.

>

> >>He said that all religious paths, like all rivers flowing to the sea,

> leads to the Divine. But he was convinced that his religion of Saivism was

> the supreme religion and said, "Saiva Samayame Samayam", meaning "Saiva

> relgion is the only (real) religion"..

>

> Ganesalingam

>

>

>

>

> ............................................

> Tamil Software Download (eMail, Internet, word processing, KeyBoard)

> http://www.tamil.net/newtamil/ekalappai_1.html

> .............................................

> eMail setup:

> http://www.gbizg.com/Tamilfonts/Tamil-Outlook-Express.htm

> ..................................

> Tamil Fonts, Keyboard drivers and help:

> http://www.gbizg.com/tamil/Using_ekalappai.htm

> ..................................

> PDF-Adobe instructions for installing Tamil font and eKalappai

> http://www.tamil.net/special/ekalappai3.pdf

> ..................................

>

> Your use of is subject to

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

sir,

 

i have one doubt. i thought that agamas are a rituals or a way of

worship of lord shiva. like in shiva temples they follow poojas

within a set of agama. where as in vishnu temples they follow the

rituals laid down by sri ramanujar.

the conflict arose only when only shiva was worshiped by agamas and

nayanmars were totally immersed in praise of shiva and forgot vishnu.

with the advent of alwars who were vishnu devotees and the emergence

of vishitadvaitam by ramanujar,the protection of saiva treditions

were taken over by adeenams.inspite of adishankara who did not

differenciate between vishnu and shiva we had the different schools

of thought emerging in south.this might be because of tamil poets and

saints considered vishnu differently. but we had alwars nalayira

divya prabandams. iam unable to make out the reasons for different

philosophies emerging.can any one throw light on this.

 

regards

 

cdr bvn

[Guest guest]

There are a number of vaishnava agamas which lay down the procedure

of the worship of mahavishnu. Examples of Vaishnava agamas are the

puraNas and the pancharatra texts. While dvaita siddhantha and

vishishTadvaita siddhantas accept the agamas as pramaNas , advaita

vedAnata does not credit the same status to agamas. When you can

accept vedavyasa's bramhasutras , why not the puraNas that were

edited and classified by him ?

 

Where as the common opinion is that without the help of the agamas

one cannot directly understand and conclude about the supremacy of

bramhan just by studying the vedas. We indeed need the help of the

agamas in order to understand what the shrutis have to say about

bramhan.

 

Though , the shiva agamas claim that shiva is supreme, they do not

have actual support of their claim that shiva himself is parabramha

or the supreme, back from the vedas. There is no clear depiction in

the vedas claiming the supremacy of shiva or any other god except

narayana as sarvottama. Even in bhagavatamahapurana there is a clear

depiction of the subordination of rudra-devaru to mahavishnu. So

followers of shiva cult do not consider vishnu agamas at all which in

in clear violation to their proposal of shiva sarvottamattva.

 

Acharya shankara who is credited to be the 'sthapaka' of shad-matas

(the six matas like sowra, ganapathya, shaktha, shiva, shanmukha and

vishnu ) accepts (shankara digvijaya) during his debate with

mandana , that the all prevailing vedas do contain some flaws in the

sense that they contain some word which have no meaning. The only

doubt is how can you claim something which is flawed to be pramana to

base your arguments on? So accepting the agamas and puranas by

advaita vedanta will be contradictory to their proposal of bheda of

jivatma and paramatma. The vaishnava agamas claim that vishnu is

supreme and clearly say that there is a difference between jiva and

bramha.

 

All the acharyas except acharya madhwa neglect the importance of

agamas as pramaNas for supporting thier proposal of bheda between

jiva and bramha. We can see the references to the 100s and 1000s of

vaishnava aagama texts in his sarvamoola granthas.

 

naham kartaa harih kartha

 

gokulAnandatIrtha

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin, "vaidyanathiyer"

<vaidyanathiyer> wrote:

> sir,

>

> i have one doubt. i thought that agamas are a rituals or a way of

> worship of lord shiva. like in shiva temples they follow poojas

> within a set of agama. where as in vishnu temples they follow the

> rituals laid down by sri ramanujar.

> the conflict arose only when only shiva was worshiped by agamas and

> nayanmars were totally immersed in praise of shiva and forgot

vishnu.

> with the advent of alwars who were vishnu devotees and the

emergence

> of vishitadvaitam by ramanujar,the protection of saiva treditions

> were taken over by adeenams.inspite of adishankara who did not

> differenciate between vishnu and shiva we had the different schools

> of thought emerging in south.this might be because of tamil poets

and

> saints considered vishnu differently. but we had alwars nalayira

> divya prabandams. iam unable to make out the reasons for different

> philosophies emerging.can any one throw light on this.

>

> regards

>

> cdr bvn