Thenkalai Vadakalai difference during marriage

[Guest guest]

Dear Sir,

 

Thanks for a crisp summary of what two kalai's believe.

Seems to me that differences are subtle.

Although I was born to vadagali family, actually

Tenkalai seems more practical for moksha.

However, even more pragmatic for moksha is what the Lord says in

Charama shloka, as is (without the complications/limitations imposed

by the kalais),

because both kalais differ (as reproduced below) from the direct

message of Charama shloka,

where God promises moksha to everyone who surrenders.

 

>>The Lord can be accused of partiality or unkindness, if He gives

moksha to some and not to others. Further, the Lord cannot grant moksha

to all people. So, the Vadakalai school says that the Lord's grace has

to have some reason, like the efforts by the individual soul. The

Tenkalai school says that the Lord's grace (kripa) is spontaneous. He

grants moksha to those whom he wishes <<

 

Personally, I prefer what the Lord says in the Charama Shloka, as is.

 

This makes Kalais more a matter of fellowship, tradition and ego.

All these crop up at times of grand events in one's life

like marriage.... naturally, in arranged marriages, people

seek same kalai.

 

In this context, ideally we should equally respect both traditions,

and let not impose one on the other. In inter-kalai marriages and

worship,

accomodate both traditions as equally as possible.

 

If we rather superimpose both kalais with the ultra truth

(charama shloka as is), then the kalai differences

become even more insignificant.

 

dAsan

 

K.S. tAtAchAr

 

Anand Govindarajan <gurusevas

 

Sat, 03 Dec 2005 06:15:28 -0000

Thenkalai Vadakalai difference during marriage

 

Achrayan ThiruvadigaLE charaNam,

 

Pranaamas to srivaishnavites who are all making this group a great

sathsangam.  I'm a silent but regular visitor to this sathsangam. 

Today I would like to pour my anxiety(aathangam) before this group.

 

When we (espically vaishnavites) start looking for varan for our girls

face many problems.  One of the main hurdle is the kalai.  As of today

our boys are well educated and positioned in a very good status. They

can very well differentiate between things. But as said by sri sri

sadagopan iyengar in one this message this boys earn more spend more,

ignoring our sampradayam.

 

As soon as the horscope is taken for marriage proposal they start

behaving as if they are the deep followers of our sampradayam.  Without

knowing the basic difference between these two kalai start avoding the

opposite subsect. Many well educated girls with multiple degrees even

doctor's degree were unable to get married.

 

Herewith I had given the article from Srivaishnavan.com which had given

clear clarification for the both the kalai's.

 

My sincere thanks to the Srivaishnavan.com for giving such a clear

clarification.

 

The first one is about, the position and nature of Lakshmi. The

principle of Vadakalais is as follows:

 1) Goddess Lakshmi has three characteristics. i) The first one is her

recommending and pleading role to Lord Narayana on behalf of the

Jivatma. (Purushakara). ii) The second one is that she is herself the

means for attaining salvation, just as Narayana is the means for

attaining salvation (upaya). iii) The third characteristic is that, she

is also the object of attainment (upeya). In Sri Vaikunta, she and

Narayana are served by the chetanas or Jivatmas after attaining moksha.

 2) Lakshmi is Paramatma (along with Narayana); and is not Jivatma.  

 3) Lakshmi is also infinite in nature (vibhu), like Narayana.

 

The Tenkalais accept Lakshmi's role as a mediator, i.e. her

recommendatory nature. They also accept that she, along with Narayana,

is the object of attainment, in Paramapada. But they do not accept the

principle that she is also the means of attaining salvation; i.e., that

she is also an upaya. 2) They say Lakshmi is a Jivatma. 4) Lakshmi is

atomic in nature.

 

Another point of difference is about the status of the Jivatma who

attains Kaivalya. Those who have performed Jnana Yoga perceive and

enjoy their own souls. This is called Kaivalya. Vadakalai school holds

that Kaivalya is inferior to Paramapada or Moksha. It is not eternal;

and the soul finally reaches Paramapada. So Kaivalya, according to the

Vadakalai school, is situated outside Sri Vaikunta. The Tenkalai school

also accepts that Kaivalya is inferior. But they state that these souls

enjoy Kaivalya eternally in the Paramapada or Sri Vaikunta only, in the

outer most parts.

 

The Vadakalai school accepts both bhakti and prapatti as the means for

attainment of moksha. The Tenkalai school does not accept bhakti as a

means or upaya. They state that accepting or adopting bhakti yoga as a

means is against the nature of the dependent soul. The soul is

absolutely dependent on the Lord. So, he should not, by himself, adopt

bhakti yoga.

 

The Vadakalai school states that prapatti has to be a positive,

specific act of surrender, by the Jivatma to the Lord. The Tenkalai

school does not consider that a positive act of surrender is necessary.

They say that i) knowledge of the essential nature of the Jivatma, and

ii) mental acceptance (non-rejection) on the part of the Jivatma to

Iswara granting him salvation, are required. So the Jivatma need not

specifically adopt any means for salvation, as a positive act. He may,

however, do good things and service to God, for the pleasure of the

Lord.

 

The Vadakalai school holds that a positive effort is necessary, on the

part of the Jivatma to attain the Lord's grace. The Lord can be accused

of partiality or unkindness, if He gives moksha to some and not to

others. Further, the Lord cannot grant moksha to all people. So, the

Vadakalai school says that the Lord's grace has to have some reason,

like the efforts by the individual soul. The Tenkalai school says that

the Lord's grace (kripa) is spontaneous. He grants moksha to those whom

He likes. The Vadakalai philosophy is compared with the practice of the

monkey (markata nyaya). In the case of a monkey, the child must cling

or attach itself to the mother. Similarly, the Jivatma has to make some

efforts to gain Lord's grace. The Tenkalai school is compared to the

cat system. In the case of a cat, the mother cat holds the child cat,

in its mouth and moves about (marjara nyaya). Similarly, Tenkalai

school states that it is the Lord, who grants favours to those, whom He

likes.

 

The next difference is the Lord's attitude towards the sinners. The

Tenkalai school states that the sins of a devotee are pleasing to the

Lord; just like the dirt in the wife's body is pleasing to the husband;

or the dirt in the calfs body is pleasing to the mother cow. The

Vadakalais say: The Lord ignores or does not see the sins of the

devotee. In the examples given, the husband or the mother cow does not

hate the wife or the calf, respectively, because of the dirt. The dirt

however is in due course cleaned. Similarly, the sins of a devotee are

not seen by the Lord.

 

Yes, another point of difference is about performance of compulsory

duties, like Sandhyavandana and others. 9) The Tenkalai school holds

that for an exalted person, who is ready to receive the Lord's grace,it

is not an offence to give up the performance of these compulsory

duties. -But they do these compulsory duties, so as to set an example

to ordinary persons; because, following the example of such great

personalities others also should not give up their performance of

compulsory duties. The Vadakalai schools holds that the performance of

compulsory duties has been laid down by the sastras. So, these have to

be done as laid down, by all persons. Non-performance of these is a

sin, which will attract God's punishment.

 

The Tenkalai school holds that in the first part in the charama sloka,

"giving up all the dharmas" means that, all dharmas must be given up

first, before seeking refuge in the Lord. The Vadakalai school states

that these dharmas actually refer to the different vidyas, in the

bhakti yoga. These vidyas have already been given up by the Jivatma,

due to his inability; and that this is a statement of fact.

 

The Tenkalai school states that the Lord also grieves when a person is

suffering. They quote the authority from Ramayana, where it is said

that Rama becomes grief-stricken at the sorrow of human beings. The

Vadakalai school says: A person has to feel sorry, for somebody's

grief, only if he is not able to remove the grief of the other person.

When a person has the capacity to remove another man's grief, there is

no need for him to feel sorry. He will remove the other man's grief.

Similarly, the Lord has got the powers to remove a person's grief. So,

there is no need for Him to feel sorry. He will remove the grief of the

humanbeing. It is stated in Ramayana, that Rama was feeling sorrow at

the people's sorrow for two reasons: 1) Good people who see that in the

avataras, like Rama or Krishna, He also feels sorry, develop further

affection towards Rama or Krishna and thus do good deeds. 2) Bad, or

wicked people, seeing the Lord also grieving, think that He is also a

human being like themselves; and thus, do wicked things and suffer.

 

The Vedas say that the Lord is smaller than the smallest; and is bigger

than the biggest. The Lord is present everywhere. The Vadakalai school

states that the Lord's being inside an atom means that the Lord is

present even in an atom. Similarly, when it is stated that the Lord is

bigger than the biggest, or, infinite; this means that the. Lord is

also there, wherever such infinite things like Time are. The Tenkalai

school states that the Lord is also inside the atom and similarly He

also envelops the infinite things, like Time, because of His special

powers.

 

I request all the srivaishnavites to thik about this atleast today,

So that our vaishnavam will get a strong pillars.

 

with pranaams

 

Anand

 

 

 

--------

 

*  Visit your group "" on the web.

 

*  

 

 

*  

 

--------

[Guest guest]

Dear SrEvaishNavites,

I agree that we should respect each kalai and the traiditons . These

differences should not be an impediment in understanding human values.

For example, because of this vadakalai people are not able to understand the

great works of MaNavALa mAmunikaL and thenkalai people do not realise the

Greatness of Sri VEdhAntha DhEskan and his works.(There are exceptions of

course)

By the way, I would like to place the following clarifications.

 

The southern school of thought.

 

EVen prapathi is not accepted as the means - Prapathi is rejected as it implies

a son aksing for a guarantee of maintenance from ones father.

 

Further, that Lord is partial, this question is dealt deeply and is a study in

itself. This is dealt in parathyAdhikaraNam and has different interpretations of

Sri MaNavALa mAmunikaL, Sri VEdhantha Desikar and Sri vAdhikEsari azhagiya

maNAvAL jEyar. However, the pertinent pAsuram in this aspect is 'veRidhEa aruL

seivar seivArgatku vugandhu' thiruvAiMozhi 8-7-8;

 

An exalted person does not give up but it gets shed automatically -vuRanguvAn

kaip paNdam polEa nazhuvum.

 

These are some subtler clarifications and there are more. A few samples are

enough to show that these are very minor in nature except 4or 5 basic tenets.

 

dAsan

vanamamalai padmanabhan

 

 

-

tatachar (AT) aol (DOT) com

 

Saturday, December 03, 2005 9:07 PM

Re: Thenkalai Vadakalai difference during marriage

Dear Sir,Thanks for a crisp summary of what two kalai's believe.Seems to me that

differences are subtle.Although I was born to vadagali family, actuallyTenkalai

seems more practical for moksha.However, even more pragmatic for moksha is what

the Lord says in Charama shloka, as is (without the complications/limitations

imposed by the kalais),because both kalais differ (as reproduced below) from

the direct message of Charama shloka,where God promises moksha to everyone who

surrenders.>>The Lord can be accused of partiality or unkindness, if He gives

moksha to some and not to others. Further, the Lord cannot grant moksha to all

people. So, the Vadakalai school says that the Lord's grace has to have some

reason, like the efforts by the individual soul. The Tenkalai school says that

the Lord's grace (kripa) is spontaneous. He grants moksha to those whom he

wishes <<Personally, I prefer what the Lord says in the Charama Shloka, as

is.This makes Kalais more a matter of fellowship, tradition and ego.All these

crop up at times of grand events in one's lifelike marriage.... naturally, in

arranged marriages, peopleseek same kalai.In this context, ideally we should

equally respect both traditions,and let not impose one on the other. In

inter-kalai marriages and worship,accomodate both traditions as equally as

possible.If we rather superimpose both kalais with the ultra truth(charama

shloka as is), then the kalai differencesbecome even more

insignificant.dAsanK.S. tAtAchArAnand

Govindarajan <gurusevas (AT) (DOT) co.in>Sent: Sat,

03 Dec 2005 06:15:28 -0000 Thenkalai Vadakalai difference

during marriage Achrayan ThiruvadigaLE charaNam,Pranaamas to srivaishnavites

who are all making this group a great sathsangam. I'm a silent but regular

visitor to this sathsangam. Today I would like to pour my anxiety(aathangam)

before this group.When we (espically vaishnavites) start looking for varan for

our girls face many problems. One of the main hurdle is the kalai. As of

today our boys are well educated and positioned in a very good status. They can

very well differentiate between things. But as said by sri sri sadagopan iyengar

in one this message this boys earn more spend more, ignoring our sampradayam.As

soon as the horscope is taken for marriage proposal they start behaving as if

they are the deep followers of our sampradayam. Without knowing the basic

difference between these two kalai start avoding the opposite subsect. Many

well educated girls with multiple degrees even doctor's degree were unable to

get married.Herewith I had given the article from Srivaishnavan.com which had

given clear clarification for the both the kalai's.My sincere thanks to the

Srivaishnavan.com for giving such a clear clarification.The first one is about,

the position and nature of Lakshmi. The principle of Vadakalais is as follows:

1) Goddess Lakshmi has three characteristics. i) The first one is her

recommending and pleading role to Lord Narayana on behalf of the Jivatma.

(Purushakara). ii) The second one is that she is herself the means for

attaining salvation, just as Narayana is the means for attaining salvation

(upaya). iii) The third characteristic is that, she is also the object of

attainment (upeya). In Sri Vaikunta, she and Narayana are served by the

chetanas or Jivatmas after attaining moksha. 2) Lakshmi is Paramatma (along

with Narayana); and is not Jivatma. 3) Lakshmi is also infinite in nature

(vibhu), like Narayana.The Tenkalais accept Lakshmi's role as a mediator, i.e.

her recommendatory nature. They also accept that she, along with Narayana, is

the object of attainment, in Paramapada. But they do not accept the principle

that she is also the means of attaining salvation; i.e., that she is also an

upaya. 2) They say Lakshmi is a Jivatma. 4) Lakshmi is atomic in nature.Another

point of difference is about the status of the Jivatma who attains Kaivalya.

Those who have performed Jnana Yoga perceive and enjoy their own souls. This is

called Kaivalya. Vadakalai school holds that Kaivalya is inferior to Paramapada

or Moksha. It is not eternal; and the soul finally reaches Paramapada. So

Kaivalya, according to the Vadakalai school, is situated outside Sri Vaikunta.

The Tenkalai school also accepts that Kaivalya is inferior. But they state that

these souls enjoy Kaivalya eternally in the Paramapada or Sri Vaikunta only, in

the outer most parts.The Vadakalai school accepts both bhakti and prapatti as

the means for attainment of moksha. The Tenkalai school does not accept bhakti

as a means or upaya. They state that accepting or adopting bhakti yoga as a

means is against the nature of the dependent soul. The soul is absolutely

dependent on the Lord. So, he should not, by himself, adopt bhakti yoga.The

Vadakalai school states that prapatti has to be a positive, specific act of

surrender, by the Jivatma to the Lord. The Tenkalai school does not consider

that a positive act of surrender is necessary. They say that i) knowledge of

the essential nature of the Jivatma, and ii) mental acceptance (non-rejection)

on the part of the Jivatma to Iswara granting him salvation, are required. So

the Jivatma need not specifically adopt any means for salvation, as a positive

act. He may, however, do good things and service to God, for the pleasure of

the Lord.The Vadakalai school holds that a positive effort is necessary, on the

part of the Jivatma to attain the Lord's grace. The Lord can be accused of

partiality or unkindness, if He gives moksha to some and not to others.

Further, the Lord cannot grant moksha to all people. So, the Vadakalai school

says that the Lord's grace has to have some reason, like the efforts by the

individual soul. The Tenkalai school says that the Lord's grace (kripa) is

spontaneous. He grants moksha to those whom He likes. The Vadakalai philosophy

is compared with the practice of the monkey (markata nyaya). In the case of a

monkey, the child must cling or attach itself to the mother. Similarly, the

Jivatma has to make some efforts to gain Lord's grace. The Tenkalai school is

compared to the cat system. In the case of a cat, the mother cat holds the

child cat, in its mouth and moves about (marjara nyaya). Similarly, Tenkalai

school states that it is the Lord, who grants favours to those, whom He

likes.The next difference is the Lord's attitude towards the sinners. The

Tenkalai school states that the sins of a devotee are pleasing to the Lord;

just like the dirt in the wife's body is pleasing to the husband; or the dirt

in the calfs body is pleasing to the mother cow. The Vadakalais say: The Lord

ignores or does not see the sins of the devotee. In the examples given, the

husband or the mother cow does not hate the wife or the calf, respectively,

because of the dirt. The dirt however is in due course cleaned. Similarly, the

sins of a devotee are not seen by the Lord.Yes, another point of difference is

about performance of compulsory duties, like Sandhyavandana and others. 9) The

Tenkalai school holds that for an exalted person, who is ready to receive the

Lord's grace,it is not an offence to give up the performance of these

compulsory duties. -But they do these compulsory duties, so as to set an

example to ordinary persons; because, following the example of such great

personalities others also should not give up their performance of compulsory

duties. The Vadakalai schools holds that the performance of compulsory duties

has been laid down by the sastras. So, these have to be done as laid down, by

all persons. Non-performance of these is a sin, which will attract God's

punishment.The Tenkalai school holds that in the first part in the charama

sloka, "giving up all the dharmas" means that, all dharmas must be given up

first, before seeking refuge in the Lord. The Vadakalai school states that

these dharmas actually refer to the different vidyas, in the bhakti yoga. These

vidyas have already been given up by the Jivatma, due to his inability; and that

this is a statement of fact.The Tenkalai school states that the Lord also

grieves when a person is suffering. They quote the authority from Ramayana,

where it is said that Rama becomes grief-stricken at the sorrow of human

beings. The Vadakalai school says: A person has to feel sorry, for somebody's

grief, only if he is not able to remove the grief of the other person. When a

person has the capacity to remove another man's grief, there is no need for him

to feel sorry. He will remove the other man's grief. Similarly, the Lord has got

the powers to remove a person's grief. So, there is no need for Him to feel

sorry. He will remove the grief of the humanbeing. It is stated in Ramayana,

that Rama was feeling sorrow at the people's sorrow for two reasons: 1) Good

people who see that in the avataras, like Rama or Krishna, He also feels sorry,

develop further affection towards Rama or Krishna and thus do good deeds. 2)

Bad, or wicked people, seeing the Lord also grieving, think that He is also a

human being like themselves; and thus, do wicked things and suffer.The Vedas

say that the Lord is smaller than the smallest; and is bigger than the biggest.

The Lord is present everywhere. The Vadakalai school states that the Lord's

being inside an atom means that the Lord is present even in an atom. Similarly,

when it is stated that the Lord is bigger than the biggest, or, infinite; this

means that the. Lord is also there, wherever such infinite things like Time

are. The Tenkalai school states that the Lord is also inside the atom and

similarly He also envelops the infinite things, like Time, because of His

special powers.I request all the srivaishnavites to thik about this atleast

today,So that our vaishnavam will get a strong pillars.with pranaamsAnand

-------- * Visit your group "" on the web. *

 

* Your use of is subject

to the --------

[Guest guest]

5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"> Achrayan ThiruvadigaLE

charaNam, Pranaamas to srivaishnavites who are all making this group a great

sathsangam. I'm a silent but regular visitor to this sathsangam. Today I

would like to pour my anxiety(aathangam) before this group. When we (espically

vaishnavites) start looking for varan for our girls face many problems. One of

the main hurdle is the kalai. As of today our boys are well educated and

positioned in a very good status. They can very well differentiate between

things. But as said by sri sri sadagopan iyengar in one this message this boys

earn more spend more, ignoring our sampradayam. As soon as the horscope is

taken for marriage proposal they start behaving as if they are the deep

followers of our sampradayam. Without knowing the basic difference between

these two kalai start avoding the opposite subsect. Many well educated girls

with

multiple degrees even doctor's degree were unable to get married. Herewith I had

given the article from Srivaishnavan.com which had given clear clarification for

the both the kalai's. My sincere thanks to the Srivaishnavan.com for giving such

a clear clarification. The first one is about, the position and nature of

Lakshmi. The principle of Vadakalais is as follows: 1) Goddess Lakshmi has

three characteristics. i) The first one is her recommending and pleading role

to Lord Narayana on behalf of the Jivatma. (Purushakara). ii) The second one is

that she is herself the means for attaining salvation, just as Narayana is the

means for attaining salvation (upaya). iii) The third characteristic is that,

she is also the object of attainment (upeya). In Sri Vaikunta, she and Narayana

are served by the chetanas or Jivatmas after attaining moksha. 2) Lakshmi is

Paramatma (along with

Narayana); and is not Jivatma. 3) Lakshmi is also infinite in nature (vibhu),

like Narayana. The Tenkalais accept Lakshmi's role as a mediator, i.e. her

recommendatory nature. They also accept that she, along with Narayana, is the

object of attainment, in Paramapada. But they do not accept the principle that

she is also the means of attaining salvation; i.e., that she is also an upaya.

2) They say Lakshmi is a Jivatma. 4) Lakshmi is atomic in nature. Another

point of difference is about the status of the Jivatma who attains Kaivalya.

Those who have performed Jnana Yoga perceive and enjoy their own souls. This is

called Kaivalya. Vadakalai school holds that Kaivalya is inferior to Paramapada

or Moksha. It is not eternal; and the soul finally reaches Paramapada. So

Kaivalya, according to the Vadakalai school, is situated outside Sri Vaikunta.

The Tenkalai school also accepts that

Kaivalya is inferior. But they state that these souls enjoy Kaivalya eternally

in the Paramapada or Sri Vaikunta only, in the outer most parts. The Vadakalai

school accepts both bhakti and prapatti as the means for attainment of moksha.

The Tenkalai school does not accept bhakti as a means or upaya. They state that

accepting or adopting bhakti yoga as a means is against the nature of the

dependent soul. The soul is absolutely dependent on the Lord. So, he should

not, by himself, adopt bhakti yoga. The Vadakalai school states that prapatti

has to be a positive, specific act of surrender, by the Jivatma to the Lord.

The Tenkalai school does not consider that a positive act of surrender is

necessary. They say that i) knowledge of the essential nature of the Jivatma,

and ii) mental acceptance (non-rejection) on the part of the Jivatma to Iswara

granting him salvation, are required. So the Jivatma need not

specifically adopt any means for salvation, as a positive act. He may, however,

do good things and service to God, for the pleasure of the Lord. The Vadakalai

school holds that a positive effort is necessary, on the part of the Jivatma to

attain the Lord's grace. The Lord can be accused of partiality or unkindness, if

He gives moksha to some and not to others. Further, the Lord cannot grant moksha

to all people. So, the Vadakalai school says that the Lord's grace has to have

some reason, like the efforts by the individual soul. The Tenkalai school says

that the Lord's grace (kripa) is spontaneous. He grants moksha to those whom He

likes. The Vadakalai philosophy is compared with the practice of the monkey

(markata nyaya). In the case of a monkey, the child must cling or attach itself

to the mother. Similarly, the Jivatma has to make some efforts to gain Lord's

grace. The Tenkalai school is compared to the cat system. In the case of a cat,

the

mother cat holds the child cat, in its mouth and moves about (marjara nyaya).

Similarly, Tenkalai school states that it is the Lord, who grants favours to

those, whom He likes. The next difference is the Lord's attitude towards the

sinners. The Tenkalai school states that the sins of a devotee are pleasing to

the Lord; just like the dirt in the wife's body is pleasing to the husband; or

the dirt in the calfs body is pleasing to the mother cow. The Vadakalais say:

The Lord ignores or does not see the sins of the devotee. In the examples

given, the husband or the mother cow does not hate the wife or the calf,

respectively, because of the dirt. The dirt however is in due course cleaned.

Similarly, the sins of a devotee are not seen by the Lord. Yes, another point

of difference is about performance of compulsory duties, like Sandhyavandana

and others. 9) The Tenkalai school holds that for an exalted person,

who is ready to receive the Lord's grace,it is not an offence to give up the

performance of these compulsory duties. -But they do these compulsory duties,

so as to set an example to ordinary persons; because, following the example of

such great personalities others also should not give up their performance of

compulsory duties. The Vadakalai schools holds that the performance of

compulsory duties has been laid down by the sastras. So, these have to be done

as laid down, by all persons. Non-performance of these is a sin, which will

attract God's punishment. The Tenkalai school holds that in the first part in

the charama sloka, "giving up all the dharmas" means that, all dharmas must be

given up first, before seeking refuge in the Lord. The Vadakalai school states

that these dharmas actually refer to the different vidyas, in the bhakti yoga.

These vidyas have already been given up by the Jivatma, due to his inability;

and that this is a statement

of fact. The Tenkalai school states that the Lord also grieves when a person is

suffering. They quote the authority from Ramayana, where it is said that Rama

becomes grief-stricken at the sorrow of human beings. The Vadakalai school

says: A person has to feel sorry, for somebody's grief, only if he is not able

to remove the grief of the other person. When a person has the capacity to

remove another man's grief, there is no need for him to feel sorry. He will

remove the other man's grief. Similarly, the Lord has got the powers to remove

a person's grief. So, there is no need for Him to feel sorry. He will remove

the grief of the humanbeing. It is stated in Ramayana, that Rama was feeling

sorrow at the people's sorrow for two reasons: 1) Good people who see that in

the avataras, like Rama or Krishna, He also feels sorry, develop further

affection towards Rama or Krishna and thus do good deeds. 2) Bad, or wicked

people, seeing the Lord also

grieving, think that He is also a human being like themselves; and thus, do

wicked things and suffer. The Vedas say that the Lord is smaller than the

smallest; and is bigger than the biggest. The Lord is present everywhere. The

Vadakalai school states that the Lord's being inside an atom means that the

Lord is present even in an atom. Similarly, when it is stated that the Lord is

bigger than the biggest, or, infinite; this means that the. Lord is also there,

wherever such infinite things like Time are. The Tenkalai school states that the

Lord is also inside the atom and similarly He also envelops the infinite things,

like Time, because of His special powers. I request all the srivaishnavites to

thik about this atleast today,So that our vaishnavam will get a strong pillars.

with pranaams Anand

RAJARAMAN

Enjoy this Diwali with Y! India Click here