Question on Sri sampradaya - I am getting two versions (Please clarify)

[Guest guest]

I would like to get the truth about these issues,

Q1:

Is it true that Manavalamamunigal asked all to follow

desika sampradaya as is claimed in GPP3000 (as in this mail)

 

Q2: Is it true that Lord of Srirangam order as:

A: "we will not desire listening to anything else,

but only Desika prabhandam"

 

B: "no one after Vedanta desikan must be installed as

'archa' and offered mariyadai in our sannidhi."

 

Q3: Why is GPP3000 so different than GPP6000.

Why are they very much against each other?

 

There are so many issues in the mail, please read and clarify.

If these are true, What is a devotee to accept.

 

======================================================

Parthasarati Dileepan <dileepan@u...>

 

The tale two Taniyans

Sat, 20 Apr 2002 14:17:35 -0400

 

srIman venkata nathArya kavitArkika kesari |

vedAntacArya varyome sannidatthAm sadAhrudi ||

 

rAmAnuja dayApAtram jnAna vairAgya bhUshaNam |

srImat venkatanAthAryam vande vedAntha desikam ||

 

A detailed account of the origin and wide reverential

adoption of these two taniyans is given in

pp. 196 – 205 of muvvAyirappadi guruparamparA

prabhAvam by Srimad tritIya brahma tanthra

swatanthra Swami of Srimad Parakala MaTham

published by LIFCO, 1968.

 

Sri Vaishnavam is blessed with two major Guru Parampara

Prabhavam (GPP) texts. One is ARAyirappadi GPP by Srimad

Pinbazhagiya Perumal Jeeyar (PPJ), a sishya of Sri Nampillai.

This text starts with Sriman Narayana, of course, and

includes all the Azhvars, all the Acharyas up to Bhagavad

Ramanuja, and after Sri Ramanuja, the text follows the

Acharya line of Embar, Bhattar, Nanjeeyar, and finally

Nampillai.

 

The second important GPP is mUvAyirappadi GPP by Srimad

Trutheeya brahma tantra swatantra Jeeyar Swami. This

text also starts with Sriman Narayana, obviously, and

covers the same line of Azhvars and Acharyas up to

Bhagavad Ramanuja. After Sri Ramanauja, the text

briefly covers only the Acharyas with direct "thirumudi"

connection with Swami Vedantha Desikan, namely, Kidambi

Achchan, ThirukkurugaipirAn PiLLAn, EngaLAzhvAn, Nadadur

AmmAL, and AppiLLAr, etc. Then Swami Sri Desikan is

covered extensively. After Swami Sri Desikan, the two

direct Samsryana Acharyas namely, Nayinarachariyar and

Brahmatantnra Swatantra Swami, followed by PrativAdi

Bayangaram Annan Swami vaibhavam are covered in some

detail. Finally, several Acharyas including Srimad

Adivan Satakopan and Manavala MAmunigaL are briefly

mentioned.

 

There are many key differences between 6000 GPP and

3000 GPP, particularly with respect to incidences from

Bhagavad Ramanuja's vaibhavam. Of the two, 3000 GPP

is accepted as the authentic account of GPP by Sri

Desika Sampradaya line of Acharyas.

 

There are some interesting passages from 3000 GPP that

adiyEn would like to share with our members.

 

Desika prabhandham for Dhivya Dampati during Panguni Uttiram

(From the account of Swami NainArAcAryAr pp. 219 -222)

----------------------------

After Swami Sri Desikan's ascendance to Paramapadam,

NayinArAcAryAr and Brahma Tantra Swatantra Jeeyar Swami

toured all over India. During their tours they established

Swami Sri Desikan's Dhivya Mangala Vigrahas in many temples.

We see these Vighrahas to this day even if the sampradayam

has changed hands.

 

Finally, Sri NayinArAcAryAr arrived in Sri Rangam and stayed

there instructing sishyas in Sri Bhashyam. One Panguni

Uttiram day, after Thirumanjanam when Namperumal and Sri

Ranganachchiyar were together in sErththi, Sri NayinArAcAryAr

and Brahma Tantra Swatantra Jeeyar Swami rendered the following

two soul stirring songs from Amruta Swathini (#9 and #31):

 

ennadhu yaan seykinREn ennAthArukku

innadimai thandhaLippAn imaiyOr vaazhum

ponnulagil thiruvudanE amarndha nAdhan

punalArum pozhil arangan thigazha mannith

than agalam agalAdha thagavAlOngum

thagavudanE than karumam thAnE yeNNi

annaiyena adaikkalam kondu ancal thandhu

en azhalARa nizhalAra aLikkinRAnE.

 

(The Lord who is served by Nithyasoorees in

Sri Vaikuntam is waiting in Sri Rangam to

grant the kankarya Sri here and now to those

free of ahankaram and mamakaram. His natural

compassion towards Chetanas grows without

bound due to His association with PirAtti

who is eternally resident upon His chest.

He, like my compassionate mother who makes it

Her duty to protect, is bestowing upon me the

cool shade of His lotus feet and eliminates

all my Samasaric grief.)

 

 

ninnaruLAM gadhiyanRi maRRonRu illEn

nedungAlam pizhai seydha nilai kazhindhEn

unnaruLukku inidhAna nilai ugandhEn

un saraNE saraNennunm thuNivu poondEn

manniruLaay ninRa nilaiy enakkuth theerththu

vAnavar tham vAzhchchi thara variththEn unnai

innaruLAl ini enakkOr baram ERRAmal

en thirumAl adaikkalm koL ennai neeyE

 

(But for your grace I have to other refuge,

I have abandoned my long held ways of causing

offense; I am desirous of prapatti to receive

your grace; I am determined that your lotus

feet are the only refuge; please remove the

darkness of ignorance; I am clutching your feet

for the life of Nityasoorees; due to your cool

grave without any burden to me, please provide

me with your protection.)

This pasuram explains prapatti and its five angas.

 

Through the Archakas Divya Dampati enquired, "You have

sung the songs that reveal the essence of Udaiyavar's Gadya

Thraiyam composed on this Panguni Uttiram day. What do you

desire from us?" Sri NayinArAcAryar beseeched the Dhivya

Dampati to grant their ears for the recitation of Sri Desika

Prabhandham. Namperumal and Sri Ranganachiyar immediately

decreed to the Araiyar to do so. Thus began the tradition

of reciting Desika Prabhandam during Panguni Uttiram day at

Sri Rangam. At this time PillAi antAdi was also recited

after Sri Desika Prabhandam.

 

At the conclusion of the recitation, Namperumal and Sri

Ranga Nacciyar conveyed two important pronouncements

through the Archakas,

 

(i) "after hearing the prabhandham of Vedanta desikan,

the one who has secured ramanuja siddantam without

any error through many texts, we will not desire

listening to anything else," and,

(ii) "no one after Vedanta desikan must be installed as

'archa' and offered mariyadai in our sannidhi."

 

(here is text from the moolam:

"nammudaiya sannidhiyil nam vEdhAntha dhEsikanukku

piRpattavarai arcchaiyAga vaiththu varisaigaL nadaththa vENduvathillai")

 

(Question: To my knowledge this is out of practice these days.

Does anyone know when the change took place?)

 

Parakala Matam and Thiruvengadam

(From the account of Swami Brahmatantra Swatantra Jeeyar (BSJ), pp. 225)

------

Sri NayinArAchAryar's sancharam took the Acharya and his

sishyas to Thiruvengadam. During their stay, Thiruvengadam-

udaiyan appeared in Swami BSJ's dream and commanded him to

stay on at Thirumalai and take over the administration of

the temple. Further, the Lord also appeared in the dream

of the officials and commanded them to hand over the temple

keys and insignia to Swami BSJ. As Swami BSJ was narrating

his dream to Sri NayinArAchAryar, the temple officials came

looking for Sri BSJ Swami. Then, with the blessings of Sri

NayinArAchchAriyar, Swami BSJ started looking after the

administration of the temple besides continuing to teach

Sri Bhashyam, etc to his disciples. Swami BSJ also built

a Matam at Thirumalai. He installed Swami Sri Desikan's

dhivya mangala vigraham at the Matam and at Sri Govindarajan

Sannidhi in Keezh Thiruppati. During this time several

sishyas studied under Swami BSJ including Gadikasadam Ammal,

who later became Acharya for Srimad Athivan Satakopa Jeeyar.

 

(Question: What is the present association between Sri

Parkala Matam and Thriuvengadam? )

 

Prativati Bayangaram Annan (PBA) (page 229)

----------

Upon the command of Sri NayinArAchAriyar, Sri PBA Swami

moved to Sri Rangam and was delivering Sri Bhashya kAlakshepam.

At this time Sri Manavala Mamunigal (MM) was also delivering

kAlakshepam on Bhagavad Vishyam. Sri MM instructed some of

his sishyas to join the Sri Bhashya goshti with Sri PBA Swami.

In course of time these sishyas including eRumbiyappa observed

some differences between the teachings of Swami Sri Desikan

offered by Sri PBA Swami and the instructions they were

receiving from Sri MM Swami. These sishyas objected to this.

Unable to tolerate the objections, Sri PBA Swami submitted

Swami Sri Desikan's interpretations at the lotus feet of Lord

Ranganatha and beseeched the Lord to correct him in case he

had erred. But the Lord responded by offering his garland

and other mariyAdai right in front of the objectors for them

to see. Swami NayinArAcAryar was pleased to hear these events.

 

Sri Manavala Mamunigal (MM) page 234

---

Sri MM Swami approached Kidambi Nayinar aka Purushotama

Desikar at Kanchi and studied Sri Bhashyam and desika dhivya

sri sukthees. In his old age Sri MM directed his disciples

not to install an archa vigharaham for him in accordance with

the edict of Periya Perumal and Sri Ranga Nachchiyar. Further,

he instructed that only Sri Desika Sapradayam is sat-sampradayam.

The text from moolam is as follows:

 

"tham sarama dhasaiyilum periya perumAL

sriranganAcchiyAr niyamanppadikku srimad

vEdhAntha dhEsikanukku piRpatta thamakku

archchAdhigaL vENduvathillai enRu thammai

Asrayaiththa mudhaligaLukkum niyamiththu aruLi,

vEdhAntha dhEsikan sampradhAyamE sathsampradAyam

enRu kAtti aruLinAr."

 

 

Athivan Satakopan

-----------------

The last Acharya covered very briefly by 3000 GPP is Srimad

Athivan Satakopa Jeeyar. It is interesting for me to find a

connection between the Acharya line illuminated by 6000 GPP

and that of 3000 GPP with respect to this Jeeyar.

 

It is well known that Sri Bhashyakarar established 74

simhasanathpathees for the propagation of Samsrayana paramaparai.

3000 GPP states that among these 74 simhasanathipati, Sri

Ramanuja selected four and granted them the privilege of

teaching Sri Bhashyam. They are Kidambi AchchAn,

ThirukkurugaipirAn piLLAn, MudaliANdAn, and Nadadur AzhvAn.

These four are Sri Bhashya Simhasanathipathees. Among these

four, ThirukkurugaipirAn piLLan is the only Sri Bhashya, Sri

Bhagavad Vishaya ubhaya simhasanathipathi. These line merge

with Swami Sri Desikan and emerges through NayinArAchchAn and

Brahmatantra Swatantra Jeeyar Swami down to Gadikasadam Ammal.

 

Where as, Srimad Athivan Satakopa Swami's samasrayana paramparai

come down through Embar, Bahattar all the way down to his own

divine father Sri Kesavacharyar Swami. Srimad Athivan Satakopa

Swami studied shasthras, rahasyarthAs, Sri Bhashyam, Srimad

Bhagavad Vishyam, etc., from Gadikasadam Ammal. Thus, Srimad

Athivan Satakopa Jeeyar swami is the first Acharya to merge

the two great branches into a single line of Acharyas, Sri

Ahobila Matam Srimad Azhagiya Singars.

 

-- adiyEn ramanuaja dasan

srimad azhagiya singar thiruvadi

 

 

 

===================================================================

Dear bhaktas:

 

At the time of triteeya parakAlaswAmi's ascent to Sri

VaikunTham (1406 C.E.) - azhagiya maNavALa perumAL (later

to become maNavALa mahAmuni) was a young householder who

had not yet headed north to Srirangam (from his birth

place in AzhwAr thirunagari), or taken up sanyAsam.

 

Clearly, the moovayirappadi GPP is a document dating at

least one century prior to the yatIndra pravaNa prabhAvam -

which states that the thaniyan of maNavALa mAmunigaL was

uttered during the year 1430 C.E.

 

The reinstatement of thiruvadhyaya utsavam by Swami deSikan,

and the divine command of periya perumAL re: the chanting

of rAmAnuja dayA pAtram in ALL SriVaishnava homes and kovils

(as per moovayirappadi GPP) occurred around 1360 C.E., more

than two generations prior to the emergence of maNavALa

mAmunigaL's thaniyan.

 

adiyEn

-Srinath C.

 

===================================================================

Parthasarati Dileepan <dileepan@u...>

Sat Apr 27, 2002 4:32 pm

Two GPP texts

 

 

 

 

 

 

sri:

Srimate Srilakshminrisimha Parabrahmane Nama:

Srimate Sri Lakshminrisimha Divyapadukasevaka

Srivan Satakopa Sri NarayanaYatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

 

namo narayana!

 

 

p.s. adiyEn has tried to be as faithful to the original

text as possible giving the exact original where ever

appropriate. This post is intended to give the perspective

of our Acharya paramparai. Please refrain from initiating

polemical arguments.

 

 

 

 

 

 

===================================================================

===================================================================

Parthasarati Dileepan wrote:

 

(i) "after hearing the prabhandham of Vedanta desikan,

the one who has secured ramanuja siddantam without

any error through many texts, we will not desire

listening to anything else," and,

(ii) "no one after Vedanta desikan must be installed as

'archa' and offered mariyadai in our sannidhi."

 

(here is text from the moolam:

"nammudaiya sannidhiyil nam vEdhAntha dhEsikanukku

piRpattavarai arcchaiyAga vaiththu varisaigaL nadaththa vENduvathillai")

 

(Question: To my knowledge this is out of practice these days.

Does anyone know when the change took place?)

 

Dear Sri Dileepan:

As far as the first one (reg. Desika Prabhandham) I am not sure when it was

stopped. But as far as the second thing is concerned, that is "no one after

Vedanta Desikan must be intalled as Archa" is still true. In SriRangam Swami

Desikan was the last Acharya to have an archa inside the temple. Even Sri

Mamunigal's sannidhi is on the Uththra Veedhi(at the Pallvaraya Madam) and

not

within the temple complex. There are several arguements over this issue of

Swami Mamunigal's sannidhi outside the main temple complex. Whatever the

arguements the fact remains that Swami Desikan is the last Achaya to have an

Archa and a sannidhi inside the temple complex who used to have all the

temple

honors during the major uthsavams. And until 18th century or early 19th

century

temple records are there at Srirangam (even Sri Thennacharya sampradhayam

people will accept it) that Swami Desikan was the last Acharyan to get the

temple honors during the Adhyayana Uthsavams and other uthsavams. But when

th

e kalai fights started involving Swami Desikan's Sannidhi(sometime early

Nineteenth century) the temple honors were stopped for Swami Desikan in

Srirangam.

 

Ramanujadasan Kannan

===================================================================

===================================================================

"Krishna Kashyap" <kkalale1@s...>

Sat Apr 27, 2002 7:26 pm

RE: Re: Two GPP texts

 

I thank sri Dileepan and Sri AMR Kannan for letting us know about these

historical issues. Honestly since I grew up away from any religious center

such as srirangam, this information is valuable for me to understand the

different issues. I think if some one writes a series about these two books

as to how these different paramparas existed including the kalai issues if

they are presented in an academic way for an intellectual assessment, it

will be very valuable for us. As indicated by Dileepan, I guess these email

lists have some value for us who are sparsely spread across the US and world

for that matter. hence for us who are subscribing to these channels of

information, it will be valuable if someone writes such details quoting

original pramanas so that we can enjoy our rich heritage.

 

this morning, I came to know from HH parakalamutt swamy about the fact that

Bramha tantra parakalamutt jeer I, was sribhasya / sanskrit text acharya for

Ghatikasatam ammal ( acharya of Adivan Satakopar) and Kidambi Acchan,

Acharya of Manavala Mamuni ( for Sribhasyam). HH also mentioned about how

Parakalamutt moved to Tirupati and Mysore. History and Stories are a nice

way to associate us with our acharyas.

===================================================================

===================================================================

Parthasarati Dileepan <dileepan@u...>

Sun Apr 28, 2002 5:00 pm

Regarding Prapatti

sri:

Srimate Srilakshminrisimha Parabrahmane Nama:

Srimate Sri Lakshminrisimha Divyapadukasevaka

Srivan Satakopa Sri NarayanaYatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

 

namo narayana!

 

Prapatti in general is an act of total and

unconditional surrender to the lotus feet of

Lord Sriman Narayana for the fruit of nithya

kainkaryam for the Dhivya Dampati in Sri

Vaikuntam, aka moksham. A person will get

motivated to perform Prapatti when two

conditions are true, (i) Akincanyam, and (ii)

ananya gatitvam. These two relate to one's

desire for mOksham, but inability to secure it

through one's own effort. Akinchanyam refers

to one's inability to perform Bhakti Yogam as

mOkshOpAyam. "ananya gatitvam" refers to the

condition that we have no other upAyam for

mOksham other than prapatti. "ananyagatitvam

may also be interpreted as total faith in no

one other than Lord Sriman Narayana. However,

Srimad Azhagiya Singar points out in the

current issue of Sri Nrisimha Priya, the

primary meaning for "ananya gatitvam" is the

former meaning, i.e. other than prapatti there

is no other mOkshOpAyam.

 

The actual prapatti is characterized by five

angAs, namely AnukUlya sankalpam, prAtikUlya

varjanam, gOpthruthvavaraNam, kArpaNyam, and

mahAvisvAsam. Here, the mahAvisvAsam refers to

unshakable faith that Lord Sriman Narayana will

accept this simple act of prapatti and put

Himself in place of Bhakti Yogam for mOksham.

 

This act of prapatti may be performed through

three different means, swanishtai, ukti nishtai,

and AcArya nishtai, based on one's level of

knowledge, understanding, and the tradition.

 

Prapatti can be done for immediate effect, i.e.

to ascend to mOksham immediately after the

performance of prapatti. This is called Artha

prapatti. Or, more commonly, thrupta prapatti

is performed and this will result in mOksham at

the end of present life. There is enormous

justification for Thrupta prapatti. Refer to

Srimad Azhagiya Singar's commentary on Srimad

Rahasya Traiya Saram (RTS) appearing in Sri

Nrisimha priya.

 

All of us misunderstand some aspects of

Prapatti at one time or another. These

misunderstandings can be eliminated only

through prolonged study under a sadacharyan.

Far be it for me to claim deep knowledge.

With this disclaimer adiyEn would like to

present the following about Sri PiLLai

Lokacaryar's views from Sri Vacana BhUshaNam.

 

First, the act of prapatti only remedies the

Bhagavan's anger towards us and opens the gate

for the ocean of Lord Sriman Narayana's grace

to flow. Prapatti must be recognized only as

sAdyOpAyam, i.e. a means to appeal to

siddOpAyam which is the actual means for

mOksham. In other words, prapatti as

sAdyOpAyam is NOT a direct means for mOksham.

It only acts as a sort of catalyst.

SAdyOpAyam, i.e. prapatti, invokes the ever

present siddOpAyam, i.e. Sriman Narayana's

grace. Then, the compassion of Lord Sriman

Narayana (siddopAyam) accepts the feeble

prapatti we do and He Himself takes the place

of Bhakti Yogam. Thus Sriman Narayana is real

upAyam for mOksham. In fact the primary

beneficiary of our prapatti is also Sarveswaran

only.

 

Now, adiyEn would like to address the view of

Swami Sri piLLai LokAcAryar (PL) on the subject

of Prapatti. Is there a difference of view

between prapatti as taught to us by our Acharya

paramparai and that of Sri PL? After all, Sri

PL states in Sri Vacana bUshaNam #54,

 

"idhu thannai pArtthAl, pitAvukkup,

putran ezhutthu vAngumAppOlE iruppathonRu"

 

"prapatti for mOksham is like a son asking

his father to give it in writing that he,

the father, will protect him, the son."

 

The implication is, protecting the son is not

just the prime duty of the father, but it is

the very essence of fatherhood. Therefore, it

is preposterous for the son to even think

of asking his father to commit to protecting

him in writing. Such an act betrays a deep

lack of faith in our Lord.

 

Sri PL also states in #142,

 

"ivan avanaip peRa ninaikkumpOdhu indha

prapattiyum upAyamanRu"

 

"when the jIvan wishes to attain Iswaran,

this prapatti is also not an upAyam"

 

There are many other statements in Sri vacana

bhushanam that seem to put down prapatti as a

means for mOksham. Some of these statements

are given below.

 

#124: "thAn daridhranAgaiyAlE thanakku

kodukkalAvadhu onRumillai"

 

"since he has no possession, there is

nothing for him to give"

 

#146: "Sarva aparAdhangaLukkum

prAyachchittamAna prapatti, thAnum aprAdha

kOdiyilElAy kshAmaNam paNNa vENdumpadi

nillA ninRadhiRE"

 

"Even though prapatti is a remedy for all

kinds of offenses, it also is a member of

offensive acts requiring supplication for

forgiveness for having adopted it."

 

#147: "nedu nAL anya paraiyayp pOndha

baryayai lajjA bayangal inRikkE, barthru

sahAsaththilE ninRu, "ennai angIkarikka

vENum" enRu abEkshikkumA pole iruppathu

onRiRE ivan paNNum prapatti"

 

"The prapatti he does is like a long-time

unfaithful wife comes in front of her

husband, without any shame or fear, and

asks to be accepted by him."

 

However, Sri PL also states in #134,

"prapatti upAyatthukku ikkuRRangaL

onRumillai"

 

"prapatti is free of any of these defects"

 

Here, Sri PL is referring to faults associated

with upAsaNa, i.e. prapatti is free of defects

in upAsanA. Regardless, #134 does praise

prapatti.

 

What is it then? Is prapatti a means without

blemish? Or is it a conceited act to be

avoided? While Sri PL repeatedly admonishes

that prapatti must not be considered as upAyam

for mOksham, he also declares that prapatti,

unlike upAsanA, is free of any defects. How do

we reconcile these two contradictory views from

the same author?

 

The key for resolving this apparent contradiction

can be found in Srimad Rahasya Thraiya Saram (RTS)

chapter #23, SiddopAya sodhanA adhikAram.

 

"… AgaiyAl, prapattiyum kUda upAyamanRu

enRu silar athivAtham paNNukiradhuvum

siddOpAyattinudaiya prAdhAnyamadiyAga

iththanai…"

 

"some exaggerate that even prapatti is not

a means (upAyam). The basis for this

exaggeration is to emphasize the

prominence of siddOpAyam"

 

The apparent contradiction in Sri PL's

statements vanishes if we revisit them with

this clarification from Swami Sri Desikan.

 

First, the statement about son trying to get

his father's commitment to protect in writing.

 

"idhu thannai pArtthAl, pitAvukkup, putran

ezhutthu vAngumAppOlE iruppathonRu" #54

 

The phrase "idhu thannai pArkkil" means if

you consider the prapatti we perform as an

independent means for mOksham, then, and only

then, it would be like the son asking for a

written commitment from his father for

protection. This is not inconsistent with the

teachings of our Sampradayam. We have to keep

in mind the preeminence of Sriman Narayana's

compassion in mind relative to our prapatti

which only serves the purpose of removing the

Lord's anger towards us for the sins we have

been committing from beginingless time. We

have to have Mahaviswasam that our puny

prapatti will indeed melt His anger away and

His natural vAtsalyam and kAruNyam will then

come to the fore and Sriman Narayana Himself

will stand in place of Bhakti Yogam on our

behalf and grant us mOksham. Thus, we must

never think that the prapatti we perform is the

reason we get mOksham. It is Sriman Narayana

who is the real upAyam. This is what is

emphasized by Sri PL. Sri PL accepts the need

for prapatti just as much as our sampradayam.

All other statements that seem to put down

prapatti can be resolved in a similar fashion.

The intent of Sri PL is to guard us from the

real danger of complacently falling into the

thought that our prapatti is the cause for

mOksham.

 

Now let us look at one more statement of Sri

PL, #135:

 

"Athma yAdAthma jnyAna kAryamAgaiyAlE

svarUpaththukku ucithamumAy, "siRRa vENdA"

enkiRa padiyE nivrutthi Sadyam AgaiyAlE

sukaramumAy irukkum"

 

"The knowledge resulting from realizing the

true nature of jivAtmA, will lead one to

the appropriate state of inaction (for

mOksham) that is easy as well."

 

If we look at this statement as the post-

prapatti state, then inaction for moksham at

that state is consistent with the teachings of

our Acharya pramparai. However, if the

realization of the true nature itself is

considered as the act of prapatti, i.e. prapatti

is only a mental realization, not an act at

all, not even a mental act but only a state of

inaction not opposing the Lord's grace for

moksham, then there is a difference.

 

In Chapter 8 of Srimad RTS, Swami Sri Desikan

explains the different categories of mumukshus

(ones who crave for mOksham), such as sva

nishtan, ukti nishtan, and Acharya nishtan. In

Chapter 12 of Srimad RTS Swami Sri Desikan

describes the procedure for performing prapatti

referring to Swami's prAchAryan Sri Nadadur

AmmaL. In combination, these two chapters

propose action and prescribe a procedure for

it. Those who doubt whether Swami Sri Desikan

actually performed Bhara Nyasam as a separate

and overt act for mOksham need to study these

two Chapters in particular, and all the other

chapters as well for good measure.

 

>From Srimad RTS, Chapter #8:

 

"EdhEnum oru prakAramAgavum, ArEnum oruvar

anushtikkavumAm prapattikkalladhu

SarvESvaran parama purushArtham kodukka

irangAn enRadhAyiRRu"

 

"without someone performing the act of

prapatti, by adopting one of the

(appropriate) methods, Sarveswaran will

not condescend to grant parama

purushArtham."

 

In summary, the difference of view on the issue

of prapatti is very subtle. The writings of

Sri PL in fact allow us not to have any

difference at all. However, in practice there

is a difference.

 

-- adiyEn ramanuja dasan

srimad azhagiya singar thiruvadi

 

p.s. This post is intended to give the perspective

on prapatti for the members of Sri Malolan Net.

Pease refrain from initiating polemical arguments.

 

===================================================================

===================================================================

 

"R.Venkat" <venkat.raghavan@m...>

Mon Apr 29, 2002 6:36 am

Query on prapatti

 

Dear bhagavathas,

 

pranamams.

 

These days we are enjoying lucid postings of Sri Dileepan which are

written in a simple style with apt quotes from the works of acharyas.

Today's posting on Prapatti is superb one. adiyen has one doubt here.

 

Sri Dileepan wrote:

 

In summary, the difference of view on the issue of prapatti is very

subtle. The writings of Sri PL in fact allow us not to have any

difference at all. However, in practice there is a difference.

 

Query: Does it mean that PL suggests that no separate action has to

be done seeking the parama purushartam from perumal. adiyen heard

the views of current day followers of Sri Manavala maamuni sampradayam

is different among their various acharyas. adiyen also heard that

Sri Manavala maamuni's arthi prabandham itself is an act of surrender

at the lotus feet of Sri Ramanuja. Learned members may clarify this

doubt.

 

regards

 

dasan venkat

===================================================================

===================================================================

Parthasarati Dileepan <dileepan@u...>

Mon Apr 29, 2002 10:04 am

GPP by Dvitiya Brahmatantra Swamy

 

sri:

Srimate Srilakshminrisimha Parabrahmane Nama:

Srimate Sri Lakshminrisimha Divyapadukasevaka

Srivan Satakopa Sri NarayanaYatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

 

One more mail from Balaji!

 

Thanks Balaji for two nice and informative posts!

You are absolutely right, the thruteeyai Swami

refers to the GPP by dviteeyai Swami and even

has quoted some slokas from it. The loss of

this text to posterity is indeed a great loss

for not just our community but secular historians

as well.

 

 

-- adiyEn

 

---------------------------

Swamy Deshikan Thiruvadigale Sharanam !!!

 

The Guruparamparaprabhavam of Dvitiya Brahmatantra Swamy is a huge treatise

- PannirAyirappadi guruparampara prabhavam. unfortunately it a lost

treasure. Sri Tritiya Brahmatantra Swamy at amany places quotes stanzas and

prose from this work which I think was basically in Devanagari ? adiyEn made

a desperate attempt to aquire this work without knowing that it was totally

extinct. Paramahamsetyadi Sri Poundarikapuram Andavan once told me that Sri

Madhurantakam Swamy had a copy but was not found later.

 

Another great work which extensively brings about the life of Swamy Deshikan

is "Sri Vedantha Deshika Vijaya Champu". This is a mega work on our Deshikan

and runs into 200 pages. The entire work has six stabakas. Every stabaka has

around 100 verses and 10 gadyams. In all it makes around 500 shlokams and 90

gadyams.

 

Also, Deshika Sahasranamam composed by Thirukkudanthai Deshikan is of very

high value as far as Deshikan is concerned. The 50 other works on Deshikan

are a great source of knowledge as well as his biography.

 

vAzhi vyAkhyAmuddirak kai !!!

vedAnthasUricharaNau sharaNam prapadye !!!

--

===================================================================

===================================================================

 

Parthasarati Dileepan <dileepan@u...>

Thu May 2, 2002 2:57 pm

Varnam

sri:

Srimate Srilakshminrisimha Parabrahmane Nama:

Srimate Sri Lakshminrisimha Divyapadukasevaka

Srivan Satakopa Sri NarayanaYatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

 

namo narayana!

 

"ajnyar bramikkiRa varNa Asramna vidyA vruthtangaLai

kardhaba janmam, svapasAdhamam, silpa naipuNam,

paSmAhuthi, sava vidhavA alngAram enRu kazhippar."

 

"Only fools are confounded by vaRnam, Asramam, vidyA, and

anushtAnam. Their births are lowly, their knowledge is

useless, their vaidika karma is like "havis" given to ash.

They are analogous to bedecked corpse, or widow"

 

So says, Sri Azhagia Manavala Perumal Nayanar (AMPN), younger

brother of Sri Pillai Lokacharyar Swami, in "Acharya Hrudayam" #86.

 

Earlier in the same text, in #86, Sri AMPN declares,

 

"mlEcchanum bhaktanAnAl, chaturvEdigaL anuvarththikka

aRivu koduththuk, kula dheyvathhOdu okka pUjai koNdu,

pAvana thIrththa praSdhAnam, engiRa thirumugappadiyum …."

 

"In accord with the words of Bhagavan, even if a person is of

the lowest of low birth (mlEchchan), if he has Vishnu bhakti (8

aspects of bhakti), he is an "andhaNan" (Brahmin). Worship as

your kula dheyvam, accept his sri pAdha thIrtham."

 

Citations abound in Sri Vaishnava texts for revering all Sri Vasihnavas

without regard to VarNam. "paNdaik kulaththai thavirndhu" (discard

your hoary clan identity) says PeriyAzvar. The stories of Thiru

mazhisai piran, ThiruppANAzvar, and Nammazhvar clearly

demonstrate to us the need for utmost regard for all Sri Vaishnavas.

ThoNdaradippodi Azhvar in Thirmalai says to high and mighty vedic

brahmins, "thozhumin, kodumin, koLmin" (worship, give, and take)

from Sri Vaishnavas who are from the lowliest of low births.

PeriyavAccAn piLLai has commented on the term "thozumin" to

mean - falling at the feet of all Sri Vaishnavas without discrimination.

 

So, the message seems to be, if a person is a Vishnu Bhaktha, even if

he is from a very low birth, he must be treated as equal to an exalted

Brahmin, worshipped even to the extent of falling at his feet, and have

a give and take relationship. Anyone who thinks of caste, education,

anushtanam, etc., are fools.

 

Is this in line with the teachings of Sri Desika Sampradayam? Swami

Sri Desikan always gives surgically precise perspective without

exaggeration or understatement. What is Swami's teachings to us in

this regard. Swami Sri Deskan deals with this subject matter in mainly

in Chapter 25 of Srimad Rahasya Traiya Saram (RTS), "prabhAva

vyavastha adhikAram.

 

Kulam and jAti

--------------

Kulam refers to Vaishnava kulam, non-Vaishnava kulam. It can

change. But jAti is birth based. It cannot change. PeriyAzhvAr's

"paNdaikkulam thavirndhu" refers to relinquishing the previously held

"devatAntra kulam" (devathAnthrAdi sankIrNa kulam) and embracing

the "thONdar kulam (Sri Vaishnava kulam). Thus, PeriyAzvar was

not indicating the abandonment of one's birth based jAti and adopt a

new jAti. Swami says,

 

"jAti bhEdiyAdhu, kulam bhEdhikkum",

(jAti cannot change, kulam can).

 

If this is not so, all the jAti based duties prescribed by shasthrAs

and ordained by the Lord will become meaningless. In as much as there

are difference between castes among non-bhagavathas, there are

differences between castes among bhagavathas. The difference between

non-bhagavatha Brahmin and bhagavatha non-brahmin results in the later

gaining access to mOksham where equality prevails among all.

 

Azhvar

------

In general, Swami Sri Desikan admonishes that the life stories of

Azhvar's must not be cited as example to be adopted in our practice.

Swami says,

 

"vidurAthigaLilum utkrushta prabhAvarAna

AzhvArgaLudaiya vrutthAnta visEshangaLai nam

anushtAnaththukku drushtAntam Akkal AgAdu ."

 

In addition, Swami goes on,

 

"avargaL vruththAnthangaLaiyum ARAyndhAl Sva jAti

niyamaththai kadandhami illai."

 

(even if we investigate the azhvar's life stories we find that

they did not break the limits of their own jAti.)

 

mlEchcha Vishnu bhakta/thozumin

--------------------------------

Garuda purANam describes in the words of the Lord Himself of eight

different characteristics of a sincere Vishnu Bhaktha. The Lord goes

on to say, "Such a Vishnu Bhatha, even if he is a mlEchcha, will be

celebrated by everyone as a exalted Brahmin, man of enormous wealth,

a sanyasi, and a scholar. With him we can have give and take.

He is worthy of worship just like me."

 

The term worship (pUjya) from Gardua Puranam is similar to the word

"thozumin" from Thirumalai cited earlier. The true significance of

this is to admonish everyone about the narakam that awaits those who

disrespect bhakthAs, says Swami Sri Desikan.

 

"ivarkaLai sajAtIyargaLOdu okka ninaiththu avanjyai

paNNina pOdhu narakamAm enRu ivvaLavilE thAthparyam".

 

Sri Uttamoor Swami (US) in his commentary on this Thirumalai pasuram

refers to Sri PVP's interpretation of prostrating at the feet of

low caste bhagavathas. Then Sri US draws our attention to Srimad

RTS Chapter 25. Sri US quotes from Srimad RTS,

 

"AgaiyAl jAti vyavaSthai kulaiyAdhE niRka, bhAgavatha

prabhAvam kaNdukoLvadu"

 

and adds,

 

"enRavarai uLLa prabhAva vyavastA adhikAra (Srimad RTS,

Chapter 25) sri suktiyai anuSandhikka."

 

(note the sri sukthi from Srimad RTS Chapter 25, namely,

"therefore, the greatness of bhjagavathAs must be understrood

within the limits of jAti.")

 

This question also comes up in 3000 padi GPP in Sri Ramanuja

vaibhavam. At one time Sri Ramanuja invites Sri Thirukkachchi

nimbi (TKN) to his house and attempts to fall at his feet. Then, Sri

TKN himself reminds Bhagavad Ramanuja of the shashtrAs prohibiting

such action and forbids Sri Ramanuja from falling at his feet. To

fully appreciate the significance of this episode we must realize the

close, talking relationship Sri TKN had with Lord PeraruLALan. This

perumal is still today called "pEsappatta perumal" on account of this.

Even though TKN was such an exalted Bhagavtha, he still forbade Sri

Ramanuja from falling at his feet due to shasthra

prohibition.

 

Give and take

-------------

The "kodumin, koLmai" (Give and Take) in Thirumalai and from Garuda

PurANam refers only to knowledge, not marriage. Sri PVP also limits

the interpretation of this phrase to just knowledge. Even in the case

of knowledge it is limited only to showing the correct path. It does

not include manthra upadesam or manthrArtha upadesam. Here again we

must remind ourselves of Sri Ramanuja and Thirukkachi Nambi. When

Bhagavad Ramanuja was still searching for a proper Acharya, it was

Thirukkachchi Nambi who guided him towards Sri Periya Nambi. Also,

Sri TKN was the one who found the answers from Lord Varadarajan to

the six questions Bhagavad Ramanuja had.

 

anushtAnam

----------

Whatever is said and done, our action must be guided by shasthras.

Swami Sri Desikan reminds us of the strict anushtanam observed by

Sriman Nathamuni, Alavandhar, and Emperumanar, even in their old

age.

 

"… NAthamunigaL, AlvandhAr, emperumAnAruLLitta

paramAchAryagaLudaiya anthima divaSAvadhiyAna

anushtAnangaLaik kEttu theLindhu koLvadhu."

 

In summary, kulam can change, but jAti cannot. Irrespective of jAti

all BhagavathAs must be highly respected and worshiped, considering

them with any disrespect will result in Narakam. However, our

respect and worship must be consistent with Shasthras. We can give

and take knowledge, limited to general guidance. anushtAnam is

something that must never be given up.

 

-- adiyEn ramanuja dasan

srimad azhagiya singar thiruvadi

[Guest guest]

SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA;

APPAN THIRUVADIGALE SARANAM.

 

Dear Sri.Rushikesa Madhava and Srivaishnavas,

Accept my pranams.

 

Sri RM has raised some questions and doubts on sensitive issue. Adiyen

will try to explain to the extent possible as far as my knowledge guides me.

 

 

 

1. Questions regarding GuruParampara 6000 and 3000.

====================================================

It is a well known fact that GPP 6000 is followed by Thenacharya Sampradhyam

and GPP 3000 by Desika sampradhayam. Adiyen belong to Thenacharya sampradhyam

and have not gone through GPP 3000. So, Adiyen will refrain from commenting

upon GPP 3000. Still, as the questions relate to Acharya Sri Manavala

mamunigal, Adiyen venture to enter into this diffficult task. It is pointed out

in the question that Sri Manavala mamunigal has upheld the DEsika Sampradhaya

as a sat one and has instructed his follwers to follow it.

 

Is it not strange that Sri Manavala mamunigal who was ordered by his mentor

Thiruvaimozhi pillai to dwell on Baghavat vishyam alone should have issued such

instructions to his followers? Again, let us see Upadesratnamalai,

his work, a concise GPP 6000.

 

Sloka35:

Azhvarkalaiyum, Arulicheyalkalaiyum, thazvaga ninaippavarkal tham,

naragil veezhvarkal enre ninaithu Nenje, Eppozhuthum Nee yavarpal,

chenranuka koosithiri.

 

Sloka38:

'EMPERMANAR DHARSANAMENRE ITHARKU, NAMPERUMAL PERITTU NATTIVAITHAR....."

 

>From Sloka 39 onwards he lists the line of Acharys who have

nurtured Baghavat Vishyam as a treasure.

 

Sloka67:

ACHARIYARKAL, ANAIVARUM MUNNACHARITHA, ACHARM THANNAI ARIYATHAR,

PESUKINRA VAARTHIAKALAI KETTU, MARULATHE,

POORUVARKAL CHEERTHA NILAI THANNAI NENJEE CHER.

 

Sloka68:

NATHIKARUM NARKALAIYIN, NANNERICHERTHIKARUM

AATHIKANATHIKARUMAMIVARAI,

OORTHU NENJE MUNNAVARUM PINNAVARUM, MOORKARENA VITTU,

NADU CHONNAVARAI NAALUM THODAR.

 

Sloka71:

MUNNOR MOZHINTHA, MURAI THPPAMAL KETTU,

PINNORNTHU THAMATHANAIP PESATHE,

THANNENJIL THORRINATHE SOLLI, ITHU SUDDHA UPADESAVARAVARRETHENBER

MOORKAR AVVAAR.

 

Sriman Rushikeasa Madhava Swamin,Adiyen have done my job of pointingout the

instructions given by Sri Manavala mamunigal, as we believe. Now, it is upto

you to draw conclusions.

 

 

2. Doubts regarding Athivan Satagopa Jeeyar.

============================================

This famous Jeeyar and his fore fathers belong to line of sishyas of

Vadakku thiruveedhi pillai. Adiyen is not able to understand the logic

behind the argument " Thus Srimad Athivan satagopa jeeyar is the first acharya

to merge the two great branches into a single line of acharyas." since he

studied Sri Bhashya and other rahasyas from GhatikaSATHAM aMMAL. Well,

Sri Manavalamamunigal studied Sri Bhashyam from Kidamabi Nayanar of

Sree Bhashaya paramparai. Why he should not be considered as the first Acharyan

of bringing 2 branches into one? You yourself can ponder over this point.

 

Sri Parthasarathy Dileepan has also rquested to refrain from initiating polemic

arguments. This point also may be considered.

 

Regarding Sreevachanbhooshanam and AcharyaHrudhayam.

These two works of Thennacharya Sampradhya are difficult one to understand and

to grasp by simple reading. A strong foundation of Srivaishnava knowledge and

an able guidance by well learned Thennacharya are necessary. Otherwise,

stumbling over wrong conclusions are propable. They teach the essence of

Srivaishanava sampradhya as seen by Thennacharyas.

So, Adiyen do not want to enter into this area.

 

Let Adiyen conclude with a simple logic.

========================================

Emperuman, Sriman Narayanan, all powerful,no equal or no superior, needless to

say, has created all Chetanas, Achethanas. The purpose of his creation is a

Leela, recreation for him. All the chethanas shoud join him in Paramapadam and

worship him just like Nityasuris. Unfortunately, Chethanas have fallen prey to

worldly pleasures and are adamant in remaining in the world for ever. To attain

material benefits, our effort is essential. Surely, we have to undergo the

reactions. But, to reach HIM once for all, He is the ONE to decide. To redeem

the chethanas, he has prescribed Sastras which are foot steps to understand HIM

and to create a desire in Chetanas to attain him and to make IT still

deeper... insuch a fashion, once for all to quit the world (samsara) and join

him. HE is the creator and can do as he please. So, other means in any form are

only some sort of help. BUT, HE ALONE CAN GRANT MOKSHA OR PARAMAPADA FOR those

Who want ONLY HIM. ALL THOUGHTS, ACTIONS ARE FOR HIM, BY HIM ( AHAMANNAM

AHAMNNAM ...AHAMNNATHO...). ( VARIKONDU UNNAI VIZHUNGUVAN KANILENRU AARVURRA

ENNAI OZHIYA ENNIN MUNNAM PAARITHU ENNAI MURRA

PARUGINAN,,,...Thirvaimozhi.9,6,9). The consciousness of self totally goes

away and EMPERUMAN PERVADES THE CEHETHANA INTOTO.

 

THIS IS THE CRUX OF THENNACHARYA SAMPRADHYA.

 

Adiyen hopes to some extent, we have cleared the doubts of

Sri Rushikesa Madhava.

 

Adiyen Ramanuja dasan T.Parthasarathy.

On Wed, 15 May 2002 Rushikesa Madhava wrote :

>I would like to get the truth about these issues,

>Q1:

>Is it true that Manavalamamunigal asked all to follow

>desika sampradaya as is claimed in GPP3000 (as in this mail)

>

>Q2: Is it true that Lord of Srirangam order as:

>A: "we will not desire listening to anything else,

>but only Desika prabhandam"

>

>B: "no one after Vedanta desikan must be installed as

>'archa' and offered mariyadai in our sannidhi."

>

>Q3: Why is GPP3000 so different than GPP6000.

>Why are they very much against each other?

>

>There are so many issues in the mail, please read and clarify.

>If these are true, What is a devotee to accept.

>

[Guest guest]

Sri:

SrimatE RAmAnujAya Nama:

 

Dear HrishikEsa Madhava

 

I am sending a reply which is not "complete" wrt your

question. I'm going to write a separate article on "mArjara"

philosophy and one can disprove "marakata" philosophy which are the

main,primary difference distinguishing the two sects

namely "thenkalai" and "vadakalai" sampradAyam. I'm doing some

research wrt your query and in due course I will give a better

description(I need some references which I lack at the moment). So I

request you to be patient(the rest is left to you).

 

> I would like to get the truth about these issues,

> Q1:

> Is it true that Manavalamamunigal asked all to follow

> desika sampradaya as is claimed in GPP3000 (as in this mail)

 

What is "Desika SampradAyam"?

(i) Why should MaNavALa mAmunigaL instruct people to follow the above

sampradAyam when there were so many great acharyas prior to desikan

esp RAmAnujA?

 

 

(ii)There is absolutely no logic in it(if GPP3000 says so!).

 

(iii)It's like saying: A man(fool)gives credit(for his existence) to

every damn soul on earth with the exception of his own mother from

whose womb he came. That mother is "RAmAnujA". WHere is the question

of "Desika sampradAyam"?

 

(iv)People with half(and less than half)baked knowledge will twist

and turn the story to suit their whims and fancies.

 

 

> Q2: Is it true that Lord of Srirangam order as:

> A: "we will not desire listening to anything else,

> but only Desika prabhandam"

 

The so called "Lord SriRanganatha" had listened to so much of

cribbings(by AzhwArs,and other AchAryas,and desikA himself quotes in

many places!).

 

Ask those(who follow GPP3000),why they write "RAmAnuja dAsan" instead

of "dEsika dAsan" when Lord Ranganatha Himself declared that HE wants

to listen to only desika prabandham.

 

Since maNavALa mamunigaL was a successor to Desikan(chronology),Lord

RanganAtha overwrote HIS previous statement(acc to GPP3000) and said

everybody should follow maNavALa mAmunigaL only and Prabandham

sEvAkAlam should start with "Sri sailEsa dayApAtram..munim"(GPP6000)!

 

God made different castes to prove the "elite" class brahmaNa

that "true love/devotion to Him" alone matters. Someone doing trikAla

sandhyAvandanam blah blah ensures that one is a good brahmaNa. That's

it. Are you aware of the story? Each person belonging to different

caste committed the same crime and God gave the highest punishment to

the brahmin. In the name "brahmin" he did atrocity!(You will still

find people doing that!)

 

Sri Dileepan writing that RAmAnujA didn't fall at Tirukkkachi nambi

(in accordance with the caste prescribed by sAstrAs)is wrong.

RAmAnujA postrates before him and also RAmAnujA postrates before

another sUdra lady. RAmAnujA was walking behind his sisyAs and sisyAs

tell the lady(sUdrA,who was walking towards them)to hide herself,then

the lady says "tell me where there is no God,and I'll go in that

direction". By the time RAmAnujA himself hears this statement and

says there is "no higher philosophy" than this and falls at her feet.

"THE TRUE DEVOTEES OF GOD ALONE ARE BRAHMANS".

 

 

> B: "no one after Vedanta desikan must be installed as

> 'archa' and offered mariyadai in our sannidhi."

 

Lord Parthasarathy says in BG "whoever worships ME in whichever form

(deity),I appear as that to them". HE didn't say that Siva/Brahma

shouldn't be worshipped. So how can Lord Ranganatha make such

a "wild/nonsensical/loose" statement that no one other than vedanta

desikan must be installed? There is absolutely no sense in it if

that's what GPP3000 claims!

 

These are all concocted(cooked up)stories. I will be very happy to

have a copy of GPP3000 and see what's in there! Infact in one site(I

don't remember the site,and I'm going to trace and get back to the

author)it said,Tirumalai Chakravarthy was a disciple of Swami

Desikan. I can swear that Tirumalai Nallan Chakravarthy was a

contemporary of Sri RAmAnujA.

 

Infact I will not at all be surprised if GPP3000(after some time)

claims that "RAmAnujA as a disciple of Swami Desikan". In the eyes of

Quantum Mechanics one can go backwards in Time to tackle

the "histories"(and also change the history). So there are people who

even manipulate the History(and re-write it to suit their own wild

imagination!).

 

> Q3: Why is GPP3000 so different than GPP6000.

> Why are they very much against each other?

 

I have started doing some research along these lines. I'm not an

authority on either to tell you what to do. But since you want to

know the "truth",here is my suggestion(you can take it or leave it!):

 

(i)Don't follow anything blindly(since you're confused about the

authenticity of the two namely GPP6000,GPP3000)

 

(ii)What you see could be wrong;what you hear could be wrong; A

proper inquiry alone will lead you to the truth.

 

(iii)God has given you the mind(manas which undergoes conflict all

the times and acc. to BG krSNA is the "manas")and also buddhi

(intellect,which has the capacity to analyse,reason out without a

bias). So whoever says,ask them to explain in detail about the pre-

desika and post-desika history,and finally you make a decision on

your own!

 

This split must have come after MaNavALa mamnuigaL's period. The

whole society was screwed during sankara's time. Whole life time of

RAmAnujA was spent in rectifying that gross damage done by sankara.

This is one of the reasons(as said by U. Ve. Sri VenkataKrishnan)that

RAmAnujA didn't write ant commentaries on "Divya prabandham". There

was a need to establish(what has been misinterpreted by sankara)

SriVisishtAdvitam. Why did RAmAnujA tell the "mUla mantra" to

everybody? Of course if one learns from an AchArya,that's great. But

not everyone has an access to an AchArya. This should not be a

stumbling block for a jIvAtma in seeking the mOksha. That's why

RAmAnujA tells the secret. Whether you understand it and say or say

it without knowing the meaning,it's going to fetch mOksha for sure.

There is no doubt about it(I'm going to share my views on God's

Nirhetuka krpa). Knowing this very well,Bhagavad RAmAnujA says

the "AstAkshara mantra". But unfortunately many mentally blind souls

(like DrtarAStra)don't realize this truth!

 

Another important thing is many people didn't like RAmAnujA accepting

non-brahmins as his protege. Slowly these differences magnify and

first popped up in TiruNArAyaNapuram. People slowly started

blabbering in Prabandham gOshti(at one stage people were introducing

some new terminologies and that's why you have two different

sARRumaRai!).

 

Let us take Adi Sankara as an example. He says that one should ignore

satyam and anantham(as they are mere qualifications)and consider only

gnyAnam in the sUtrA(Taitriya Upanisad 2:1:1,I'll check for the exact

no)"satyam,gnyAnam,anantham brahman". If you look at the grammar,it

clearly says that the first three words are adjectives/attributes

qualifying the noun "brahman". If you leave the first and third,you

have to leave the second word also.

 

The same Sankara says that "brahman" is beyond attributes(Advaitins

are experts in jugglery of words with no sense)and then makes a

comparison in "tasya yathA kapyAsam pundarIkam Evam akshiNi". Sankara

compares the eyes of the Lord to the butt/nates of a monkey". Why the

hell one needs to compare when "X" is beyond attributes. He violates

his own statements. One can easily disprove Sankara's philosophy by

mere mathematical induction/logic.

 

He says "Brahman is one without a second". The moment he used the

word "second" the plurality has entered the scene.

 

In essence,Sankara's philosophy was a badly written thesis(he didn't

proofread his own first draft!). They think "Aham BrahmAsmi

(BrhadAraNyaka Upanisad)"

 

There is no dearth for "fake" gurus. And one can easily get duped!

Appearances are deceptive. Fake gurus always go behind only the 'weak

mided people".

 

A TRULY KNOWLEDGEABLE PERSON WILL NEVER IMPART WRONG KNOWLEDGE;HE

WILL FACE ANYTHING/ANYBODY BOLDLY. "Bhagavad RAmAnujA is the example"

 

Let me give you couple of examples:

 

I don't have any rites to plagiarise someoneelse's thesis(by doing

some minor modifications here and there and put my name). Same

way,one should put nAmam(whatever designs one wants)on God by

constructing new temples but one doesn't have the rite to change

something that was already established by RAmAnujA. There are written

records that the so called "swami desikan" himself followed thenkalai

sampradayam(bore thenkalai namam,Supreme Court has declared based on

the historical evidence that kanjeevaram temple is a thenkalai

temple).

 

There are so many musicians who sing very well. But not all of them

are equal(infact they are nowhere near) to Ariyakkudi RAmAnuja

Iyengar/Vishwanatha iyer. You need to go to the right person to

verify certain things.

 

If you read Parthasarathi Dileepan's article,it's very clear and

obvious that "he has pre-conceived notions(but with sugar coating,he

thinks no can read him in between the lines!)and biased views wrt

caste system".

 

MaNdhUka thinks that "well is the largest,b'coz it has never seen the

river,sea and ocean in its lifetime".

 

AnushtAnam is to self-discipline oneself,it's not the end(mOkshA). A

person however expert he is in swimming(all kinds of brahma

vidyAs),and if he is thrown into mid-pacific ocean at the time of

Tornaedo will surely get drowned. He will not drown if only if there

is His grace(Nirhetuka krpA). With his little of knowledge of fluid

dynamics(and other vEda sAstrAs),he can't win over the wild ocean.

Only the "unconditional love/service towards Him" will save a

jIvAtmA. It's not a big deal to test. Ask all those people foll

anushtAnam "whether they are ready for this game"?

 

Finally I know lot of brahmins who follow anushtAnam(but don't do it

properly)who stink like gutter(they lack basic human ethics)!

 

AzhwAr EmperumAnAr Jeeyar TiruvadigaLE saraNam

gita

 

Quote: Mind in its own place can make a hell of a heaven and heaven

of a hell - Socrates

[Guest guest]

srImathE rAmAnujAya namaha

srImadh varavara munayE namaha

 

Dear Members,

 

A wonderful posting! Please read through Smt Geetha's posting completely. I

am happy that there are persons who can raise their voice when a sacrilege

is done. As Smt Geetha had said in her mail, even I was trying to gather

information and have sent a copy of this message from Sri Dileepan to Sri

Puttur Krishnaswamy Iyengar of Sri Vaishnava Sudarsanam fame. No one needs

an introduction of him as he is the present day doyen of our sampradhAyam

and the numerous articles and books published by him regarding the false

proclamations made are still to be answered convincingly.

 

While I could have refuted the postings regarding the prapatti and the

varNAsrama dharma, Sri Vacchana bhooshaNam and AchArya hrudhayam, very

clearly and deliberately misinterpreted, I wanted to take the opinion of a

scholarly person who has devoted his life to this. Again I am planning to

disturb two very busy persons, Sri Velukkudi swamy and Sri M.A

Venkatakrishnan swamy to get their advise also on this. I will post about

this shortly.

 

However, I would just like to add to what Smt Geetha had written based on

my limited knowledge.

 

 

 

 

 

=====Quote 1============

What is "Desika SampradAyam"?

(i) Why should MaNavALa mAmunigaL instruct people to follow the above

sampradAyam when there were so many great acharyas prior to desikan

esp RAmAnujA?

 

 

(ii)There is absolutely no logic in it(if GPP3000 says so!).

 

(iii)It's like saying: A man(fool)gives credit(for his existence) to

every damn soul on earth with the exception of his own mother from

whose womb he came. That mother is "RAmAnujA". WHere is the question

of "Desika sampradAyam"?

 

(iv)People with half(and less than half)baked knowledge will twist

and turn the story to suit their whims and fancies.

==========End Quote 1==========================

 

Very very valid questions. Add to it the following. If Swamy Desikan would

really have advocated this, then he should have done vyAkhyAnams only for

Swamy Desikan's Sri Sookthis and not for Sri Vachana BhooshaNam or AchArya

Hrudhayam, which clearly refutes the vadakalai view point. There is no way

one can say that he wrote all things and then realized that the Desika

SampradhAyam is the correct but due to non-availability of time he did not

do it, for, it is a well known fact that even during his "anthima" days, he

used to sit down and write the AchArya hrudhayam vyAkhyAnam and when

questioned by his sishyAs, as to why he was troubling himself, he said that

"I am writing this for your grandchildren to be benefitted not for me". So

it is clear that until his last breath he was only holding the views of Sri

Ramanuja and expounded by embAr, bhaTTar, nanjeeyar, nampiLLai,

periyavAcchAn piLLai, vadakkuth thiruveedhip piLLai, piLLai

lOkAchAryar/azhagiya maNavALa perumAL nAyanAr and thiruvAimozhippiLLai as

dearest to his heart.

 

Also in his upadEsaratthinamAlai, nowhere he has mentioned about Swamy

dEsikan. One may say that he had glorified only those AchAryAs who were

instrumental in propagation of ThiruvAimozhi, but I am sure a person would

have certainly included an AchAryA without any doubt, whether he has

commented on ThiruvAimozhi or not, if that person asks everybody to follow

the sampradhAyam of that AchAryA. Isn't it? Common sense and logic. Again

if according to those spurious accounts, if Sri maNavALa mAmuni would have

asked everyone to follow Sri Desikan's sampradhAyam, out of utmost respect,

then he would have composed atleast a "dEsika dasakam" if not "vimsathi".

All of you know that there is nothing like this. So how is it possible that

Sri maNavALa mAmuni would have advocated this.

 

Well these are all considering and accepting that Swami dEsikan followed a

completely different sampradhAyam other than the thennAchArya sampradhAyam.

But in one of the earlier postings I had clearly shown, how, Swamy dEsikan

supports only the thennAchArya sampradhAyam, through the slOka, "swAmin!,

swasEsham..." and the avatharikai for the "munivAhana bhOgam" where in he

clearly states that "kAraNa vasthu innadhendRu aRudhiyidamudiyAtha

krupaiyinAlE", speaking clearly about the nirhEtuka krupA of emberumAn.

 

Now if one accepts that swAmy dEsikan was advocating only thennAchAryA

sampradhAyam, then there is no wonder, Sri maNavALa mAmunigAL was asking

everyone to follow what Sri Desikan have said.

 

====Quote 2=======

These are all concocted(cooked up)stories. I will be very happy to

have a copy of GPP3000 and see what's in there! Infact in one site(I

don't remember the site,and I'm going to trace and get back to the

author)it said,Tirumalai Chakravarthy was a disciple of Swami

Desikan. I can swear that Tirumalai Nallan Chakravarthy was a

contemporary of Sri RAmAnujA.

 

Infact I will not at all be surprised if GPP3000(after some time)

claims that "RAmAnujA as a disciple of Swami Desikan". In the eyes of

Quantum Mechanics one can go backwards in Time to tackle

the "histories"(and also change the history). So there are people who

even manipulate the History(and re-write it to suit their own wild

imagination!).

=====End quote 2======

 

Very correct observation! Yes, Thirumalai Nallan Chakravarthy was a sishyA

of Ramanuja and is said to have converted even some hunters into Sri

Vaishnavaites. These hunters were the ones who helped our Sri Ramanuja when

he was in exile due to the atrocities commited by the KrimikanTa chOlan. On

seeing their bhakthi when Sri Ramanuja asked them as to who taught them all

these things, they replied that it was their AchArya by name Thirumalai

nallAn, for which Sri Ramanuja said "nallAn enRa kALamEgham ippadi

varshikkiradhE" (The dark cloud named 'nallAn' is pouring the grace and the

bhakthi in a great manner so that everyone is benefitted). So undoubtedly

Sri Thirumalai Nallan Chakravarthy is a sishyA of Sri Ramanujar and not Sri

Desikar.

 

Finally regarding Sri Ramanujar not commenting on Divya prabhandams are

indeed due to the fact that, through out his life he was only arguing

against the advaitis who are really masters of contradicting statements. I

have explained this in my earlier posting on the Sapthagiri magazine

blasphemy. Please read through that. However, Smt Geetha has echoed the

same thoughts that I had written there and I am sure there can be no second

thoughts to this.

 

Having said all the above I would also like to request all the members to

read through the postings of Sri Thirunarayanan Parthasarathy swamy who was

to have posted the first rebuttal to it in a very very diplomatic manner.

Read it in tandem with Smt Geetha's posting. Most of the "concoctions" will

come to light clearly. As said, once I get a response from Sri Puttur

Swamy, Sri Velukkudi swamy and Sri MAV swamy, I will post them too in the

list.

 

AzhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyar thiruvadigaLE saraNam

adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan

Thirumalai Vinjamoor Venkatesh

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

 

 

The information contained in this message is legally privileged and

confidential information intended only for the use of the addressed

individual or entity indicated in this message (or responsible for

delivery of the message to such person). It must not be read, copied,

disclosed, distributed or used by any person other than the addressee.

Unauthorised use, disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited and may be

unlawful.

 

Opinions, conclusions and other information on this message that do not

relate to the official business of any of the constituent companies of

the SANMAR GROUP shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by

the Group.

 

If you have received this message in error, you should destroy this

message and kindly notify the sender by e-mail.

 

Thank you.

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

[Guest guest]

Sri:

SrimathE RAmAnujAya nama:

 

Dear Devotees,

I am writing this post with tears. It saddens me to see

our great scholars HH Sri Chinna Jeeyar,Sri U. Ve.

Venkatakrsihanan,Sri Vellukkudi krishnan swami,Sri Vanamamalai Jeeyar

and so on keeping quiet. Things are being misquoted without proper

evidence. It's my humble request to them to speak to establish

the "real" SrivisishtAdvitam as per "Bhagavad RAmAnujA(His infinite

heart/mind towards all jIvAtmAs)" wish. I'm a beginner,have entered

the scene a bit late but I believe in "yatra yOgeshwara

parthO...thirmama:". I don't have any references here(other than

Sundara KANdam,NDP,Srimad Bhagavatham and BG). Please speak. Sri

Dileepan writes that even "EmperumAnAr" didn't fall at the feet

of "Tirukkachi Nambi". He is stating this to back up his argument on

anushtAnam(indirectly hinting that a brahmin need not prostrate

before a lower class). As far I am aware this is not true. So is the

case when Udayavar falls at one sudra feet. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

AzhwAr EmperumAnAr Jeeyar TiruvadigaLE saraNam

sarva krSNArpaNam astu

gita

[Guest guest]

Sri:

SrimathE RAmAnujAya nama:

 

Dear Sri Venkatesh,

I'm happy to see another person in the same path that I'm

walking.

 

> even I was trying to gather information and have sent a copy of

> this message from Sri Dileepan to Sri Puttur Krishnaswamy Iyengar

> of Sri Vaishnava Sudarsanam fame. No one needs an introduction of

> him as he is the present day doyen of our sampradhAyam

> and the numerous articles and books published by him regarding the

> false proclamations made are still to be answered convincingly.

 

Please let us know what Sri Puttur Krishnaswamy iyengar says. We need

to educate ourselves with the right knowledge

 

> While I could have refuted the postings regarding the prapatti

> and the varNAsrama dharma, Sri Vacchana bhooshaNam and AchArya

> hrudhayam, very clearly and deliberately misinterpreted, I wanted

> to take the opinion of a scholarly person who has devoted his life

> to this. Again I am planning to disturb two very busy persons,

> Sri Velukkudi swamy and Sri M.A Venkatakrishnan swamy to get their

> advise also on this. I will post about this shortly.

 

Please do so. We need them and their inputs so badly. I'm planning to

send a personal mail to HH Tridandi Sri Ramanuja Chinna Jeeyar.

Despite the busy schedule HH Sri Jeeyar patiently answers some of my

questions. I'm very very happy that you responded and I have lesser

knowledge than what you have.

 

I also went through TiruNarayanan's post. That gave me the strength

to take a step forward.

 

> Ramanuja and expounded by embAr, bhaTTar, nanjeeyar, nampiLLai,

> periyavAcchAn piLLai, vadakkuth thiruveedhip piLLai, piLLai

> lOkAchAryar/azhagiya maNavALa perumAL nAyanAr and

thiruvAimozhippiLLai as

> dearest to his heart.

 

Is there a copy of GPP3000 with you? I started reading GPP6000 and

then I put it on a sidetrack. Now the situation needs it badly. I'm

going to first finish reading that and I'm going to come back to all

you to clear my doubts. I don't have any proper knowledge of

ThennAchArya sampradAyam.

 

> Also in his upadEsaratthinamAlai, nowhere he has mentioned about

Swamy

> dEsikan. One may say that he had glorified only those AchAryAs who

were

> instrumental in propagation of ThiruvAimozhi, but I am sure a

person would

> have certainly included an AchAryA without any doubt, whether he has

> commented on ThiruvAimozhi or not, if that person asks everybody to

follow

> the sampradhAyam of that AchAryA. Isn't it? Common sense and logic.

Again

 

This always puzzled me. Why maNavALa mAmnuigaL didn't mention swami

desikan in Upadesha RatnamAlai? We need to quote Swami Desikan's work

itself to refute their views. But we need the help of Scholars in

this area.

 

> Well these are all considering and accepting that Swami dEsikan

followed a

> completely different sampradhAyam other than the thennAchArya

sampradhAyam.

> But in one of the earlier postings I had clearly shown, how, Swamy

dEsikan

> supports only the thennAchArya sampradhAyam, through the

slOka, "swAmin!,

> swasEsham..." and the avatharikai for the "munivAhana bhOgam" where

in he

> clearly states that "kAraNa vasthu innadhendRu aRudhiyidamudiyAtha

> krupaiyinAlE", speaking clearly about the nirhEtuka krupA of

emberumAn.

 

Beautiful,such verses we need to shut up the mouths.

 

> Now if one accepts that swAmy dEsikan was advocating only

thennAchAryA

> sampradhAyam, then there is no wonder, Sri maNavALa mAmunigAL was

asking

> everyone to follow what Sri Desikan have said.

 

 

Absolutely right. Just my mere question in reply to someone else'

post on bhara-nyAsa,triggered the ego of Sri V Sadagopan. He says he

feels sorry that somebody(me and he is replying to my post only)

speaks ill of Swami Desikan. I didn't speak ill of swami desikan. All

I tried to explain was the "greatness of God/Nirhetuka krpA". For

this itself he got offended,what about the atrocities happening in

kanjeevaram,that too put "vadakalai nAmam" for RAmAnujA Himself. Will

not that affect us? I got couple of mails supporting Sri V Sadagopan

(those people follow Desika sampradAyam). How they get united??!!!!

Even Bhagavad RAmAnujA couldn't unite people that easily! What about

other temples where they change the thenkalai namam to a vadakalai

namam. One Vadakalai boy is sending me a mail saying that I need

humility. He didn't answer my question to kanjeevaram. He quotes Sri

Velukkudi Krishnan swami(saying that even Sri Krishnan Swami always

quotes Swami Desikans works). When I asked him whether it was out of

humility they change the namams,there is no reply to that! They have

infinite ego!

 

 

> Having said all the above I would also like to request all the

> members to read through the postings of Sri Thirunarayanan

> Parthasarathy swamy who was to have posted the first rebuttal to

> it in a very very diplomatic manner. Most of the "concoctions" will

> come to light clearly. As said, once I get a response from Sri

> Puttur Swamy, Sri Velukkudi swamy and Sri MAV swamy, I will post

> them too in the list.

 

Sri TiruNarayanan Parthasarathy's post was wonderful. But I wrote

this post(without referring to Sri Parthasarathy)just out of my love

for AzhwArs,pUrvAchAryAs true devotion to God. Why don't you post

these things once in a while since you have more knowledge than what

I have. I felt very happy to read Sr Tirunarayanan's remark on sri

parthasarathy dileepan(dual-natured articles!)

 

AzhwAr EmperumAnAr Jeeyar TiruvadigaLE saraNam

sarvam krSNArpaNam astu

gita

[Guest guest]

srImathE rAmAnujAya namaha

srImadh varavara munayE namaha

 

Dear Smt Geetha,

 

====Quote 1=====

 

 

Is there a copy of GPP3000 with you? I started reading GPP6000 and

then I put it on a sidetrack. Now the situation needs it badly. I'm

going to first finish reading that and I'm going to come back to all

you to clear my doubts. I don't have any proper knowledge of

ThennAchArya sampradAyam.

====Unquote 1=========

 

No. At the moment I am not having a copy of the same. I am trying to buy

one. But I did have a brief account of this in a book of Sri Desika

Prabhandham. The accounts given in that are not at all reliable.

 

======Quote 2========

This always puzzled me. Why maNavALa mAmnuigaL didn't mention swami

desikan in Upadesha RatnamAlai? We need to quote Swami Desikan's work

itself to refute their views. But we need the help of Scholars in

this area.

=====Unquote 2========

 

As I had explained previously, Sri maNavALa mAmunigaL, tried to glorify

only the following persons,

 

1. All AzhwArs and ANdAL.

2. Sri EmberumAnAr

3. All those poorvAchAryAs who had done commentaries for the ThiruvAimozhi

or tried to safe guard them.

and finally,

4. His beloved Sri Pillai lOkAchAryar.

 

Remember, he talks about his immediate predecessor Sri ThiruvAimozhip

piLLai only in the beginning and that is it. But this one pAsuram is just

conveying everything in the words "endhai thiruvAimozhip piLLai innaruLAl

vandha, upadEsa mArgatthai sindhai seidhu, pinnavarum kaRkka, upadEsamAip

pEsuginREn, mannia seer veNpAvil vaitthu". He has said very clearly that

the entire pAsuram is due to the grace of his AchArya Sri ThiruvAimozhip

piLLai. Now he had spoken about Sri piLLai lOkAchAryar only out of his

abhimAnam for him, which was due to the wonderful works he made to

safeguard the misinterpretation of Sri Ramanuja's works. Otherwise, he had

praised only those who commented on thiruvAimozhi and specifically "eedu".

 

Sri dEsikar does not appear in this list, due this reason and this itself

proves that the claims, that Sri dEsikar did a 74000p padi vyAkhyAnam for

ThiruvAimozhi which is called 'nigama parimaLam', are completely baseless.

If Sri dEsikar had done really such a work, why should it be lost when all

the other works are available? Again if he(swAmy dEsikan) had really

commented on it in a grand manner in line with our poorvAchAryAs, sure, Sri

maNavALa mAmunigaL would have included his name also. Again this goes to

prove the claim that Sri mAmunigAL advocated everyone to follow dEsika

sampradhAyam.

 

I read your other post in which you had said that you are disturbed that

great people like Sri Chinna jeeyar swami, Sri Velukkudi swamy and Sri MA

Venkatakrishnan swamy have not come forward to refute this. Let me tell you

one thing, the reason is that they all know that all these attempts are

futile, They have all attempted this earlier very much and are still doing

it now, if things seem to get out of our hand. But tell me one thing. Do

you really think that if they write a rebuttal, people like Sri

Parthasarathy Dileepan & Anand Karalapakkam will change. So why should they

waste their energies on this. Let small people like me do this. They have

very good followers and let them all concentrate only on educating us. Of

course they always help me when I contact them regarding any dispute and

all the I am writing are not a "vidhanDAvAdham" or "kutharkkam".

 

Let alone these great present day people, even their fathers and fore

fathers cannot change them. One can wake a person who is really sleeping

but not the person who is acting as if he is sleeping.

 

AzhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyar thiruvadigaLE saraNam

adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan

Thirumala Vinjamoor Venkatesh

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

 

 

The information contained in this message is legally privileged and

confidential information intended only for the use of the addressed

individual or entity indicated in this message (or responsible for

delivery of the message to such person). It must not be read, copied,

disclosed, distributed or used by any person other than the addressee.

Unauthorised use, disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited and may be

unlawful.

 

Opinions, conclusions and other information on this message that do not

relate to the official business of any of the constituent companies of

the SANMAR GROUP shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by

the Group.

 

If you have received this message in error, you should destroy this

message and kindly notify the sender by e-mail.

 

Thank you.

 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

[Guest guest]

Sri:

SrimathE RAmAnujAya nama:

 

Dear Venkatesh,

 

Thanks for the reply. As you said,if all the works of

Swami Desikan are available then how come 74000ppadi alone is

missing. One can give credit only to what is existing. If I am

writing a journal article,I'll quote only those who have given

contributions exactly in that area. Otherwise why would I cite their

names in the reference list?

 

Yes,one can not change someone who "pretends"! Tirukkachi

nambi is one of the AchAryAs of EmperumAnAr. A true sisyA has to fall

at his AchAryA's feet(otherwise he will not learn anything from the

AchAryA). With just common sense,one can easily say that RAmAnujA

must have fallen at Tirukkkachi nambi's feet(irrespective of the

caste).

 

Can you write an article on varNAsrama dharmam(genuine

interpretation)as per vEda sAstrAs for my benefit? Since I'm not

previleged to learn,I would like to know what's said in that.

 

I have heard that "pancha sUktam" comes in all the four

vEdAs. Also people say vEdAs are ApouruSEya. Is there any parallel

connection between this and the "puruSa sUktam"? My question is

what's the connection between puruSa in apouruSEya and the puruSa in

puruSa sUktam? What does "puruSa" appearing in two places refer to?

Can you highlight on this?

 

Can you tell the meaning of pAsurams 36 and 57 of URM

(UPadEsa RaththinamAlai)? In fact I will be very happy if someone

writes on entire URM. Though I understand a good tamizh,I should not

misinterpret the meanings. If you have learnt URM(with vyAkhyAnams)

under an AchAryA,I request you to post as and when time permits you.

 

> Do you really think that if they write a rebuttal, people like Sri

> Parthasarathy Dileepan & Anand Karalapakkam will change. So why

> should they waste their energies on this. Let small people like me

> do this. Of One can wake a person who is really sleeping

> but not the person who is acting as if he is sleeping.

 

Yes,you're right. Even that "Lord PArthasarathy" wouldn't be able to

change such people. Along the lines of Sri Mukundan,I do agree that

we should focus our energies on right people. And God will send right

people to us and vice versa. I know a boy(3 weeks friendship) who was

a shivaite(eating non-veg) now has become a veg,sri vaishNavite. He

asked me to teach him ViSNu sahasranamam and he says that he always

thinks that "only association" makes a person good/bad and one should

always associate onself with people who are better than oneself so

that one can learn from the other person. How true! It's all HIS work.

 

AzhwAr EmperumAnAr Jeeyar TiruvadigaLE saraNam

gita

[Guest guest]

Srimathi Vaidhehi Wrote:

 

 

I have heard that "pancha sUktam" comes

in all the four

vEdAs. Also people say vEdAs are ApouruSEya. Is there

any parallel

connection between this and the "puruSa sUktam"? My

question is

what's the connection between puruSa in apouruSEya and

the puruSa in

puruSa sUktam? What does "puruSa" appearing in two

places refer to?

Can you highlight on this?

 

Can you tell the meaning of pAsurams 36

and 57 of URM

(UPadEsa RaththinamAlai)? In fact I will be very happy

if someone

writes on entire URM. Though I understand a good

tamizh,I should not

terpret the meanings. If you have learnt URM(with

vyAkhyAnams)

under an AchAryA,I request you to post as and when

time permits you.

 

Unquote:

 

It is not Pancha suktam which is in all the 4 vedas.

It is only Purusha Suktam which is available in Rig,

yajur and sama vedas.

 

When we say Purusha suktam as 'apouruSEya', what we

mean is

The Purusha suktam is unauthored by any person.

 

apouruSEya lieterally mean something that is not

authored.(unauthored, ONLY from the mouth of the Lord)

(It is nice to remember Kaliyan's words(Kaligalum ,

vedamum, needhi noolum, Karpamum, sorporul thanun...

neermayinal arulseithu), Here Kaliyan talks of

Gynapiran as one who has showered to this worold,

Vedas, and other angaas of Vedas out of compassion to

the human kind.)

 

It is also clear from the verses of Purusha Suktam ,

that Purusha is none other than the Lakshmipathi,

Sriman Narayana.. (refer verses starting

'Hreeshchate Lakshmi... ')

 

 

 

The words 'Desikar' in verse 36 and 57 does not refer

to Swami Desikan. If someone says so, he needs to

recaliberate his Tamil grammer. It is used not as a

proper noun. It is rather used as a common noun. The

rough meaning of word 'Desika' is 'great and saintly

person'

 

Even in yathiraja Vimsathi, Swami MM uses words

'Desika', as 'Vachamagochara Mahaguna Desikagriya,

Koorathinatha....' while referring to Acharyas like

Swami Koorathalwan.

 

Thanks

Regards

KM Narayanan

 

 

 

 

 

 

- Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup

http://fifaworldcup.