Guest guest Posted April 6, 2003 Report Share Posted April 6, 2003 Dear bhagatars Many Srivaishnavas resort to the "opinions" and "rulings" of a nebulous group "acharyas" as if they were, a united, congruous, and harmonious band of divine beings and like the Catholic Pope "infallible". Yet we know that the "acharyas" were many Ramanuja appointed 700 simhasanadhipatis. (We hear nothing about the 300 women teachers that he also appointed!). All these men (and women) were very much human beings with the svabhava that is natural to the species. They often disagreed in their views and many learned acharyas wrote complex polemic works refuting each others arguments. Hence we have the classical Vadagalai/Tengalai divide and the 18 points of doctrinal dispute which are still not resolved till this day! There is no Srivaishnava "pope" and no unitary body issuing "fatwas" each and every acharya and matham is independent and can make up their own minds on doctrinal points and matters of interpretation. If you approach three acharyas today on any major issue you will probably have at least two opinions. (Please note that there is often also bitter rivalry between acharyas of the same faction!). When such be the case, it is important to understand that the acharya is a guide and counsellor on the spiritual path and the one that formally establishes our connection with Sriman Narayana (a connection which was never lost and is irrevocable, perpetual and natural one is advised to choose a personal acharya and after testing him (or her) to ensure that what is taught is (a) in the spirit of Ramanuja¹s teachings, (b) is reasonable and practicable and © benefits all beings one should then surrender to the guidance and teachings of such a person. To invoke the tired phrase "our acharyas have said ŠŠ.. " ‹ is vague, general and unhelpful and ultimately a cop-out from actually using our intelligence. Krishna said to Arjuna in the 18th chapter "reflect well over all that I have taught you and then follow the teachings as you will" there was no "command" to "do as I say because I am God" but use you intelligence and reason and make up your own mind. Vedanta in general is a methodology of (1) sravana listen to the teachings (2) manana reason, apply logic and reflect upon the teachings and (3) nididhyasana meditate upon and REALISE those teachings in your own life. Adiyen Sri Rama Ramanuja Achari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2003 Report Share Posted April 8, 2003 Dear Devotee, In response to your comments... > > - > <purohit > <ramanuja> > Sunday, April 06, 2003 2:59 PM > [ramanuja] Re: Authority of Acharyas > > > > > Dear bhagatars > > Many Srivaishnavas resort to the "opinions" and "rulings" of > a nebulous > group "acharyas" as if they were, a united, congruous, and > harmonious band > of divine beings and like the Catholic Pope "infallible". Yet > we know that > the "acharyas" were many Ramanuja appointed 700 > simhasanadhipatis. (We > hear nothing about the 300 women teachers that he also > appointed!). Your statistics seem to be coming from an unqualified source. All AchAryas, along with both Eastern and Western scholars on the subject, concur that only 74 of Sri Ramanuja's closest disciples were appointed by him to carry on the torch of his Darshanam. Since many of these men were married, their spouses shared an equal - but undoubtedly separate - role in following the disciplines and promoting the faith. While I would not doubt that women did serve as teachers in their own right, I do not think that the conditions of the day would have permitted Sri Ramanuja to formally appoint women as AchAryas. All > these men (and women) were very much human beings with the > svabhava that is > natural to the species. They often disagreed in their views > and many learned > acharyas wrote complex polemic works refuting each others > arguments. Hence > we have the classical Vadagalai/Tengalai divide and the 18 points of > doctrinal dispute which are still not resolved till this > day! There is no > Srivaishnava "pope" and no unitary body issuing "fatwas" > each and every > acharya and matham is independent and can make up their own minds on > doctrinal points and matters of interpretation. If you approach three > acharyas today on any major issue you will probably have at least two > opinions. (Please note that there is often also bitter rivalry between > acharyas of the same faction!). I would contend that if there is a "pontifical head" to SriVaishnavam, it is Sri Ramanuja. He and his teachings continue to serve as the paradigm and "measuring stick" for all AchAryas and erudite devotees of Ramanuja sampradAyam that I learned from, and it is my understanding that the only way that a view within our community is regarded to be valid is that it does not sway from the fundamentals of Sri Ramanuja's system of thought. Indeed, even in recent history, AchAryas have been duly ostracized for teaching from their own personal perspective rather than maintaining the continuity of thought for which the SriVaishnava faith is extolled. While AchAryas cannot be prevented from varying their emphasis on different aspects of our philosophy based on what they have learned - some preferring Veda and anushtAnam, others emphasizing divya prabhandam, others focusing Vedanta, and still others focusing on activism and social reform - if seen in terms of the "big picture", there is very little deviation in their frame of thought from what Ramanuja himself established. Regarding the famous 18 differences that differentiate the two kalais, these did not become solidified until the notion that a separate sampradAyam existed under the tutelage of Swamy Vedanta Desika came into vogue. Prior to that time - and I learned this from a Western scholar - these 18 differences were simply one among many views that were the object of healthy discussion and debate among scholars, and were, for the most part left as unanswered anamolies that only added to the experience of SriVaishnava thought. > > When such be the case, it is important to understand that the > acharya is a > guide and counsellor on the spiritual path and the one that formally > establishes our connection with Sriman Narayana (a connection > which was > never lost and is irrevocable, perpetual and natural one is > advised to > choose a personal acharya and after testing him (or her) to > ensure that what > is taught is (a) in the spirit of Ramanuja¹s teachings, (b) > is reasonable > and practicable and © benefits all beings one should then > surrender to > the guidance and teachings of such a person. I would agree, but the question arises as to what "litmus test" an unqualified disciple should use to make sure that these three qualifications are present within the AchArya. Such a test can only be given when one is experienced enough in the faith to determine whether or not a doctrine preached by the AchArya goes against the "spirit of Ramanuja". And, frankly, I do not believe that any member of laity is qualified to do that in this day and age. Consequently, I am of the view that we must accept the AchArya as gift from God and follow his teachings to the best of our abilities, prior to passing some judgement on him at the risk of this being based on our own false ego. I made this mistake when I met a qualified scholar several years ago, and by the time that I realized my mistake and was willing to learn from him, he had passed away. > > To invoke the tired phrase "our acharyas have said SS.. " < is vague, > general and unhelpful and ultimately a cop-out from actually using our > intelligence. Krishna said to Arjuna in the 18th chapter > "reflect well > over all that I have taught you and then follow the teachings > as you will" > there was no "command" to "do as I say because I am God" > but use you > intelligence and reason and make up your own mind. Vedanta > in general is a > methodology of (1) sravana listen to the teachings (2) > manana reason, > apply logic and reflect upon the teachings and (3) > nididhyasana meditate > upon and REALISE those teachings in your own life. I would concur with this, but would point out this level of discrimination is something gained from training and experience under the tutelage of the AchArya. So, again, it is best to first cultivate an attitude of reverence for the Teacher. Respectfully, adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan Mohan > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.