Guest guest Posted March 3, 2004 Report Share Posted March 3, 2004 Reproduced below is the rejoinder from the Divya-desa Paramparya Padu-kappu Peravai, Srirangam, to the loud Terminological Inexactitudes attributed to the Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya in the matter of Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara Temple, our Holy-of-Holies. The rejoinder merits the widest publicity in the press that you can possibly arrange, and in other media and manner. A mail from you to the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh would also be appropriate, so as to highlight the Kanchi Kamakoti's unwarranted attempts at trivialising the Srivaishnava religion. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Divya-desa Paramparya Padukappu Peravai 214, East Uttara Street, SRIRANGAM-620006 (District Trichy, Tamil Nadu). To The Editor, Unwarranted falsehoods of Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya, regarding the Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara Temple. Sir, On his recent visit to Hyderabad, the Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya had made unwarranted public statements regarding the time-honoured and established Vaishnava character and administration of the Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara Temple. We have the privilege of seeking your cooperation in discharging your valued role as responsible Press, in contradicting the falsehoods contained in the Kanchi Acharya's statements. The Press Note prepared by us is attached for your ready reference and use. Regards from (A.Krishnamachari) SECRETARY Phone: 0431-2434398 kicha19 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Sri: Certain unwarranted statements on the administration and worship mode in the ancient and world-famous Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara-Srinivasa Temple have been carried in the Deccan Chronicle (February 29 2004) and the New Indian Express (February 28 2004). These statements have been attributed to the Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya when on his visit to Hyderabad. The Kamakoti personage's statements primarily betray his upstart bid to capture power and property in the Tirumalai Srinivasa Temple which is amongst the most venerated and historically well-documented centres of Srivaishnava worship in India. The statements constitute a paranoid ranting which underline the rabble doctrine, "The more loud, the more true" and "The more brazen, the more broadcast". They also betray a compulsive emotional need of this speaker to keep drawing attention to himself, and to stay centre-stage in the mass media, however reckless his enunciations or dubious his so-called initiatives for public peace or plainly moth-eaten his erudition. This manner of peremptory noise-making is hardly fair or edifying to the common sense and intelligence of the large number of followers he claims to have. Some of the Kanchi personality's discoveries are as sensational as they are simply crass, as when he says that "Ramanuja had nothing whatever to do with Tirumalai". His another profundity is that "the Vaikhanasa mode of worship is not in anyway related to the philosophical doctrine of Vishishtaadvaita". Two other of his statements are carping on Sri Tridandi Sriman Narayana Ramanuja Chinna Jeeyar, and expose his neurotic jealousy of the venerated Jeeyar Svami. "Sri Tridandi Jeeyar should not interfere", says the Kanchi personality, "with Tirumalai temple administration matters. The Jeeyar is not a mathaadhipati at all but only a Vishishtaadvait preacher, and barely a wayfarer in Tirumalai !" In targeting the Tridandi Jeeyar svami for his crude attack, the Kanchi personality has forgotten to produce his own credentials which would empower him to declare a Srivaishnava institutional head as persona non-grata in Tirumalai. The Kanchi personality seems to be the only individual who is ignorant of the fact that he has no locus standi whatsoever to declaim and decide matters in respect of the holy Sri Venkatesvara Temple in Tirumalai-Tirupati. Thanks to the media hype sponsored by his admirers in public life, this neo-Sankaracharya has come to be just tolerated, but not legitimised, in the four-seat Convocation of the Sankaracharya-s (Badarinath, Dvarakanath, and Puri-Jagannath, and Sringeri). None of the pontiffs of these four Sankara-peethas (which are regarded as having been founded by the venerated Sankara bhagavat-paada himself) has come out with the hilarious kind of statements as the Kanchi personality has presently made. The Kanchi personality's strategy for gaining a foothold in the Sri Venkatesvara Temple administration is contained in his rather bland statement, "We Sankaracharya-s too have the right of offering worship-rites in Vishnu temples." Sri Sankara Bhagavat Paada was self-evidently a Vaishnava saint, but later-day distortions depict him as an ash-smeared Saiva. Any of the Sankara mathaadhipati-s is therefore received, as indeed any religious head of vaidika religion, with temple honours not only in Tirumalai but also in other temples in the country. But it is one thing to receive temple honours and a respectful preference to have darshan, and an entirely another thing (and unwarranted claim) to administer the rites of worship there. The Kanchi personality attempts to claim the right to administer the rites of worship in Tirumalai temple with general bland remarks, half-statements and by confusing the issues. The totality of available evidence establishes Sri Venkatesvara Temple in Tirumalai hills as the Srivaishnava temple par excellence, and of great antiquity. The multi-strand evidence is authenticated in history, classical literature, inscriptional records, and the unbroken tradition of worship here and in other temples of the country. The Temple has been the inspiring theme of not only the ancient Tamil Sangham classics and post-Sangham classics like Kamban's famed Ramakatha etc, but is also venerated in the rapturous compositions of the subsequent daasa-saahitya in Kannada language, the moving songs of Kshetrajna, Annamacharya etc, and down to Sri Tyagaraja. Sri Ramanujacharya (1017-1137 AD) had visited Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvaram hills at least three times, and had established the Elder Jeeyar in 1057-58 (with his residential Matham) in order to oversee the organisation of worship of Sri Venkatesvara. The Junior Jeeyar was established in 1102. Sri Ramanuja's first-generation disciple Sri Anantaazhvaan (who hailed from to-day's Karnataka) was appointed by his mentor to keep the Lord's flower gardens and orchards. Anantaazhvaan's crucial Sanskrit work, Sri Venkataachala Itihaasa-maalaa, is a very authentic and comprehensive record of the debate sponsored by the local ruler Yaadava Naaraayana to put an end to Saiva importunate claims. It fell to Sri Ramanuja to establish, in this debate, on unambiguous and unassailable evidence that Sri Venkatesvara was the Vishnu of the veda-scripture. The streamlined modes of worship identified and reintroduced in the Temple by Sri Ramanuja were somewhat affected on account of the ravaging raids (1310 circa) of the Temples in the South by Malik Kafur and Ulugh Khan. The worship in Tirumalai was eventually restored by Manavaala Mahaa-muni who became the pontiff of the Srivaishnava capital of Srirangam. The worship in Tirumalai Temple is rendered as per the (Vaishnava) Vaikhaanasa Aagama, which is the twin of the (Vaishnava) Pancharaatra Agama which is in observance in Srirangam Temple. The 108 sanctified Vaishnava Temples of the country observe one or the other Aagama, and Sri Vedantaachaarya's work, Paancharaatra-rakshaa, establishes that there is no material conflict between the two Aagama-s. It is therefore palpably absurd to say, as our Kanchi personality now fantastically proposes, that the Vaikhaanasa of Tirumalai is exclusive of the Srivaishnava Vishishtaadvaita religion and doctrine. The Kanchi research-finding is contradicted by the fact that every Vaikhanasa temple in the South (Aandaal in Srivilli-puttoor, for instance) is indisputably corroborative of Vishishtaadvaita metaphysics and has a clear and unique Srivaishnava in character. It is to be deplored that with the ostensible objective of widening the space for festive perambulation, the centuries-old large 'thousand-pillar' mandapam- pavilion was demolished recently. The demolished mandapam contained stone sculpting of as many as 164 time-honoured 'Tenkalai' Srivaishnava Oordhva-pundram (sanctified religious marking). This has simultaneously caused a triple loss to the Temple traditions, historical evidence, and archaeological values. On behalf of the vast Srivaishnava Community of the country, and as especially the ardent devotees of Lord Sri Venkateswara, WE APPEAL to the TT Devasthanam urgently to consider the following steps in the interests of the un-vitiated continuance of the fragrant and time-sanctified worship-modes of Lord Sri Venkatesvara's Temple, which is our Holiest of Holies ~~ * Give no quarter whatsoever to the Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya in the administration and organisation of worship of Sri Venkatesvara Temple in Tirumalai, considering that he has no 'sampradaaya' affiliation to the Temple at all, and has therefore no locus standi to dictate to the TTD on the Temple affairs. * Reconstitute the Temple Board to provide primacy for the Elder ('pedda keylvi' ) Jeeyar Svami, the Junior ('chinna keylvi') Jeeyar Svami, identified descendant of Anantaazhvaan, and Sri Tridandi Sriman Narayana Ramanuja Chinna Jeeyar Svami (whose 'sampradaaya' insight and service are unassailable). * Constitute a seven-member standing committee to ensure the preservation of Srivaishnava Vaikhanasa Vishishtaadvaita traditions which had historically prevailed since ancient times in the Tirumalai Temple. The committee will provide ex officio for Sri Vaana-maa-malai Jeeyar Svami, one Vaikhaanasa archaka, three scholars of Veda-Shaastra, and two persons with sound administrative experience (one retired from Central Government and another retired from State Government). "Sri Venkateyso jayatu" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2004 Report Share Posted March 5, 2004 Dear Sri Tirumanjanam SundaraRajan swAmi. Thank You for your mail. Your mail reminds me of, the timkering by the same person -persona non-grata- at thiruchanur temple some years back. Fortunately, that did not take off. Now, he he is trying his pranks at thirumala temple. It clearly points out to one thing. They are blatantly and shamelessly displaying their jealousy insofar as the crowd, wealth and powers are concerned.--> Can they match our Lord Almighty with any other deity? 'ethanai seyyinum en magan mugam nEAr ovvAi" "kandavARRAl thanadhEA vulagena ninRAn' The tenor of the rejoinder distinctly reflects not only your frame of mind, not only your bent of thinking , not only your forceful writing, not only the transmission of the message but vividly rings in my ears your voice, thorugh this mail. Thank you. Can you please provide me with the mail ids of ttd and Chief Minister of Andhra Pradhesh for us to send mails? Thank You for including me in your esteemed list. ramanuja dhasan vanamamalai padmanabhan - SundaraRajan Tirumanjanam SriVaishnavaSri ; LakshmitatacharMA ; Ramanuja internet ; RangarajanSujata ; AzhvarMA-Melkote ; PadmanabhanNS ; Rajappa ; VelukkudiKrishnanSvami Wednesday, March 03, 2004 9:13 PM [ramanuja] Kanchi Kamakoti on Tirumalai. Reproduced below is the rejoinder from the Divya-desa Paramparya Padu-kappu Peravai, Srirangam, to the loud Terminological Inexactitudes attributed to the Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya in the matter of Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara Temple, our Holy-of-Holies. The rejoinder merits the widest publicity in the press that you can possibly arrange, and in other media and manner. A mail from you to the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh would also be appropriate, so as to highlight the Kanchi Kamakoti's unwarranted attempts at trivialising the Srivaishnava religion. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Divya-desa Paramparya Padukappu Peravai 214, East Uttara Street, SRIRANGAM-620006 (District Trichy, Tamil Nadu). To The Editor, Unwarranted falsehoods of Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya, regarding the Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara Temple. Sir, On his recent visit to Hyderabad, the Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya had made unwarranted public statements regarding the time-honoured and established Vaishnava character and administration of the Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara Temple. We have the privilege of seeking your cooperation in discharging your valued role as responsible Press, in contradicting the falsehoods contained in the Kanchi Acharya's statements. The Press Note prepared by us is attached for your ready reference and use. Regards from (A.Krishnamachari) SECRETARY Phone: 0431-2434398 kicha19 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Sri: Certain unwarranted statements on the administration and worship mode in the ancient and world-famous Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara-Srinivasa Temple have been carried in the Deccan Chronicle (February 29 2004) and the New Indian Express (February 28 2004). These statements have been attributed to the Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya when on his visit to Hyderabad. The Kamakoti personage's statements primarily betray his upstart bid to capture power and property in the Tirumalai Srinivasa Temple which is amongst the most venerated and historically well-documented centres of Srivaishnava worship in India. The statements constitute a paranoid ranting which underline the rabble doctrine, "The more loud, the more true" and "The more brazen, the more broadcast". They also betray a compulsive emotional need of this speaker to keep drawing attention to himself, and to stay centre-stage in the mass media, however reckless his enunciations or dubious his so-called initiatives for public peace or plainly moth-eaten his erudition. This manner of peremptory noise-making is hardly fair or edifying to the common sense and intelligence of the large number of followers he claims to have. Some of the Kanchi personality's discoveries are as sensational as they are simply crass, as when he says that "Ramanuja had nothing whatever to do with Tirumalai". His another profundity is that "the Vaikhanasa mode of worship is not in anyway related to the philosophical doctrine of Vishishtaadvaita". Two other of his statements are carping on Sri Tridandi Sriman Narayana Ramanuja Chinna Jeeyar, and expose his neurotic jealousy of the venerated Jeeyar Svami. "Sri Tridandi Jeeyar should not interfere", says the Kanchi personality, "with Tirumalai temple administration matters. The Jeeyar is not a mathaadhipati at all but only a Vishishtaadvait preacher, and barely a wayfarer in Tirumalai !" In targeting the Tridandi Jeeyar svami for his crude attack, the Kanchi personality has forgotten to produce his own credentials which would empower him to declare a Srivaishnava institutional head as persona non-grata in Tirumalai. The Kanchi personality seems to be the only individual who is ignorant of the fact that he has no locus standi whatsoever to declaim and decide matters in respect of the holy Sri Venkatesvara Temple in Tirumalai-Tirupati. Thanks to the media hype sponsored by his admirers in public life, this neo-Sankaracharya has come to be just tolerated, but not legitimised, in the four-seat Convocation of the Sankaracharya-s (Badarinath, Dvarakanath, and Puri-Jagannath, and Sringeri). None of the pontiffs of these four Sankara-peethas (which are regarded as having been founded by the venerated Sankara bhagavat-paada himself) has come out with the hilarious kind of statements as the Kanchi personality has presently made. The Kanchi personality's strategy for gaining a foothold in the Sri Venkatesvara Temple administration is contained in his rather bland statement, "We Sankaracharya-s too have the right of offering worship-rites in Vishnu temples." Sri Sankara Bhagavat Paada was self-evidently a Vaishnava saint, but later-day distortions depict him as an ash-smeared Saiva. Any of the Sankara mathaadhipati-s is therefore received, as indeed any religious head of vaidika religion, with temple honours not only in Tirumalai but also in other temples in the country. But it is one thing to receive temple honours and a respectful preference to have darshan, and an entirely another thing (and unwarranted claim) to administer the rites of worship there. The Kanchi personality attempts to claim the right to administer the rites of worship in Tirumalai temple with general bland remarks, half-statements and by confusing the issues. The totality of available evidence establishes Sri Venkatesvara Temple in Tirumalai hills as the Srivaishnava temple par excellence, and of great antiquity. The multi-strand evidence is authenticated in history, classical literature, inscriptional records, and the unbroken tradition of worship here and in other temples of the country. The Temple has been the inspiring theme of not only the ancient Tamil Sangham classics and post-Sangham classics like Kamban's famed Ramakatha etc, but is also venerated in the rapturous compositions of the subsequent daasa-saahitya in Kannada language, the moving songs of Kshetrajna, Annamacharya etc, and down to Sri Tyagaraja. Sri Ramanujacharya (1017-1137 AD) had visited Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvaram hills at least three times, and had established the Elder Jeeyar in 1057-58 (with his residential Matham) in order to oversee the organisation of worship of Sri Venkatesvara. The Junior Jeeyar was established in 1102. Sri Ramanuja's first-generation disciple Sri Anantaazhvaan (who hailed from to-day's Karnataka) was appointed by his mentor to keep the Lord's flower gardens and orchards. Anantaazhvaan's crucial Sanskrit work, Sri Venkataachala Itihaasa-maalaa, is a very authentic and comprehensive record of the debate sponsored by the local ruler Yaadava Naaraayana to put an end to Saiva importunate claims. It fell to Sri Ramanuja to establish, in this debate, on unambiguous and unassailable evidence that Sri Venkatesvara was the Vishnu of the veda-scripture. The streamlined modes of worship identified and reintroduced in the Temple by Sri Ramanuja were somewhat affected on account of the ravaging raids (1310 circa) of the Temples in the South by Malik Kafur and Ulugh Khan. The worship in Tirumalai was eventually restored by Manavaala Mahaa-muni who became the pontiff of the Srivaishnava capital of Srirangam. The worship in Tirumalai Temple is rendered as per the (Vaishnava) Vaikhaanasa Aagama, which is the twin of the (Vaishnava) Pancharaatra Agama which is in observance in Srirangam Temple. The 108 sanctified Vaishnava Temples of the country observe one or the other Aagama, and Sri Vedantaachaarya's work, Paancharaatra-rakshaa, establishes that there is no material conflict between the two Aagama-s. It is therefore palpably absurd to say, as our Kanchi personality now fantastically proposes, that the Vaikhaanasa of Tirumalai is exclusive of the Srivaishnava Vishishtaadvaita religion and doctrine. The Kanchi research-finding is contradicted by the fact that every Vaikhanasa temple in the South (Aandaal in Srivilli-puttoor, for instance) is indisputably corroborative of Vishishtaadvaita metaphysics and has a clear and unique Srivaishnava in character. It is to be deplored that with the ostensible objective of widening the space for festive perambulation, the centuries-old large 'thousand-pillar' mandapam- pavilion was demolished recently. The demolished mandapam contained stone sculpting of as many as 164 time-honoured 'Tenkalai' Srivaishnava Oordhva-pundram (sanctified religious marking). This has simultaneously caused a triple loss to the Temple traditions, historical evidence, and archaeological values. On behalf of the vast Srivaishnava Community of the country, and as especially the ardent devotees of Lord Sri Venkateswara, WE APPEAL to the TT Devasthanam urgently to consider the following steps in the interests of the un-vitiated continuance of the fragrant and time-sanctified worship-modes of Lord Sri Venkatesvara's Temple, which is our Holiest of Holies ~~ * Give no quarter whatsoever to the Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya in the administration and organisation of worship of Sri Venkatesvara Temple in Tirumalai, considering that he has no 'sampradaaya' affiliation to the Temple at all, and has therefore no locus standi to dictate to the TTD on the Temple affairs. * Reconstitute the Temple Board to provide primacy for the Elder ('pedda keylvi' ) Jeeyar Svami, the Junior ('chinna keylvi') Jeeyar Svami, identified descendant of Anantaazhvaan, and Sri Tridandi Sriman Narayana Ramanuja Chinna Jeeyar Svami (whose 'sampradaaya' insight and service are unassailable). * Constitute a seven-member standing committee to ensure the preservation of Srivaishnava Vaikhanasa Vishishtaadvaita traditions which had historically prevailed since ancient times in the Tirumalai Temple. The committee will provide ex officio for Sri Vaana-maa-malai Jeeyar Svami, one Vaikhaanasa archaka, three scholars of Veda-Shaastra, and two persons with sound administrative experience (one retired from Central Government and another retired from State Government). "Sri Venkateyso jayatu" azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam ramanuja/ b.. ramanuja c.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2004 Report Share Posted March 5, 2004 SrI: Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama: Swamin: I think you can get the e-mail address from the TTD web site www.tirumala.org. I got the following IDs from this web site and are as below. TTD - Administration E-Mail: ttdt Another ID: webmaster. May be you have to use the TTD adminisration e-mail E-Mail ID of CM - Sri N. Chandrababu Naidu (from AP Govt. web site): cmap . The above E-mail ID is from the following web site of AP Govt.: www.andhrapradesh.com http://www.aponline.gov.in/apportal/contact/CONTACT_DETAILS.ASP?CONTACTID=494www\ ..aponline.gov.in) : Dasan Srinivasan nsp wrote: > Dear Sri Tirumanjanam SundaraRajan swAmi. Thank You for your mail. > Your mail reminds me of, the timkering by the same person -persona > non-grata- at thiruchanur temple some years back. Fortunately, that > did not take off. Now, he he is trying his pranks at thirumala temple. > > It clearly points out to one thing. They are blatantly and shamelessly > displaying their jealousy insofar as the crowd, wealth and powers are > concerned.--> Can they match our Lord Almighty with any other deity? > 'ethanai seyyinum en magan mugam nEAr ovvAi" > "kandavARRAl thanadhEA vulagena ninRAn' > The tenor of the rejoinder distinctly reflects not only your frame of > mind, not only your bent of thinking , not only your forceful writing, > not only the transmission of the message but vividly rings in my ears > your voice, thorugh this mail. Thank you. > Can you please provide me with the mail ids of ttd and Chief Minister > of Andhra Pradhesh for us to send mails? > Thank You for including me in your esteemed list. > ramanuja dhasan > vanamamalai padmanabhan > - > SundaraRajan Tirumanjanam > SriVaishnavaSri ; LakshmitatacharMA ; Ramanuja internet ; > RangarajanSujata ; AzhvarMA-Melkote ; PadmanabhanNS ; Rajappa ; > VelukkudiKrishnanSvami > Wednesday, March 03, 2004 9:13 PM > [ramanuja] Kanchi Kamakoti on Tirumalai. > > > Reproduced below is the rejoinder from the Divya-desa Paramparya > Padu-kappu Peravai, Srirangam, > > to the loud Terminological Inexactitudes attributed to the Kanchi > Kamakoti Sankaracharya > > in the matter of Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara Temple, our Holy-of-Holies. > > The rejoinder merits the widest publicity in the press that you can > possibly arrange, and in other media and manner. > > A mail from you to the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh would also > be appropriate, > > so as to highlight the Kanchi Kamakoti's unwarranted attempts at > trivialising the Srivaishnava religion. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Divya-desa Paramparya Padukappu Peravai > 214, East Uttara Street, > SRIRANGAM-620006 > (District Trichy, Tamil Nadu). > > To > The Editor, > > > Unwarranted falsehoods of Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya, > regarding the Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara Temple. > > Sir, > > On his recent visit to Hyderabad, the Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya > had made unwarranted public statements regarding the time-honoured and > established Vaishnava character and administration of the Tirumalai > Sri Venkatesvara Temple. > > We have the privilege of seeking your cooperation in discharging > your valued role as responsible Press, in contradicting the falsehoods > contained in the Kanchi Acharya's statements. > > The Press Note prepared by us is attached for your ready reference > and use. > > Regards from > > (A.Krishnamachari) > SECRETARY > Phone: 0431-2434398 > kicha19 > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Sri: > > Certain unwarranted statements on the administration and worship > mode in the ancient and world-famous Tirumalai Sri > Venkatesvara-Srinivasa Temple have been carried in the Deccan > Chronicle (February 29 2004) and the New Indian Express (February 28 > 2004). These statements have been attributed to the Kanchi Kamakoti > Sankaracharya when on his visit to Hyderabad. > > > The Kamakoti personage's statements primarily betray his upstart bid > to capture power and property in the Tirumalai Srinivasa Temple which > is amongst the most venerated and historically well-documented centres > of Srivaishnava worship in India. The statements constitute a paranoid > ranting which underline the rabble doctrine, "The more loud, the more > true" and "The more brazen, the more broadcast". They also betray a > compulsive emotional need of this speaker to keep drawing attention to > himself, and to stay centre-stage in the mass media, however reckless > his enunciations or dubious his so-called initiatives for public peace > or plainly moth-eaten his erudition. This manner of peremptory > noise-making is hardly fair or edifying to the common sense and > intelligence of the large number of followers he claims to have. > > > Some of the Kanchi personality's discoveries are as sensational as > they are simply crass, as when he says that "Ramanuja had nothing > whatever to do with Tirumalai". His another profundity is that "the > Vaikhanasa mode of worship is not in anyway related to the > philosophical doctrine of Vishishtaadvaita". > > > Two other of his statements are carping on Sri Tridandi Sriman > Narayana Ramanuja Chinna Jeeyar, and expose his neurotic jealousy of > the venerated Jeeyar Svami. "Sri Tridandi Jeeyar should not > interfere", says the Kanchi personality, "with Tirumalai temple > administration matters. The Jeeyar is not a mathaadhipati at all but > only a Vishishtaadvait preacher, and barely a wayfarer in Tirumalai !" > In targeting the Tridandi Jeeyar svami for his crude attack, the > Kanchi personality has forgotten to produce his own credentials which > would empower him to declare a Srivaishnava institutional head as > persona non-grata in Tirumalai. > > > The Kanchi personality seems to be the only individual who is > ignorant of the fact that he has no locus standi whatsoever to declaim > and decide matters in respect of the holy Sri Venkatesvara Temple in > Tirumalai-Tirupati. Thanks to the media hype sponsored by his admirers > in public life, this neo-Sankaracharya has come to be just tolerated, > but not legitimised, in the four-seat Convocation of the > Sankaracharya-s (Badarinath, Dvarakanath, and Puri-Jagannath, and > Sringeri). None of the pontiffs of these four Sankara-peethas (which > are regarded as having been founded by the venerated Sankara > bhagavat-paada himself) has come out with the hilarious kind of > statements as the Kanchi personality has presently made. > > > The Kanchi personality's strategy for gaining a foothold in the Sri > Venkatesvara Temple administration is contained in his rather bland > statement, "We Sankaracharya-s too have the right of offering > worship-rites in Vishnu temples." Sri Sankara Bhagavat Paada was > self-evidently a Vaishnava saint, but later-day distortions depict him > as an ash-smeared Saiva. Any of the Sankara mathaadhipati-s is > therefore received, as indeed any religious head of vaidika religion, > with temple honours not only in Tirumalai but > > > > > also in other temples in the country. But it is one thing to receive > temple honours and a respectful preference to have darshan, and an > entirely another thing (and unwarranted claim) to administer the rites > of worship there. The Kanchi personality attempts to claim the right > to administer the rites of worship in Tirumalai temple with general > bland remarks, half-statements and by confusing the issues. > > > The totality of available evidence establishes Sri Venkatesvara > Temple in Tirumalai hills as the Srivaishnava temple par excellence, > and of great antiquity. The multi-strand evidence is authenticated in > history, classical literature, inscriptional records, and the unbroken > tradition of worship here and in other temples of the country. The > Temple has been the inspiring theme of not only the ancient Tamil > Sangham classics and post-Sangham classics like Kamban's famed > Ramakatha etc, but is also venerated in the rapturous compositions of > the subsequent daasa-saahitya in Kannada language, the moving songs of > Kshetrajna, Annamacharya etc, and down to Sri Tyagaraja. > > > Sri Ramanujacharya (1017-1137 AD) had visited Tirumalai Sri > Venkatesvaram hills at least three times, and had established the > Elder Jeeyar in 1057-58 (with his residential Matham) in order to > oversee the organisation of worship of Sri Venkatesvara. The Junior > Jeeyar was established in 1102. > > > Sri Ramanuja's first-generation disciple Sri Anantaazhvaan (who > hailed from to-day's Karnataka) was appointed by his mentor to keep > the Lord's flower gardens and orchards. Anantaazhvaan's crucial > Sanskrit work, Sri Venkataachala Itihaasa-maalaa, is a very authentic > and comprehensive record of the debate sponsored by the local ruler > Yaadava Naaraayana to put an end to Saiva importunate claims. It fell > to Sri Ramanuja to establish, in this debate, on unambiguous and > unassailable evidence that Sri Venkatesvara was the Vishnu of the > veda-scripture. The streamlined modes of worship identified and > reintroduced in the Temple by Sri Ramanuja were somewhat affected on > account of the ravaging raids (1310 circa) of the Temples in the South > by Malik Kafur and Ulugh Khan. The worship in Tirumalai was eventually > restored by Manavaala Mahaa-muni who became the pontiff of the > Srivaishnava capital of Srirangam. > > > The worship in Tirumalai Temple is rendered as per the (Vaishnava) > Vaikhaanasa Aagama, which is the twin of the (Vaishnava) Pancharaatra > Agama which is in observance in Srirangam Temple. The 108 sanctified > Vaishnava Temples of the country observe one or the other Aagama, and > Sri Vedantaachaarya's work, Paancharaatra-rakshaa, establishes that > there is no material conflict between the two Aagama-s. It is > therefore palpably absurd to say, as our Kanchi personality now > fantastically proposes, that the Vaikhaanasa of Tirumalai is exclusive > of the Srivaishnava Vishishtaadvaita religion and doctrine. The Kanchi > research-finding is contradicted by the fact that every Vaikhanasa > temple in the South (Aandaal in Srivilli-puttoor, for instance) is > indisputably corroborative of Vishishtaadvaita metaphysics and has a > clear and unique Srivaishnava in character. > > > It is to be deplored that with the ostensible objective of widening > the space for festive perambulation, the centuries-old large > 'thousand-pillar' mandapam- pavilion was demolished recently. The > demolished mandapam contained stone sculpting of as many as 164 > time-honoured 'Tenkalai' Srivaishnava Oordhva-pundram (sanctified > religious marking). This has simultaneously caused a triple loss to > the Temple traditions, historical evidence, and archaeological values. > > > On behalf of the vast Srivaishnava Community of the country, > > and as especially the ardent devotees of Lord Sri Venkateswara, > > > WE APPEAL > > to the TT Devasthanam > > urgently to consider the following steps > > > in the interests of the un-vitiated continuance of the fragrant and > time-sanctified worship-modes of Lord Sri Venkatesvara's Temple, which > is our Holiest of Holies ~~ > > > * Give no quarter whatsoever to the Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya in > the administration and organisation of worship of Sri Venkatesvara > Temple in Tirumalai, considering that he has no 'sampradaaya' > affiliation to the Temple at all, and has therefore no locus standi to > dictate to the TTD on the Temple affairs. > > > * Reconstitute the Temple Board to provide primacy for the Elder > ('pedda keylvi' ) Jeeyar Svami, the Junior ('chinna keylvi') Jeeyar > Svami, identified descendant of Anantaazhvaan, and Sri Tridandi Sriman > Narayana Ramanuja Chinna Jeeyar Svami (whose 'sampradaaya' insight and > service are unassailable). > > > * Constitute a seven-member standing committee to ensure the > preservation of Srivaishnava Vaikhanasa Vishishtaadvaita traditions > which had historically prevailed since ancient times in the Tirumalai > Temple. The committee will provide ex officio for Sri Vaana-maa-malai > Jeeyar Svami, one Vaikhaanasa archaka, three scholars of > Veda-Shaastra, and two persons with sound administrative experience > (one retired from Central Government and another retired from State > Government). > > > "Sri Venkateyso jayatu" > > > > > > > azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam > > > > Sponsor > > > > > > > > Links > > > ramanuja/ > > b.. > ramanuja > > c.. Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > > > azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam > > > > ------ > Links > > * > ramanuja/ > > * > ramanuja > <ramanuja?subject=Un> > > * Terms of > Service <> . > > 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.