[sri ramanuja] on Sandhyavandhanam

[Guest guest]

Dear members, praNAmams

 

One point I would like to add to Sri Vishnu's comment, is that by

overly discussing the following of Vaideeka rituals we are implicitly

concerning ourselves only with dwijas, i.e. for most intents and

purposes, brahmins. If we think about the 'idealised' situation, we

should be having roughly equal proportions of all varNas in any

functioning society. Or at least, in terms of sheer man/woman-power,

we should be ending up with far more Kshatriyas/Vaishyas/Shudras than

brahmins. But who forms the largest contingent in most of these

-groups for example, and who are the most "visible"

ShriVaishnavas in our community? I am probably right in thinking that

most of us are brahmins. Historically, something has obviously gone

wrong here!

 

So I think it is very easy for us to keep on talking about things

that only concern our small group, like why dwijas should do

sandhyaavandanam. But I think if we had got the societal balance

right historically, really we should be only mentioning it in passing

- we should be saying something more along the lines of:

 

"prappannans should strive to engage in meditation on God's qualities

at all times, serve all beings as service to God [to quote from HH

Chinna Jeeyar Swami],... oh and incidentally, that small subset of

prappanans initiated in Vedic duties should be performing their nitya

naimittika karmas as part of that service".

 

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying we should ignore it. I

completely agree that those who have had upanayanam (whether they are

brahmin, Indian, non-Indian, whatever - and there are increasing cases

of the latter) should be performing sandhyaavandanam - after all, we

all did agree to have our upanayanam so on our own head be it! But,

what I am saying is, there is a disproportionate proportion of time

dedicated to discussing the rituals which only pertain to a miniscule

percentage of the world's population. When there is so much in our

sampradaayam that is for all people, I think it is our responsibility

to concentrate on that. Otherwise people will think of us as just

another "brahmin-centric" tradition (to be honest, already most of the

people I know think "Iyengars" anyway when they hear Srivaishnava) and

people won't appreciate the all-encompassing nature of our tradition.

 

I have a huge respect for the Tengalai tradition as I have always

heard it to be one which truly reaches out to all; my own family is

from the Vadagalai tradition and sadly, there are indeed some who are

very devoted to rituals for ritual's sake, varNAshrama taboos etc.

(even though many probably wouldn't know the first difference between

Swami Desikan and ManavaaLa maamunigaL!). My plea to those of you who

are guardians of the Tengalai tradition is as follows: please do not

lose the valuable lessons you can teach the rest of us by descending

into discussion of internal issues. People who have had upanayanam

should do their sandhyaavandanam, period. But no big deal, they

should take their own responsibility and get on with it, while we try

and concentrate on upliftment of society at large. The aim of the

game is to bring the knowledge of shriiman naaraayaNa to all peoples

through service, and any discussion of whether or not a miniscule

percentage of the population are doing their duties is an issue for

them and shouldn't take center stage in any truly egalitarian

shrivaishNavam-based society. At least this is my opinion, anyway.

 

Please forgive any offences, none intended

sarvAparAdhAn kShamasva

namO nArAyaNAya

with praNAmams,

Ranjan

 

 

ramanuja, "Vishnu" <vsmvishnu wrote:

>

> One clarification is, I am NEVER saying we should not do

> sandhyavandanam. What I am saying is it does not really matter in

> thennacharya sampradayam. I have seen even highly ritualistic

> scholars not being much serious abt it.

>

> A few inconsistencies do exist in our rituals against the philosophy

> and I am not qualified and learned enough to elaborate more. There

> is no thought policing kind of thing in our sampradayam and its

> beauty lies in the variety of the practices of its followers.

>

> adiyen

> Vishnu

>

>

>

> ramanuja, "Vishnu" <vsmvishnu@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Sriman Madhavakkannan,

> >

> > There are ritualistic and non-ritualistic people in both schools

> of

> > thought and their opinions vary.

> >

> > Why does Manavala Mamunigal say, "japahOmAdi gaLAlE arthakAmarkku,

> > arhtatthAlE prapannarkku"? Does the Acharya's thiruvuLLam apply

> only

> > to ashtAksharI japam? Is it not an anomaly in our sampradAyam if

> we

> > perform sandhyAvandanam but dont do ashtAksharI japam?

> >

> > From the commentary you quoted of Appillai, it nowhere appeared

> > that the Acharya prescribes thrikAla sandhyAvandanam.

> >

> > adiyen ramanuja dasan

> > Vishnu

> >

>