Ayyappa and demigod issue

[Guest guest]

I have been keeping silent on this issue. I was very much disturbed by the

direction in which this arguement was going. I totally agree with Vasu Murthy

and Dr. Balaji Hebbar. We should respect or atleast tolerate others beliefs

and values. I was planning to call and talk to Mr. Potti. Please, see that

this type of rudeness will not be repeated in this platform. I request Mr.

Potti to stay in this VMS group and continue his service to Shri Hari.

Best regards,

Srinivasa Bhat, Troy, Michigan

[Guest guest]

Vasu Murthy <vmurthy writes:

 

> 2. We should respect his and other's choice of beliefs > and worship. As Sri

Hebbar has said, various factors > come into the play in the choice of beliefs

and > worship and we should respect his and everybody's > choice of worship.

There is no question of

> advocacy or pressuring any one to change his choice of > worship. My original

intent of the thread was to show

 

Vasu: Hebbar has said that there are local variations. Hebbar's e-mail DOES NOT

SPEAK of any local variation that includes Ayyappa worshipping. The usage of

Hebbar's writing to justify this is completely flawed.

 

No question of advocacy? Nataraj wrote that this is unacceptable to the Madhvas

and that whoever is doing this needs to understand it. Nataraj never pressured

anyone to do anything. It is Potti who started this saga on the lines of " Oh, I

am sooooooo hurt that you said so " etc.

 

 

 

> 4. Let us close this thread. All the philosophical > issues seem to have

been exhausted.

 

This is an escapist attitude. The philosophical issue is very clear and you do

not seem to want to call a spade a spade.

 

> 5. I also request sri Gopal Potti to stay on the > list. I understand his

desire to leave following the > rancour in the threads. I request him again to

stay.

 

OH, please! What is this supposed to accomplish? That we will not discuss any

topic openly again?

 

In case none of the arguments can convince anyone with an open mind, I refer you

to Sri NAPS Rao's e-mail. We have his word that H H Vidyamanya Theertharu said

that " as long as truth emerges, it is OK to indulge in debate " or something to

that effect.

 

 

> I pray to Lord krishNa to bless all the bhaktas and > readers of the list.

 

Thank god, there is something in your e-mail that I agree with!

 

Regards.

[Guest guest]

krishNa sevakas,

I was out of town and not in E-mail contact for the last two days. The

thread has taken unexpected turns. Let me expand on a couple of things.

 

1. I know Gopal Potti very well. I have seen krishNa pujas in his home. They

are full of devotional atmosphere and tradition. In my opinion, he is one of the

most ardent devotees of krishNa. I deeply respect and admire his devotion. His

service to

the Hindu and mAdhva communities in the area are exemplary.

 

2. We should respect his and other's choice of beliefs and worship. As Sri

Hebbar has said, various factors come into the play in the choice of beliefs and

worship and we should respect his and everybody's choice of worship. There is no

question of

advocacy or pressuring any one to change his choice of worship. My original

intent of the thread was to show that Gita does not preclude people from

worshipping demigods. I definitely did a poor job of conveying the intent.

 

3. Let treat with respect minority and unpopular opinions on the list. Even if

we disagree with some body, let us show respect, kindness and compassion towards

the individual and the view point. Let us try to approach " Sthitha praj~na " as

much as

possible. This also creates an atmosphere suitable for honest debate. Let us

keep a spiritual atmosphere in the list. This is the approach of sri

Jayatheertha and other in our tradition in their writings. Let us try to emulate

them.

 

4. Let us close this thread. All the philosophical issues seem to have been

exhausted.

 

5. I also request sri Gopal Potti to stay on the list. I understand his desire

to leave following the rancour in the threads. I request him again to stay.

 

I pray to Lord krishNa to bless all the bhaktas and readers of the list.

 

 

Hare srinivasa,

Regards,

Vasu Murthy

 

 

 

 

 

--

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

Vasu Murthy

 

vmurthy

 

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

[Guest guest]

> Dear shrI Acharya:

>

> You have pointed out that my thinking is flawed. No problem.

> I accept that. In my profession as a college professor in the

 

 

Prof. Hebbar: Please go back to read my e-mail

that you are quoting. What I said is this: that Vasu's reference to your e-mail

is flawed, because he implied that your observations of variance from the Madhva

norm in some communities makes Ayyappa worship permissible.

 

I did not say your arguments were flawed. You pointed out some facts, and I

would not be foolish enough to dispute what is a fact.

 

Now you clearly state that we should be making a similar concession to Ayyappa.

That is a liberal viewpoint; while I can't agree with you, I cannot dispute your

right to an opinion.

 

I apologize to you if you felt offended by my earlier e-mail. It is not my

intention to belittle you or your thinking. I note with great pride that you

are the only professor I know who is equally skilled in taking a Western as well

as Shastraic approach to Dvaita.

 

Since you had copied the list as well as Shri Potti, I was forced to do so as

well.

 

 

Regards,

Arvind

[Guest guest]

>AsifJah

>Thu, 20 Jan 2000 23:57:26 EST

>Re: Ayyappa and demigod issue

 

>No question of advocacy? Nataraj wrote that this is unacceptable to the

>Madhvas and that whoever is doing this needs to understand it. Nataraj

>never pressured anyone to do anything. It is Potti who started this saga

>on the lines of " Oh, I am sooooooo hurt that you said so " etc.

 

Let me refresh Sri AsifJah's memory: I have stated very clearly before by

an email that I would not have made any comment if Mr. Prasanna Krishna had

simply stated that Lord Ayyappa was not an avathara of any devatha and

according to Madhva Philosohpy, Lord Ayyappa does not exist. But he went

on making a statement that he strongly recommend that any madhva worshipping

Lord Ayyappa should be stopped right now. That prompted me to send an email

explaining why I believe in Lord Ayyappa. That is all. Being a

krishnabakta, I cant not go to your level of making fun of people

especially respected Sri

Vasu Murthy.

 

Dear Vasu, my position of leaving VMS is firm. Please remove my name by this

weekend. My help will be always there since I am doing service to Lord

SriKrishna.

 

Dear Sri Ramachandra Rao, I will send you an email directly answering some

of your questions at a later time regarding gradation and other things.

 

For people who want to continue this thread, please direct all your

enquiries to

 

The Hindu Temple Socoety of North Ameria,

Sri Maha Vallabha Ganapti Devastanam

45-57 Bowne Street

Flushing, NY 11355

Tel. 718-460-8484

http://www.indianet.com/ganesh

 

Whether it is a coincident or not, this week without my request, I received

a 2000 calender by mail from NY Ganapthi Temple where in the month of June

page, you will see a picture of Lord Vishnu as Mohini and Lord Shiva with

sages. Now some of you can go after NY temple priests and Board of Trustees

for coming up with a picture like that. Please note that there are a lot of

learnt schalors associated wth that temple since I know them very well

while I was in NY area during early 70s.

 

Best regards to all,

 

Gopal Krishna Potti

[Guest guest]

AsifJah wrote:

 

> Vasu Murthy <vmurthy writes:

>

> > 2. We should respect his and other's choice of beliefs > and worship. As Sri

Hebbar has said, various factors > come into the play in the choice of beliefs

and > worship and we should respect his and everybody's > choice of worship.

There is no question of

> > advocacy or pressuring any one to change his choice of > worship. My

original intent of the thread was to show

>

> Vasu: Hebbar has said that there are local variations. Hebbar's e-mail DOES

NOT SPEAK of any local variation that includes Ayyappa worshipping. The usage

of Hebbar's writing to justify this is completely flawed.

>

> No question of advocacy? Nataraj wrote that this is unacceptable to the

Madhvas and that whoever is doing this needs to understand it. Nataraj never

pressured anyone to do anything. It is Potti who started this saga on the lines

of " Oh, I am sooooooo hurt that you said so " etc.

>

> > 4. Let us close this thread. All the philosophical > issues seem to have

been exhausted.

>

> This is an escapist attitude. The philosophical issue is very clear and you

do not seem to want to call a spade a spade.

>

> > 5. I also request sri Gopal Potti to stay on the > list. I understand his

desire to leave following the > rancour in the threads. I request him again to

stay.

>

> OH, please! What is this supposed to accomplish? That we will not discuss any

topic openly again?

>

> In case none of the arguments can convince anyone with an open mind, I refer

you to Sri NAPS Rao's e-mail. We have his word that H H Vidyamanya Theertharu

said that " as long as truth emerges, it is OK to indulge in debate " or

something to that effect.

>

> > I pray to Lord krishNa to bless all the bhaktas and > readers of the list.

>

> Thank god, there is something in your e-mail that I agree with!

>

> Regards.

 

Aravind,

All this has been said before. We are not covering any new ground. This

discussion has to be closed now.

 

srinivAsam bhaje anisham..

 

 

Regards,

Vasu Murthy

 

 

--

 

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

Vasu Murthy

vmurthy

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

[Guest guest]

Dear shrI Acharya:

 

You have pointed out that my thinking is flawed. No problem.

I accept that. In my profession as a college professor in the

Humanities field, argumentations are part of the scenario. To

use an amercanism " it comes with the territory " . I deal with

my colleagues and my graduate students all the time who also

feel the same way over other issues. My job as a teacher is

to be patient and work and rework these things to clarify to

the other party (to the best of my ability) what I am

saying. It may or may not work. But that's OK!

 

To clarify my previous analogies:

 

1. In the Dharmasthala narrative, I was making the aNNappa =

ayyappa correlation. I wouldn't be surprised if these two are

regional variations of one demi-god etc. Certainly, the names

are similar and Dharmasthala (as the crow flies) is not all

that far from Sabarimalai. Anyway, as an academic without

further proof I will deem it to be just a personal conjecture

on my part. I don't except you or anyone else to agree with

that. And I fully understand.

 

2. In the GauDa-SArasvat narrative, I was making the

correlation of the unorthodox fish-eating practice to the

" unorthodox " Ayyappa worship practice.

 

In both of these situations (aNNappa worship and fish-eating),

the Mainline MAdhva tradition has tended to tolerate and look

" the other way " at these. Perhaps (and only perhaps) such an

allowance should be permitted in the Ayyappa worship as well.

It certainly seems plausible.

 

shrI Acharya, some us tend to be more sensitive than others.

It is OK. Anyway, it only reinforces shrImadAcArya's philosophy

that each jIva is unique as per its svabhAva. Let us give

allowance for that. If someone feels sensitive about Ayyappa,

just let it be.

 

Many thanks to you for patiently reading my write-ups and

responding to them.

with kindest regards,

B.N.Hebbar

[Guest guest]

Dear shrI Acharya:

 

In that case, the apology must come from me to you for

having misread you. Not the other way around. I must be man

enough to admit that in front of all. How can I ever be

offended by a FRIEND? That is impossible.

 

No matter what, your goodself, Vasu, shrI Gopal Potti and all

others in this forum, I will continue to hold as my good

friends in both the secular and the sacred.

 

regards to all,

Hari-vAyu smaraNa

B.N.Hebbar