Guest guest Posted January 22, 2000 Report Share Posted January 22, 2000 Many, many thanks to Balaji Hebbar for bringing out the historical aspects of Tulu Madhvas! I am more interested in the historical facts of Tulu brahmanas, language,script(!?) etc. and thus I was a silent observer of the all these days. I met Dr. Gururaja Bhat in 1976 and admired his work even though some findings might have gone contrary to the local belief he was a true scientist, archeologist and iconologist. I am glad Dr. Balaji Hebbar is acquainting the coastal madhvas their sampradaya and how historically influenced to other non-tulu speaking madhvas. Historically speaking, of course, can we forget Sri madhvAcharyA's original name, community, place and the language he spoke and wrote? Balakrishna Rao [ ] Friday, January 21, 2000 5:16 AM Digest Number 264 --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ---------------------------- Get great offers on top-notch products that match your interests! Sign up for eLerts at: <a href= " http://clickme./ad/elerts1 " >Click Here</a> ------ nAham kartA hariH kartA tatpUjA karmachaakhilam.h| taThaapi matkR^itaa pUja tatprasaadhEna naanyaThaa| tadbhakti tadphalam.h mahyam.h tatprasaadaat.h punaH punaH | karmanyaasO harAvevam.h vishNOsthR^iptikaraH sadhA || " I am not the doer, shri Hari is the doer, all the actions that I do are His worship. Even then, the worship I do is through His grace and not otherwise. That devotion and the fruits of the actions that come to me are due to His recurring grace " If one always practices to do actions with a dedicated spirit to Hari, in this way, it pleases Vishnu. --- Quoted by Sri madhvAchArya in GitA tAtparya ------ There are 10 messages in this issue. Topics in today's digest: 1. Re: rAyarA gadyAs RAMACHANDRA RAO <bkrrao 2. Re: Delete my name from VMS list/Second Request napsrao <napsrao 3. Re: Digest Number 263 Balakrishnan Basker <bbasker 4. ReDigest Number 263- Ref: Ayaappa rajcaval.kkh (Raja R Cavale) 5. Coastal MAdhvas Balaji Hebbar <bhebbar 6. Ayyappa and demigod issue Vasu Murthy <vmurthy 7. Re: Ayyappa and demigod issue Ssrriinn 8. Re: Coastal MAdhvas AsifJah 9. DELETE hema rao <hema_rao 10. Re: Ayyappa and demigod issue AsifJah __________________________ ___ __________________________ ___ Message: 1 Thu, 20 Jan 2000 01:56:26 -0800 (PST) RAMACHANDRA RAO <bkrrao Re: rAyarA gadyAs Dear Mutalik, There is an article on 'Sarvasamarpana gadya' also written by me in the dvaita-list. You may find it useful. There is a translation of 'Pratah sankalpa gadya' by Davanagere Bhima Rao. It is an excellent book on this great work of Sri Gururaja. There is an English translation of this work by Srimushnam Nagarajachar published by SMSO sabha (or a sister organization of it.). It is also very informative. THe 'Sarvasamarpana gadya' has been translated with a lot of details of the prameyas involved by late Sri P. Vishnuteertha. Possibly the book is available in some bookshops in Bangalore. With best wishes, Bannur.R Both the above books are not in print. Venk Mutalik <vmutalik wrote: " Venk Mutalik " <vmutalik Sri gururAjo vijayate Does anyone on VMS have a translation in full of rAyarA gadyAs. Also, is a recitation of the gadyAs on audio cassette available? The dvaita list has a gloss on the prAtah sankalpA gadyA, by Sri Bannur. A complete translation of these would be a very good supplement for our VMS's literary pursuits. namaskAra Venkatesh/Pramodini ____ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com __________________________ ___ Message: 2 Thu, 20 Jan 2000 16:34:16 +0530 napsrao <napsrao Re: Delete my name from VMS list/Second Request Dear Friends, I find that the subject is being changed from the correctness of worship of Demigod Ayyappan to the the sense of wrong felt by Mr. Potti. Arguments are also being offered about Broadmindedness, Tolerance etc. I have no wish to contribute to this aspect of the matter, but I will quote a statement made by Sri 108 Vidyamanya Tirtha Swamiji (whom I believe, most of us respect) about the practice of arriving at the Siddhantha by pointing out the errors of the Purvapakshas considered earlier. The original is in Kannada and has been translated by me. Mr. Nelamangala ha also made this point, I believe. As far as I am concerned, I am interested in the subject to the extent that Pramanas are made available about the validity of the beliefs. If such Pramanas do not exist, the conclusion is obvious. " There will be no harm done to Hindu Unity due to critical examination of concepts (of philosophy or religion). " " When we see Yathi Pranava Kalpa of Sri Madhvaacharya, about the manner of behaviour of Ascetics, we see that most of our activities go against the Shasthras. But we can not accept the charge made against us in recent times. Some persons feel that expounding the Siddhantha of Srimadacharya in big public functions by criticising and showing the errors of other systems is wrong. But, if one should get real devotion in God, it is necessary to have clear knowledge about God without any doubts. Such knowledge is only obtained by Khanadana and Mandana - (showing the errors in Purvapaksha and showing that the Siddhnatha answers all doubts and has no errors). Therefore, if the normal people should become true devotees of God, such critical appreciation of Siddhantha is necessary. Because we criticise such Siddhanthas, does not mean that we hate the followers of such schools. We will continue to have affection and appreciation of such persons also. Therefore, we feel that our activities in this direction will not harm Hindu Unity. " I feel therefore, that if at all, there is conviction and faith on the issue, it should be discussed freely or we should close this discussion itself. NAPSRao __________________________ ___ __________________________ ___ Message: 3 Thu, 20 Jan 2000 11:16:00 +0530 Balakrishnan Basker <bbasker Re: Digest Number 263 Respected Sir. In this digest though there are 12 messages in the digest only seven are sent as shown under . Can you kindly send the left over messages or the whole digest No.263. Regards. Dr.B.Basker. wrote: >_________________________ __ Message: 4 Thu, 20 Jan 2000 23:18:14 +0300 rajcaval.kkh (Raja R Cavale) ReDigest Number 263- Ref: Ayaappa " If there is an Almighty, who is only That One who is beyond everything, saving only those who believe in Him and if He can not appear to the people of different visions in different forms, then He suffers from a very serious limitation. " Dear Friends, The above statement is made by none other than myself at the beginning of a future book of mine on a personal view on Hinduism which I hope I will be able to publish one day.(This is not a 'Plug-in'). I have made a halt to its possible publication because I am working in the country where the origin of the second religion of the world started in the 6th Century of the last Millennium. The above statement is made as my reaction to their motto that 'The God is The Only One and is the Greatest'. Greater than Whom? If something is the greatest then it is so in comparison to other things whose existence can not be denied. Otherwise the statement should be just 'God is'. Here the people say that what they believe is the correct one and if you ask them how do they know about it, they say it is given in their book. How is that true? because it is revealed by God. Who says so?, it is given in their book. This is a circular argument used by all religions of the world including Hinduism. Therefore we can not write off a person because he recognizes Ayyappa. We need not reject a person just because his belief is not clearly supported in Puranas. Whole creation is God's manifestation and different forms of worships and all point towards the Ultimate God and form an ascension towards full Knowledge. I believe that 'Avatar' of God did not stop at Puranas, it is still continuing in one form or the other to the present day. Yours sincerely, Rajaram Cavale. 1. Do not forget to include the 'dot' before kkh in our address as below rajcaval.kkh 2. Please note our new telephone number: (009662) 6240000 Ext.3353. __________________________ ___ __________________________ ___ Message: 5 Thu, 20 Jan 2000 19:56:28 -0400 Balaji Hebbar <bhebbar Coastal MAdhvas Dear shrI Acharya: Let me give you a few examples of how hinterland MAdhva customs differ from coastal MAdhva customs, some of which had (perhaps?) the candid approval of ShrImadAcArya himself. One example that readily comes to mind and the one that perhaps clearly demarcates the difference between the two cultures is the fish-eating habits of the GauDa-SArasvat MAdhvas (who can be readily recognized by their typical " Mangalorean " surnames such as Pai, Prabhu, Kamath, Shenoy etc.). It has been an officially long-accepted habit among the GauDa-SArasvats to eat fish. These peoples were converted by ShrImadAcArya himself (who, I am sure, was quite aware of their dietary habits even as he converted them) on his way back via Gomantaka (Goa) after his Second North Indian Tour. Until 1476 AD, the entire GauDa-SArasvat community were parishoners of the PhalimAr MaTha of UDupi. HH RAmacandra TIRtha, the 10th Pontiff on the pITha of the PhalimAr MaTha, on account of certain marked differences between the TuLu and the KonkaNI MAdhvas decided that they ought to be goverened by their own maThas. As such in 1476, he choose a young lad from among their own ranks and ordained him as nArAyaNa TIrtha at Bhatkal (North Kanara). The paramparA descended from HH nArAyaNa TIrtha today goes by the name " JIvottama PartagALi MaTha " (alias GokarNa MaTha). Later on, in 1542 AD, after the Portuguese conquest of Gomantaka, another maTha, the KAshI MaTha based at Cochin came into being. In fact, the present pontiff of the KAshI MAtha HH SudhIndra TIrtha thinks that ShrImadAcArya was KonkaNI-speaking and not TuLu speaking. This has become a rather sticky issue between the TuLu and the KonkaNI MAdhvas. Hon'ble Dr. BNK Sharma however has argued (and quite successfully so, I might add) that ShrImadAcArya was a Taulava and not a Konkanastha. To complicate matters further, inscriptions were discovered four decades ago within the precincts of the KRSHNa Temple at UDupi by one of my late professors, the late Hon'ble Prof. Padur Gururaja Bhatt (MA, PhD and a TuLu MAdhva himself) that funds were donated by Messrs. DAmarasa Prabhu and LingaNNa Pai (both GauDa-Sarasvat MAdhvas) to make extensive addittions and renovations to the KRSHNa Temple in 1614 AD. This would have been roughly 14 years after the sajIvavRndAvana pravesha of HMVH VAdirAja GurusArvabhaumaru at Sode. Further, in both the GokarNa and the KAshI MaThas (it may be noted), the pUjAparicArakas (i.e. devaraseve avaru) when they go home on vacation eat fish and afterwards resume their duties normally once they are back in their mAthas assisting their svAmIs in their daily pUjAs to the paTTada devarus of their respective maThas. The SvAmIjIs themselves in their pUrvAshrama would also perhaps have eaten fish. Anyway, nobody even bats an eyelid about all this. Such an action would be unthinkable in the hinterland or the TauLava mAThas. Yet I have personally seen shrI Gopinath Galagali's father, the Hon'ble PaNDit Pandarinathachaya Galagali do " shAstrIya pATha " to HH VidyAdhirAja TIrtha svAmIjI, the incumbent pontiff of the GokarNa MaTha. Another one that comes to my mind is the " mInu hiDiyo habba " during TuLu MAdhva weddings (clearly a coastal habit). These were done, of course, when weddings lasted 13 days. Today, in this age of ready-made divorces, one should be happy if the marriage lasts longer than the actual wedding ceremony itself. There is no such thing as " melugacche " among orthodox TuLu MAdhva women. The Konkanasthas, however, DO have it. And there are many others..... Anyway, these are " deshAchAra " issues and they are better off left in their own cultural settings. ShrImadAcArya taught us the glorious doctrine of tattvavAda, and bearing this in mind, let us all be united as MAdhvas under this banner through ABMM, VMS, CMS etc. to preserve and perpetuate this. I know both your good self and shrI Gopal Potti equally well. Both of you are wonderful people who have done a lot for the MAdhva community in the New York and Washington DC areas respectively and will (I am sure) do much more in the years to come. And so, it pains me to see two well-meaning and devout MAdhvas to have this harsh verbal duel. I am deeply sorry to see my good friend Vasu Murthy, a VMS director, and a man of deep sincereity, patience and goodwill to have been caught in the middle of all this. With his usual dignified demeanor he has done some superb tight-rope walking on this issue. My hats-off for him on that. He is truly fit to be the director. I pray sincerely that all parties effect a compromise on this matter as expeditiously as possible. In any organization and on any given issue, there are bound to be differences of opinion along conservative and liberal lines. That is a given. The idea, however, is to work together despite these differences. I am sure you both know all this. Sorry for the sermonizing. My deep praNAms to you both and one and all in the MAdhva community. kindest regards, Hari-vAyu smaraNa, B.N.Hebbar __________________________ ___ __________________________ ___ Message: 6 Thu, 20 Jan 2000 21:06:59 -0500 Vasu Murthy <vmurthy Ayyappa and demigod issue 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 ================================== __________________________ __ __________________________ ___ Message: 7 Thu, 20 Jan 2000 22:29:55 EST Ssrriinn Re: Ayyappa and demigod issue 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 __________________________ ___ __________________________ ___ Message: 8 Thu, 20 Jan 2000 23:44:33 EST AsifJah Re: Coastal MAdhvas Prof.Hebbar: > I know both your good self and shrI Gopal Potti equally well. > Both of you are wonderful people who have done a lot for the > MAdhva community in the New York and Washington DC areas > respectively and will (I am sure) do much more in the years > to come. And so, it pains me to see two well-meaning and > devout MAdhvas to have this harsh verbal duel. I think you may be confusing me with someone else, I did not have any duel with anyone. Usually, I end up with a monologue as I am very vocal in expressing my opinions and mince no words; but on the issue of legitimacy of worshipping Ayyappa, I did not have anything to say. I merely stated after the fact that calling Madhva theoreticians " extremists " is a disservice. I certainly do not practise the perfect Madhva way of living but I have high regard for those who do. Those who are now creating new " hybrid " Madhva communites by worshipping false gods through ignorance should not be mollycoddled. I agree with NAPS Rao's comments; I reiterate again that if truth hurts one must learn to be deaf, not cry foul! Regards, Arvind Acharya __________________________ ___ __________________________ ___ Message: 9 Thu, 20 Jan 2000 20:54:46 -0800 (PST) hema rao <hema_rao DELETE Hi, Please remove my ID from your mailing list. I do not wish to receive any more emails. Thanks, Hema. Talk to your friends online with Messenger. http://im. __________________________ ___ __________________________ ___ Message: 10 Thu, 20 Jan 2000 23:57:26 EST AsifJah Re: Ayyappa and demigod issue 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. __________________________ ___ __________________________ ___ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2000 Report Share Posted January 23, 2000 Dear shrI Balakrishna Rao: I stand humbled by your kind words. However, all credit should rightfully go to that late great savant, the Rt. Hon'ble Prof. Gururaja Bhat. He was a superb academic, an archeologist, a historian of religion and an authority on MalabAr culture. Hon'ble Pt. Bannanje Govindacharya has great regard for him and took over as Director of the Institute of Indian Studies founded by the late professor at KaDiyALI, UDupi. I remember the time when Prof. Bhat went (sometimes walking literally for miles in the hot humid MalabAr climate) to each and every temple in South Kanara and photographed all the deities and wrote extensive notes on their origin, period etc. For his work, the University of Heidelberg in Germany was planning to not only invite him to occupy the chair of Indology but eventually award him a D.Litt. degree. Of course, tragedy struck and he was snatched away from us. It was he who brought up the very pertinent point that the BRhaspati (Guru) and vAyu cult existed among the MalabAr brahmins. Hence a connection between UDupi KRShNa and GuruvAyUr KRShNa. In the case of the latter, Guru (BRhaspati) and vAyu established GuruvAyUr KRShNa (as the local legend says) and in the case of the former, it is vAyu who became a Guru (i.e. ShrImad Ananda TIrtha) and established UDupi KRShNa (also as per local legend). In addition, both were BAlakRShNas. It was an important discovery which caused many an academic to view in askance the local legends. Pt. Bannanje has never believed in the Malpe miracle theory of ShrImadAcArya obtaining KRShna from a boat. Neither does the Sumadhvavijaya make mention of it. Prof. Bhatt's discovery only reinforced these. As you have rightly pointed out that we must never forget the MalabAr/TauLava origins of shRImadAcArya, but it is also equally important to bear in mind that it is the illustrious pontiffs and paNDits of the Deccan hinterland " Deshastha " MAdhva MaThas who have been the real vanguards and defenders of the faith over the centuries. Other than HH Vijayadhvaja and VAdirAja TIrthas, there are none amongst the TauLavas who came even close to the hinterland scholars in terms to calibre and quality of erudition. It is they who periodically and systematically measured their intellectual swords with their Advaitic counterparts to produce metaphysical masterpieces of a superb quality. If it were not for them, (other than the Grace of God factor), our beloved Dvaita for all purposes would have probably remained a MalabAr metaphysic. regards, Hari-vAyu smaraNa B.N.Hebbar 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.