Reg. Ayyappa, Durga, Sathyanarayana etc Pujas

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhagavatas

I am overwhelmed by the response to the query seeking PramaaNams for the observance of Pujas like Ayyappa, Durga and Satyanarayana. So many Bhaagavatas have raised these doubts time and again in spite of my explaining to them. That is why the message was posted to elicit authentic authority, if possible with ACTUAL QUOTES from Vedas, Upanishads, Itihaasas and “Saatvic” PuraaNas or from the writings of Acharyas of Bhagavad Ramanuja- Swami Desika Satsampradaayam (from Sriman Nathamunigal to our present day Achaaryas).

 

Kindly read the original message again. Let me hasten to assure you that, personally, I have no doubts and

I have complete conviction in the saving grace of Sriman Narayana who alone can grant mOksha – (as already indicated in the original message).

 

Other "Ksudra devatas" may be His Sareeram and His children like all of us and some of them may even be His Bhaktas and we are sure, therefore, that they deserve neither "nindanam" or "vandanam".

 

The intention of the original posting is to help us –Prapannas, offer clarification on similar questions from others who may have GENUINE doubts in this regard and our replies should be supported by proper authority from our holy scriptures. Otherwise, we will be dismissed as projecting our personal opinions.

 

Personal opinions, conjectures and speculations and hair splitting arguments in justification of or against the observances are NOT (Repeat NOT) expected as answers to this query. Only PramaaNams (if possible, with actual quotes) may be posted, if only to help us explain better to genuine doubts raised by others – (not by way of “Vithandaavaadam”)

Dasoham

Anbil Ramaswamy

[Guest guest]

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha: Swamin: I'm reproducing (to the extent of my understanding) what I heard from Sri Velukudi Swamin's upanyasam. He said: a) It's better to avoid participating/viewing other devathas even when you walk on the road. b) the reasoning for that is even if we do simple Namaskaram to them they'll think that, what I'm going to give to this prapannan. I've nothing to offer to this vishnu bhakthan. c) "Kandum kanamal irupathu nallathu" d) we should politely as the sametime firmly refuse to attend these devathas rituals. e) in tirupavai, 29th song Andal says "matrai nam kamangal matreilo empavai" f) 1st song "Narayanane namakke parai taruvan" adiyan iramanuja dasan Padmanabhan Washington d.c.Ram

[Guest guest]

Adiyens humble salutations to the feet of all bhagawathas here.

 

Adiyen was once asked a question similar to the current one in discussion . The question is

 

 

 

It is said in Sanskrit that -

 

" Aakashat patitam toyam yatah gachathi saagarm, Sarva deva namsakarah keshavam pratigachathi "

 

Meaning : Just as raindrops falling from the sky ultimately end up into the sea, in the same way do prayers to all gods ultimately reach Lord Keshava.

 

 

If this were to be true, does it not follow that it may not be wrong to pray to gods other than Sriman Narayana?

 

Adiyen had then attempted to give a reply to this question which are presented below. Just thought that presenting the same here makes some sense.

 

 

Kindly forgive and correct Adiyen for any flaw in the reply.

 

 

Adiyen

 

Sudarsana Ramanuja Dasan

 

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

 

The "SharIra- sharIrI" relationship between paramatma and jeevatma is the answer to this question.

 

I will first resort to the works of Swami Desikan to explain this philosophy by references from vedic and Upanishad. The tamil Vedas have many many references which I have not touched here fearing the length of the article.

 

 

Then I will take the question of what if one worships other gods. To answer this question, I will take refuge at the words of two Vedanthacharyas – Lord Krishna and Swami Nigamantha Maha Desikan.

 

 

Part 1 : SharIra-sharIrI bhavam:

 

 

In simple terms, The implied meaning of this verse is that paramatma or parabrahmam or Sriman Narayanan resides in every jeevan as antaryami. Bhagwan does the anupravesam in every jeevan. The devas, Brahma, Shiva et al , everyone fall under the jeevatma class and paramatma sriman narayanan resides in them as well.

 

There is an other analogy similar to this which can be used for understanding.

 

There is a king. The king wears many gold ornaments and costly vastrams. Whenever a person garlands the king, he just garlands these ornament or the dress. But it is implied and understood that he has garlanded the king.

 

Can we say that " if I need to garland a king, it is enough to garland the king's dress " ??

 

 

The kings dress or ornament whichever actually has the garland, has this greatness only because the king wears it that day.

 

(Even this analogy is v v superficial. Cos it's the aatma which is in the status of king.. If we assume that garlanding the kings body is garlanding the same, then after the demise of the king, we ve to keep the dead " body " as king and make it rule.. since that is not the case, it's the body which is the king. It's the atma which enjoys the status as a king thru this body. This body is the medium for the atma to suffer/enjoy, rather to reap the karma effect.)

 

 

Similarly, the other deities, u n me, all have existence cos of the anupravesam of the Lord in us. Plz note here , I just say that Paramatma resides in us and we (they) are not Paramatma itself.

Any doubt in philosophy, sampradayam has an answer in the works of our greatest

Aacharya Sri Nigamantha MahaDesikan. I will take few quotations to my limited knowledge and explain this.

 

In Saranagathi Deepikai, Swami Desikan says,

 

" Aavishya dhArayasi vishwam amushya yanta

 

sEshi shriya: pati asEsha tanu: nidhAnam!

Ityadi lakshna ganai: purushottamam twam

 

jAnAti yo jagathi sarva vid esha gita: "

 

Oh Deepaprakasa, You have entered all the entities in the world and have given them this status. With your sankalpam, u rule all these entities. You have both sentients and insentients as your property (sEsham) and as bhOga Vasthus. You are the cause behind them (ChEthanam & achEthanam); both dissolve in you (attain layam). Hence you become the aatma with they becoming your body(sarIram).

You never leave Piratti even for a split of second. You become the only reason for this universe. Also you have said in Gita that If one identifies you as the paramatma with all these identities and reasons, he has understood everything that needs to be known.

 

 

Also Swami says

" Vishwam Dwathiyam vabu: "

ie the entire universe become ur (Lords) body.

" sarwa: kira: twayi padanthi "

ie all the words end in you (Lord).

" tatha: sarwa asi "

ie hence (Lord) you become everything

 

At an other place, Swami says

 

" Sargha sthithi pralaya vibrahma nAtikAyAm

 

shailUshavath vividha vesha parigraham twam "

 

 

Hey Varada, in the playful episode of 'sargha sthithi pralaya' 'creation saving destruction', u assume different forms to do these. 'shailUShavath vividha vesha parigraham' is to clarify that the antaryami of Brahma , Siva et al is Lord himself.

 

This the saaram of vedas. Lets see a few verses of Vedas and upansihads

 

Purusha Suktham

says

 

Purusha evedagum sarvam!

Yat bhUtam yacha bhavyam!

Utamrutatvasyeshana:!

 

All the things in the present, past and future are nothing but purusha. He is the master of eternity.

 

 

Who is this purusha? The purusha is identified as

 

"hreescha te lakshmischa patnau"

 

Hree (dignity) and lakshmi (shri) are your wives. And this lakshana fits only to Sriman Narayana..

 

 

Mahabharatam

in a similar tone says,

 

"Ya yesha dEvaki putra:

purasthAdavathishtathe!

Sa yeva purusho nbhUtam bhavyam chApi tatha bhavath!!"

 

 

'The Lord, the son of Devaki, appearing before us is verily the supreme person, representing all the things of the past, present and future times.

 

 

Narayana suktham

says

 

Yacchhakinchit jagath yasmin drushyathe shrUyathepi va

antarbahischa tat sarwam vyapya narayana stitah:

 

 

 

Anything and everything that is seen in this world by the eyes or which is heard from the sastras, the supreme Lord Sriman Narayana pervades in and out of them.

 

 

tasyA: shikAya madhye paramatma vyavasthita:!!

sah brahma sah shivah sah indrah sah aksharah parama swarAt!

 

The location of the Lord as antaryami of everything has been descripted in NArAyana suktham. The Lord who is located in such a position forms the antaryami of Brahma , Siva, Indra and mukthatmas who are not bound by karmas (swarAt)

 

 

Upanishads say,

 

thath eva anupravishat. thath anupravishya

..

 

The brahman created everything and then entered into everything.

 

sayaschayam purushe, yaschasa aditye, sah ekah, sah evam vit.

 

He who is in the purusha, and he who is in aditya, is one and the same. n he is the seed for all that is here.

 

 

Padma Puranam

distinguishes this difference as

 

Brahmadya: sakalA devA yaksha tumburu NArada:!

 

Te Sarve purusha amshatwaduchyante purusha iti!!

 

 

The creator-Brahman and other gods, Yakshas, Tumburu, Narada , all these are called Purusha in a secondary meaning as they constitute a part of that Purusha.

 

 

Lord Himself says in Gita

as

 

"vishtabyahamidham krutstra eka amshena sthitho jagath"

 

 

"I am sustaining all the world thorugh my smallest part (eka amshena)

 

Sri Nammazhwar

conveys the same thing very clearly in simple terms in Thiruvaimozhi.

 

Avane agal jnalam padaithidanthan

Avane akthu undu umizhnthan alanthan

 

Avane avanum avanum avanum

avane mattrum ellam arindhaname

 

 

He destroys (eats) and creates again (gets them back, umizhthan). avanum (brahma) avanum (siva) avanum (indran) ellarum avane (sriman narayanan) .

 

 

In VaradarAja PanchAsath,

Swami gives a very clear explanation to this.

 

"Brahma iti shankara: iti indra: iti swarAt iti

 

Atma iti sarwam iti sarwa chara achara atman!

 

hastIsha: sarwa vachasAm avasAna seemam

 

twam sarwa kAranam uchanthi anapAya vacha:"

 

 

Hey Varada (hasteesha) who resides as Antaryami (atman) in all (sarwa) chara (movable) and achara (immovable) vasthus of the world, the imperishable Vedas (anapAya vacha: ) declares you(twam) , the one who is the cause of all worlds (sarwa kAranam), with liking (uchanthi) as Brahma (brahma iti), as siva (sankara: iti), as indra (indra: iti), as the one who is not bound by karmas (swarat iti), as atma (atma iti), as everything (sarwam iti) and as the end of anything and everything that can be described (sarwa vachasam avasAna seemam).

 

 

The tatparyam of this is that since Vishnu is the last and final end of everything, any thing which is described has to finally describe him.

 

 

Consider there is a person X. When we speak about X, we do not speak of the name X but we speak of X as a person. This in turn not only refers to the body but also to the atma (soul). Further this also refers to the paramatma who stays in the jeevatma named X, Thus jeevatma is the body of the paramatma. Hence Paramatma is Shariri and Jeevatma is shareeram. Anything that is spoken of jeevatma will in turn apply to paramatma. And the chain ends with paramatma

..

 

One more example. A person wishes to water a plant. He waters the leaves and stem. But the water reaches the stem which is actually needed. If one waters the root directly, it will satisfy the leaves and stem as they all depend on this root alone

 

 

Same ways, any thing done to any of the demi-gods will finally reach Paramatma.

 

 

Now lets look at the words of Lord Krishna in Gita in more detail.

 

Lord Krishna in Gita says

 

bahUnAm janmanAmanthe jnanavanmam prapadyathe!

 

Vasudeva: sarwam ithi sa mahAtma sudurlabHa:!!

 

 

After many births and deaths, he who has complete knowledge surrenders to me after knowing that I am the cause of all causes. Such a great soul is very rare.

 

 

Kamais tai stair hrita jnana: prapadyante anya devata

 

Tam tam niyamam asthaya prakruthya niyatha: swaya!!

 

 

Those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires surrender to demi gods and worship them according to their own natures.

 

Yepy anya devatA bhakthA yajante sraddhayAnvitah

 

Tepi mAMeva kauntEya yajanty avidhi pUrvakam

 

 

Even those who are devoted to other divinities with faith in their hearts, worship Me alone, Oh ArjunA, though not as sanctioned by the SaasthrAs. (Note the root-stem example applies very aptly here)

 

 

Sah tayA shraddhayA yuktas tasyArAdhanam ihate!

 

lAbhate cha tata: kAmAn vihitAn hitAn!!

 

 

Endowed with such a faith, if a person proceeds to worship a particular demi god and obtain his desires. But these benefits are bestowed by me alone.

 

 

Yo yo yAm yAm tanum bhaktah sraddhayarchitum icchathi

 

Tasya tasyAchalam shraddha tAmeva vidadAmyaham!!

 

 

 

 

I am in everyone's heart as the supersoul. The Lord out of compassion says that "Whichever devotee seeks to worship with faith whatever form, I make that very faith steadfast". All their worship to other demi-gods ends at

My feet (Sarva dEva namaskAram Kesavam prathigacchathi). These demi-gods derive their power from a small portion of My omnipotence.

 

 

 

 

These have been conveyed in simple tamil in a condensed manner by Swami Desikan in GItArtha Sangraham as

 

 

thAnn ninRa uNmayait-tann-tani mAyai maRaitthamayum

 

 

 

tAnn anRi maayaitanait-tavirppAn virahu aRRamayum

 

 

 

 

This the meaning of the Sanskrit verse under discussion. More details has been given by Aazhwars in Prabandham. Fearing the increasing volume of the article

I refrain from entering them now.

 

 

Part 2: Question: "If this were to be true, does it not follow that it may not be wrong to pray to gods other than Sriman Narayana?"

 

 

The answer is given by our 2 vedanthacharyas which we can see one by one.

 

 

Swami Desikan in Varadaraja panchasath says,

 

"Praptha Udayeshu varada twat anupravEshat

Padmasana Adishu siva adishu kanchukeshu!

 

Tan mAtra darshana vilopitha semushika

 

tAdAmya mooda mathaya: nipathanthi adhIra:"

 

 

Hey Varada, those ill-knowledged (vilobhita semushIka), ill-brained

people ( mooda mathaya: ), who view just the external form (tan mAtra darsana) of the shirts (kanchukeshu) that have been formed (praptha udayeshu) because of your entry or anupravesam (twat anupraveshat) ie Brahma etc (padmasana Adishu),

Siva etc (Siva Adishu) and thinks that you are one such among them (tAdAmya) will ruin by reaching the lower levels (

nipadhanthi).

 

i.e. Those who worship other gods will not get moksham and they will have to suffer the samsara world.

 

Lord Krishna in Gita says

 

"Anvantu phalam tEsham tat bhavatya alpa mEdhasam!

 

devAN devayajo yAnti mad bhakthA yAnti mAm api!!

 

 

Men of small intelluigence worship demi gods for material desires. The fruits which these demi gos give are limited and temporary. The worshippers of demi-gods will go the world of the demi-gods but those who worship Me will come to Me.

 

 

Anyone is free to worship the demigods. But the ideal thing which one should want for is MOKSHAM. This moksham (and all other things) can be granted by Lord Narayana alone.

 

 

Purushasuktham says

"Utamrutatvasyeshana:"

Having told about the all pervading nature of Purusa, Vedas say that He alone can give final release from bondage to men and this highest person is the final release. The word Amruta here means this final release and this can be given only by Lord Narayana.

 

 

Mokshadharma in Mahabharatham says

 

"AnnajAthasya bhUtasya manushyAdErakAranAth!

 

nirvanadAyi bhavathi [krupaya purushOthama:!!"

 

 

The supreme person grants through his natural mercy the eternal bliss to men (Moksham) and other beings that grow by food.

 

 

The demi-gods with the limited power granted by Vishnu can give some of the wordly pleasures depending upon their authority, but cannot give Moskham.

 

The so called Brahma, siva, Indra etc are just posts. They do not refer to the person. The jeevatmas who have done enormous punya gets these posts and at the end they will also get dissolved in the maha pralayam.

 

Swami Desikan says this "ananyagathithwam" in Adaikkalapathu and takes refuge in Lord.

 

"Sadaimudian sathumugan enru ivar mudhalam tharam ellam

 

Adaya vinai payanagi, azhindu vizhum padi kandu

Kadimalaral piriyatha kachi nagar athigiri

Idam udaiya arulalar inaiyadigal adainthene"

 

Thus we have seen how authentic our Ramanuja – Desika sampradayam is. There is no contradiction in Vedas, Upanishads, Itihasams and (SAtwika) Puranams. The works of our Azhwars and Acharya Sarwabhaumas reflect these perfectly.

Lets resort to the words of our Acharyas and stick to the principles of our sampradayam to attain Moksha in the easiest way and the only possible way for us.

 

"Seeronru thoopul thiruvenkatamudaiyan

paar onru sonna pazhamozhiyul - Oru onru

thane amaiyAtho thAraniyil vaazhwarku

vAnera pomalavum vaazhvu"

 

 

Till now, I have attempted to answer the doubt to my best. If there are any mistakes committed in this, please pardon and correct me.

 

Srimathe Nigamantha Mahadesikaya Namaha!!!

 

 

 

 

 

On 10/16/07, Ram Anbil <Ramanbil wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Bhagavatas

I am overwhelmed by the response to the query seeking PramaaNams for the observance of Pujas like Ayyappa, Durga and Satyanarayana. So many Bhaagavatas have raised these doubts time and again in spite of my explaining to them. That is why the message was posted to elicit authentic authority, if possible with ACTUAL QUOTES from Vedas, Upanishads, Itihaasas and "Saatvic" PuraaNas or from the writings of Acharyas of Bhagavad Ramanuja- Swami Desika Satsampradaayam (from Sriman Nathamunigal to our present day Achaaryas).

 

Kindly read the original message again. Let me hasten to assure you that, personally, I have no doubts and

I have complete conviction in the saving grace of Sriman Narayana who alone can grant mOksha – (as already indicated in the original message).

 

Other " Ksudra devatas " may be His Sareeram and His children like all of us and some of them may even be His Bhaktas and we are sure, therefore, that they deserve neither " nindanam " or " vandanam " .

 

 

The intention of the original posting is to help us –Prapannas, offer clarification on similar questions from others who may have GENUINE doubts in this regard and our replies should be supported by proper authority from our holy scriptures. Otherwise, we will be dismissed as projecting our personal opinions.

 

 

Personal opinions, conjectures and speculations and hair splitting arguments in justification of or against the observances are NOT (Repeat NOT) expected as answers to this query. Only PramaaNams (if possible, with actual quotes) may be posted, if only to help us explain better to genuine doubts raised by others – (not by way of "Vithandaavaadam")

 

Dasoham

Anbil Ramaswamy

[Guest guest]

Dear BhagavatasThough we wished to close the topic, Sri Darshana iyer had raised some very iinteresting questions relating to the subject to which replies had to be provided. As they may be of interest to Bhaggavatas,the questions and replies are forwarded for information.DasohamAnbil RamaswamyramanbilTo: darshanaiyerSubject: RE: Reg. Ayyappa, Durga, Sathyanarayana etc PujasFri, 19 Oct 2007 01:12:11 +0000Dear friendYou wrote:"Likewise, be it Shiva or Ganapathi or Subrahmanya, if you consider them as Bhaktas, then deserve vandanam as much as Hanuman or the Alwars deserve" Reply:There is a BIG difference. According to SrivaishNava Siddhantam, right from the four faced Brahma to the humblest blade of grass on earth, all are subject to their Karma and are governed by the TriguNas, namely Sattvam, Rajas and Tamas. They (Brahma, Rudra, Indra and others) hold their positions as reward for their past puNya karma and as ordained by Sriman Narayana. They are not capable of granting mOKsham sought by Prapannas. The only one with Suddha Sattvam (without an admixture of the other two) is Sriman Narayana. WHO ALONE can grant mOksham. It is also true that there can no greater VishNu Bhakta than Shiva. But, When? ONLY on occasions when there occurs a preponderance of Sattva (and other guNas are at low key) in his psyche like when he composed his "Mantra Raja pada Stotra" in Ahirbudhnya Samhita in which he himself admits "like all others, I am also your Daasabhootan" There were umpteen occasions when this "Daasabhootan" was overwhelmed by Rajas and Tamas and acted differently. For example, 1. When out of unprovoked anger, he clipped one of the 5 heads of Brahma and acquired "Brahmahathi dOsham" and came to be known as "Kapaali" because the skull stuck to his palm and refused to drop off until Sriman Narayana came to his rescue and relieved him of the curse. Siva himself admits this to Paarvati saying - “I was so scared that I would have to live with trauma forever but because of your bhaghyam, I got that relief!†2. When he fought with Krishna along with Ganapathi, Subramanya and his entire retinue in the Banasura episode, in which he was worsted. 3. When he similarly took the side of POundareeka VaasudEva with his entire host and gave a bitter fight with Lord Krishna and got defeated. There are very many instances in which he gave boons to Asuras and every time Sriman Narayana had to undo the damage without detracting from the boons granted by him. (example, Basmaasura, HiraNyakasipu, Ravana and many more) Because of his mood swings, his hostility to Bhagavaan and his indiscriminate granting of boons to worthless souls, Prapannas do not consider him worthy of worship. Also, as mentioned earlier, he has himself acknowledged to Tirumazhisai Azhwar that he was NOT CAPABLE of granting mOKsham (pENinum varam tara miDukkillaatta tEvar). Ganapathi and Subrahmanya never showed themselves up as VishNu Bhaktas at any time. But, Hanuman and Azhwars stand on a different footing. They were unalloyed Bhaktas throughout. Thus, there is no comparison between them and the Siva family. Vedasruti says "Narayana created Rudra"‑ "Narayanath Rudro Ajayata"How can the creator and the created be the same?Siva worships Narayana according to his own statement in his Mantrarajapada stotra.How can the worshipper and the worshipped be the same?Vedas say that all deities obtained their respective positions from Vishnu by praying to him and according to their karma.How can the employer master and the employee servant be the same? We see even in our own times that a person who is in a really high position has no need to go about to trumpet himself an equal to anybody else; Only the one who is far inferior down in the line would try to boost his morale by claiming parity with the superior, ignoring his own incapacity and equating himself with the superior on such common grounds like saying that both are just men and the blood of both is of the same red color or some such flimsy grounds. Thus, devotees of Vishnu had no need to go about proving the superiority of their God (and the opposite of other deities) even though there were ample evidence for both in the Vedas and the various scriptures. And, as the saying goes, “Good wine needs no bush†So, now you will understand that unlike what you say -"Hariyum Haranum CANNOT BE onnu, Idai Ariyaadavan Vaayila TAAN mANNu" Now, you will understand that the reason behind the stand taken by Prapannas is NOT biased but the bias, if any, is on your side. SincerelyAnbil Ramaswamy===================================================================== > Wed, 17 Oct 2007 05:53:58 +0100> darshanaiyer Re: Reg. Ayyappa, Durga, Sathyanarayana etc Pujas> Ramanbil; > > Dear sir,> > I have been a member of this group since long and this> is not the first time I am looking at the biased> nature of the group as well as its moderator(s). That> least bothers me. I very well knew that you would not> publish my mail on the group and would have trashed> it. But yet I wrote in the faint and feeble hope that> some good sense might prevail. Now I have realized> that only if replies appeal to "your sense", then it> is accepted as sensible, otherwise, it is dismissed as> "Vithandaavaadam". > > > You say that "ksudra devatas" may be His Sareeram and> His children like all of us and some of them may even> be His Bhaktas and we are sure, therefore, that they> deserve neither "nindanam" or "vandanam". Why is it> that you say that the Lord's Bhaktas do not deserve> vandanam? Do you not offer vandanams to the Alwars or> Hanuman? You may consider them as Acharyas, but> foremost they are bhaktas and then only Acharyas.> Likewise, be it Shiva or Ganapathi or Subrahmanya, if> you consider them as Bhaktas, then deserve vandanam as> much as Hanuman or the Alwars deserve. So if Sriman> Narayana appears with Shanka-Chakra-Gada-Padmam only> then will you offer your vandanams and if the same> Sriman Narayana appears in the guise of Shiva, you> will not offer worship.> > "Ksudra Devatas" - what a brilliant terminology.> Elsewhere I read the comments of a so called> "Vaishnava" or "Bhagavatha" calling Shri> Chandrashekharendra Saraswathi as a "liar". I wonder> if such behaviour and mindset constitutes a > Bhagavatha or a Vaishnava.> > > All these days I have restrained from saying this, but> now I am forced to say this:-> > "Hariyum Haranum onnu, ARIYADAVAN VAYILA MANNU"> > regards,> Sudarshan Aiyer> > > > --- Ram Anbil <Ramanbil wrote:> > > Dear Bhagavatas> > I am overwhelmed by the response to the query> > seeking PramaaNams for the observance of Pujas like> > Ayyappa, Durga and Satyanarayana. So many> > Bhaagavatas have raised these doubts time and again> > in spite of my explaining to them. That is why the> > message was posted to elicit authentic authority, if> > possible with ACTUAL QUOTES from Vedas, Upanishads,> > Itihaasas and “Saatvic†PuraaNas or from the> > writings of Acharyas of Bhagavad Ramanuja- Swami> > Desika Satsampradaayam (from Sriman Nathamunigal to> > our present day Achaaryas).> > > > Kindly read the original message again. Let me> > hasten to assure you that, personally, I have no> > doubts and> > I have complete conviction in the saving grace of> > Sriman Narayana who alone can grant mOksha – (as> > already indicated in the original message).> > > > Other "devatas" may be His Sareeram and His children> > like all of us and some of them may even be His> > Bhaktas and we are sure, therefore, that they> > deserve neither "nindanam" or "vandanam".> > > > The intention of the original posting is to help us> > –Prapannas, offer clarification on similar questions> > from others who may have GENUINE doubts in this> > regard and our replies should be supported by proper> > authority from our holy scriptures. Otherwise, we> > will be dismissed as projecting our personal> > opinions.> > > > Personal opinions, conjectures and speculations and> > hair splitting arguments in justification of or> > against the observances are NOT (Repeat NOT)> > expected as answers to this query. Only PramaaNams> > (if possible, with actual quotes) may be posted, if> > only to help us explain better to genuine doubts> > raised by others – (not by way of > > “Vithandaavaadamâ€)> > Dasoham> > Anbil Ramaswamy> > > > Messenger blocked? Want to chat? Go to http://in.messenger./webmessengerpromo.php>