Guest guest Posted March 15, 2007 Report Share Posted March 15, 2007 , " Vishnu " <vsmvishnu wrote: , Ramji Govindarajan <ramji_iyengar@> wrote: > > Dear Sriman Ramji, Exaclty that is what I am trying to oppose. It may be the faith of some exclusive ganesha worshippers. But some of the perverts from the mainstream Hinduism who have got no business with it, are trying to promote it, as they see it as a challenge to the Srivaishnava concept that the Master of Lakshmi is the Supreme Being. Also those who to the concept of Lakshmi Ganapati do not mean Lakshmi as aunt of ganesha, but they unfortunatetly mean as a Sakti/power of ganesha. The relationship they mean is derogatory, though not mundane. But what business the employees of the temple of " SrinivAsa " have got to do with it? What is the status of Padmavati Thayar according to them? adiyen Vishnu > > As you can see from above names. Serial nos. 12 and 31 have names of two goddesses - one who is his aunt (Lakshmi) and the other his mother (Durgaa)!. The different names signifies various forms of energy attributes of Ganapathi - when Ganapathy's power to bless one with prosperity is worshipped he is called Lakshmi Ganapathy; when Ganapathy's power to fiercely protect is worshipped he is Durgaa Ganapathy and so on. ONE COULD REASONABLY CONCLUDE THAT THE TERM LAKSHMI GANAPATHY HAS BEEN FURTHER MODIFIED AS MAHALAKSHMI GANAPATHY IN THE CONTROVERSIAL PHRASE USED BY TTD. The phrase 'Sri Mahalakshmi Ganapataye namah' actually has been used to pay respects to Ganapati whose power to bestow prosperity has been mentioned - IT DOES NOT SIGNIFY ANY RELATIONSHIP WITH THE SUPREME GODDESS MAHA LAKSHMI. > > Now to address the second issue: > > (b) The absolutely necessity of including reference to Ganapathy in the TTD publication > > This is where I guess a mix of factors including politics, mis information, ignorance, innocence, vested interests come into play - The TTD committee has perhaps some North Indian gentlemen (from Maharashtra etc.) where ppl. start off with obeisances to Ganesh - after all we owe the Mahabaratha literature to Ved Vyas and Ganesh - it is also common to start any work by mentioning Ganesh's name (more north indian and smartha tradition) > > Now we should educate TTD to focus on 'pure vaishnavite' traditions - towards this the letter/email to TTD is honorable/commendable effort - BUT I GUESS WE NEED NOT OVER REACT AND GET UPSET ABOUT THIS 'MINOR' MISHAP. > > We vaishnavites have other pressing jobs - 1. Preserve vedas/vedic traditions 2. Stem the missionary advances of other religions which is resulting in serious damage to the very foundation of Hinduism - the attrition rate of Dalits (the very simple people who have in their own ways preserved Hinduism) is extremely alarming - each one of us should in our own ways try and address these priorities at the very earliest - NOW! > > Best wishes > > Ramji > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 Sri:Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama:May be they should rather invoke Sri Visvaksenar (justas Sri Bishmar did) if at all there is a need for vignan nignanthi.It is a bit misguided coming from TTD of all organizations. Whyare things changing from the way Udayavar set it? It is perplexing.Adiyen is sure our Acaryas / Jeeyars are looking into it. They areour only refuge.All references to "other pressing jobs" is really missing the point.Is this how our Purvacaryas lived / wanted us to live?Adiyen dasasnu dasan.Munoor Mozhinda Murai thappamal KettuPinnornthuthaam athanai Pesathe Tham Nenjil thondrinathe solliIthusuttha upadesa varavatradhenbarMurkaraavaarVishnu <vsmvishnuramanuja Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 9:48:27 PM[sri ramanuja] Fwd: Re: R - My email to TTD , "Vishnu" <vsmvishnu wrote: , Ramji Govindarajan <ramji_iyengar@> wrote:>> Dear Sriman Ramji,Exaclty that is what I am trying to oppose. It may be the faith of some exclusive ganesha worshippers. But some of the perverts from the mainstream Hinduism who have got no business with it, are trying to promote it, as they see it as a challenge to the Srivaishnava concept that the Master of Lakshmi is the Supreme Being.Also those who to the concept of Lakshmi Ganapati do not mean Lakshmi as aunt of ganesha, but they unfortunatetly mean as a Sakti/power of ganesha. The relationship they mean is derogatory, though not mundane.But what business the employees of the temple of "SrinivAsa" have got to do with it? What is the status of Padmavati Thayar according to them?adiyenVishnu> > As you can see from above names. Serial nos. 12 and 31 have names of two goddesses - one who is his aunt (Lakshmi) and the other his mother (Durgaa)!. The different names signifies various forms of energy attributes of Ganapathi - when Ganapathy's power to bless one with prosperity is worshipped he is called Lakshmi Ganapathy; when Ganapathy's power to fiercely protect is worshipped he is Durgaa Ganapathy and so on. ONE COULD REASONABLY CONCLUDE THAT THE TERM LAKSHMI GANAPATHY HAS BEEN FURTHER MODIFIED AS MAHALAKSHMI GANAPATHY IN THE CONTROVERSIAL PHRASE USED BY TTD. The phrase 'Sri Mahalakshmi Ganapataye namah' actually has been used to pay respects to Ganapati whose power to bestow prosperity has been mentioned - IT DOES NOT SIGNIFY ANY RELATIONSHIP WITH THE SUPREME GODDESS MAHA LAKSHMI. > > Now to address the second issue:> > (b) The absolutely necessity of including reference to Ganapathy in the TTD publication> > This is where I guess a mix of factors including politics, mis information, ignorance, innocence, vested interests come into play - The TTD committee has perhaps some North Indian gentlemen (from Maharashtra etc.) where ppl. start off with obeisances to Ganesh - after all we owe the Mahabaratha literature to Ved Vyas and Ganesh - it is also common to start any work by mentioning Ganesh's name (more north indian and smartha tradition)> > Now we should educate TTD to focus on 'pure vaishnavite' traditions - towards this the letter/email to TTD is honorable/commendable effort - BUT I GUESS WE NEED NOT OVER REACT AND GET UPSET ABOUT THIS 'MINOR' MISHAP.> > We vaishnavites have other pressing jobs - 1. Preserve vedas/vedic traditions 2. Stem the missionary advances of other religions which is resulting in serious damage to the very foundation of Hinduism - the attrition rate of Dalits (the very simple people who have in their own ways preserved Hinduism) is extremely alarming - each one of us should in our own ways try and address these priorities at the very earliest - NOW!> > Best wishes> > Ramji> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 17, 2007 Report Share Posted March 17, 2007 Dear Sriman Raghuram Madabhushi, After finding in the blasphemous content in page 3, you can also find a prayer to vishvaksena in page 9, followed by a sloka on Venkatesa, " mAnAtIta prathita vibhavAm.. " , " SrI vishNu chitta kula nandana.. " and a Sloka on yatIndra also! Such a nonsensical compilation of things is the " dirty panchangam " of TTD. Is it right on the part of our Hindus to indulge in mud-slinging against each others' personal gods? adiyen Vishnu ramanuja , Raghuram Madabushi <scifilvr wrote: > > Sri: > Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama: > > May be they should rather invoke Sri Visvaksenar (just > as Sri Bishmar did) if at all there is a need for vignan nignanthi. > > It is a bit misguided coming from TTD of all organizations. Why > are things changing from the way Udayavar set it? It is perplexing. > > Adiyen is sure our Acaryas / Jeeyars are looking into it. They are > our only refuge. > > All references to " other pressing jobs " is really missing the point. > Is this how our Purvacaryas lived / wanted us to live? > > Adiyen dasasnu dasan. > > Munoor Mozhinda Murai thappamal Kettu > Pinnornthuthaam athanai Pesathe > Tham Nenjil thondrinathe solli > Ithusuttha upadesa varavatradhenbar > Murkaraavaar > > > > Vishnu <vsmvishnu > ramanuja > Wednesday, March 14, 2007 9:48:27 PM > [sri ramanuja] Fwd: Re: R - My email to TTD > > , " Vishnu " <vsmvishnu@> > wrote: > > , Ramji Govindarajan > <ramji_iyengar@> wrote: > > > > > Dear Sriman Ramji, > > Exaclty that is what I am trying to oppose. It may be the faith of > some exclusive ganesha worshippers. But some of the perverts from > the mainstream Hinduism who have got no business with it, are trying > to promote it, as they see it as a challenge to the Srivaishnava > concept that the Master of Lakshmi is the Supreme Being. > > Also those who to the concept of Lakshmi Ganapati do not > mean Lakshmi as aunt of ganesha, but they unfortunatetly mean as a > Sakti/power of ganesha. The relationship they mean is derogatory, > though not mundane. > > But what business the employees of the temple of " SrinivAsa " have > got to do with it? What is the status of Padmavati Thayar according > to them? > > adiyen > Vishnu > > > > As you can see from above names. Serial nos. 12 and 31 have > names of two goddesses - one who is his aunt (Lakshmi) and the other > his mother (Durgaa)!. The different names signifies various forms of > energy attributes of Ganapathi - when Ganapathy's power to bless one > with prosperity is worshipped he is called Lakshmi Ganapathy; when > Ganapathy's power to fiercely protect is worshipped he is Durgaa > Ganapathy and so on. ONE COULD REASONABLY CONCLUDE THAT THE TERM > LAKSHMI GANAPATHY HAS BEEN FURTHER MODIFIED AS MAHALAKSHMI GANAPATHY > IN THE CONTROVERSIAL PHRASE USED BY TTD. The phrase 'Sri Mahalakshmi > Ganapataye namah' actually has been used to pay respects to Ganapati > whose power to bestow prosperity has been mentioned - IT DOES NOT > SIGNIFY ANY RELATIONSHIP WITH THE SUPREME GODDESS MAHA LAKSHMI. > > > > Now to address the second issue: > > > > (b) The absolutely necessity of including reference to Ganapathy > in the TTD publication > > > > This is where I guess a mix of factors including politics, mis > information, ignorance, innocence, vested interests come into play - > The TTD committee has perhaps some North Indian gentlemen (from > Maharashtra etc.) where ppl. start off with obeisances to Ganesh - > after all we owe the Mahabaratha literature to Ved Vyas and Ganesh - > it is also common to start any work by mentioning Ganesh's name > (more north indian and smartha tradition) > > > > Now we should educate TTD to focus on 'pure vaishnavite' > traditions - towards this the letter/email to TTD is > honorable/commendable effort - BUT I GUESS WE NEED NOT OVER REACT > AND GET UPSET ABOUT THIS 'MINOR' MISHAP. > > > > We vaishnavites have other pressing jobs - 1. Preserve > vedas/vedic traditions 2. Stem the missionary advances of other > religions which is resulting in serious damage to the very > foundation of Hinduism - the attrition rate of Dalits (the very > simple people who have in their own ways preserved Hinduism) is > extremely alarming - each one of us should in our own ways try and > address these priorities at the very earliest - NOW! > > > > Best wishes > > > > Ramji > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 18, 2007 Report Share Posted March 18, 2007 Sri:Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama:Hurting the sentiments of other bhagavathas is really not good.It should all be done with love and respect. Udayavar or any ofour other purvacharyas never ever disrespected followers of other schools, while at the same time prayed to correct perceptions or remove the ignorance. Many, if not all, of our purvacharyas suffered so much in the hands of thecontemporary administrations, but adiyen never read/heard they ever did anything other than really praying for a change of heart.I remember hearing about the reason behind Sri Parashara Bhatthar's thaniyan for Thiruppavai (Neela thunga sthana giri...).May be we could all pray to Sri Satagopan, or appropriately to, Sri Ananthazhawanto bring some order to the goings on in Thiruvengadam. Really, our only refuge is our respective Jeeyars. Also, adiyen is clear that "Anya devathanthara seshathvam ozigay" is not something to be taken lightly. adiyen dasanu dasan.[all views are really out of my ignorance, please disregard / accept adiyen'sapologies if they are not correct]Vishnu <vsmvishnuramanuja Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2007 7:42:22 AM[sri ramanuja] Fwd: Re: R - My email to TTDDear Sriman Raghuram Madabhushi,After finding in the blasphemous content in page 3, you can also find a prayer to vishvaksena in page 9, followed by a sloka on Venkatesa, "mAnAtIta prathita vibhavAm.." , "SrI vishNu chitta kula nandana.." and a Sloka on yatIndra also!Such a nonsensical compilation of things is the "dirty panchangam" of TTD.Is it right on the part of our Hindus to indulge in mud-slinging against each others' personal gods?adiyenVishnuramanuja , Raghuram Madabushi <scifilvr wrote:>> Sri:> Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama:> > May be they should rather invoke Sri Visvaksenar (just> as Sri Bishmar did) if at all there is a need for vignan nignanthi.> > It is a bit misguided coming from TTD of all organizations. Why> are things changing from the way Udayavar set it? It is perplexing.> > Adiyen is sure our Acaryas / Jeeyars are looking into it. They are> our only refuge.> > All references to "other pressing jobs" is really missing the point.> Is this how our Purvacaryas lived / wanted us to live?> > Adiyen dasasnu dasan.> > Munoor Mozhinda Murai thappamal Kettu> Pinnornthuthaam athanai Pesathe > Tham Nenjil thondrinathe solli> Ithusuttha upadesa varavatradhenbar> Murkaraavaar> > > > Vishnu <vsmvishnu> ramanuja > Wednesday, March 14, 2007 9:48:27 PM> [sri ramanuja] Fwd: Re: R - My email to TTD> > , "Vishnu" <vsmvishnu@> > wrote:> > , Ramji Govindarajan > <ramji_iyengar@> wrote:> >> > > Dear Sriman Ramji,> > Exaclty that is what I am trying to oppose. It may be the faith of > some exclusive ganesha worshippers. But some of the perverts from > the mainstream Hinduism who have got no business with it, are trying > to promote it, as they see it as a challenge to the Srivaishnava > concept that the Master of Lakshmi is the Supreme Being.> > Also those who to the concept of Lakshmi Ganapati do not > mean Lakshmi as aunt of ganesha, but they unfortunatetly mean as a > Sakti/power of ganesha. The relationship they mean is derogatory, > though not mundane.> > But what business the employees of the temple of "SrinivAsa" have > got to do with it? What is the status of Padmavati Thayar according > to them?> > adiyen> Vishnu> > > > As you can see from above names. Serial nos. 12 and 31 have > names of two goddesses - one who is his aunt (Lakshmi) and the other > his mother (Durgaa)!. The different names signifies various forms of > energy attributes of Ganapathi - when Ganapathy's power to bless one > with prosperity is worshipped he is called Lakshmi Ganapathy; when > Ganapathy's power to fiercely protect is worshipped he is Durgaa > Ganapathy and so on. ONE COULD REASONABLY CONCLUDE THAT THE TERM > LAKSHMI GANAPATHY HAS BEEN FURTHER MODIFIED AS MAHALAKSHMI GANAPATHY > IN THE CONTROVERSIAL PHRASE USED BY TTD. The phrase 'Sri Mahalakshmi > Ganapataye namah' actually has been used to pay respects to Ganapati > whose power to bestow prosperity has been mentioned - IT DOES NOT > SIGNIFY ANY RELATIONSHIP WITH THE SUPREME GODDESS MAHA LAKSHMI. > > > > Now to address the second issue:> > > > (b) The absolutely necessity of including reference to Ganapathy > in the TTD publication> > > > This is where I guess a mix of factors including politics, mis > information, ignorance, innocence, vested interests come into play - > The TTD committee has perhaps some North Indian gentlemen (from > Maharashtra etc.) where ppl. start off with obeisances to Ganesh - > after all we owe the Mahabaratha literature to Ved Vyas and Ganesh - > it is also common to start any work by mentioning Ganesh's name > (more north indian and smartha tradition)> > > > Now we should educate TTD to focus on 'pure vaishnavite' > traditions - towards this the letter/email to TTD is > honorable/commendable effort - BUT I GUESS WE NEED NOT OVER REACT > AND GET UPSET ABOUT THIS 'MINOR' MISHAP.> > > > We vaishnavites have other pressing jobs - 1. Preserve > vedas/vedic traditions 2. Stem the missionary advances of other > religions which is resulting in serious damage to the very > foundation of Hinduism - the attrition rate of Dalits (the very > simple people who have in their own ways preserved Hinduism) is > extremely alarming - each one of us should in our own ways try and > address these priorities at the very earliest - NOW!> > > > Best wishes> > > > Ramji> > > > > > > > > > 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.