Biased Sites on Sri Vaishnavism

[Guest guest]

(comments from Moderators- Please contact the owner of the concerned website for

further correspondence)

 

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha.

Srimath Varavaramunaye Namaha.

 

Dear Bhaktas,

 

I would like to first state that this posting of mine is not intended to hurt

anybody's beliefs or sentiments.

 

I have noticed that many people who claim to be Sri Vaishnavas have put up

questionable sites on the net. Essentially, these sites claim to present Sri

Vaishnavism to the masses, but upon closer reading, it is clear that the author

has superimposed his own viewpoints on some issues, which are not accepted

wholly by the sampradaya.

 

One site is Ramanuja.Org. The author repeatedly attempts to pass off the

incidents depicted in the Puranas as 'myths', which have no basis in history.

 

Now, I am aware of the arguments regarding this issue. Be what may, a follower

of the Vaidika Darshanam, having ascertained the validity of an acharya's

teaching on the basis of Veda, he needs to accept the sampradayam of the acharya

and possess conviction. This brings us to some questionable content in this

website by Mani Varadarajan, which I believe does not reflect Emperumanar's

view. Here are some examples:

 

1) In the translation of Purusha Suktam, the author comments on the sloka,

'VedAhametam Purusham Mahantam' and states,

 

" This verse is probably closest to the Sri Sampradaya visualization of Sriman

Narayana, as creator and maintainer of all "

 

In other words, the author is implying that the 'Sri Sampradayam' has a

conception of God that is loosely based on Sanskrit Veda, with a few slokas

coming close to our viewpoints. Rather than stating that Sriman Narayana,

glorified by our azhwars and acharyas is the same God of the Veda, he simply

states that we have just added some character to a 'vedic god' and made him more

personal.

 

Despite starting the translation with 'Lakshminatha Samarambham...', freely

compares the Purusha of the Purusha Suktam with Norse Mythology and speculates

on the dates of the apaurusheya Veda in the course of his vyakhyanam, which

certainly does not reflect the opinions of the sampradaya.

 

2)His casual dismissal of the Puranas as 'intellectual' myths is illustrated by

the following statement in his site:

 

" In later North Indian bhakti we see devotees playing a character in Krishnaite

myths "

 

and note his opinion of what our Vyakhyana Chakravarti, Sri Periyavacchan Pillai

thought of Ramayana,

 

" Periyavaccan Pillai is a theologian. He understands the stories (Ramayana) as

allegories, not merely as depicting the dramatic situation between the mystic

and the lord but as relevant to the human predicament.... "

 

Please correct me if I am wrong, but did Sri Periyavacchan Pillai anywhere say

that the Ramayana was an allegory and that Sri Rama is just a character?

 

I am quite aware of the deep meanings of Ithihasa and Purana. For instance, the

disrobing of Draupadi - The Kaurava Court represents Samsara, the Kauravas

represent the dangers of Samsara, the 5 Pandavas are the 5 Indriyas which let

you down in Samsara, Draupadi is the Jiva who surrenders to Krishna for

liberation. But this allegorical meaning does not mean that the LITERAL meaning,

ie, the actual incident, is a myth, or that it is a work of fiction. The Lord's

avataras are considered as historical, and at the same time, impart meanings

like these. Every sastra has more than one meaning in a single sentence.

 

This writer, appears to be popular. I request educated memberes to shed light on

this issue. I am still wondering how some so-called Sampradaya followers believe

that the azhwars and Emperumanar ever considered our dear Lord as a mere

fictional character.

 

No offense is intended.

 

Adiyen Sri Vaishnava Dasan,

 

Govindarajan.