Clarification

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Dileepan:

 

Thanks for your clarification. I know you are all dedicated to the

sampradayam. When our forefathers conceived a way of life for us (we Sri

VaishnavAs), they took a broad spectrum of people into consideration. Our

“Dayaika Sindhu” Ramanujacharya had considerations for persons from every

walk of life. He did not propose a way of life that will only suit

intellectual giants like Sumant Kaushik or a “Most ideal” Sampath

Rangarajan. An intellectual like Sumant, who has achieved much in life (MIT

etc.), may rightly feel that the coconuts offered to Vinayaka may be better

reserved for chutney or the milk offered in Abhishekam to Malolan be

reserved for solving the nutrition problem of World’s children. Like

Sankara puts it these are the concessions that our religion offers to the

ignorant masses that did not have the ‘purva-janma suhrudam’ to reach the

level of Sumant Kaushik.

 

Given the broad spectrum of people and their needs, can Sri Vaishnavism

offer some hope. It appears to me that in its present form it does not seem

to hold many in its fold. Is it at least possible for us to do something

within the framework of Sri Vaishnavism that will once again revitalize it

and bring back its lost children to its fold. This is a challenge that

Emperuman has placed before all of us and our AchAryas are doing their best

in this regard. (One example is 50 years back I would have been refused

Samashreyanam and it is a concession that my achArya has shown me)

 

In this respect, I feel the position taken by some of the Malolan members

are counter-productive. The emphasis should be different. A scheme for

developing discipline, atma gunAs, spirit of giving, helping, not speaking

ill of others etc., doing nitya karmAnushtAnam etc, are in my opinion

require greater emphasis than down-grading someone as a anya-devatA

worshipper. In fact we should have a voluntary ban on this anya-dEvata

topic for at least 6 months. Many sincere spiritual aspirants in India

pose this question: Don’t you Sri Vaishnavites have anything else to say

except avoiding anya-dEvata worship.

 

Telling co-members that you will be dealt in a non-lenient way etc., smacks

of arrogance and immaturity and only puts Malolan net in a bad light. I

hope ‘restraint’ which is a hallmark of our culture is practiced sincerely

by people who claim themselves as ‘ideal’.

 

 

S. Vijayaraghavan

Buffalo/NY

 

____

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Gopaladesika Mahadesikaya Namah:

 

Dearest all,

 

It is a lively topic. Great subject and interesting discussion that has been

going on. I can not resist writing adiyEn's two cents' worth.

 

Sri Vijay Srinivasan has written about broad spectrum.

 

There are three classes (or four?)

 

1. Asthikan: One who belives or has faith that there is God. (including demi

god)

2. Bhakthan: A devotee of God ( Sriman Narayanan)

3. Sisha: One who has attined the stae of a disciple of a Srivaishnava

AchArya. (who is in the glorious AchArya parampara)- at this point, the

sishya is advised of the ONE and ONLY Lord- who is Sriya: Pathi Sriman

Narayanan- avan allaal Deivam illai: maRRumOr Deivam uNdO mathiyillaa

maanidargaaL?..uRRa pOdhanRi neengaL oruvan enRu uNara maateer//)

 

4. Then comes the stage of prapannan. (Needless to say: Prapannan does not

know any other Deivam . Sishya does not consider other ones as deivam, and

avoids. Prapannan deos not " know " any other one.

 

Your broad spectrum is in 1. Our is 3 and 4. (some are in 2 who

are yet to undergo smasaryanam; nut know thaier AchAryan, at least, hence

they are in 3.)

 

I would just like to enjoy Alvandhar's 11 ths lokam of SthOthra rathnam:

(where in he actually quotes: sa brahma: sa siva srEndra:.. Parama

svaraat..)

 

slokha 11 :-

svaabhaavikaanavadhik'aatisay'esitrtvam

naarayana! tvayi na mrsyati vaidikah kah;

brahmaa sivas satamakhah parama-svaraaditi

ete'api yasya mahim'aarnava-viprusas te.

 

O Naarayana! who is there among the learned adherents of the vedas

that do not acknowledge your intrinsic Godhood, endowed as you are

with unsurpassable excellence? For Brahma,siva,indra and the supreme

muktas are but drops in the ocean of your glory.

 

Ramajua having heard this slokam recited by some Srivaishnava (who had

intentionally recited to catch attention of Ramanuja, as instructed and

sent by Yamunacharya ofrom Srirangam), and enquired was to who is the great

composer of this greatest slOkam.

 

Regards

 

Narayana Narayana

 

Narayana dAsan

 

 

 

 

 

 

----Original Message Follows----

" Vijayaraghavan Srinivasan " <vijayaraghavan_s

 

Clarification

Mon, 25 Oct 1999 16:42:10 EDT

 

Dear Shri Dileepan:

 

Thanks for your clarification. I know you are all dedicated to the

sampradayam. When our forefathers conceived a way of life for us (we Sri

VaishnavAs), they took a broad spectrum of people into consideration. Our

“Dayaika Sindhu” Ramanujacharya had considerations for persons from every

walk of life

 

____

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Sri Lakshmi nrisimha parabrahmaNE nama:

Sri Lakshmi nrisimha divya paduka sevaka

srivan satakopa sri narayana yatindra mahadesikaya nama:

 

Dear Sri Vijayaraghavan:

 

My e-mail to you was in private and did not expect the assumed privacy to be

breached unilaterally. It was my hope that we would resolve differences

through private exchanges and present the consensus to the net. But now,

with reluctance adiyEn is responding in public.

 

 

>

> Vijayaraghavan Srinivasan [vijayaraghavan_s]

> Monday, October 25, 1999 4:42 PM

>

> Clarification

>

>

> Dear Shri Dileepan:

>

> walk of life. He did not propose a way of life that will only suit

> intellectual giants like Sumant Kaushik or a “Most ideal” Sampath

> Rangarajan. An intellectual like Sumant, who has achieved much

> in life (MIT etc.),

 

Let us refrain from personal sarcasm.

 

 

 

> may rightly feel that the coconuts offered

> to Vinayaka may be better reserved for chutney or the milk offered

> in Abhishekam to Malolan be reserved for solving the nutrition

> problem of World’s children.

 

Sumanth did make a humorous remark about coconuts. But he did not say

anything about Malolan. Let us not extrapolate and put words into the mouth

of others.

 

BTW, you obviously missed Sumanth's point.

 

 

 

 

> Like

> Sankara puts it these are the concessions that our religion offers to the

> ignorant masses that did not have the ‘purva-janma suhrudam’ to reach the

> level of Sumant Kaushik.

 

Please, please, surely you know that ridiculing others is not an atma guna

you talk about below.

 

 

 

 

>

> Given the broad spectrum of people and their needs,

> can Sri Vaishnavism offer some hope. It appears to

> me that in its present form it does not seem to hold

> many in its fold. Is it at least possible for us to

> do something within the framework of Sri Vaishnavism

> that will once again revitalize it and bring back its

> lost children to its fold. This is a challenge that

> Emperuman has placed before all of us and our AchAryas

> are doing their best in this regard. (One example is

> 50 years back I would have been refused Samashreyanam

> and it is a concession that my achArya has shown me)

>

> In this respect, I feel the position taken by some of

> the Malolan members are counter-productive. The emphasis

> should be different. A scheme for developing discipline,

> atma gunAs, spirit of giving, helping, not speaking

> ill of others etc., doing nitya karmAnushtAnam etc, are

> in my opinion require greater emphasis than down-grading

> someone as a anya-devatA worshipper.

 

 

The Atma guNAs you talk about are not exclusive properties of Sri

Vaishnavas. As a matter of fact Christians are probably the best when it

comes to giving material succor. But we need to understand that an open

ended spirit of giving is NOT an atma gunam. Not speaking ill of others

(which, sorry to say, you have unfortunately violated above) is again not

unique to Sri Vaishnavas only. Doing nityakarma is again common to all

Hindus. As human beings we must follow all of these. No one ever said Sri

vaishnavas must abandon all these. In fact we must excel in them. (The

giving spirit must be consistent with shastras).

 

But all these do not make one a Sri Vaishnava. These are nice to have for

anyone. But to be a Sri Vaishnava you must have single minded dedication to

Dhiva Dampati and sadacarya paramaparai. This is what makes you a Sri

Vaishnava. Having all the other atma guNaas is so much the better and no

doubt all our AcAryas have stressed the importance of these. But the most

important atma gunam is understanding our svaroopam as a seshan for divya

dampati and practicing it. In the presence of this important atma guNam all

other atma guNas will shine with true luster. In the absence of this

important atma gunam, all other atma gunas will not be of great use in this

life, may be for a future birth.

 

Further, all the anushtaanam in the world will not make one a Sri Vaishnava

unless you get initiated through Samasrayanam and follow the principles of

the samskaram. All the recitation of vedas, dhiva prabhandham, and

elaborate arAdhanai every day will not give you moksham. The only sure way

for that is prapatti (and bhakti yoga) and we all know that for praptti to

be valid we need to take on a life of a chaste wife. This is why talking

about avoiding anyadevata contact is important. We have to teach our

children from day 1 about this. If we ourselves take them to anyadevata

temples, etc., then no wonder they will be lost.

 

There are many reasons for Sri Vaishnavas to abandon Sri Vaishnavam. It is

not because a few of us speak about fidelity to Sriman Narayan in a private

forum of dedicated Sri Vaishnavas.

 

If popularity of Sri Vaishnavam is more important than principle then there

is no end for compromise.

 

Of course we must act in a way that inspires others to follow. But

gathering a following is secondary. Otherwise our focus will be on

expanding our following rather than the principles that our poorvAcAryas

starting from Azhvaars have given us.

 

The health of Sri Vaishnavam is the responsibility of Emperuman and AcAryAs.

Our responsibility is to follow our AcAryas.

 

Trying to define what challenges our AcAryas face is, to me, a mark of

arrogance, (sorry for using such a strong word, but you have used this word

in your post against another and this is just to show that we need to be

careful with such language in public.)

 

Bringing back lost children is dependent upon their karma. If their karma

makes them get attracted to scores of anya-devata, even though our Lord is

ready and willing to give material comforts as well as " neeL visumbu " , they

will only go and fall at the false god's feet. Even Ranganatha will not do

anything as the law of karma is His divine will.

 

But as Malolan Net members our ideal is Kulasekaraazhvaar. Even if Perumal

rejects us we have no other go but His thiruvadi, like a baby who goes after

its mother even if she pushes it aside for some reason. This is the ideal

we must have and we must state this ideal repeatedly so that it gets

ingrained in our AtmA. Attracting a large following is not the ideal.

 

 

 

Sri Vijayaraghavn, you say,

> ..... require greater emphasis than down-grading

> someone as a anya-devatA worshipper.

 

 

Sri Vijayaraghavan, please do not make things up. Who did we down-grade?

Please go back and read my first post. It was entirely answers to some of

the challenges against the principle of exclusive Sriman Naryana worship,

raised by so called Sri Vaishnavas in the past at various places. adiyEn

stated these poorvapakshas and responded to them. There was nothing in the

post denigrating any sincere Malolan Net member. Even a hard-core anya

devata worshipper cannot be offended as my post was in the nature of answers

to objections. If you think the answers were not correct let us debate it.

Please do not make things up, adiyEn did not down-grade anybody. This

charge upsets me quite a bit.

 

Please note, the points made in the post were not my own opinions, they were

strictly opinions and words of Azhvars, Swami Sri Desikan, and Srimad

Azhagiya Singar's.

 

 

> In fact we should have a voluntary ban on this anya-dEvata

> topic for at least 6 months.

 

If there is anything that almost all our AcAryas stress is the importance of

avoiding anya devatA worship. Therefore, it is an important issue and we

must talk about it as often as there is confusion. In fact talk about this

topic must be music to our ears. Besides, if we cannot talk about this even

in a forum like Sri Malolan Net, where else can we talk about it. The post

was made to clarify some doubts raised by sincere bhaktas. The answers were

provided in the net so that everyone can benefit. Why must it provoke such

an ire is perplexing.

 

 

 

> Many sincere spiritual aspirants in India pose this question:

> Don’t you Sri Vaishnavites have anything else to say

> except avoiding anya-dEvata worship.

 

 

On the contrary, it is the Sri Vaishnavas still mired in anyadevata worship

for one reason or another who protest the most. In fact adiyEn knows of at

least one smArta who is as much a staunch Vaishnava as the best (or the

worst :-)) among us.

 

It is not just a few intellectuals (sic) who keep talking about this. It is

our acaryaas who repeat this time and again.

 

 

 

>

> Telling co-members that you will be dealt in a non-lenient way

> etc., smacks of arrogance and immaturity and only puts and only

> puts Malolan net in a bad light I hope ‘restraint’ which is a

> hallmark of our culture is practiced sincerely by people who

> claim themselves as ‘ideal’.

 

 

Sri Vijayaraghavan, your outburst is unwarranted. Sri Rangi did not

directly tell you anything. Yet you made a pointed post. I tried to

clarify by private mail. Now you have made an unwarranted second post.

Since you have brought it out in the open, with reluctance adiyEn is

presenting the following.

 

In your first mail you wrote:

> According to strict orthodox achAryAs even Sudarsana

> Homam was not done by Sri VaishnavAs (kAmyArtham).

 

 

From my telephone conversation it was confirmed that you knew Srimad

Azhagiya Singar had recently completed a Sudarshana Homam. Given this

context it is quite expected that Sri Sannithi sishyas would be offended by

your comment about " kAmyArtam " For the record, let me state, Srimad

Azhagiya Singar who is second to none when it comes to anushtaanam,

orthodoxy and tradition, performed Sudarshana Homam with sankalpam made on

behalf of Malolan, and the homam was done for loka kshemam. Many vaidhikaas

benefit from such homams and yagyams. Further, while it is not common to

perform Sudarshana Homam in houses for the reason you state it IS common to

perform such jagnas in temples and Mathams. This may be verified by pandits

and scholars from India. Thus, what you stated as forbidden for Sri

Vaishnavas is only partially correct, and the implication you left that

Srimad Azhagiya Singar performed a homam that is kamyArtam was quite

offensive to many Sri Sannithi sishyas.

 

Further, it is known that you have expressed a view that orthodox Sri

Vaishnavas worship only Sri Rama and Sri Krishna, not any other form of the

Lord like Nrisimha. This is first hand knowledge to me as it is to others.

This is a direct affront against the 45 yati varas of Sri Ahobila matham and

all the yatis for whom the aradhanai devatai is Sri Lakshmi Nrisimha. Given

this background, your comment about Sudarshana Homam was taken as a renewed

attack on Sri Ahobila Matham and Srimad Azhagiya Singar. This is the reason

for the emotional response. In fact adiyEn would like to commend Sri Rengi

for boldly stating what others only felt but were hesitant to mention it.

If defending one's AcArya smacks of arrogance and immaturity, so be it.

IMHO, the day when defending one's AcArya would put Malolan net in a bad

light we need to close it down.

 

It saddens me that one post about anya-devatA in the form of answering some

objections raised by others has come to this, that too in Sri Malola Padhuka

Sevaka Net. If we cannot boldly defend this principle here where else can

we do it? If we ourselves must sweep this principle under the rug who will

teach it to our lost children (sic)?

 

Please pardon me for subjecting the net to all this. But some basic

principles are involved that need defending.

 

srimad azhagiya singar thiruvadi dileepan