Part 6-Experiencing Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja's Divine Works

[Guest guest]

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

Part 6 - Experiencing Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja's Divine Works

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

 

Shree Bhagavat Ramanuja proceeds further to explain the " Sat Vidya " verses of

Chaandokya Upanishad in Vedaartha Sangraha.

 

The following paragraphs are explaining the Sat Vidya verses in detail -

therefore the concepts are NOT repeated but are elaborated. The level of

argument and counter-argument is getting higher.

 

The Upanishad has declared that the Brahman is the upAdAna kAraNam (material

cause) (and the nimiththa kAraNam (efficient/instrumental cause)) of the

universe. Because of getting knowledge regarding Brahman, how is that

everything becomes to be known? This question is answered with explanation. In

the world, we find that the cause (kAraNam) and the effect (kAryam) are

different from one another. For example, potter is the efficient cause and

clay is the material cause in making a pot. The pot is the effect. Here, the

cause and the effect are different from one another. But the Sruthi states

that in the creation of the universe, the cause and the effect are one and the

same. A question arises here in this context - " If cause and effect are one

then, are not the natures of the universe like impurities, being ephemeral etc

becomes applicable to Brahman? Bhagavath Ramanuja answers this question as

follows: Before creation, all the chit and achit entities were the body of

Brahman in their subtle form (sUkshma-avastha). This means that all the chit

and achit entities were not like as of date with form, name, species

identification etc. Brahman thus having the subtle chit and achit entities is

the cause. The Brahman wished and created the universe by giving expanded

(sthUla-avastha) form (form, name, identification etc) to all chit and achit

entities and entered into them as " Antaryaami-Antaraatma " and is having all

the chit and achit entities as its body. The same Brahman having the expanded

universe as his body is the effect. Therefore the cause and effect are the

Brahman. As the universe is the body/mode/attribute

(Sareeram/Prakaaram/Apratuk-Siddha-Viseshanam) of the Brahman, the Brahman who

is the soul is untouched by the impurities and natures of the universe.

Therefore the knowledge about Brahman, leads to the knowledge of everything

automatically.

 

Without knowing this, Swethaketu asked his Father " Kathannu Bhagavassa

Aadesa? " " How is that " Aadesa " revered Sir? " The basis of his question is " The

natures of entities in the universe are manifold. How is that the knowledge of

that one " Aadesa " leads to the knowledge of everything? " Bhagavath Ramanuja

explains this very clearly so that the verse " Tat Tvam Asi " can be taken up

for discussion.

 

The Brahman with subtle (sUkshma) chit and achit tatvas as his

body/mode/attribute (Sareeram/Prakaaram/Viseshanam-Dharmam) gets the expanded

(sthUla) chit and achit tatvas as his body/mode/attribute

(Sareeram/Prakaaram/Viseshanam-Dharmam). Therefore the Brahman is the upAdAna

kAraNam - material cause of the universe. As the Brahman wishes (Sankalpam)

and creates the universe as told above, he is the nimiththa kAraNam -

efficient cause. As the Brahman is having infinite and divine powers which are

extraordinary and beyond the reach of our sense organs, he needs no other

accessories (Sahakaari) in this creation. The sUkshma and sthUla modes of all

the chit and achit entities are only for the body (Roopam) of the Brahman. The

reality-substance-nature (Swroopam) of Brahman therefore is called " Avikaari

Swaroopam, Swaamsena Avasthitam " meaning " unchanging with infinite

divine-auspicious qualities and untouched by all impurities and is in its own

absoulte pure nature " . Here is that the one must carefully and clearly

understand that " Dharmam " is different from " Dharmi " . " Viseshanam " is

different from " Viseshyam " . " Amsam " is different from " Amsi " . " Prakaaram " is

different from " Prakaari " . " Sareeram " is different from " Sareere(Aatma) " . But

on the same time, it is to be again carefully and clearly understood that

" Dharmaam-Dharmi " , " Viseshanam-Viseshyam " , " Amsam-Amsi " , " Prakaaram-Prakaari " ,

" Roopam-Swaroopam " , " Sareeram-Sarreere(Aatma) " are inseparably related such

that the reality(substance), continuance of existence and actions of

" Dharmam/Viseshanam/Amsam/Roopam/Sareeram " are not independent but absolutely

dependant on the " Dharmi/Viseshyam/Amsi/Prakaari/Swaroopam/Sareere(Aatma). The

explanation follows:

 

" Dharmam " is a characteristic. " Dharmi " is that which possesses the

characteristic.

" Viseshanam " is attribute. " Viseshyam " is that which is attributed by the

attribute.

" Amsam " is especial appearance. " Amsi " is that which has the especial

appearance.

" Prakaaram " is mode. " Prakaari " is that which has the mode.

" Sareeram " is body. " Sareere " is that which has body.

 

The terms " Dharmam " , " Viseshanam " , " Gunam " , " Amsam " , " Prakaaram " are almost

synonymous terms. The terms " Dharmi " , " Viseshyam " , Amsi " , " Prakaari " are

almost synonymous terms.

 

The Brahman by its Swaroopam (reality-substance) is the eternal support

(Aadhaara), control (Niyaamaka) and owner (Seshi) of all Chit and Achit

entities and has all the chit and achit entities for his purpose of sport

(leela) and enjoyment (bhoga). All the Chit and Achit entities are eternally

and inseparably supported (Aadeyam), controlled (Niyaamyam) and owned (Sesham)

by the Brahman and exist for the purpose of Brahman. Therefore, the Brahman is

the " Aatma " of all chit and achit entites and all the chit and achit entities

are the body (Sareeram) of Brahman. The " Aatma " is called " Sareere " . The

Sareeram is Apratak-Siddha Viseshanam of the Sareere. The Sareere is the

Viseshyam.

 

When we see pot, flowerpot, vessels and such things made out of clay, we think

that they are all different entities. But when we come to know about clay

which is the material cause of all these things, then we understand that the

pot etc., are only different forms/modes of clay. In similar manner, though

the chit and achit entities are manifold, when we understand that Brahman is

the cause of all these entities and all these are forms/modes of Brahman, then

everything becomes to be known. It is to be noted here that Brahman is not

Chit and Achit but Chit and Achit are modes/forms of Brahman. Therefore the

Brahman is different from all chit and achits as Brahman is the

Viseshyam/Prakaaree/Sareere and all the chit and achit entities are

Viseshanam/Prakaaram/Sareeram of Brahman.

 

" Sat Eva Somya Edam Agre Aasit Ekameva Adveetheeyam " therefore confirms that

the Brahman is the only upAdAna kAraNam and nimiththa kAraNam. The sUksham

chit-achit visishta Brahman is called as " Sat " . " idam " in " idam Agre " talks

about the sthUla chit-achit visistha Brahman.

 

Let us examine the meaning of the term " Visistadvaita " . It is derived by two

ways - " Visistasya Advaitam - Visistadvaitam " and " Visistayoho Advaitam -

Visistadvaitam " .

 

" Visistasya Advaitam " means - The Brahman qualified by all chit and achit

entities as his Saareeram/Prakaaram/Viseshanam (body/mode/attribute) is

without a second entity meaning unparalleled and unsurpassed. This brings out

the ultimate supremacy of Shreeman Narayana Para Brahman who is Akila Heya

Pratyaneeka: and Ananta Kalyaana Gunaakara:

 

" Visistayoho Advaitam " means - The Brahman having the subtle (sukshma) chit

and achit entities as his Saareeram/Prakaaram/Viseshanam (body/mode/attribute)

before creation is the same Brahman having the expanded (stUla) chit and achit

entities as his Saareeram/Prakaaram/Viseshanam (body/mode/attribute) after

creation. This brings out the fact that Shreeman Narayana Para Brahman is the

only material cause and efficient cause of the universe.

 

Shreeman Nigamaantha Maha Desika defines the same as " Asesha Chit-Achit

Prakaaram Brahmaikameva Tatvam " . This is the most precise definition of our

Siddhaantham.

 

The Brahman is the UpAdAna kAraNam and the Nimitha kAraNam for all chit and

achit entities. This does NOT mean that his " Swaroopam " gets changed to Chit

and Achit. But only his " Roopam " (Sareeram) which was subtle (sUkshma) chit,

achits becomes expanded (stUla) chit, achits ie., the chit achits gets

form,name etc.,. Therefore, the Brahman is " Satyam-Ignyaanam-Anantam " only,

even though the Brahman is the UpAdAna kAraNam. The changes in his " Roopam "

does not in any way contradict " Satyam-Ignyaanam-Anantam " . The same is the

case with his divine " Roopam " (divya mangala vigraham) also which changes as

per his wish in various avataaras. The Brahman who had subtle chit and achit

as his " Roopam/Sareeram " is the same Brahman who is having expanded chit and

achit as his " Roopam/Sareeram " . Therefore the Brahman is UpAdAna kAraNam

(Visistayoho Advaitam Visistadvaitam). As the Brahman wished and created the

universe, the same Brahman is the " Nimitha kAraNam " . The Brahman with all the

chit and achit tatvas as his body and who is with infinite divine attributes

and untouched by all impurities is unparalleled and unsurpassed (Visistasya

Advaitam Visistadvaitam). " " Satyam-Ignyaanam-Anantam " states the nature

(swaroopa) of Brahman as unchanging, sentient infinite is the nature of

Brahman. The " Satyam " term makes it clear that the Brahman is different form

Achit. The " Ignyaanam " term makes it clear that the Brahman is different from

Baddha Jeevaatmans. The " Ananta " term makes it clear that the Brahman is

different from the Muktha and Nitya Jeevaatmans. Therefore the Brahman is

" Purushothama: " Shreeman Narayananan. The sruthi " Anena Jeeveenaatmana

Anupravisya Naama RUpe Vaakaravaani " confirms the Sareera-Aatma Bhaavam

between the universe and the Brahman.

 

" Tat Ikshata: Bahusyaam Prajaayethi " The Brahman denoted by " Aadesa " term by

his characteristic of controlling the entire universe thought in his mind " Tat

Ikshata: " What was thought by the Brahman? " Bahusyaam Prajaayethi " The Brahman

thought that " I become many " .

 

To summarise, the Brahman having sUkshma chit-achit entities as his body is

the upAdAnam and the same Brahman having sthUla chit-achit entities as his

body is the upAdeyam. " Ekameva " confirms that the Brahman (Sat) is the upAdAna

kAraNam and " Adveeteeyam " confirms that the Brahman (Sat) is the nimiththa

kAraNam. Up to this, it was explained that the Brahman who is Purushotthama:

Shreeman Narayana: Pundareekaksha: is the only cause of the universe.

 

Before taking up the ascertaining the meaning of the verse " Tat Tvam Asi " ,

Shree Bhagavath Ramanuja explains the " Naama Roopa VyaakaraNa " as mentioned in

the Upanishad as follows. I have added the outline of on

" AarambhanaadhikaraNam " for better understanding and ascertaining that

Advaita's interpretation in this context is not warranted by Brahma Sutra

itself. I request the reader to very carefully follow the points.

 

" Hantaahamimaa: tisro devathaa: anena jeeveenaathmanaanupravishya naama roope

vyaakaravaani "

 

As told earlier regarding " Samashti Srushti " and " Vyashti Srushti " , the

" Vyashti Srushti " is told here. The Brahman by its second wish, created the

representative divinities of " Prakruthi, Tejas & Ap " , entered into them by

having the Jeevaatman as his body and gave names and forms to them. " Anena

Jeeveenaatmanaa " makes it clear that the Jeevaatman has the Brahman as its

" Aatma " . " Nama Roope Vyaakaravaani " makes it clear that the expanded form of

the chit and achit entities is the form (sareeram) of Brahman. At this point,

one needs to know a very important truth: When a demi-god or a human being or

a animal or a tree is alive (meaning - with jeevaatman), we denote them by

their respective names like " Indra " or " Devadatha " or " Lion " or " Neem "

respectively. When it is dead, we denote " them " as " corpse " (dead body) or

wooden-log. The corpse, wooden-log etc are Achit composed of the five

elements. If there is nothing in them as " Aatma " after the departure of

Jeevaatman, then even such denoting (as corpse, wooden-log etc.,) is not

possible. This establishes that an " Aatma " is inside even after the departure

of Jeevaatman after death. One has to now understand that the entry of

Jeevaatman having Brahman as its " Aatma " into various bodies with name, form

etc., is in " Vyashti Srushti " which is as per the second wish of Brahman. In

the " Samashti Srushti " , which is as per the first wish of Brahman, the Brahman

alone enters into Tejas, Ap and Annams. The Veda has therefore explained the

" Advaarakam " and " Saddvaarakam " terms as follows: The creation of name, forms

etc., for Tejas, Ap etc., is done by the Brahman only and is called

" Advaarakam " . This is " Samashti Srushti " . The same Brahman by having the

Jeevaatman (Chit) as his body (sareeram/prakaaram/viseshanam) entered and did

the creation of name, forms etc (as we see the universe now) and this is

called " Saddvaarakam " .

 

Bhagavath Ramanuja here gives an important explanation. Let us first read the

greatest Aacharya's own words before reading my words.

 

" Ethaduktam Bhavathi - Jeevaatma Thu Brahmana: Sareerathayaa Prakaaratvaath

Brahmaathmaka: " Yasya Aatma Sareeram " Ithi Sruthiyantharaath Evam Bhoothasya

Jeevasya Sareerathayaa Prakaara Bhoothaani Deva Manushyaadhi Samsthaanaani

Vasthuuni Ithi Brahmaathmakaani Thaani Sarvaani Ahta: Devo Manushya: Yaksho

Raakhasa: Pasu: Mruga: Pakshii Vruksho Lathaa Kaashtam Silaa Trunam Ghata:

Pata: Ithyaadayassarve Prakruthi Prathyayayogena Abhidhaayakathayaa

Prasiddhaa: Sabdaa: Loke Thatthatdravyavaachyathayaa Prateeyamaanathatthat

Samsthaanavasthu Mukena Thadabhimaani Jeeva-Thadantharyaami Paramaatma

Paryantha Samghaathasyaiva Vaachakaa: Ithi "

 

Now an important discussion starts. The viseshanam-prakaaram is of two types.

The first type is that, being the body as well as viseshanam and the second

type is being only as viseshanam but not as body. For example, if suppose I

wear an ornament, the ornament is just viseshanam but not body of the Jeevan

(chit). On the other hand, the body of the Jeevan is both viseshanam as well

as " body " . I think this might me bit confusing. Let me explain

1. What does " body " mean? And

2. What is meant by " soul " ?

 

Soul is the one that eternally and inseparably supports controls and owns the

body for its purpose. Body is the one that is eternally and inseparable

supported, controlled and owned by the soul and exists for the purpose of the

soul. This is the definition of soul and body respectively. Generally when I

say " body " , the picture of it which comes to a person's mind is " that which

has head, legs, hands etc. " . If you take the body of a snake, it does not

possess legs hands etc as it is found in human body. The body's physical form

thus varies from species to species. Therefore the definition is not in terms

of these physical natures but only the definition given above holds well as

far as the soul-body relationship is concerned.

 

Bhagavat Raamaanuja in his Shree Bhaasya talks about this as " Yasya Chetanasya

Yat Dravyam Sarvaatmanaa Swaarthe Niyantum Dhaarayitum Cha Sakyam Tat

Seshatayka Swaroopam Cha Tat Tasya Sareeram " . He further explains the same in

Vedaartha Sangraha itself as " Prutak Sidhi Anarha Aadhaara-Aadheya Bhaava:

Niyantru Niyaamya Bhaava: Sehsi-Sesha Bhaavancha " .

 

The Brahman supports controls and owns the entire universe eternally and

inseparably. The entire universe is supported controlled and owned by the

Brahman and exists for the purpose of Brahman eternally and inseparably.

Therefore the Brahman is the soul of the universe and the universe is the body

of the Brahman.

 

This relation is to be eternally and inseparably present between the soul and

the body otherwise the concept is ruled out. For example, assume that a man is

supporting an object say " pot " . Though he is the supporter and the pot is

supported, the man cannot be the soul of the pot and the pot cannot be called

as his body. This is because it is possible that the same pot can be supported

by someone else (if he gives it to another person) or by something else say

ground (if he keeps it on the ground). The inseparable eternal relation is not

present here in this example. Similarly in an example, a man controls his

servant by his order. Though the man is the controller and his servant is

controlled, the man cannot be called as the soul of the servant and the

servant cannot be called as his body. This is because it is possible that

someone else can control the same servant. The inseparable eternal relation is

not present in this example also. Follow another example where a man owns a

land and gets benefits from it. Though the man is the owner of the land and

enjoys the benefits from his land and the land is owned and exists for the

purpose of the man, the man cannot be called as the soul of the land and the

land cannot be called as the body of the man. The inseparable eternal relation

is not present in this example also, as another person can own the land if it

is sold or seized.

 

The body-soul relationship between the Universe and the Brahman is eternal and

inseparable. The universe cannot exist without the Brahman and the Brahman is

not without the universe as his body. Before creation, the Brahman has the

subtle Chit & Achit entities as his body. He creates the universe by giving

expanded form, name etc to them. The form, name etc are given to the Chit

entities as per their karma, which is without a beginning. The Brahman after

creating the universe has the expanded universe as his body. Therefore the

Brahman is declared as the material cause and instrumental cause of the

universe. The Brahman has infinite divine qualities and is untouched by all

impurities of the universe as he is the soul and the universe is his body.

 

This key concept of Visistaadvaita is declared by many verses in Veda

explicitly like " Ya: Aatmani Thistan Ya: Aatmaanaam Antaro Yamayati Yam Aatmaa

Na Veda Yasya Aatma Sareeram " .

 

Therefore the Jeevan (Chit) is the " Sareeram " (body) of Brahman and therefore

it is aprutak-siddha-viseshanam of Brahman.

 

We find words like " Deva: " , " Manushya: " etc., in the world denoting respective

entities. Each word has two parts namely " Prakruti " and " Vikruthi " as per the

grammar of which each part has its own meaning. Let us now consider a word

" Manushyow " . Here the " Prakruthi " part " Manushya " denotes the nature of the

entity " being human " and the " Vikruthi " " ow " denotes " twin " such entities.

Like this, all words are composed of to denote various entities.

 

Now, the terms " Deva: " , " Manushya: " etc., first denotes the form " body " (as

seen by eyes). (The term " body " is here understood to mean " Prakaaram " here

just for understanding - " body " is called " body " (sareeram) by the above key

concept of Visistaadvaita). Through the way of denoting the body, it then

denotes the Jeevaatman who is the " Aatman " of the " body " (sareeram). Then most

importantly, the same word denotes the " Paramaatman (Brahman) " who is the

" Aatman " of the " Jeevaatman " . The " Jeevaatman " is the body of " Paramaatman " .

 

Now an objection arises in this context: The term " Manushyow " has the

" Prakruthi " part " Manushya " denoting the nature of the entity " being human "

and the " Vikruthi " " ow " denotes " twin " (number) such entities. But these

aspects " being human " , " being two in number " etc., are not applicable for the

" Brahman-Paramaatman " . How is that the term " Manushyow " is denoting the

Brahman? Bhagavath Ramanuja answers this question ((objection in the form of

question) by " Vastu Mukena " . The terms do not denote " Paramaatman-Brahman "

directly by their meaning but it is definite that these words denote finally

" Paramaatman-Brahman " through the entities having only the Paramaatman-Brahman

as their " Aatman " and all such entities being the body (Sareeram) of

Paramaatman-Brahman. The objection is refuted, rejected and the question is

answered in full accordance with the Pramaanams.

 

The " Vaacha-Aarambanam " sruti, which was considered, is considered with its

treatment in Brahma Sutra. As I told before, this is written just to make it

clear that this sruthi has been interpreted against the Saastra in Advaita.

Actually I apply no interpretation here.

 

The second chapter of Brahma Sutra named " Avirodha-Adyaaya " has its first

paada named " Smruthi Paada " . This paada has the " Aarambanaadhikaranam " . The

first sutra in this is " Thadanyathvam AARAMBANA Sabdaadibhya: " . Here in this

adhikaranam, it is established that the Brahman is the kAranam and kArayam -

meaning, sUksha chit-achit visishta Brahman is the sthUla chit-achit visishta

Brahman. Advaita has taken " Vaachaarambanam " as one word. On the other hand,

the Brahman Sutra is only " Thadanyathvam Aarambanaa Sabdaadibhya: " The sutra

is NOT " Thadanyathvam Vaachaarambana Sabdaadibhya: " The Brahma Sutra therefore

implicitly (actually explicitly) states that " Advaita is against Saastra " .

Even a person who has not read Shree Bhaasya also can easily point out this!

In Shree Bhaasya, Bhagavath Ramanuja refutes the Kaanaatha-Matham that argues

favouring difference between kAraNam and kAryam considering pratyaksham and

anumaanam only.

 

I will take the verse " Tat Tvam Asi " in the next part of this series. I would

like to say few words regarding " Bhaasyam " . " Bhaasyam " means " Commentary " .

What is commentary? Commentary is the work of commentator done to explain the

purport of original text. How a commentary should be? The commentary should be

without the prejudice of the commentator. Why should there be a commentary? A

commentary has to be there where there is a need to comprehend clearly on the

grounds of pramaanams with valid logical reasoning the purport of original

text.

 

Any rational soul will identify only the commentary of Bhagavat Ramanuja

Yatiraja on Saareeraka Saastra as " The Commentary " . That is why the commentary

of Bhagavat Ramanuja is called as " Shree Bhaashyam " by all. It is the same

case with the other works of our greatest Aacharya. An example is quoted here.

A person once quarrelled with his mother badly. He left his mother saying that

I will not even utter the word " Amma " (mother) in future. He fell down

accidentally when he skidded over rough track. Out of pain he unknowingly

uttered " Amma " (called " mother " )! Like this, even if a person wants to say

something against the Bhaasya of our greatest Aacharya, he has to take the

name of it only as " Shree Bhaasya " with or without his liking. In fact, not

even a single person has refuted even a single word of our Bhagavat Ramanuja

Yatiraja. Even if someone tries to talk something against Bhagavat Ramanuja

Yatiraja's divine works, before Swamy Nigamaantha Maha Desika's words dismiss

those counter-arguments, the Veda-BrahmaSutra-Gita themselves dismiss those

arguments against our Yatiraja's works. This greatness is unparalleled and

unsurpassed and is unique only for Swamy Yatiraja's works - just because only

Swamy Bhagavath Ramanuja Yatiraja's works are telling only what the

Veda-BrahmaSutra-Gita are telling. On the other hand, the commentaries of

other schools of thoughts are just opinions of individuals based on

individual's prejudices. I am very proud that I have an unparalleled and

unsurpassed greatness, which is not even applicable for Bhagavat Ramanuja

Yatiraja! Surprised? Yes. I call myself identifying my swaroopam as " Ramanuja

Daasa: " (servant of Bhagavath Ramanuja Yatiraja). It applies to all those who

call themselves identifying their swaroopam as " Ramanuja Daasa: " . This " Daasya

Nama " and hence worshipping the Divya Paaduka of Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja

are not applicable for Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja himself! Is it not? That is

why such a unique greatness hence expression of being proud in this regard. In

fact this is not expression of being proud but only the actual

jeeva-swaroopa-anusandaanam. I am sure that Lord Vishnu is most delighted when

he hears the chanting of Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja's name. Swamy Desikan has

stated " Parichita Gahana Samyameendrasya Sooktha: " meaning - " The purport of

Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja's words are difficult and deep to be understood

even when they are learnt again and again " . Shreemath Nadaadoor Ammal has

stated " ikva Pathi Vidhushaam Eshaa Prowdi: Sriya: PrabhuNa Sape " meaning " The

greatness and wisdom enshrined in the words of Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja

cannot be even sensed by scholars who are not following the Parama Vaidika

Matham - It can be known only by the those who follow Bhagavat Ramanuja

Yatiraja Darsanam, this is sworn on the Lord of Lakshmi himself " . Such is the

immeasurable greatness of Bhagavat Ramanuja Yatiraja's divine works. When I

find myself (adiyEn) to write articles every week on Bhagavat Ramanuja

Yatiraja's divine works, I ascertained that it is only because of the divine

mercy of my Aacharya Shreemath Ahobila Shree Lakshmi Nrusimha Divya Paaduka

Sevaka ShreevaN Satakopa Shree Narayana Yatindra Maha Desika's Divya MaNi

Padukaa.

 

" Tasmai Raamaanujaaryaaya Nama: Parama Yogine |

Ya: Sruthi Smruthi SootraaNaam Antar ijvaramaseesamath || "

 

" Shreematey Raamaanujaaya Nama: "

 

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

To be continued.. .

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

Thanks & Regards

M.S.HARI Ramanuja Daasan.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

__________________

Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1