Swami Bhashyakarar and the age of digital alterations

[Guest guest]

At 10:17 AM 4/3/2001 -0700, Kannan AMR wrote:

>... Please do not use a real picture which is digitally manipulated. It

>is true Swamy Emberuamnar is the Darsanacharyar for both Desika

>Sampradhayam as well as Thennacharya Sampradhayam. But we should respect

>the Thirumeni of Swamy Emberumanar which is there in SriPerumbhudhur. I

>strongly request all the elders in these forums guide this younger

>generation. Let us not fight and try to change anything.

 

 

Digital alteration is not as hideous as physical alteration

which was quite common in our shared history. Many temples

have changed thirumans and some back again. Adiyen has heard

from elders that only a few decades ago Sri Perumboothoor was

indeed a Vadakalai temple and Swami Bhashyakarar was adorning

a Vadakalai thiruman. Due to changed tides Swami Bashyakarar's

thirumeni is now with Thenkalai thiruman. Thanks to digital

alteration the present generation is able to behold the

original thirumeni.

 

It is better not to fight over it, let us enjoy the Sri

Perumboothoor thirumeni both with Thenkalai and Vadakalai

thiruman. After all, our Thenacharya brethren enjoy Swami

Sri Desikan with Thenkalai Thiruman in Thiruvallikkeni.

Then, why not we enjoy Sri Perumboothoor vaLLal with

Vadakalai Thiruman, albeit digitally altered.

 

With due respects to my friend Kannan, I would request

Sri. Hari not to abandon the picture which has appeared

in many publications including that of Sri Sannidhi

(please see Acharya Vaibhavam among others).

 

-- adiyEn ramanuja dasan

srimad azhagiya singar thiruvadi

[Guest guest]

Dileepan wrote:

 

> Digital alteration is not as hideous as physical alteration

> which was quite common in our shared history. Many temples

> have changed thirumans and some back again. Adiyen has heard

> from elders that only a few decades ago Sri Perumboothoor was

> indeed a Vadakalai temple and Swami Bhashyakarar was adorning

> a Vadakalai thiruman. Due to changed tides Swami Bashyakarar's

> thirumeni is now with Thenkalai thiruman.

 

namO nArAyaNa. Sri. Dileepan has courageously mentioned this

fact which is well-known to many Srivaishnavas and other Astikas.

None of the poorvacharyas from nathamunigal to udayavar, and

from swami kooratthalvan to vedanta desikar ever mentioned the

existence of any " ubhaya " urdhva pundram in their writings. Swami

desikan, the sarvatantra swatantra - who wrote voluminously about

every detail of Sri sampradayam, never so much as hinted at any

disagreement over the shape of thiruman-kaappu etc. among his

elders or contemporaries. The " kalai " term was never in use by

shishyas of any of the poorvacharyas, until the time of mamunigaL.

It was during the ensuing period - of revival in Srivaishnava temple

worship and maintenance, that two kalais began to be recognized.

Prior to this, " kalai " only referred to non-Srivaishnava mathams!!

" pal kalayOr thaam manna vandha iraamanusa... " (amudhanaar)

 

In the past few decades as Sri. dileepan rightly points out, the

thirumankaappu of perumal in many kovils has been changed -

perhaps keeping with the demographics of which kalai is more

numerous/aggressive at what location etc. This has resulted in

many sad outcomes like the kanchi elephant court case, the

introduction of thenkalai sarrumurai even at swami desikan's

own birthplace (thooppul), and the harrasment of bhaktas

trying to conduct swami desikan purappaadu in Srirangam

periya perumaL kovil, where swami desikan's sannidhi is

right next to that of perumaL. For that matter, a vadakalai

Srivaishnavan is not permitted to chant gadya trayam in the

ghosthi at Srirangam kovil. All these atrocities in the name

of thirumaN or kalai. If someone today takes exception

over a succint matter such as digital manipulation of an image,

perhaps they should first start with taking exception to the

greater injustices perpetrated at various divya desams. It is

very easy to sound " politically correct " - but separating the

'political' part from the 'correct' is another matter altogether.

 

> With due respects to my friend Kannan, I would request

> Sri. Hari not to abandon the picture which has appeared

> in many publications including that of Sri Sannidhi

> (please see Acharya Vaibhavam among others).

 

Very well put. The day when both sarrumurais are recited

in every kovil, and when every Srivaishnavan is allowed to

chant gadyatrayam everywhere is when such pictures will

be abandoned.

 

adiyEn,

-Srinath C.

[Guest guest]

Dear Swamins:

1. It is true in SriRangam Temple Vadakalai sect has not been allowed to recite

the Prabhandhams or other seva Kalams. That is true with temples such as Sri

Parthasarathy temple etc,. But let me ask you a question. Are we allowing any

Thennacharya person to participate in our temples? For example during the

uthsavam of Sri Veeraragahvan at Thiruvalloor, I know many people (especially

from Triplicane) want to go and do the Kainkaryam. What are we going to do? If

we look at things objectively then we can see that all of us part are of this

problem.

2. Let us analyze why we are not allowing Thennachrya Sampradhayam in our temple

or vice-versa. The simple reason is we dont trust each other. By allowing

someone to do a kainkaryam in our temple, we think that other person may start

looking for more privileges and eventually one day even the sampradhayam of the

temple may be changed because of the initial concessions we have given.

Therefore there is no mutual trust on both sides. By digitally manipulating the

images, this is what exactly we are doing. We are spreading more and more hatred

and suspicion among the Sri Vaishnavas. An eye for an eye will make the entire

world blind. Please let us not do that. Let us see the problems in a larger

perspective. Unless we boldly correct each and every step we take, we will be

limping forever.

3. > After all, our Thenacharya brethren enjoy Swami Sri Desikan with Thenkalai

Thiruman in Thiruvallikkeni.

Dear Swamins, not only in Thiruvallikkeni but also in SriPerumbhudhur Sri

Desikan is with Thenkalai Thirumann. But we should not forget one thing. THESE

TEMPLES ARE WELL ESTABLISHED THAT THEY BELONG TO THE THENNACHARYA SAMPRADHAYAM.

Of course we can argue that they were also changed once upon a time. So, we want

to change the history? In that case we will be supporting the reservations and

Mandal Commissions recommendations etc,. as they are also trying to reverse the

history. Any attempt to change the past history is not correct. But we can just

learn from the past and make sure that never happens again. Again it is very

easy to talk from an American perspective. Please look at the ground reality.

There is no support from the government, a very reluctant younger generation,

and above all we are a miniscule minority. With all these drawbacks how long we

are going to fight like street children?

Please do not take things personally. Let us look at things objectively and try

to do something for a better tomorrow.

Ramanuja Dasan Kannan

 

 

On Wed, 04 Apr 2001 10:05:33

Srinath Chakravarty wrote:

>Dileepan wrote:

>

>> Digital alteration is not as hideous as physical alteration

>> which was quite common in our shared history. Many temples

>> have changed thirumans and some back again. Adiyen has heard

>> from elders that only a few decades ago Sri Perumboothoor was

>> indeed a Vadakalai temple and Swami Bhashyakarar was adorning

>> a Vadakalai thiruman. Due to changed tides Swami Bashyakarar's

>> thirumeni is now with Thenkalai thiruman.

>

>namO nArAyaNa. Sri. Dileepan has courageously mentioned this

>fact which is well-known to many Srivaishnavas and other Astikas.

>None of the poorvacharyas from nathamunigal to udayavar, and

>from swami kooratthalvan to vedanta desikar ever mentioned the

>existence of any " ubhaya " urdhva pundram in their writings. Swami

>desikan, the sarvatantra swatantra - who wrote voluminously about

>every detail of Sri sampradayam, never so much as hinted at any

>disagreement over the shape of thiruman-kaappu etc. among his

>elders or contemporaries. The " kalai " term was never in use by

>shishyas of any of the poorvacharyas, until the time of mamunigaL.

>It was during the ensuing period - of revival in Srivaishnava temple

>worship and maintenance, that two kalais began to be recognized.

>Prior to this, " kalai " only referred to non-Srivaishnava mathams!!

> " pal kalayOr thaam manna vandha iraamanusa... " (amudhanaar)

>

>In the past few decades as Sri. dileepan rightly points out, the

>thirumankaappu of perumal in many kovils has been changed -

>perhaps keeping with the demographics of which kalai is more

>numerous/aggressive at what location etc. This has resulted in

>many sad outcomes like the kanchi elephant court case, the

>introduction of thenkalai sarrumurai even at swami desikan's

>own birthplace (thooppul), and the harrasment of bhaktas

>trying to conduct swami desikan purappaadu in Srirangam

>periya perumaL kovil, where swami desikan's sannidhi is

>right next to that of perumaL. For that matter, a vadakalai

>Srivaishnavan is not permitted to chant gadya trayam in the

>ghosthi at Srirangam kovil. All these atrocities in the name

>of thirumaN or kalai. If someone today takes exception

>over a succint matter such as digital manipulation of an image,

>perhaps they should first start with taking exception to the

>greater injustices perpetrated at various divya desams. It is

>very easy to sound " politically correct " - but separating the

>'political' part from the 'correct' is another matter altogether.

>

>> With due respects to my friend Kannan, I would request

>> Sri. Hari not to abandon the picture which has appeared

>> in many publications including that of Sri Sannidhi

>> (please see Acharya Vaibhavam among others).

>

>Very well put. The day when both sarrumurais are recited

>in every kovil, and when every Srivaishnavan is allowed to

>chant gadyatrayam everywhere is when such pictures will

>be abandoned.

>

>adiyEn,

>-Srinath C.

>

>

>Srimate Sri Laksminrisimha Divya Paduka Sevaka

>Srivan Satakopa Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya Nama:

>

>

[Guest guest]

At 09:42 AM 4/4/2001 -0700, Kannan AMR wrote:

>given. Therefore there is no mutual trust on both sides. By digitally

>manipulating the images, this is what exactly we are doing. We are

>spreading more and more hatred and suspicion among the Sri Vaishnavas. An

>eye for an eye will make the entire world blind. Please let us not do

>that. Let us see the problems in a larger perspective. Unless we boldly

>correct each and every step we take, we will be limping forever.

 

 

Dear Kannan:

 

Let us not over-react over a digital picture. I understand

that in your opinion digitally altering a picture promotes

hatred. I don't see any evidence of that. As you have put

very well we need to look at the ground reality and I just

don't see any hatred being generated over these pictures.

The fact as you have presented, is, this picture has been

around for many years and have been published in many books,

yet there has been no ground swell of opposition, let alone

hatred.

 

Your (over) reaction seems also to be based on your view

of western style photo-journalism and authenticity. But

what is authentic? Since this thriumeni came into existence

during the time of Bhagavad Ramanuja, and, in as much as there

was no kalai bedam at that time, claim of authenticity to

thenkalai thiruman has no basis in historical fact. On the

other hand, claim of authenticity purely on the basis of what

exists today is nothing short of arrogance and tyranny. So,

it is best to leave these things to be worked out by passage

of time. There is nothing to be gained by accusing either

side. Hatred is a very strong word. Such accusations

will cause more hatred than any digitally altered picture

ever will.

 

If you insist that the digital alteration of pictures is one

of the main causes of hatred, okay, have it your way. But

your opinion is just that, an opinion, not supported by hard

evidence. Let me also add, the hatred you talk about, which

is caused by many other important factors - not digital

alteration of a few pictures - cannot be reversed with your

prescription of preservation and acceptance of the status quo.

There must be genuine change of heart from those who have

the power to change the practices of temples such as Thiruvallur,

Thiruvallikeni, Sri Rangam, Thirumalai, Sri Perumboothoor,

Azhagar kovil, Koodalazhagar kovil, Azhvar Thirunagari and

other nava Thiruppatees, and scores of other temples all over

Tamil Nadu. If reform is your cup of tea, please focus your

energies at the real source of the problem in stead of taking

a cheap shot at a few innocent web site administrators and

accusing them of spreading hatred. If you ask me, let us

forget about changing the world, correcting past mistakes,

forging a better future for Sri Vaishnavam, et al. In stead,

let us concentrate on serving our Acarayas. If we concentrate

on just that, Perumal will take care of all those weighty

problems of world peace and harmony.

 

-- adiyEn

[Guest guest]

Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Parabramhane Namaha:

 

 

I agree with Sri Dileepan swami and his point is pretty apt with you on " let

us forget about changing the world, correcting past mistakes,

forging a better future for Sri Vaishnavam, et al. In stead,

let us concentrate on serving our Acarayas. If we concentrate

on just that, Perumal will take care of all those weighty

problems of world peace and harmony " .

 

Let's not make a mountain of an ant hill.

 

Acharya Thiruvadigale Sharanam.

 

Dasan

Venkatachari

 

 

>Dileepan <dileepan

>

>Re: Swami Bhashyakarar and the age of digital alterations

>Wed, 04 Apr 2001 14:35:34 -0400

>

>At 09:42 AM 4/4/2001 -0700, Kannan AMR wrote:

> >given. Therefore there is no mutual trust on both sides. By digitally

> >manipulating the images, this is what exactly we are doing. We are

> >spreading more and more hatred and suspicion among the Sri Vaishnavas. An

> >eye for an eye will make the entire world blind. Please let us not do

> >that. Let us see the problems in a larger perspective. Unless we boldly

> >correct each and every step we take, we will be limping forever.

>

>

>Dear Kannan:

>

>Let us not over-react over a digital picture. I understand

>that in your opinion digitally altering a picture promotes

>hatred. I don't see any evidence of that. As you have put

>very well we need to look at the ground reality and I just

>don't see any hatred being generated over these pictures.

>The fact as you have presented, is, this picture has been

>around for many years and have been published in many books,

>yet there has been no ground swell of opposition, let alone

>hatred.

>

>Your (over) reaction seems also to be based on your view

>of western style photo-journalism and authenticity. But

>what is authentic? Since this thriumeni came into existence

>during the time of Bhagavad Ramanuja, and, in as much as there

>was no kalai bedam at that time, claim of authenticity to

>thenkalai thiruman has no basis in historical fact. On the

>other hand, claim of authenticity purely on the basis of what

>exists today is nothing short of arrogance and tyranny. So,

>it is best to leave these things to be worked out by passage

>of time. There is nothing to be gained by accusing either

>side. Hatred is a very strong word. Such accusations

>will cause more hatred than any digitally altered picture

>ever will.

>

>If you insist that the digital alteration of pictures is one

>of the main causes of hatred, okay, have it your way. But

>your opinion is just that, an opinion, not supported by hard

>evidence. Let me also add, the hatred you talk about, which

>is caused by many other important factors - not digital

>alteration of a few pictures - cannot be reversed with your

>prescription of preservation and acceptance of the status quo.

>There must be genuine change of heart from those who have

>the power to change the practices of temples such as Thiruvallur,

>Thiruvallikeni, Sri Rangam, Thirumalai, Sri Perumboothoor,

>Azhagar kovil, Koodalazhagar kovil, Azhvar Thirunagari and

>other nava Thiruppatees, and scores of other temples all over

>Tamil Nadu. If reform is your cup of tea, please focus your

>energies at the real source of the problem in stead of taking

>a cheap shot at a few innocent web site administrators and

>accusing them of spreading hatred. If you ask me, let us

>forget about changing the world, correcting past mistakes,

>forging a better future for Sri Vaishnavam, et al. In stead,

>let us concentrate on serving our Acarayas. If we concentrate

>on just that, Perumal will take care of all those weighty

>problems of world peace and harmony.

>

>-- adiyEn

>

>

>Srimate Sri Laksminrisimha Divya Paduka Sevaka

>Srivan Satakopa Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya Nama:

>

>

[Guest guest]

>But your opinion is just that, an opinion, not supported by hard

>evidence.

 

Dear Dileepan:

This is what I call it as an American Perspective of the issue. Do you know

after the publication of the Yathiraja Sapdhathi in early 90s with this altered

Thirumann picture of Swami Emberumanar, what was the reaction from the local

Sthalathar of SriPerumbhudhur? They were totally annoyed and started reacting

towards the other sect. This is what the ground reality is. Therefore such acts

(changing the Thirumann digitally) are nothing short of adding ghee to the fire.

No one will come to streets to explicitly show their reactions so that we can

watch it here in CNN. Therefore actually affected persons were not the people

who printed the picture. Not the publisher. Not the person who actually changed

the Thirumann. But a poor Vadakalai SriVaishnava who wants to do a real service

Swamy Ethiraja.

 

>There must be genuine change of heart from those who have

>the power to change the practices of temples such as Thiruvallur,

>Thiruvallikeni, Sri Rangam, Thirumalai, Sri Perumboothoor,

>Azhagar kovil, Koodalazhagar kovil, Azhvar Thirunagari and

>other nava Thiruppatees, and scores of other temples all over

>Tamil Nadu.

 

Well Said Swamin. I cannot wait to see this. I hope you will take the

initiative as for as the Thiruvallur is concerned by using your goodwill with

Sri Ahobila Mutt.

 

>In stead, let us concentrate on serving our Acarayas.

 

Yes, absoultely. Hope you will agree that telling not to distort a picture of

Swami Emberumanar is also a service.

 

RamanujaDasan Kannan

 

 

 

On Wed, 04 Apr 2001 14:35:34

Dileepan wrote:

>At 09:42 AM 4/4/2001 -0700, Kannan AMR wrote:

>>given. Therefore there is no mutual trust on both sides. By digitally

>>manipulating the images, this is what exactly we are doing. We are

>>spreading more and more hatred and suspicion among the Sri Vaishnavas. An

>>eye for an eye will make the entire world blind. Please let us not do

>>that. Let us see the problems in a larger perspective. Unless we boldly

>>correct each and every step we take, we will be limping forever.

>

>

>Dear Kannan:

>

>Let us not over-react over a digital picture. I understand

>that in your opinion digitally altering a picture promotes

>hatred. I don't see any evidence of that. As you have put

>very well we need to look at the ground reality and I just

>don't see any hatred being generated over these pictures.

>The fact as you have presented, is, this picture has been

>around for many years and have been published in many books,

>yet there has been no ground swell of opposition, let alone

>hatred.

>

>Your (over) reaction seems also to be based on your view

>of western style photo-journalism and authenticity. But

>what is authentic? Since this thriumeni came into existence

>during the time of Bhagavad Ramanuja, and, in as much as there

>was no kalai bedam at that time, claim of authenticity to

>thenkalai thiruman has no basis in historical fact. On the

>other hand, claim of authenticity purely on the basis of what

>exists today is nothing short of arrogance and tyranny. So,

>it is best to leave these things to be worked out by passage

>of time. There is nothing to be gained by accusing either

>side. Hatred is a very strong word. Such accusations

>will cause more hatred than any digitally altered picture

>ever will.

>

>If you insist that the digital alteration of pictures is one

>of the main causes of hatred, okay, have it your way. But

>your opinion is just that, an opinion, not supported by hard

>evidence. Let me also add, the hatred you talk about, which

>is caused by many other important factors - not digital

>alteration of a few pictures - cannot be reversed with your

>prescription of preservation and acceptance of the status quo.

>There must be genuine change of heart from those who have

>the power to change the practices of temples such as Thiruvallur,

>Thiruvallikeni, Sri Rangam, Thirumalai, Sri Perumboothoor,

>Azhagar kovil, Koodalazhagar kovil, Azhvar Thirunagari and

>other nava Thiruppatees, and scores of other temples all over

>Tamil Nadu. If reform is your cup of tea, please focus your

>energies at the real source of the problem in stead of taking

>a cheap shot at a few innocent web site administrators and

>accusing them of spreading hatred. If you ask me, let us

>forget about changing the world, correcting past mistakes,

>forging a better future for Sri Vaishnavam, et al. In stead,

>let us concentrate on serving our Acarayas. If we concentrate

>on just that, Perumal will take care of all those weighty

>problems of world peace and harmony.

>

>-- adiyEn

>

>

>Srimate Sri Laksminrisimha Divya Paduka Sevaka

>Srivan Satakopa Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya Nama:

>

>

[Guest guest]

Kannan AMR wrote:

 

> This is what I call it as an American Perspective of the issue. Do you know

after the publication of the Yathiraja Sapdhathi in early 90s with this altered

Thirumann picture of Swami Emberumanar, what was the reaction from the local

Sthalathar of SriPerumbhudhur? They were totally annoyed and started reacting

towards the other sect. This is what the ground reality is. Therefore such acts

(changing the Thirumann digitally) are nothing short of adding ghee to the fire.

No one will come to streets to explicitly show their reactions so that we can

watch it here in CNN. Therefore actually affected persons were not the people

who printed the picture. Not the publisher. Not the person who actually changed

the Thirumann. But a poor Vadakalai SriVaishnava who wants to do a real service

Swamy Ethiraja.

 

This is absolutely correct!! It is the irresponsible behavior of people who

publish pictures of udayavar with vadakalai thirumaN, which has caused

all these problems. In fact, the atyapacharam indulged by the sthalathars

of the rajagopuram sannidhi in disallowing srimad mukkoor azhagiyasingar

from perfroming mangalashasanam there is a direct result of such digital

manipulation. If not for such irresponsible publications, none of these

sthalathars would have ever comitted atrocities against devout vadagalais.

It will behoove us all to publicly apologize for this digital misdemeanor,

which has resulted in so many tensions between the two kalais, starting

from the gadyatrayam ghosthi to the kanchi elephant, all the way back

to thooppul vilakkoli deepaprakasar. Who knows, such apologies

might even prevent the dhwaja sthambam of thirupathi temple from

getting re-chiselled into thenkalai fashion!!

 

-Srinath C.

[Guest guest]

Well written mail. Let us do the best possible damage to our sampradhayam by

showing off more hatred towards the other sect. No one said the activities done

by the other sect are all correct. But an eye for an eye will make the whole

world blind. And I never mentioned that because of the digital manipulation only

all our sampradhayam disputes happend. Let us not do the mistakes in a different

form. Please again and again I am requesting all of us to find a way to correct

aberrations.

RamanujaDasan Kannan

 

On Wed, 04 Apr 2001 17:06:59

Srinath Chakravarty wrote:

>Kannan AMR wrote:

>

>> This is what I call it as an American Perspective of the issue. Do you know

after the publication of the Yathiraja Sapdhathi in early 90s with this altered

Thirumann picture of Swami Emberumanar, what was the reaction from the local

Sthalathar of SriPerumbhudhur? They were totally annoyed and started reacting

towards the other sect. This is what the ground reality is. Therefore such acts

(changing the Thirumann digitally) are nothing short of adding ghee to the fire.

No one will come to streets to explicitly show their reactions so that we can

watch it here in CNN. Therefore actually affected persons were not the people

who printed the picture. Not the publisher. Not the person who actually changed

the Thirumann. But a poor Vadakalai SriVaishnava who wants to do a real service

Swamy Ethiraja.

>

>This is absolutely correct!! It is the irresponsible behavior of people who

>publish pictures of udayavar with vadakalai thirumaN, which has caused

>all these problems. In fact, the atyapacharam indulged by the sthalathars

>of the rajagopuram sannidhi in disallowing srimad mukkoor azhagiyasingar

>from perfroming mangalashasanam there is a direct result of such digital

>manipulation. If not for such irresponsible publications, none of these

>sthalathars would have ever comitted atrocities against devout vadagalais.

>It will behoove us all to publicly apologize for this digital misdemeanor,

>which has resulted in so many tensions between the two kalais, starting

>from the gadyatrayam ghosthi to the kanchi elephant, all the way back

>to thooppul vilakkoli deepaprakasar. Who knows, such apologies

>might even prevent the dhwaja sthambam of thirupathi temple from

>getting re-chiselled into thenkalai fashion!!

>

>-Srinath C.

>

>

>Srimate Sri Laksminrisimha Divya Paduka Sevaka

>Srivan Satakopa Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya Nama:

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Friends,

 

We are nothing but a bundle of blunder born in this world to clear off

our prArabdham so that we can ultimately join the NithyaSuri gOshti.

Instead of concentrating on ways to get there why are we fighting

over trivia? Is this how our AchAryans were arguing in the recent

Yathi Sammelan? Are their interest in the sampradAya any inferior to

ours? When these very pillars are forging to March Ahead why are we

their sishyAs loosing our sanity? Merely appending their thaniyans

in our mails is not enough to show our respects to them. It is how we

live and let others live that exhibits this.

 

puRam chuvar kOlam seidhu puL kavvak kidakinrErae!

 

(this statement befits me also)

adiyEn

Rajagopalan Srinivasan

[Guest guest]

Sarvam Sri Vishnu Mayam,

Om Namo Narayanaya Namaha,

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

 

 

Dear Sri Swami Bashyakara Bhakthas,

 

I think we discussed more than enough on this topic. Some one has to say "Stop; no further." Let us not wash our dirty linen in the public. Whether we like it or not there are two "Kalais" that have come to stay. Our efforts now should be directed towards to find out as much common ground as possible for both the "Kalais" to tread upon without infringing or trampling the sentiments of one Kalai or the other. This is the basic premise on which our Acharyas are trying to build a "friendly future" for both the Kalais. Let us not, by indulging in such trivial matters, burn this bridge at the start of its constructional stage itself. Saner minds strive to bury the hatchet.

 

Finally, as our Acharya Sriman Thiruvaragathu Amudhanaar said "Let us worship only the Lotus Feet of Sriman Emperumanaar":

 

" IRamanusan Adi Poomannave"

 

Let us not bother much about what is in His forehead. Luckily there are no separate identity for each of the Kalai at Lord's Feet.

 

Dasan,

 

Kandhadai Krishnakumar

 

[Guest guest]

SrI:

SrImatE rAmAnujAya namaH

 

namO nArAyaNa!

 

Dear devotees,

 

SrI KaNNan has brought out a good point and it was sufficiently

answered by SrI Dileepan and SrI SrInath. The mail-box today

when opened had more discussions on the same issue !

 

aDiyEn would like to add few words too ....

 

ThirumEni of bhAshyakArar Or any archa-mUrti

is suddha-satva and we worship through the aagama

procedures. Photos help us a great way to be in

rememberance of those merciful forms taken by

PerumAL,BhAshyakArar and others. But, thirumaN is not a

part of the thirumEni as such. Only bhattars adorn the

Lord with such ThirumaNs which is mainly in accordance with

the way Temple is administered. Exeptions are there like in

the case of Utsava mUrti of Lord SrInivAsa wherein the

thirumaN {Vadakalai} is a part of the thirumEni itself.

 

Photos of AchAryas are more for pouring out one's love

and aDiyEn strongly feels that a devotee is justified in adorning

his dear AchArya with the thirumaN followed by his lineage, to

which that AchArya also belongs. Objections can be made if the

AchArya " will not " accept that thirumaN. It can't be

the case since the devotee's AchArya parampara accepts it.

If the devotee claims that his Photo with digitally altered

ThirumaN is the exact replica of how an archA-mUrti,inclusive of

thirumaN, is present at some divya-dEsam like SrI-PerumpUdUr,

then the objection is vaild. By the way, SrIman NArAyaNa is

the first AchArya of the parampara and the above holds good

for His Photos as well.

 

If we accept that BhAshyakAra is common to both the kalais,

there is no problem in accepting both types of thirumaN be

adorned in BhAshyakAra's forehead according to individual's

choice - atleast in the photos etc that he/she keeps. Ofcourse,

one shouldn't be aggressive to the effect that the thirumaN in

the archA-thirumEni of AzhwAr,AchAryas and PerumAL has to be

changed to Vadakalai thirumaN only etc and fight with the

Thenkalai administrators - We respect the present

administrations looking after Divya-Desams.

 

Even for that matter, aDiyEn feels that a devotee can digitally

alter things like colour of cloth etc to bring out the better

finish to the Photo without violating aagama SAstra/sampradAyam

{ex: If the devotee feels that the vEshti{dhoti} in the photo is

too dull, he/she can digitally alter it to look white}. It is a

sign of one's love and reverence to his/her dear AchArya/PerumAL.

-------------------

 

SrI KaNNan has a point that digital alteration of thirumaN evoke

the wrath of some the~nkalais. Those the~nkalais must also have

the feeling that the BhAshyakAra belongs only to them just because

they are currently the administrators of the temple. Yes, in

temple administration, one shouldn't poke the nose and fight

with the other kalai. Thats not the case here.

 

Probably, from the point of view of SrI KaNNan, he can

suggest that it will be better to place a note below such digitally

altered Photos like " Archa-mUrti of BhAshyakAra at SrI-PerumpUdUr

with digitally altered ThirumaN,....This is not to claim any

current administrative linkage of my lineage with this temple .. " .

SrI KaNNan and others may come up with some thoughtful notes in

the above manner which will not evoke any meaningful anger from

the other kalai. But, fundamentally, aDiyEn is not against the

concept of digital alteration in cases such as the present one

and it is in no way dis-respectful to BhAshyakAra's archA-avatAra

/ thirumEni.

 

aDiyEn would also like to point out that SrI Hari is well

knowledged in SAstras and well-informed on these fundamental

issues of the sampradAyam. Its not a good sign to treat him as

one among the bunch of " misled Younger Generation " sticking to

fanatic activities and calling for the involvement of " elders " to

correct such " Young <ignorant> Ones " {That was the first opinion

aDiyEn got by reading those sentences; Ofcourse changed it later

since SrI KaNNan wouldn't have conceived that way}. SrI KaNNan as

a sincere SrI VaishNava has good respect to all bhAgavatas and

SrI Hari too. aDiyEn is not denying that. But, in his first

objection mail some will not able to understand his feelings

towards Younger Generation's guidance mixed with this issue of

SrI Hari's Web-Site. Probably SrI KaNNan had that issue to convey

parallelly and things got jumbled to mean certain things which he

didn't intend. Mistakes can be pointed out by anyone. But lets

not make over-statement of what has been done by innocent persons.

-----------

 

The spirit behind SrI KaNNan's mail has to be well appreciated

by everyone, which will also not be denied by any.

 

Incidentally, aDiyEn would like to cite from SrI Abhinava DESika

UtthamUr SwAmi's Introduction to SwAmi DESikan's Saccharitra

Raksha, in which SrI UtthamUr SwAmi says that the Vadakalai and

The~nkalai mode of thirumaNs were not prevelant in the times of

SwAmi DESikan. Its because, in the whole chapter dedicated to the

determination of the type of Urdhva-PuNDram to be worn by us and

even PerumAL in archA-avatAra, SwAmi DESikan quotes extensively

from PAn~carAtra, Smrutis and other pramANas including AzhwAr's

Divya-Prabandhams and discusses varieties of possible shapes that

can arise from pramANas and even the materials to be used. Finally,

siddhAnta is made that the ThirumaN on forehead should be worn

vertically from the end of the nose in the shape of Hari's Foot

with gap in-between. There was no consideration as a possibility

in this chapter about the line on the nose going below the

ThirumaN which is in the shape of Lord Hari's foot. SrI UtthamUr

SwAmi thus ends " IdanAl, pAdattin KeezhE izhuppadenRa bhEdam

SrI DESikan kAlatthil illai yenbadu theLivAm " {ie. " Hence, it is

very clear that the difference in the way of adorning a line below

the foot was not present in the times of SrI DESika " }.

 

Earlier, aDiyEn thought that such differences in ThirumaN might

be possible from the times of Bhagavad RAmAnuja itself as a

family tradition {not to do anything with kalai difference} and

later it was pressed upon to make it as an identification symbol

wrt to the kalai. But Saccharitra-raksha of SwAmi DESikan negates

such a view.

 

Note: aDiyEn is not advocating that one has to be against

the~nkalais, the~nkalai thirumaN etc. The above citation was

only as the information to the followers of SrI RAmAnuja as

further firmly established by SwAmi DESikan. In this light,

it will be a very valid objection on the usage of the~nkalai

thirumaN for SwAmi VEdAnta DESikan in his various archa avatAra

thirumEnis under the control of The~nkalai administrators,

since SwAmi DESikan neither had such an^ushTAnam nor advocated it

in his writings. Similarly, its valid to adorn BhAshyakAra

with vadakalai thirumaN in the photos, probably with added

footers.

 

We have to live together with the~nkalais without hatred,

animosity etc and make cautious steps in sensitive issues.

This is accepted by all.

 

AzhwAr,EmperumAnAr,DESikan,Azhagiyasingar thiruvaDIgaLE SaraNam

 

aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,

anantapadmanAbhan.

krushNArpaNam.

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhagavathas:

 

First, I do not agree with those who want to end this

discussion forthwith just because it is controvertial.

As long as we keep it civil there is nothing wrong in

some back and forth. Let us not make this net strictly

bland.

 

>===== Original Message From Srinath Chakravarty <xsrinath =====

 

 

>manipulation. If not for such irresponsible publications, none of these

>sthalathars would have ever comitted atrocities against devout vadagalais.

 

Dear Sri Srinath, this is an overreach, do you really think

that digital alteration of a picture resulted in atrocities

against devout Vadakalai? The unfortunate rivalries between

kalais is deep rooted. Thiruman fights is only a symptom.

Please do not jump to conclusions.

 

Let us take for example what happened in Sri Rangam just a few

days ago. This is based on reports I received a few days back.

When Srimad Azhagiya Singar visited Sri Rangam last week

HH noticed a Thenkalai Thiruman placed on top of the Raja

Gopuram built by Srimad Mukkoor Azhagiya Singar. This is

absolutely new. Then, Jeeyar expressed that there was no

need to introduce something new and this is an unwelcome

development. HH expressed the opinion that it is better

to take it down. In a couple of days a group of Thenkalai

Sri Vasihnavas took out a procession shouting that the

Thenkalai Thiruman must not be removed and also made

speaches against Srimad Azhagiya Singar.

 

Now, what are we to make of this.

 

Let us assume this thiruman continues to be present in

the Rajagopuram. Then, a few years from now if one of

our great grandchild takes a picture of the Rajagopuram

and digitally removes the thenkalai thiruman to show the

gopuram as it originally was, then, there will be enough

people among Vadakalais itself to condemn him or her of

spreading hatred. This is what is happening now with Hari.

 

Further, this act of putting Thenkalai Thiruman on top

of the Rajagopuram is much more serious than any digital

alteration, that too to show the thirumeni in its original

form. Afterall, those who have beholden the thirumeni during

thirumanjanam swear that on the thirumeni Vadakalai thiruman

can be clearly seen.

 

For amity to come about, first, we must not overreact and

accuse people of " spreading hatred " . That is one of the most

irrresponsible acts from someone who claims to speak for

unity and cooperaton. It is easy to talk about unity and

accuse others of spreading hatred, but it takes a lot of time

and energy to do something concerete, that is the ground

reality.

 

Finally, I am not really interested in changing the world.

Sri Perumboothoor, and a host of other temples can continue

to be Thenkalai kovil and Thiruvallur can continue to be

a Vadakalai temple. I am not complaining about Thenkalai

kovils. Let them continue their practice. My interest is

strictly to serve my acharya. But, those who take exceptions

to vadakalai thiruman on Sri Perumboothoor Sri Ramanuja are

the ones who must take the initiative to change things. Since

Kannan has expressed extreme emotions in this regard, I

invite him to take some effort to change things in his

place of residence Thiruvallikeni. Until he succeeds

even .01% in that, I request him not to go balastic and

accuse accuse easy targets of bloody murder.

 

-- adiyEn

[Guest guest]

>But, those who take exceptions

>to vadakalai thiruman on Sri Perumboothoor Sri Ramanuja are

>the ones who must take the initiative to change things. Since

>Kannan has expressed extreme emotions in this regard, I

>invite him to take some effort to change things in his

>place of residence Thiruvallikeni. Until he succeeds

>even .01% in that, I request him not to go balastic and

>accuse accuse easy targets of bloody murder.

 

Well, when I just made a point, within my own community (I mean Sri Ahobila Mutt

Sishyas) I have been accused of murdering someone!!! Unless we dont make

mistakes or repeat mistakes in a different manifestation, nothing will change.

When I say " WE "

I mean both the kalais. Therefore the question of changing Thiruvallikkeni

doesn't arise at all (When I am being accused as a murderer in my own

community). But I will definitely try to reach out to people who are generous

enough to listen. Because I know many many younger generation people are tired

of this Dhwesham. And I am so happy that many people supported my views through

private emails. I am happy not because my views got some support, but to know

that there are hearts, who want to take this glorious sampradhayam from the past

turmoil to a wonderful future. As for as SriRangam is concerned When Sri

Mukkoor AzhagiayaSingar started the construction, it was agreed that a Thenkalai

Thirumann will adorn the Gopuram. This was the agreement made between Srimadh

AzhagiyaSingar and the Temple Authorities which included the local Sthalathars.

As Srimadh AzhagiyaSingar was a real Mahathma and a large hearted Saint, he

agreed to have the Temple's Thirumann. Let us follow the footsteps of that great

Acharya. I really thought with Sri Anand's good remarks this issue is over. If

someone wants to continue we can do that. But nothing will happen unless there

is a vision without a hatred mind.

As for as Sri Hari is concerned, I have lot of respects for his wonderful

accomplishments and his knowledge on Sampradhayam and I have expressed the same

through my personal email. And when I expressed my views there was nothing

personal against him. I did not call him a murderer!!!

RamanujaDasan Kannan

 

On Thu, 5 Apr 2001 15:29:33

pdileepa wrote:

>Dear Bhagavathas:

>

>First, I do not agree with those who want to end this

>discussion forthwith just because it is controvertial.

>As long as we keep it civil there is nothing wrong in

>some back and forth. Let us not make this net strictly

>bland.

>

>>===== Original Message From Srinath Chakravarty <xsrinath =====

>

>

>>manipulation. If not for such irresponsible publications, none of these

>>sthalathars would have ever comitted atrocities against devout vadagalais.

>

>Dear Sri Srinath, this is an overreach, do you really think

>that digital alteration of a picture resulted in atrocities

>against devout Vadakalai? The unfortunate rivalries between

>kalais is deep rooted. Thiruman fights is only a symptom.

>Please do not jump to conclusions.

>

>Let us take for example what happened in Sri Rangam just a few

>days ago. This is based on reports I received a few days back.

>When Srimad Azhagiya Singar visited Sri Rangam last week

>HH noticed a Thenkalai Thiruman placed on top of the Raja

>Gopuram built by Srimad Mukkoor Azhagiya Singar. This is

>absolutely new. Then, Jeeyar expressed that there was no

>need to introduce something new and this is an unwelcome

>development. HH expressed the opinion that it is better

>to take it down. In a couple of days a group of Thenkalai

>Sri Vasihnavas took out a procession shouting that the

>Thenkalai Thiruman must not be removed and also made

>speaches against Srimad Azhagiya Singar.

>

>Now, what are we to make of this.

>

>Let us assume this thiruman continues to be present in

>the Rajagopuram. Then, a few years from now if one of

>our great grandchild takes a picture of the Rajagopuram

>and digitally removes the thenkalai thiruman to show the

>gopuram as it originally was, then, there will be enough

>people among Vadakalais itself to condemn him or her of

>spreading hatred. This is what is happening now with Hari.

>

>Further, this act of putting Thenkalai Thiruman on top

>of the Rajagopuram is much more serious than any digital

>alteration, that too to show the thirumeni in its original

>form. Afterall, those who have beholden the thirumeni during

>thirumanjanam swear that on the thirumeni Vadakalai thiruman

>can be clearly seen.

>

>For amity to come about, first, we must not overreact and

>accuse people of " spreading hatred " . That is one of the most

>irrresponsible acts from someone who claims to speak for

>unity and cooperaton. It is easy to talk about unity and

>accuse others of spreading hatred, but it takes a lot of time

>and energy to do something concerete, that is the ground

>reality.

>

>Finally, I am not really interested in changing the world.

>Sri Perumboothoor, and a host of other temples can continue

>to be Thenkalai kovil and Thiruvallur can continue to be

>a Vadakalai temple. I am not complaining about Thenkalai

>kovils. Let them continue their practice. My interest is

>strictly to serve my acharya. But, those who take exceptions

>to vadakalai thiruman on Sri Perumboothoor Sri Ramanuja are

>the ones who must take the initiative to change things. Since

>Kannan has expressed extreme emotions in this regard, I

>invite him to take some effort to change things in his

>place of residence Thiruvallikeni. Until he succeeds

>even .01% in that, I request him not to go balastic and

>accuse accuse easy targets of bloody murder.

>

>-- adiyEn

>

>

>Srimate Sri Laksminrisimha Divya Paduka Sevaka

>Srivan Satakopa Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya Nama:

>

>

[Guest guest]

>===== Original Message From amrkannan =====

>Well, when I just made a point, within my own community (I mean Sri Ahobila

Mutt Sishyas) I have been accused of murdering someone!!!

 

Dear Kannan, once again you are jumping to conclusions!!

Please read my mail carefully. I have not accused you

of murdering. What I have said is that you should not

make a mountain of a mole hill. Here is what I said,

 

" not to go balastic and accuse easy targets

of bloody murder "

 

This is not accusing you of murdering anyone.

 

 

 

>As for as SriRangam is concerned When Sri Mukkoor AzhagiayaSingar started the

construction, it was agreed that a Thenkalai Thirumann will adorn the Gopuram.

 

Again you are wrong. The agreement was not as you state.

The agreement was that neither thiruman will be placed

on the gopuram.

 

Once again, I am not interested in kalai fights, I leave

that to people for whom that is of great interest. But,

let me tell you something, your approach to reconciliation

will only generate more hurt feelings. My only interest

in this matter is that Hari was unnecessary harshly

critisized for an issue that is important for everyone

to properly understand.

 

Dear Kannan, you are my friend, but your public accusation

of spreading hatred cannot be allowed to stand. That is all.

There is nothing personal.

 

>him. I did not call him a murderer!!!

 

It is just a figure of speech, get over it.

 

-- adiyEn

[Guest guest]

Srimadh Azhagiya Singar thiruvadigaLE saraNam

 

Dear Sri Kannan and fellow bAgawathAs,

 

adiyEn wants to add some thoughts. adiyEn first agrees with you

that when a mistake is brought to the attention, no matter how

small or big a mistake is, it must be corrected. No matter how

" Learned " or " Unknown " a person is, everyone is accountable for

his or her mistakes. Even if one is a Super power the " A " (Apology)

word is better than the " R " (Regret) word. However Sri Kannan may

want to note that, it is always preferable to give a feedback

through a personal mail when questions and disputes such as this

occur. It may have avoided " mana kasappu " among many of us. Email

is after all so impersonal and may be misleading.

 

However, adiyEn asked myself if this digital alteration of a

thiruman is a mistake at all. No! given the past account and the

known truth that Sri perum puthur vantha vaLLal's thiru mEni had

the Sri SampradAyam thiruman all along in the past, the digital

alteration is not a mistake. In fact many say that, when it was

changed to the other thiruman earlier in the temple, it was a BIG

mistake.

 

If one may think that the digital alteration is a " mistake " , in

fact it is ok to commit that " mistake " if it is to establish the

truth and uphold " dharma " . In a way that is what is done by Sri

Hari and his friends in the small cyber world. It is a small act

and it was infact done unknowingly as told by Sri Hari and his

friends. We donot encourage such corrections from staus quo.. etc.

intentionally by ourselves and without the directions of the

AchAryAs. When such things occur unintentionally we only have to

take it as perumAL's thiru uLLam to see Sri bAshyakArar of Sri

perum puthur with Sri sannithi thiruman again.

 

 

With regard to Srirangam, some eyewitness account of thirties say

that periyA perumAL had Sri sannidhi thiruman only. Anyway, no

matter what thiruman is used there, the shAstram says that only

great mahans can build them. Too bad, though one may prevent

Srisannithi thiruman for this Sri Raja gOpuram or protest, one can

never deny the glory of the mahan 44th Srimadh Azhagiya Singar who

built it. If vadakalai is not accpetable to Sri Ranganatha we

donot know as to why HE went and begged to Sri Sannithi jeer of

all the others, to build His Sri Raja gOpuram that even Sri thiru

mnagai AzhwAr could not attempt ?

 

It is nice to see that the " Srivaishanva yathis mAnAdu " is being

remembered. Such is often being quoted in these debates. In fact

someone even quoted that they championed the unity movement two

years ago and that some bAgawathAs opposed it for the reasons

known to themselves only. Such statements were not correct. The

reason that some people were not ready to jump into that wagon was

such that some of us certainly follow our AchAryA's thiru uLLam.

For any change to abandon our tradition and " muRais " , it cannot

come out of a North American unity movement. It must originate

from AchAryAs and not from us and our karmic minds. The unity

movement is not similar to an e-group journal to begin our own and

seek AchAryAs blessings for that and propagandae that AchAryAs

commanded us to do so. We cannot put words into the mouth of

AchAryAs and so we cannot take these proposals ourselves to

AchArayAs as well. AchAryAs know it all. Who are we to say that we

echo AchAryAs thiru uLLam in advance of two years to champions an

unity movement or of that sort, when our AchAryas never told some

of us anything about it. We are all mere thiruvadi " mann " of

AchAryAs and we cannot act anything without their thiru uLLam.

 

Those who criticize prapannas for writing their AchArya thaniyans

must adopt some caution. They must first learn about the " yathi

sammElanam " and its declarations thoroughly. Mere quoting such

sammElanams donot mean that the authors understand anything about

the sammElanam. adiyEn would hesitatingly say that such quotes

about yathi sammElanam in the current debate is without much

relevance. People may wanna read and understand the declarations

made in that sammElanam. No AchArya is saying that everyone must

abandon their pArampariyam in the name of promoting unity. No one

is saying that Srisannithi sARRumurai in Sri Veeraragavan sannithi

must be diluted or anything of that sort. They wanted to form a

joint committee that will discuss many of the temple related

problems to attempt to solve such problems.

 

It is a pity that some vadakalai sthalathArars of Sri perum puthur

have to suffer for the release of yathiraja sapthathi book with

the Sri sannithi thiruman (on Sri udayavar) printed on it. In many

ways the hostility imposed on them is no different from such

inflicted on several Hindus living in Bagladesh, pakistan and

afganistan whenever Sri Ram Janma Boomi is dealt in India. We can

only pray at our AchAryas thiruvadi that everyone live in peace

and harmony.

 

adiyEn irAmAnusa dAsan

Srimadh Azhagiya Singar thiru vadigaLE saraNam

thiruk kudanthai Rengarajan

 

_______________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com