You are here: SriPedia - SriRangaSri - Archives - Feb 2003

SriRangaSri List Archive: Message 00186 Feb 2003

 
Feb 2003 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


Shrimathey Nigamantha Maha Desikaya Namaha
As I said earlier, it is your choice to follow or not to follow. Even in the 
case of Periyar E.V.Ramaswamy Naicker who made a garland of slippers for Sri 
Rama, he was very fine till the end of his life. He used to have one full 
chicken every day. So do we have to emulate him too? In case ladies who pluck 
tulasi leaves are doing fine, we do not know what is in store for them in 
future. It is their look out whether to continue to do it or not.
It is no sin if you do not offer flowers to The Lord. But it is a certain sin 
if you do offer flowers that are prohibited from being offered or if you offer 
them the wrong way for eg. by tying flowers on a cotton thread instead of the 
fibre(or naaru as it is called in tamizh). There are plenty of examples which 
are similar to this.
Shastras are no exception for anyone. Even for the Lord Himself. After all, if 
He Himself doesn't abide by it, He cannot expect others to follow it. He 
definitely leads by example. For having tested an old Brahmin as a young boy, 
Sri Rama had to undergo testing himself when Sugriva tested his strength by 
asking him to kick a skeleton and release arrows to chop off trees. Similarly 
for Vali vadham, He Himself underwent a similar exercise at the end of Krishna 
Avataram. For having lied that He did not steal butter, he was accused of 
having stolen the Syamantaka Mani and so on. Such cases are innumerable. So 
also all acharyas have followed shastras to the letter and spirit. Bhagavad 
Ramanuja at the ripe old age of 120 lifted himself up with the help of sishyas 
to perform argyapradanam. Sri Vidura also refused to recite the Vedas since he 
did not belong to the castes that were eligible to do so. There are numerous 
instances which can be quoted with reference to the Azhwars too.
There aren't any exceptions. Different people may have different injunctions to 
follow - for eg. different rules for brahmins, kshatriyas etc. Shastras could 
also change with times - eg. yagams and homams were a must until dwapara yuga 
but nama sankirtana takes its place in kali yuga etc. But nobody is exempt. 
Just that some people have the capacity to overcome their flaws. It doesn't 
mean that other people have to follow them and commit the same flaws. As Swami 
Desika puts it, they are "vyakti viseshangal". It doesn't mean that everyone 
has to follow Thondaradippodi Azhwar for all that he did. It doesn't mean that 
all children have to follow Sri Krishna and steal things from other houses. 
They are exceptions themselves. They are not exempt from Shastras. Even the 
great Periya Nambi who was our Bhashyakarar's acharya had to suffer loss of 
eyesight. It was not preventable. Even Dasaratha who was Sri Rama's father did 
not attain moksha but only swarga. 
Hence it is ideal that we try to follow all that is possible by us even if it 
is not 100%
As for Sri, The Lord is Seshi for Her too just like He is Seshi for all of us. 
Your own narration of Tulasi's charithram shows that even the Lord is not 
exempt from curses. The curse did have the impact, isn't it? As The Lord 
declares in the Geetha "Shruthismritir mamaivaagnaa yasthaam ullangya varjayet. 
Aagnachchedhi mama drohi madbhaktopi na vaishnavaha" meaning that the Shastras 
are His order and anyone who forsakes them is a drohi to The Lord even though 
he is a Bhaktha to Him.
I would also like to mention that to a very large extent, we follow the 
Manusmriti and in kali yuga we follow Parashara smriti. "Kalau Parashara 
Smritihi" as the saying goes.
Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan
sri mani ganth <srimani@xxxx> wrote:
Swamin,

Adiyen's intention was not to find fault with Sasthras or fight with you. For 
great people, Shasthras would be an exemption.


The whole center of Sri Vaishnavism, & how it is dif. from other Vaishnavite 
cults is that, it signifies "Sri" as Lord's consort & also includes Sri Devi as 
a part of Paramathma.

Sri Lakshmi astotharam calls her as 'Namami Paramathmikaam".

So, it's upto you to agree or not. For that matter, Sri Thulasi herself is a 
lady!!

Let me narrate ri Thulasi Charitham.

Sri THulasi had did Thapas to attain, Lord ion her previous birth. She was 
married to Shanka Chooda , a demon, who was helping Sishubala. But due to the 
power of the virginity of Thulasi, Lord Krishna couldnt kill Shanka Chooda. SO, 
Lord went in his disguise & touched her , as her virginity would be lost. Sri 
Thulasi knew thtas by her power & cursed Lord to become a stone. Lord told her 
that, he was awaitinf for that monet & became stones in Kandaki nadhi. Sri 
Thulasi became a plant & Shanka chooda became the panchajanyam, which is used 
for pujas as shankam.

Thus, Sri Thulasi is available for us for aradhanam. Sri Thulasi was married to 
Shankachooda as he ahd done a thapas in his prev. birth to attain her.

I cant dare to comment on Shasthras. But, I have seen lots of women, collecting 
Thulasi leaves & they seem to be pretty happy. So, it makes us feel that, some 
of the shasthras cannot be really followed 100%

For that matter, we r following the Drvida Vedam, which was composed by a 
Sudra/Farmer.

Adiyen,

Mani.

>From: Vasudevan VK 
>To: sri mani ganth , Srirangasri@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: Re: [SriRangaSri] 
>Tulasi Aaradhanai >Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 01:57:13 -0800 (PST) > > >Srimatey 
>Nigamanta Maha Desikaya Namaha >Dear Bhagavathas, >I hope we are not here to 
>discuss whether shasthras are applicable to 100% brahmanas or to 98.643679% 
>brahmanas.(Just for the record - if anyone were to be 100% brahmana then he 
>would already be abiding by all the shastras. It is for the lesser mortals to 
>come up in spiritual life that shastras have been framed. To put it 
>differently, each one should continuously strive for achieving 100% even 
>though it may not be possible). We are here to discuss what we have on our 
>hands by assuming that shastras are supreme(Shastrayonitvaat as the sutrakaara 
>puts it). In such a scenario, we have the following choices: > Try to follow 
>the shastraic principles to the best of our capacity (which is not impossible 
>atleast so far as women being prohibited from plucking tulasi leaves is 
>concerned)OR > Such souls that consider themselves as super human and equal to 
>the rishis or better than them in knowledge could modify the already laid down 
>principles in accordance with the time,place etc (or in accordance with their 
>level of comfort and keep justifying it)OR > Rubbish the entire shastras as 
>dated and irrelevant for current days of loukika dharma and take the risk of 
>Phalanubhavam. As Swami Desika rightly puts it, Naasthi chaet naasthi mae 
>haanihi asthi chaet naasthiko hathaha(hope I got that right) > >The choices 
>rest entirely with the readers. We are not here to pass judgements on whether 
>our society is male chauvinistic or whether it has ended or whether it is 
>right. Even amongst the Divine Couple, Lord Narayana is considered as Pradhana 
>by Swami Desika in his Pradhana Satakam, inspite of all talks of Both of Them 
>being equal in various aspects and respects. The Bhagavad Geetha has also been 
>given to us by the Lord and not by Piratti. There is not even a mention of 
>Piratti - any of them - in the Bhagavad Geetha. We cannot raise these issues 
>and say that Lord Krishna is male chauvinistic too. Hence my feeling is that 
>we need to confine ourselves to the realms of available knowledge which have 
>been given to us by our great Poorvacharyas and not deliberate on the 
>genuineness of the same. > >Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan > > sri mani ganth wrote: 
>>Srimathe Nigamantha Deshikaya Nama: > >Swamin, > >Shasthras were formed for 
>the well-being of the society. In olden days, Bhramhanas were doing bagavath 
>Kainkaryam as a fulltime profession. They ahd more money & ewlath. These days, 
>in addition to doing thier loukika karmas, we r doing also bagavath 
>kainkaryam. So, the Shasthras, which were targeted for 100% Bhramhanas 
>would'nt apply for us. > >For that matter, Sri Thulasi & Periya Piratti 
>themselves are women. Male chauvanism has not ended yet. If women are not in 
>their periods, they elgible for doing Bagavath kainkaryam. > > >Adiyen, > 
>>Daasan. > >From: Vasudevan VK >To: Srirangasri@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: 
>[SriRangaSri] Tulasi Aaradhanai >Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 20:52:47 -0800 (PST) > 
>> >Srimatey Nigamanta Maha Desikaya Namaha > >Dear Bhagavatas, > >The article 
>on tulasi worship was indeed excellent. The restrictions pertaining to tulasi 
>that have been mentioned therein pertain to men. This is not to mean that 
>there are no restrictions for women. > >WOMEN SHOULD NEVER PLUCK TULASI 
>LEAVES. THEY ONLY HAVE THE RIGHT TO WORSHIP. IF THEY CONTRAVENE THIS RULE, THE 
>SOUND OF VERY LOUD CRYING WOULD VERY SOON HAPPEN IN THEIR HOUSES. > >This is 
>not to threaten any of the ladies here but is only a reproduction of the 
>shastraic principles mentioned by Muktatma Sri Mukkur Lakshmi Narasimhachariar 
>during one of his famous discourses. > >Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan. > > > 
>>--------------------------------- >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, 
>calculators, tips, and more > >[Non-text portions of this message have been 
>removed] > > > >--------------------------------- >Protect your PC - Click 
>here for McAfee.com VirusScan Online > > >--------------------------------- 
>>Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more 

---------------------------------
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
srirangasri-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list