You are here: SriPedia - SriRangaSri - Archives - Mar 2001

SriRangaSri List Archive: Message 00011 Mar 2001

 
Mar 2001 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


Dear Anand Prabhu,

Hare Krishna.
Please accept my humble obeisances.

Thank you for your mail. We shall go on disagreeing with each other.
There would be no end to it. You will not agree with me and I will not
agree with you. That has already happened once and now we see it happen once
more.

With all due courtesy, I must say very frankly that I am not in the least
claiming that I am
representing Sri Vaishnavism necessarily. This is a list for Sri
Vaishnavism. I am aware of this.
But are we to come here as mindless zombies just to facilitate this
designation of the list ?
We are individuals and we have imbibed certain ideals and conclusions in our
course of life.
When we come here, we come to understand Sri Vaishnavism in the light of
what we have known
and learnt. As such, I have merely indicated what I understand. I have never
claimed any officialdom
to my words.

Furthermore, differences of opinion are sometimes over-emphasised and
sometimes under-emphasised
depending on the views of the writer. Not all Sri Vaishnavas have protested
to my writings. In fact, many have acclaimed it
as well. Therefore, this is something that you have to settle with the other
Sri Vaishnavas. Just as in the Gaudiya Sampradaya, in the Sri Vaishnava line
also, there are disagreements even amongst scholars over certain issues.
Therefore please do not be so sure that all that you say is in itself an
official and full representation of Sri Vaishnavism as accepted by all of
its followers.
I have never claimed that I am representing Sripad Ramanujacharya. A Gaudiya
Vaishnava has due respect for all Vaishnava Acharyas although in terms of
siddhanta, he knows their positions and how they all fit in within the
system of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.You may of course argue otherwise and put
forth your arguments. I may then counter and this can go on with no end in
sight. Controversies are there everywhere, including the Gaudiya, Sri and
Madhva lines.

But I have merely presented what I have understood. I have not in the least
even mentioned that this is Gaudiya Vaishnavism and that is Sri, etc. I have
presented as I understand. I am an individual and I carry with me my own
convictions when I approach the topics at hand here. That is all. The
central point of all Vaishnava Sampradayas, no matter what they are, is the
transcendental personal feature of the Lord. That is not denied. As such, I
am finding commonality here. You may wish to highlight technical
differences, etc. But that is your choice and this is mine. You may with to
show that I am wrong as much I can also prove otherwise. It is not difficult
to engage in vithandaavaadham. But I am the least interested in this just as
you have indicated your lack of time for this purpose. Therefore I shall
continue with my postings and if you feel you have something to contribute
then you please make that. I have no qualms. But I would beg you not to
attempt to monopolise and stifle the intellectual development of this list
by claiming Sri Vaishnava siddhantic monopoly for yourself. I have merely
indicated my understanding on this matter. Therefore, kindly refrain from
strawman arguments thrusting me with the guilt of misrepresenting your
sampradaya when I never even claimed as such. If indeed this list is only
for SVs, then keep it as a closed forum, not an open one. If it is open,
many of us will carry with our sampradayic affiliations to the understanding
of SVm and you have to digest this fact.

You have pointed out that there is a difference between a picture of the
Lord and a deity of the Lord that has undergone prathishta. But pray tell
me, will a pure devotee make a difference between one manner in which the
Lord is manifest and another ? It is certainly true that the recommendation
is for us to worship the Lord in the properly consecrated forms and that
these require higher standards than the pictures. But I am here talking
about the perfectional stage. In that state which is the final ideal, a pure
devotee will see the Lord wherever He is manifest and will not relegate that
consideration to that of external ritual alone. I think that would suffice
for now. If you wish to argue along technical terms, then you are most
welcome but it will not achieve anything fruitful because each of our
sampradaayic understanding of each and every technical term may have
differences because there are differences in the epistemologies of Sri
Vaishnavism and Gaudiya Vaishnavism, albeit to a slight extent. Of course,
even in this, you may differ, feeling that there are very significant
differences. To this, my answer would be simple - difference and similarity
are two views of a bottle. You may see the bottle as half empty but I may
see it as half full.


Hare Krishna !


Your servant,
R. Jai Simman
Singapore







[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