You are here: SriPedia - Ramanuja - Archives - Jan 2005

Ramanuja List Archive: Message 00065 Jan 2005

 
Jan 2005 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]




srImathE rAmAnujAya namaha

Dear srI guNa:

I do not believe that you wrote anything inappropriate.  Further, it 
seems that, if there is a shrill response to what you wrote, it may 
stem from folks who paid scant attention to the actual problem, that 
the original posting from srI mukundan was flawed:

***********************
Sri Mukundan wrote:

>(2) To get back the grand glory of LORD of seven hills.

*********************

To explicitly opine, as the statement above does, that the grand 
glory of tiruvEngaDamudayAn, has somehow been lost, and we in our 
infinite wisdom and immense capabilities, can do something to 
restore that glory, is both flawed and inconsistent with rAmAnuja 
darshanam.  So, your post accurately states what needs to be said, 
that whatever kainkaryam our Acharyan says is worth purusing, that 
the glory of tiruvEngaDamuDaiyAn is unaffected by what we, in this 
day and time, mere mortals with clearly substantive deficiencies, 
may perceive or not.

Shastram says, of the five states of perumAL as

poorNamada: poorNamidam poorNath poorNam udachyathE
poorNasya poorNamAdAya poorNamEva avashishyathE

And the nilai (state) with the most poorthi, as smt. Sheela Belur 
succintly pointed out, is the Archavataram.  The six attributes that 
define srImannArAyaNa in his para swaroopam (gnyAna bala aishwarya 
veerya shakti tEjas) are fully resident in this most magnificent of 
archavatarams at tiruvEngaDam.

There is another troubling aspect to this issue.  Some bhAgavathas, 
in their immense 'enthusiasm', have started labelling this mantram 
(Om namO venkatEsAya) as ashTakshari.  This is totally 
inappropriate, as the only ashTAkshari for rAmanuja sampradayam is 
tirumantram.  To label anything else as ashTakshari goes against the 
spirit of the way shown by swAmy rAmAnuja (There is also a logical 
problem with such labelling, since it wont withstand the test of 
basic meemamsa, that a word should fulfil both the 'yaugika' 
and 'rooDhi' meanings per vyAkaraNa).  The other danger such usage 
poses is, tomorrow, someone else will come along and say 'Om Namo 
subrahmanyAya' is also ashTakshari and a couple of days later will 
postulate that 'Om namO gaNapathayE' as ashTakshari.

The solution to all this lies in going back to what that unique gem 
(ratnam) in our poorvAchArya-hAram, swAmy mAmunikaL, says in upadEsa 
rattinamAlai:

"munnOr mozhinda muRai tappAmal kETTu, 
pinOrndu tAm adanaip pESAdE, 
tam nenjil tOnrinadE solli, 
idu Suddha upadESavaravARRadenbar 
mUrKarAvAr"

That we faithfully walk the path shown by the acharyas of the orAN 
vazhi, and never worry about engendering new ideas and 'creative' 
ways to help 'perumAL'.

Whatever I am stating above is clearly targeted towards opinions 
expressed on this list, and simply part of a discussion.  These are 
mere view points of someone who is very ignorant, and no offense 
towards any acharya or bhagavatha is intended or meant, and if any 
is perceived, please forgive this neesan.

aDiyEn rAmAnuja dasan,

sridhar



--- In ramanuja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "gunsee" <gunsee@xxxx> wrote:
> 
> Sri:
> Dear Swamin
> Adiyen wish to clarify few points on my earlier mail , though I 
had 
> it in mind it was reflected in words :(
> Adiyen could understand the motive behind the Jeeyar's 
initiative , 
> and agreed it should be in line with your message too and also as 
> Smt.Chitra Madhan put it across when we started writting His nAma 
we 
> started thinking about Him and His KalyAna gunAs and its really 
> wonderful to do so. 
> 
> So my query was not to question Sri .Tridhandi Chinna Jeeyar swamy 
> (for which Adiyen neechan has no gnAnam and Anushtanam , totally 
not 
> fit as well), my thinking was mainly to fellow bhAghavadAs mind 
set 
> while writting this nAmA.
> 
> Adiyen's apologies at the feet of Alarmel mangai samedha 
Thiruvengada 
> MudayAn, Sri. Jeeyar swamy and bhAghavAdas for hurting the 
feelings 
> of SriVaishnavAs.
> 
> Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan
> Guna
> 
> --- In ramanuja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Ramanujam Varada Srinivasa 
Thatta" 
> <acharyatvsr@xxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > Dear Sriman Guna,
> > The wording in the message is wrong. It should have been "To 
> restore the 
> > Glory of the Kshettram". Our Lord will never lose His Glory 
because 
> He is in 
> > everything and everything is within Him.
> > Whatever be the motive (it is definitely a noble one if Jeeyar 
> Swamiji has 
> > initiated this), to write or recite the Lord,s names we should 
be 
> blessed 
> > and it is possible only due to the Grace of the Lord, showered 
on 
> us due to 
> > His Causeless Mercy. No Samsayam is warranted in this case.
> > Adiyen,
> > Ramanuja Dasan.
> > 









azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ramanuja/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    ramanuja-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 




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