You are here: SriPedia - Ramanuja - Archives - Nov 2001

Ramanuja List Archive: Message 00068 Nov 2001

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


srImathE rAmAnujAya namaha
srImadh varavara munayE namaha.

Dear Members.,

Those of you who are members of the Bhakti list, would have read the
articles from Sri Sadagopan Iyengar and the response that adiyEn posted,
confirming that swAmy maNavALa mAmuni as the last avatAram of Sri rAmAnuja
and hence Sri AdisEshan. Today you would have also read a mail from
Srinath, in which it clearly brings out their hatred for our sampradhAyam
that they cannot even withstand the fact that swAmi maNavALa mAmuni was
rAmAnuja himself and try to equate him to later day AchAryAs like Sri
kOzhiyAlam swAmi.

I am giving my reply that I am intending to post on the list. I request
advice from you all to improve upon this and send separate postings to
Bhakti list with the following in mind.

1. No offense of any sort towards the vadakalai AchAryAs.
2. Clear cut pramANams to prove that swAmy is punravathAram of Sri
rAmAnuja.

AdiyEn could not give the pramANa slOka,due to my limited knowledge.
However, to keep the discussion alive, I am posting this as there cannot
be, I hope and believe, anything wrong about the facts that adiyEn has
stated here.

For your necessary action please,

AzhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyar thiruvadigaLE saraNam
adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan
Thirumalai Vinjamoor Venkatesh

======================The message that I am going to post to Bhakti List
======================


srImathE rAmAnujAya namaha
srImadh varavara munayE namaha



Sri Srinath Chakravarty wrote :
=================================Quote
======================================
Sri Venkatesh and others with similar passionate dispositions:
adiyEn thinks it is unwise to get into kalai-specific anubhavams
about who represents the punar-avatAram of udayavar etc. Just
so you know, SriRangaRamanuja mahAdesikan (kOzhiyAlam swAmi) was
hailed as abhinava rAmAnuja during his time in bhoolokam during
the last century. Overlapping claims to udayavar's legacy abound,
and before asserting one's feelings so strongly one should stop
to think where the discussion is leading towards. This is not to
dispute any particular tradition but an attempt to show equal
respect to all without making mutually exclusive claims. We must
understand that even though there is AchArya paramparai which
attests to certain punar-avathArams, those kalakshepam traditions
are not unformly accepted across SriVaishnavam and therefore we
must approach such controversial subjects with great caution.
============================Unquote=================================

Dear Sri Srinath.

I would like to clarify the following on the above posting of yours.

First, a passion will or may lead to athivAda. There is for sure, no
athivAda in this and hence no passion. Also there is a GREAT DIFFERENCE
between hailing one to be Sri rAmAnuja, by virtue of his deeds and the
actual avatAra of Sri rAmAnuja. There is no doubt, the the title of
"abinava rAmAnuja" is conferred upon Sri kOzhiyAlam swAmi, for his
knowledge and contributions towards the sampradhAyam. This cannot be used
to disclaim the fact that swAmy maNavALa mAmuni was punaravathAram of
rAmAnuja.

Secondly, there can be no "kalai-specific" to this. The Thenkalais rever
swAmy dEsikan to a great extent, in as much, not a single upanyAsakar
belonging to this sect will complete a upanyAsam, without quoting from the
Sri sUktis of swAmy dEsikan. The only difference between the kalais were on
some, I repeatm some, philosophical issues. The vadakalais, stop with swAmy
dEsikan in the greater guruparamparai while the thenkalais, stop with swAmy
maNavALa mAmuni in the same. The guruparamparai that runs after them is
kalai specific. May be the vadakalais think that even swAmy maNavALa mAmuni
as kalai specific AchAryA. I do not want to comment on this for the fear of
invoking an argument.

As is known to the world, I repeat, swAmy maNavALa mAmuni, was the only
AchArya who had the distinction of being the AchArya of Sriman nArAyaNan
Himself, not even Sri rAmAnuja. If one can claim that Sri rAmAnuja became
the AchArya of Sriman nArAyaNan in Thirukkurungudi, well it is accepted.
But Sriman nArAyaNan gave that pride only to swAmy maNavALa mAmuni by
creating the famous thaniyan "Sri sailEsa dayA pAthram" which is in vogue
in almost all the 108 divya dEsams barring a few.

Henceforth it is clear that equating a "hail" to a "fact" is completely
unwarranted. In the same post by Sri Sadagopan iyengar, he even went to the
extent of saying Sri rAmAnuja took avathAram as Sri nArAyaNa yathIndra
mahAdEsikan, the present Jeeyar swAmy of Sri ahObila maTam. No one can
dispute it for the fact that he is being "hailed" and this IS the correct
example of kalai-specific anubhavams. Yes, the thenkalais respect the
vadakalais anubhavams and that is why, I, in my posting did not take any
exception to this.

Lastly, though I did not give the pramANa slOka, about swAmy maNavALa
mAmuni showing his true form as Sri AdhisEshan, to his AchAryan, Sri
thiruvAimozhip piLLai, it is a fact which cannot be refuted. I request
scholars in the list, who are aware of the slOka to provide the same. Now
my request is, can one such incident be attributed to Sri kOzhiyAlam swAmy
or Sri ahObila maTam jeeyar that they showed their forms as Sri AdhisEshan
to claim that they are punaravathArams of Sri rAmAnuja. PLEASE NOTE, NO
DISRESPECT IS BEING MEANT WHILE ASKING THIS QUESTION. I agree, I do not
even have the qualification to take up the names of such great swAmis and
yathis, but I am just asking this question to only differentiate once again
that, "HAILING ONE TO BE A PUNARAVATHARAM IS VERY MUCH DIFFERENT FROM THE
ACTUAL AVATHARAM".

I believe, this note leaves no doubt in anybody's mind about the fact that
swAmy maNavALa mAmuni was THE FINAL AVATARA of Sri AdhisEshan and hence Sri
rAmAnuja.

AzhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyar thiruvadigaLE saraNam
adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,
Thirumalai Vinjamoor Venkatesh








(Embedded image moved to file: pic20037.pcx)






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



The information contained in this message is legally privileged and 
confidential information intended only for the use of the addressed 
individual or entity indicated in this message (or responsible for 
delivery of the message to such person). It must not be read, copied, 
disclosed, distributed or used by any person other than the addressee. 
Unauthorised use, disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited and may be 
unlawful. 

Opinions, conclusions and other information on this message that do not 
relate to the official business of any of the constituent companies of 
the SANMAR GROUP shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by 
the Group. 

If you have received this message in error, you should destroy this 
message and kindly notify the sender by e-mail. 

Thank you. 

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




[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
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list