You are here: SriPedia - Ramanuja - Archives - Sep 2002

Ramanuja List Archive: Message 00146 Sep 2002

 
Sep 2002 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


Sri Parthasarathi thunai
Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

Dear bhagavatas,
Though enough has been discussed in this forum about the poorthi of 
kalyana gunas in archAvatAram adiyen would just like to add this 
point which adiyen happened to hear from Sri Velukuddi krishnan 
swamy's thiruppAvai upanyasam just two days back. 

We all know that dvayam has two lines but actually in the sastras the 
two lines do not come one after the other but are separated by some 
more verses in between. Even swamy desikan in one of his works 
says, "piriya Odhi sErththu anusandhikku mAru vEdam 
vidhiththadhu"(though the two kandas of dvayam have been separated 
while given in the vedas by some other verses but while practicing 
they have to be considered one after the other). Now the lines 
separating the two parts of dvayam are important to our context now.

In the sastras it appears as below:
"Sriman Narayana charanou sharanam prapathyE
edam poornam ada: poornam poornAth poorna mudrichyathE poornasya 
poorna mAthaya poorna mEvA vadhisyathE; sarvam poornam samOm
SrimathE Narayanaya namaha"
Here adiyen will like to mention that adiyen is just reproducing 
swamy's words and hence there may be a error in the trans-literation 
of the vedic verse. Learned scholars may change it but what is more 
important to us is the meaning it conveys.
In the above verse poornam has been repeated 5 times. The first one 
refers to the poornam which is near us that is our own ANTARYAMI(one 
is present inside each one of us)
The second poornam refers to something which is far from us(ada:) so 
it refers to PARAVASUDEVAN
from there the next poornam is - VYUHA VASUDEVAN IN THIRUPPARKADAL
from there the next poornam is - RAMA KRISHNA VIBHAVAVATARAM
and the final poornam refers to - ARCHAI.
The vedic verse finally not being able to say a higher poornam than 
archai ends saying that archai alone is SARVA POORNAM. And then it 
says we have to get the nithya kainkaryam for the sake of enjoyment 
of emperuman and not for our sake. Why did sastra give this 
separatory verse? We will understand why if we understand what this 
verse wanted to convey. It wanted to convey that the emperuman is 
filled with all kalyana gunas. We can do saranagathi only to 
emperuman who has kalyana gunas and we will like to do kainkaryam 
only to him filled with kalyana gunas though it is our svaroopam to 
do kainkaryam (svaroopa krutha dAsyam) irrespective of his gunas
(gunakrutha dasyam). Still to increase our interest in the 
kainkaryam to emperuman and make us ask only that after doing 
saranagathi is the reason behind the sastra adding these attributes 
before giving the final verse.

So from this sastra vakhyam it has been proved without doubt that 
archai is poornam, filled with all kalyana gunas.

In our sampradayam anything against sastram has to be left as asAram 
and neglected.

Alwar emperumAnAr Jeeyer thiruvadigalE sharanam
Adiyen Ramanuja Dasyai
Sumithra Varadarajan.





--- In ramanuja@xxxx, "thirunarayanan parthasarathy iyengar" 
<shyamala45@xxxx> wrote:
> SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA
> APPAN THIRUVADIGALE SARANAM
> 
> Dear Malolan Cadambi Accept my pranam.
> 
> You seem to raise objections based on ?  '³Agamas?  '´ Does your
objection 
relate to 
> 1. The Moorthy conscreated by ?  '³Agamas ?  '³ should have that
quality 
only OR 
> 2 that Moorthy should not have any other quality other than that 
sanctioned by 
> the ?  '±Agama?  '´ even if the devotee wishes that the lord
possess that 
quality.
> 
> Would you consider ?  '±Sri Rangaraja sthavam as an authority?
> In that case kindly refer to sloka 2.74
> ?  '³AASTHAM THE?  '¥..
> 
> ?  '¥'¥'¥'¥'¥.thava thathas seelath jadibhooyathe?  '´.
> 
> Adiyen am giving its meaning only for easy understanding.
> ?  '³ Oh! Renganatha! There is no limit for your gunas. Likewise
there 
is no limit 
> for the Avathar expressing such gunas.Apart from this, you are 
present in 
> (Archavathara roopa) in temples,houses and ashramas for worship.You 
are present 
> in all forms as they desire to pardon their errors and you are 
bound by their 
> love. Devotees are engrossed in your ?  '³souseelyam?  '´ 
>   
> Is it not clear that Lord assumes the form, gunas which devotees 
desire? You 
> have shown Jithendra Stotram. It also confirms that Lord forms 
himself as the 
> devotee desire?
> 
> Is this valid if they are sanctioned by Agamas only?
> 
> Namazhvar, our Kulapathi (as Alavandar has described ) has sung the 
divine 
> songs Thiruvaimozhi which is accepted as authority in Srivaishnava 
sampradhya. 
> Did he have the sanction of Pancharatra Agama? Right from Sriman 
Nathamunikal 
> all acharyas have followed him. If he has found some qualities in 
some 
> Archavatharas should it have the sanction of Agamas? 
>   
> Let us come to the point. :
> First the National Flag. It is a piece of cloth. The citizen out of 
love, 
> respect and regard gives the respect to it. It is not necessary 
that he should 
> know the rules about the flowing of it. His respect is spontaneous
> 
> In modern days there are many temples which do not confirm strictly 
to ?  '±Agamas?  '´
> yet people attend to these temple to worship lord out of love
> Do you mean to say the worship done there is a waste?.
> 
> One incident is attributed in Sri.Ramanuja?  '²s life . While he
was 
going rounds 
> in Srirangam, he saw some boys playing. They informed him that they 
are playing 
> the game of ?  '³worship in Srirangam temple.?  '´ He wasshown a 
sketch 
as Lord 
> Renganatha and was offered a heap of sand as ?  '³Prasadam?  '´.
Sri. 
Ramnuja 
> prostrated immediately and accepted the prasadam. It is spontaneous 
act. Does 
> this require any sanction?
>   
> We have 13 temples in Kerala sung by Azhvars. The rules and 
regulations of 
> Namboodharis govern them all. Yet, we visit these temples.
> Is the worship in these temples are correct?
> 
> The Agamas are meant for the construction, maintainance and the 
mode of worship 
> in temples. It is a technical Manual. It does not bind the devotees.
> 
> They worship the moorthy and express their love and devotions. 
> There is no rule obstructing this.
> 
> Thirupanazhvar was carried over the shoulder of Loka saranga 
Munikal to worship 
> Lord Renganatha. He has sung ?  '³Amalanathipiran..?  '´Sri.
Vedhantha 
desika has 
> written ?  '³Munivahana Bhogam?  '´.Does this enjoyment and worship
require 
the 
> sanction of Agamas?
> 
> ?  '±THIRUVUDAI MANNARAI KAANIL THIRUMALAI KANDEN?  '² TVM.4.4.7
> This is not a mistaken identity. The mind of Namazhvar is always 
occupied by 
> the Emperuman and his Kalyana gunakal .He might not have known that 
there is 
> an ?  '±Agama?  '´ by which he should worship. Yet his pasurangals
are 
accepted as 
> authority in our Sampradhya. Azhakia manavala perumal Nayanar has 
highlighted 
> some of the gunas enjoyed by NAMAZHVAR in some Divya desankal in  
sutras 159 to 
> 186 of Acharya Hrudhayam
> 
> It is upto one who has faith in our sampradhya to accept it or 
leave it. The 
> enjoyment of Namazhvar and the exhibition of the same by Azhakia 
manavala 
> nayanar is a treat for those who wants to enjoy it. Adiyen feel 
that no Agamic 
> sanction is required for this. 
> Sri. Padmanabhan desires to mail his post. If you want to enjoy 
it ,WELCOME.
> 
> One more incident in Ramanuja?  '²s life is worth quoting.
> 
> One Uyyakondar argued with Ramanuja and lost his case.
> He said that he was convinced of Ramanuja?  '²s point; but he had
no 
taste for it 
> ( Srivaishnavam.) Thereupon Ramanuja commented ?  '³You are a man
of 
know ledge 
> (vidwan), so agreed to the points .but, you have no grace of 
Emperuman. That 
> is why you do not have taste. It is your fate.?  '´ 
> 
> Lastly, You have not done justice to sloka 4.11 of Bhagavat Gita. 
> Sri. Puttur swamy has done a great job of writing a commentary to it
(BG) Sri 
> Ramanuja Bhashya where in he has devoted almost 13 pages for this 
sloka.. He 
> has established that this sloka is meant for ?  
'±Archavathara?  '´. You 
may go through 
> it. If you still disagree, you take up correspondence with him and 
let Adiyen 
> know the results.
> 
> Adiyen Ramanuja dasan. T.Parthasarathy.
>





[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