RE: Panel Discussion
From the Bhakti List Archives
• August 21, 1997
-----Original Message----- From: mvanamamalai@kpmg.com [SMTP:mvanamamalai@kpmg.com] Sent: Thursday, August 21, 1997 3:51 PM To: bhakti@lists.best.com Subject: Panel Discussion What ever we do to this day in terms of vaithika kramam is based on this work.=20 =20 That's exactly the point I'm trying to make !! The key words you have used are "in terms of vaidika kramam" !! The situation I was describing was one where we find living in strict = "vaidika kramam" next to impossible ! How many of us can boldy and truly = claim our life-styles comply with "vaidika-kramam"? So what I want to try to bring is that Srivaishnavism has quick fixes and it is wise = for us to find out about that instead of ruling out the possibility.=20 =20 Agree, I don't rule out the possibility that we can have "quick-fixes" = to your "vaidika-kramam" .... only, by their inherent nature, = quick-fixes can be termed neither "vaidika" nor "kramam" ! If we all = spend our lives looking for "quick-fixes" who will come out with real = "solutions" ?=20 =20 About 15 or 20 years back, Sri U Ve PB Annangrachar Swami was interviewed in All India = Radio and one of the questions was how can we follow all the relegious duties in = the midst of modern day's challlenges. His reply was "Every morning have shower = and stand in front of your God and chant=20 'Chittran Chirugale' and 'Vangat Kadal Kadainthaintha Madhavanai' = (just these 2 pasurams) that is it "=20 This was advocated by the Swami as the bare minimum a Srivaishnavite = could do and still could be guilt free. Over and above this what you do is kind = of optional. I thought this was wonderful.=20 I don't know in what exact context the most revered Sri.PBA Swami made = the statement. So I dare not comment on it. I do not consider myself = competent to react to statments made by such "mahAns". Let's not drag = such great people into our informal drawing room conversations. But if such a statement is to be made by anyone other than such = "mahAn-s" I am afraid I would disagree wholly with it. In my opinion it = would amount to a gross simplification of our traditions. It's like = reducing everything in SriVaishnavism to a nice, well-rounded, = comfortable formula ! It's nice and simple, no doubt, like all = formulations are !=20 . =20 =3D=3D At a purely philosophical level, SriVaishnavism thus can only = offer us=20 =3D=3D insights into "bhAgavath-dharma" a subject which only minds of a = deeply=20 =3D=3D spiritual or philosophical bent can understand and relish.=20 =3D=3DRamanuja's SriVaishnavism was not meant for "lOka-dharmA" but for=20 =3D=3D"bhAgavata-dharmA" -- the "dharma" of those who have ceased to = search for=20 =3D=3Dsuch things in life as "life-style", "1000 ways to win friends", = "how to be=20 =3D=3Da productive manager or great husband" etc. Ramanuja's Vaishnavism = was meant=20 =3D=3Dfor those who have learnt to look beyond the "practicality" of = life and have=20 =3D=3Dinstead begun the long search for the "Life they have all lost in = living" !=20 This are simply not true since in the work "NITYAM" Sri Ramanujar has = clearly prescribed what an ordinary mind should do and what a spiritual mind = could do different. =20 I agree with you. But the problem is we live in an age where the source = of much unhappiness for people is their "ordinariness"! It is then that = the "ordinary" soul wanting to turn spritual succumbs to the temptation = of quick-fixes and formulations ! =20 It is really boils down to change and adaptation. =20 I agree. But first should I not know deeply everyting there is to know = about my religion and tradition and "vaidika kramam" before I start = looking for change & quick-fixes=20 "Dont end it - Mend it" =20 So by doing this it will not become "We are only fooling ourselves " that is also not right. =20 Muralli Vanamamalai=20 =20 By all means "mend it", my good friend, but make sure you don't "dent = it" in the process ! [Mr M.K SUDARSHAN] =00=00
- Next message: Mohan Sagar: "RE: Panel Discussion"
- Previous message: RANGASWAMY_at_plh.af.mil: "Upadesham-II"
- Maybe in reply to: mvanamamalai_at_kpmg.com: "Panel Discussion"
- Next in thread: Mohan Sagar: "RE: Panel Discussion"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]