Search:
Bhakti List Archives

Re: Kundalini etc.

From the Bhakti List Archives

Lakshmi Narasimhan • January 20, 2003 


===========================================================================
Dear SrI Lakshmi Narasimhan:

It is precisely this inflexible and insensitive attitude that you are displaying in your response to the kaivalyam issue that is unproductive.  I was willing to give the benfit of doubt to you in your first message, thinking that you did not know that you were only representing the view of ten-kalai sampradAyam on the issue of kaivalyam.  Now you are confirming that not only you were aware of it, but you are also insisting that any other view, such as the view of followers of svAmi deSikan, are not rAmAnuja's views.  I am not interested in promoting polemics in the discussion.  Respect for the different viewpoints is an absolute necessity in the postings.  I hope that expect that you and others who post on the list learn to recognize tht there are other viewpoints of rAmAnuja sampradAyaam that should be respected.  Not being aware of things is one thing, but insisting that their viewpoint is the only position of rAmAnuja, only your kalai existed in rAmAnuja's time, etc., are just inviting a fight, and this h
=============================================================================

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

Dear Shri Swami and Shri Vaishnavas,

Accept my apologies in case I would offend anyone by this mail, as it is not
my intent.

>Effectively, by condemning all these, you question the very authority of
the angA-s of the veda. That would make >you non-different from a nAstikA.
Please do not write out the pranavam in open. It should not be done so.

Your statement "One cannot condemn all these" may be acceptable from a
different view-point. If one takes ONLY the path of Vyakaranam, then that is
what is condemned. Similarly if one takes ONLY the yoga margam to attain
moksham, then that is condemned. Again, all of these shastras are condemned
for PRAPANNAS and that is why I had clearly mentioned that "for those who
have fallen under the protection of Saranagathy Tattvam". It was not an open
comment for "all". I humbly request you to kindly read my mail in detail
again. And, the Veda Angas may be questioned any time as they are not the
path for moksham. They are additional sciences that one may learn. As you
had mentioned, "AdhyAyam" i.e learning is not condemned. AGAIN, learning is
different from following. If one follows the Jyothisha Shastra or Yoga
Shastra or Vyakarana Shastra instead of just learning the same, then it is
indeed condemned. As the moderator pointed out, there is nothing wrong in
knowing the basic tenets of the same and learning the same. But, it should
not be followed to attain moksha, was the point.

>What you have stated is only the thennAcharya(thenkalai) viewpoint on
>kaivalyam. This discussion on this topic is beyond the scope of this list.
>Needless to say, what you have stated about kaivalyam cannot be accepted by
>all.

>I would request you to re-check with your achAryan about what you stated in
>your previous mail.

Regarding what I stated on Kaivalyam, it was purely the view point of Shri
Ramanujar and not of any specific "kalai" for there were no different kalais
except "Thenkalai Sampradayam"at the time of Shri Ramanujar. And hence there
was no necessity for me to explicitly mention "Thennacharya Sampradayam". I
ve verified again that Kaivalyam aka Edu Nilam is indeed the athmanubhavam
and is the worst place to go according to Shri Ramanuja Sampradayam.

Please feel free to post other sampradayams' view point so that everyone
would be happy to learn different view points.

Yatheendra Pravanam Vandhe RAMYA Ramanujam Munim

Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,
Lakshmi Narasimhan


 
-------Original Message-------
 
From: bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, January 20, 2003 09:45:01 AM
To: bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Cc: nrusimhan@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Kundalini etc.
 
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lakshmi Narasimhan" 

> Vyakarana Shastram: Essence - OM - the shabdham itself is God. Condemned,

No, they are not condemned. Vyakaranam, Niruktam, jyOtisham, et all are six
angA-s of the vedam. One cannot condemn all these. Effectively, by
condemning all these, you question the very authority of the angA-s of the
veda. That would make you non-different from a nAstikA. Please do not write
out the pranavam in open. It should not be done so.

The AdhyAyam(or learning) of the vedA-agnAm is very important to vedic
study. This cannot be avoided. This underscores to need to undergo
traditional kalakshEpam under the feet of a sadAcharya.

> those who are trapped in kaivalyam (it is one of the mokshams as mentioned
> by our Purvacharyars) are never freed until the almighty really wants to
> free them. And hence, Kaivalyam is probably the worst place one should not
> go to.

What you have stated is only the thennAcharya(thenkalai) viewpoint on
kaivalyam. This discussion on this topic is beyond the scope of this list.
Needless to say, what you have stated about kaivalyam cannot be accepted by
all.

I would request you to re-check with your achAryan about what you stated in
your previous mail.

Regards,

Malolan Cadambi
Austin,TX

--------------------------------------------------------------
- SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Group Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bhakti-list
Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/


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

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



--------------------------------------------------------------
           - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
To Post a message, send it to:   bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Group Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bhakti-list
Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/
 

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