Re: Some solutions for Sri.Srikanth's query
From the Bhakti List Archives
• January 24, 1997
Dear Sri Srikanth, I really donot want to get into another tenkalai vadakali dialogue in this forum. We have different sources to validate our points. My point of views are derived from listening to our acharyaaLS and quotes from srimad Rahasya trya saaram. You have quoted from Sri Ramayanam. Nammaazwaar is adjudged as the one whose paasurams cannot be matched by anyother literatures including Sriramayanam and all combined. This is not told by me but by Swami Desikan in "kaasiniyan maniyanathithum" in "amirtha ranchani". Nammazwaar himself has delivered saying that "Anallan pennallan" and "avaravar". Aftr reading nammaazwaar, i donot need to validate anything from other literatures which are next only to thiruvaaymozhi. By the way RTS has its basis *mostly* from thiruvaaymozhi and azhwaar's arulichacheyal only. Hence It is futile to argue that since one is right as quoted from Sriramyanam and the other is then worng. When you have argued that it is "non linear" i simply said that it need not be that complicated. Other than that i donot want to argue if you must always see it as non linear. It still is not and never be nonlinear to me from where I come. There are ample sources to charectrise the jivan/param relationship. According to many srivaishnavas, the more logics one can bring in, the style of arguments reflect the more of advaithin school of arguments. But i think even logic must be permitted if one has gto extend the theory of poorvaacharaayar to convey certian message. This is what i was told as "allowed to do in my research". In addition i am also said that one must approach this as a pure service to lord and not for anyother purpose. I am of opinion that I shouldnot indulge in attempting to validate these literatures that are deleivered by Lord's amsams (eg Swami Desikan). I very much like to learn from many tenkalai scholars in this group and also by reading aruLicheyal rahasyam of Sri ManavaaLa maamunigaL. (By the way I am currently re-reading it). Perhapas you also may want to read Srimad Rahasy trya saaram sometime in addition to the vast literature you are already reading. I would like to concede here that i donot want to draw a conclusion whether you are right and i am wrong. What is started as a "math fun" is heading to this way as i understand from the post lately. It is not required of me to prove that i am right even when i am challenged. That gives in to ego. Let us both sumbit to the Lord that we served the Lord by writing with two different views and not really worry as to whether one is right or wrong. The facts stated by me are accepted almost by all my friends who are learned scholars and have read RTS. Iam sure the points quoted by you are accepted by as many others as well. It is my humble opinion that it is unworthy to dialogue anything that will end up in unfortunate misunderstanding between the two kalais. If i can contribute to their unity i will dialogue and if my writings drags us into another conflict i will take the lead to say that i quit. We can probably dialogue through private mail if you are intersted so that we need not be the reason for yet another conflict. At this juncture, I submit that the view point of both sides (ie t and v kalais) are correct in their perspective as i had always contended. Swami deiskan's "nyaasa thilakam" and "charama slOka surrukku" clearly states the same and descirbes as to why one must follow either of the path. Agian I am saying this as a source for all my thenkalai friends to look into for common understanding. Please accept my apologies if i have hurt your or anyother feelings in this net. For sometime i am going to remain a spectator by asking someone to forward the mails to my home address and learn from the good postings of yours and others as well. Please put this brief exchange behind, and come forward to write more from what you have read and I will look forward to learning from the same. Sri Sri Ranganaayikaa samEthara Sri ranganaatha swami paadhukE charaNam Sampath Rengarajan
- Next message: Satyan, Nagu (MSMAIL): "Sri Garuda Vaibhavam"
- Previous message: R. Skrintha: "Re: Some solutions for Sri.Srikanth's query"
- Maybe in reply to: R. Skrintha: "Re: Some solutions for Sri.Srikanth's query"
- Next in thread: R. Skrintha: "Re: Some solutions for Sri.Srikanth's query"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]