Re: [Re: Doubt on Thridandi Sanyasi]
From the Bhakti List Archives
• July 26, 2000
Dear Shree Mani Varadarajan, You have written : "{I realize that Sri Puttur Krishnaswamy Iyengar and others are vociferous in their statements about ancient Tamil society, but such assertions need to be backed up by evidence, properly understood in context. (Believe me, I would like what you write to be true myself -- but it is just not convincing)}" I very much appreciate your open statement and your thought that unless and until statements are backed up by evidence, it cannot be accepted and further logic is involved in it for properly understanding. But as I am also a student of Sri Puttur Krishnaswamy Iyengar, I consider the term "vociferous" that you have used has disturbed me a bit. Otherwise also, it is so. I would like to add few points regarding the ancient tamil society. 1. The ancient tamil society was having only Parama Vaidika Matham which is Visishtadvaita Shree Vaishnavam only. If you read the book publised by the Swamy on "Paripaadal", you may understand that the Swamy has not told it as "vociferous" but only with Pramaanams from Sruti, smruthies. Also it can be argued that the same tamil has not told that "tridandi sanyaasi is anti-vaishnava". Therefore, as there is no such "nishedam", it can be taken to be understood that "tridandi sanyaasi is only a parama-vaidika" 2. The "Paripaadal" though is a most ancient literature available in Tamil history, it is not just to be consiered as mere poetry. It has talked about the religion and philosophy of ancient Tamil and it clearly proves that the ancient tamil was Shree Vaishnavam. 3. The "Tirukural" has clearly talked about "Visistadvaita Shree Vaishnavam" explicitly. This point is just to substantiate the above argument and also please note that it is called "Tamil Podu Marai". 4. The tamil as well as others have considered only "Nalairya Divya Prabandam" as "Marai" on the other hand, something else is only considered as "Murai". 5. Though the "Paripaadal" talkes about demi-gods also, it is to be noted what is told by it regarding the demi-gods and about Tirumaal. It has clearly told that only "Tirumaal" (Vishnu) is the Paratatvam. It has not recognised any other divinity as such. I accept that other religions would have been in existence but when we consider the available "Paripaadal", it is enough to ascertain as it is ascertained by Swamy Sri Puttur Krishnaswamy Iyengar with Pramaanams. Your reply would be appreciated. Thanks & Regards M.S.HARI Ramanuja Daasan. ____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 --------------------------------------------------------------------http://click.egroups.com/1/6348/5/_/716111/_/964621859/ --------------------------------------------------------------------|e>- -------------------------------------------------------------- - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH - To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list@eGroups.com Visit http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/ for more information
- Next message: NAGARAVE_at_fin.gov.on.ca: "Re:Doubt on Thridandi Sanyasi"
- Previous message: Madhavakkannan V: "Periya Thirumozhi 9.7- Realise the transitory nature of sensual pleasures!"
- Next in thread: Mani Varadarajan: "Re: [Re: Doubt on Thridandi Sanyasi]"
- Reply: Mani Varadarajan: "Re: [Re: Doubt on Thridandi Sanyasi]"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]