Search:
Bhakti List Archives

Re: [Re: [Re: Doubt on Thridandi Sanyasi]]

From the Bhakti List Archives

M.S.HARI (Madabhushi Sarangarajan Hari) • July 26, 2000 


Dear Shree Mani Varadarajan,

I appreciate the way in which you have put your arguments. I have 
something to tell you now.
The Parama Vaidika Matham Visistadvaita Shree Vaishnavam is not an
"idea" or "belief" but it is established in the Apourusheya Sruthi.
There is considerable evidence in Paripaadal for this that ancient
Tamil was only the Srowta-Smaartha matham Shree Vaishnavam. If one
reads Pairpaadal without prejudice, then he/she can understand this.
Of course, other worships where there. But one must note that mere
"worship" of a deity does not mean following a religion! Because,
"worship" of Vishnu alone is not Shree Vaishnavam. Note that this
"worship" of Vishnu is also for Dvaita and Advaitas. I convey my
highest regards for the work done by Shree Puttur Swamy in this
aspect.

The "Tirukural" has clearly talked about "Visistadvaita Shree
Vaishnavam" explicitly. Any body can say anything. I do not care
for prejudices. My thought is to register everyone's ideas, respect it,
and find out what is the truth in them. "EpporuL yAr yAr vAi 
kEtpinum apporuL meipOrul kAnbadu arivu". If someone tell something
in a convincing way and another person also tells something else in
convincing way, then a rational person should not conclude that
"the purport cannot be ascertained or it cannot be known". He/she
should use his analytical skills to find out the truth. One must
not go by personalities. If some other religion claims that "Tirukural"
is of their own religion" and also Shree Vaishnavam claims that
it is their own, and if all such arguments are convincing, then
we have to carefully find what exactly "Tiruvalluvar" has told in
his work. It can be proved that the concepts told in Tirukural
are the same as in the Parama Vaidika Matham's philosophy and
practice. If a person just goes by "convincing arguments" of many
but contradicting each other, then the same logic can be extended
to Saareeraka Saastra where many have told many "convincing" ideas
but only the Bhaasya of Bhagavat Ramanuja is called "Shree Bhaasya"!
because "Shree Bhaasya" is the only purport of Saareeraka while the
others are just prejudices. "Tirukural" is 100% as per Veda, Manu
and Bhagavath Smurthi.

You have written
>In any case, none of this really matters in the long run. 
I agree with you but not fully.

You have written
>These are historical issues, not Vedantic. Our 'AdhAram' are the Alvars'
>pAsurams, not what Tamils believed in sangam times or what Tamils
>believe now.
You have to note that Alvars themselves have considered the
Apourusheya Veda as their "AdhAram". Futher, we have to necessarily 
consider History and should not omit it as "not vedantic". History
has helped Vedantins to ascertain many things. I accept that there
are deviations and contradictions in personal ideas. But the "Mimaamsa"
takes in account every aspect and has established the Parama Vaidika
Matham Shree Visishtadvaita Shree Vaishnavam". 
One must also understand clearly that any "Pourusheyam" is not 
independently authoritative. It has to be based fully on "Apourusheyam"
to be authoritative. 

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/1/7102/5/_/716111/_/964676591/
--------------------------------------------------------------------|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