Search:
Bhakti List Archives

Axiamatic principle

From the Bhakti List Archives

Parthasarati Dileepan • March 20, 1998 


At 06:06 PM 3/15/98 +0000, Chandrasekaran. V wrote:
>   Lately we find many postings alluding to superiority of 
>one Deity over the other (Durga and Lakshmi, Sri Krishna 
>fighting against Parameswaran (instance in Thiruvaimozhi) etc.) 
>This is but a multi-century old disgusting argument that had 
>done nothing but lay bare the bosoms of the arguing parties 
>and showed only how unfortunately mistaken they are about 
>our one and only God.


This e-mail list was conceived as a list for Sri Vaishnavas
and others to share and experience the glories of Sriman 
Narayana, to enjoy the outpourings of Azhvaars, to learn
as much as possible the wisdom of Sri Vaishnava acharyas, 
etc.  Sri Vaishnava acharyas ranging from Parasara, Vyasa, 
etc. of Vedic antiquity, the Azhvaars, Sri Ramanuja, Swami 
Sri Desikan, Sri Manavala Maamuni, and the present day
Acharyas such as Srimad Andavan, Srimad PP Andavan,
Azhagiya Singar, Ramanuja Jeeyar, etc., speak in one 
voice when it comes to the singular supremacy of Sriman 
Narayana and that all other devathaas spoken in the
Vedas get their powers as a gift from Sriman Narayana.

Thus, in this private e-mail list, the supremacy of Sriman 
Narayana is axiomatic.  It is not a matter open for argument.  
Acceptance of this principle, or, at least accepting not to 
challenge this principle, must be a prerequisite for 
membership into the Bhakthi list.  Any discussion about 
Vedic verses and/or Azhvaar paasurams that leave room 
for interpretation must be conducted within the boundaries 
of this principle.  If this principle is diluted, Bhakthi e-mail 
list cannot truly represent Sri Vaishnavas.

Further, it must be noted that the archive of this list is 
available to the general public through a web site bearing 
the title "Sri Vaishnava Home Page".  Thus, it is not 
unreasonable for someone browsing the archives to 
assume that the collective view expressed is authentic 
Sri Vaishnava POV.   Therefore, it is important for us 
to not dilute the basic Sri Vaishnava belief that Sriman 
Narayana alone is supreme.

All new members must be made aware of this principle at
the time they join the list.  Current members who are
ambivalent about this must be reminded of it.  Members
who are not Sri Vaishnavas are welcome to participate and
educate us, as long as our faith that Sriman Narayana 
is uniquely supreme is not derided.


Let me end this with a quote from Thiruvaaymozhi 3.9.1:


"sonnaal virOdhamithu aagilum solluvEn kENminO,
ennaavil in_kavi yaanoruvarkkum kodukkilEn,
thennaa thenaavenRu vaNdu muralthiru vEngadatthu,
ennaanai ennappan emperumaan uLanaagavE."


Free translaton:
---------------------
"Some may take offense, yet I shall say it, 
please listen, my songs are for no one but my ruler,
my master, the Lord of Thiruvengadam!"


Why does the Azhvaar feel the above may
cause offense to some?  To answer this question
think of a commoner going about telling everyone
that he has no romantic interest towards the crown
princess.  Why would anyone want to do this?  There
is no need to express this lack of desire.  In fact
expression of such disinterest may even provoke 
retribution from the royal court censuring his audacity.
Why state the obvious?  Yet, the Azhvaar  states
the obvious.  Why?  To guide the rest of us who 
seem to get confused from time to time.

(The “princess analogy” is from Sri Uttamoor Swamy’s
commentary.)


-- adiyEn