Bhakti List Archives

mahavishnu follow-up note

From the Bhakti List Archives

sudarshan madabushi • Mon Mar 22 1999 - 23:39:32 PST 


Dear members,
Re: Mahavishnu's follow-up:

I wish I could finally put Mr.Mahvishnu's recent brouhaha behind me and 
get on with the much pleasanter task of discussing the "nrsimha 
karAvalamba" stOtram…. which was what I had set out to do in the first 
place before Mr.Mahavishnu entered the scene and hijacked the 
proceedings with his shrill and tangential tirade (he calls it 
"challenge"!) against the "soundarya-lahari".

I will make a few final comments on his most recent note and then would 
like to treat the matter as closed from my side. Really, I'd rather 
expend my energies more profitably by concentrating on discussing the 
"karAvalamba-stotra".

(1) Mr.Mahavishnu says:
"I too tried to be catholic by stating that Sankara might not have
        --------------------
written the SlOka that I had found to be highly objectionable."


I find this to be very twisted logic indeed!
One little line or phrase in the "soundarya-lahari" offends 
Mr.Mahavishnu and that's more than enough cause for him to launch 
headlong into pillorying all of the hymn. He DOES NOT find a single 
thing "offensive" in the "lakshmi-nrsimha karAvalamba stOtram"… Ergo 
(therefore), he concludes, it "might not have been written by Sankara" 
at all !!!

This kind of bizarre reasoning reminds me of the controversy concocted 
by scholars of English Literature. Some time ago there were people in 
the academic fringe of England's universities who were fond of spreading 
the canard that Shakespeare's masterpieces were not actually his! They 
were all stolen from Christopher Marlowe!


(2) Mr.Mahavishnu also wrote: 

"When a work like soundaryalaharI is praised in this forum, how
can one let it go unchallenged?I think this work deserves the sharpest
criticism and strongest condemnation,whoever may be the author (be it
Sankara or his grandpa)."

Since Mr.Mahavishnu says he has read and digested "more than 12 of 
Sankara's works", I reckon he should be able to easily enlighten us all 
through a separate series of scholarly posts why, as a hard-boiled 
Vaishnava, he considers the entire "soundarya-lahari" to be a travesty 
of all poetic value in Sanskrit literature. I for one would really enjoy 
that kind of effort, Mr.Mahavishnu.

But for the present will you please give me some space on the list and 
let me continue with my humble endeavour of essaying a few thoughts on 
the "karAvalamba stOtram"? Believe me, I have no "ahamkAram" or vanity 
in all this business. All I want to do is to share my private enjoyment 
of this stOtra with other member-friends who have encouraged me to do 
so… Like Sri. Anbil, Sri.Sadagopan, Sri.Mani, Sri.Ramgopal Mudumbi, 
Sri.K.P.Sridharan, Sri.G.Surya and others.

Thank you for your interest.

Regards,
Sudarshan  

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com