svAmi maNavALa mAmuni being rAmAnujA's avatAra
From the Bhakti List Archives
• November 29, 2001
srImathE rAmAnujAya namah srImathE vara vara munayE namah dear bhAgavathAs, A member of this list wrote, in response to srI. venkatEsh's mail on svAmi maNavALa mAmuni being the avatAra of svAmi rAmAnuja as follows ====================================== Sri Venkatesh and others with similar passionate dispositions: adiyEn thinks it is unwise to get into kalai-specific anubhavams about who represents the punar-avatAram of udayavar etc. Just so you know, SriRangaRamanuja mahAdesikan (kOzhiyAlam swAmi) was hailed as abhinava rAmAnuja during his time in bhoolokam during the last century. Overlapping claims to udayavar's legacy abound, and before asserting one's feelings so strongly one should stop to think where the discussion is leading towards. This is not to dispute any particular tradition but an attempt to show equal respect to all without making mutually exclusive claims. We must understand that even though there is AchArya paramparai which attests to certain punar-avathArams, those kalakshepam traditions are not unformly accepted across SriVaishnavam and therefore we must approach such controversial subjects with great caution. ============================Unquote============================= The bottomline in all of the above, and in fact with every religious belief we have, is whether we have faith in what our AchAryAs have said, and whether we accept a particular AchAryA or not. In this case, many people find it very hard to accept that svAmi maNavALa mAmuni is the avatAram of svAmi rAmAnuja - Nothing wrong with that. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and biases. Noone should force any opinion on anyone. If one wants to see the facts behind the case, and try to understand how our AchAryAs have established the fact, then it is there to see. If one has a bias for whatever reason, then it is ok too - Just becase a small section of the "srIvaishNava" community does not accept/recognize svAmi maNavALa mAmuni (or for that matter, any similar history of any other AchArya), the loss is NOT the AchAryA's, but indeed of the people who, due to their bias fail to learn from His teachings. However, in the grand scheme of things, it really does not matter for the individual anyway. After all, the grace of the Lord is NOT dependent on our knowldege, and in fact is unconditional. My suggestion to srI. T.V.VenkatEsh would be not to waste his time arguing back and forth over this. After all no amount of logical argument will overcome historical biases. Moreover, we can collectively use the bandwidth provided on this group for more constructive purposes. AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE saraNam, adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan, Varadhan __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month. http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1 -------------------------------------------------------------- - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH - To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
- Next message: rangaswamy_m_at_hotmail.com: "Padhuka Sahasram-476"
- Previous message: Madhavakkannan V: "Re: Sribhashya in Singapore?"
- Next in thread: mani_at_alum.calberkeley.org: "Re: svAmi maNavALa mAmuni being rAmAnujA's avatAra"
- Reply: mani_at_alum.calberkeley.org: "Re: svAmi maNavALa mAmuni being rAmAnujA's avatAra"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]