Re: acharyas and their hagiologies (aitihyam)
From the Bhakti List Archives
• November 30, 2001
Dear Mukundan, I am really astonished that you have taken this so emotionally. Your acharya-bhakti runs deep, and I am sorry if what I have written has triggered some bad feelings. I think in this case I may have not properly explained myself. It is not that I deny Swami Manavala Maamunigal's greatness. He is rightly celebrated and honored in nearly all temples for his contributions. At the same time, his contribution should not be overshadowed by improperly explained stories, i.e., stories which are not given proper context. To cite an example, you wrote: --- In bhakti-list@y..., Dan Pattangiwrote: > It is our limitation in understanding that makes us ask: > - : Why THe Mass of Knowledge Himself wants to learn from Mamunigal. > > If we approach periyavas (Not JUST in age, but also in TRUE KNOWLEDGE) > we might get to learn: > Periyavas say: Its the Anubhavam of enjoying Thiruvaimozhi, so much that > tears are pouring out for hours together while giving and enjoying > Mamunigal's discourses on Thiruvaimizhi. It is beyond doubt that Manavaala Maamunigal's anubhavam of Tiruvaymozhi was unsurpassed, and that his lucid explanations brought the meaning of the divine hymns home to everyone. The propagation of Tiruvaymozhi is perhaps Swami Maamunigal's greatest contribution to the world. However, what you are saying is that the Lord *literally* lacked some anubhavas and had to go seek them from someone else. In other words, there was a shortcoming in His own jnAna and Ananda forcing Him to go elsewhere. Now, does this really make sense in the context of innumerable statements from Sruti, Prabandham, and Smrti that He is 'kurai onRum illAda gOvindA', 'satykAma, satyasankalpa', 'vijnAna-ghana', 'satyam, jnAnam, anantam'? It is these exaggerations that pose problems to the objective listener. Now I may be missing something in my understanding -- so please correct me if I am -- but the Lord's presence in Maamunigal's goshTi was perhaps more because he wished to show how *everyone* should enjoy Tiruvaymozhi, particularly as so lucidly explained by Maamunigal, and that everyone should sit among bhAgavatas and participate in bhagavad-guNAnubhavam together (kUDi irundu kuLirndu). We need not posit shortcomings in the Lord's anubhava to praise another. > Lord wanted to experience this divine Anubhava. > Lord also wanted to show to the world true nature of acharya. > For those not wanting to take on Mamunigal or accept him in small parts, > Its ok. Mamunigal is not the looser, Ramanuja is not the looser, > sampradaya is not the looser. I am afraid you have totally misunderstood the point and have taken an emotional tangent. I apologize if I was unclear. I accept Maamunigal wholesale as one of the greatest acharyas ever. I view his writings as displaying divine inspiration. His profound wisdom combined with utter humility are a constant source of pride in me as one who belongs to his tradition. I suppose there may be a few petty people who cannot see past the thirumaN and view Maamunigal with disdain. It is up to the rest of us to educate those people not by doggedly insisting on Maamunigal's divinity (which they will hardly accept), or claiming that bad things happened to them because they criticized Maamunigal (which sounds like nothing but witchcraft), but to patiently demonstrate the historical reasons *why* Maamunigal was held in as high an esteem as Sri Ramanuja. It is so obvious if one simply reads a few pages of Maamunigal's works, or thinks about what role Maamunigal played in historical context. Why is it we don't hear these things? Why is it we only hear of some dogmatic doctrines of divinity? I often wonder whether the people who insist repeatedly only on the divinity of Maamunigal or Desika have bothered to learn anything else about these great mahAtmas. Is there nothing else to say other than 'person A was the avatAra of divinity B'? aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan, Mani -------------------------------------------------------------- - 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/
- Previous message: Dan Pattangi: "acharyas and their hagiologies (aitihyam)"
- In reply to: Dan Pattangi: "acharyas and their hagiologies (aitihyam)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]