Sri: SrimathE Ramanujaya Namaha: AzhwAr EmperumAnAr Jeeyar thiruvadigalE Saranam, Dear Sri Venkatesh With due respects I have to come to Mani's defence here. There is no reason to bringing in a different hearsay to a discussion that is not related to the initial question. As you and others believe, mani's question was not intended to counter a traditional belief under some ulterior motive. Given that it is not fair to bring up a tangential topic and then apologising for bringing it up. Please, let us not fall into this trap of he said, she said issues, which will only make things worse. Thanks Venkatesh Elayavilli > On the other hand, I came to know a disturbing hearsay, that, as Sri > emberumAnAr in Thirumalai is not wearing a kAshAya vasthram and also > since he has a vyAkhyA mudhrai, this is actually Swamy dEsikan and > only the thenkalais, later converted this to Sri emberumAnAr. Please > do not say that none of you heard this. This is a very very popular > rumour. Any clues on this? I am sorry to have dragged this argument > into another potential thread. But I did this to let you all know how > the hearsays, can be true and false both to either of the sect or > people. But what I am surprised in this is that the question is on > Sri emberumAnAr's sannidhi, who is undisputedly the greatest AchArya > for both the sects. This is not on a sannidhi of Sri maNavALa > mAmunigaL or Sri dEsikar. So what are we going to gain with this and > what is the clarification one is expecting. I am sure nobody, who is > rational, will say Sri Mani was wrong when he initiated this. While > Sri Mani's view is one possible view, the other view is also another > possibility. I think this has to be left just here.
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |