Dear Shri Kasturi Rangan, Thank you for very informative posts on Sandhya, Gayatri and related issues from Brahmanas, Dhramasutras, etc. Needless to say the evidence is overwhelmingly in your favour. I would still have preferred for pramanas from within Sri Ramanuja sampradayam as done in postings of some of the bhagavathas. While there is no intention here to argue that Sri Ramanuja sampradayam is out side the pale of Dharma sUtra, is n't it true that the sampradayam promises something more than Gayatri to its votaries, and that something should be focussed on? Or should we follow Gayatri Upasana, so gloriously praised in Brahmanas, as the be-all-and-end-all? Just to tempt you to disseminate more information from your Vedic research! Regards, Srinivasadasa amshuman_k <amshuman_k@xxxx> wrote: Dear bhAgavatas, I find myself in total agreement with Shri Venkatesan's post. I am proceeding further for a few clarifications. I apologize for not reading earlier (or reading closely) the post of Shri rAmachandran, the contents of which I do not agree fully either. I apologize at this juncture, if the tone of my post is inappropriate. Having said this, it pains me to see that the sandhyavandana, gAyatrI and vedic recitation are regarded by many as empty rituals. The last time I checked, our sampradAyam was still a vaidika dharmam/vaidika matam. Sure, there are other forms of vaishNavism whose scope is restricted only to nAma-sankIrtan, and associated forms of worship. (Probably I am unfair to gaudiyas - from my impression they pay more attention to bhAgavata purANam, instead of shruti pramANam and this, in my humble opinion excludes a possibility of us having a debate with them; we may even debate with advaitins, as we agree on the pramANas! For the same reason we cannot have debate with christians or muslims, as their pramANas are different). I am also mentioning my anguish of seeing the loss of veda shAkhAs right in front of my eyes, at this point. The kAThaka shAkha of krishNa-yajur veda is for all practical purposes extinct. I know a brAhmaNa affiliated with this shAkha and follows logAkshi sUtra (as we follow Apastambha). He refuses to teach his shAkhA to anybody except to those belonging to that branch. He may be the last person of this branch. I gather that jaiminIya shAkha with about 5 chanters in kerala is almost extinct, until Shankara mutt intervened and sent a few students to learn from them. I'll try to discuss issues based on the recent exchanges on this topic. 1. Efficacy of gAyatrI: (a) chAndOgya brAhmaNam says gAyatrI is the entire creation. gAyatrI is prthvI, gAyatrI is the sustainer of all creatures. The supreme one who is indicated by the gAyatrI is sarva-vyApi (reminds one of vishNu), sarva gnyAta and ananta. He who understands gAyatrI attains pUrNatvam. (b) shathapatha brAhmaNam talks about the 4 limbs of gAyatrI and whoever knows each limb conquers the three regions, knowledge and all living things. The fourth limb is the lusturous supreme and beyond everything. The fourth limb rests in satyam, satyam is prANa etc. etc. Whoever knows this shines with greatness and glory. It also contains a curious 'atharvan type' viniyoga - after reciting this, if anyone makes an incantation against an enemy, the enemy will certainly meet his doom. (c) gOpatha brAhmaNam mentions that all creation subsist in gAyatrI. It talks gAyatrI as a duo - savitA-sAvitrI. The first limb of gAyatrI denotes the unbroken connection of prakrti and the paramatma through various intermediate agencies. The second foot denotes the glory of the supreme illuminator and the third limb denotes the understanding of gAyatrI itself. (d) jaiminIya upanishad brAhmaNa (JUB) equates praNava with gAyatrI. gAyatrI is the supreme wisdom and through its knowledge one attains amrtatvam. prajApati attained it through the knowledge of gAyatrI (tadEtat amrtam gAyatram; EtEna vai prajApati: amrtatvam agacchat; EtEna dEvA:; EtEna rshaya:; - JUB III.7.3.1). This wisdom was handed down by supreme brahman to prajApati and is available to posterity through paramEshTin, savitA, agni, indra, vishwedEva: down to kashyapa. It concludes with 'it is immortal sAman'; all others are kAmyAni and do not have enduring spiritual value'. (NOTE: I have relied on veda pramANa and have not resorted to 'scientific evaluation' of gAyatrI meditation). Conclusion: From the pramANas of veda vAkyas, indeed the parabrahman is achieved through gAyatrI ( !!! I'll add a caveat soon ). 2. Empty rituals?: The vEdas themselves do not consider these as empty. On the contrary - there are numerous references to esoteric knowledge that has to be given only to a worthy student or to a worthy son (aitarEya AraNyakam). The significance of the performance of various vedic rituals had a theological basis. As I mentioned in a pervious post, kuru-pAnchAla region was an active spot where these types of debates regularly happened. One can survey the brAhmaNa literature and note the various debates. The one I am immediately reminded of is the debate between glAva maitrEya and prAchInayogya on the significance of agnihotra in shatapatha brAhmaNa, which also reappears in gOpatha brAhmaNa. So, far from being empty rituals, they do have strong syntax and semantics. We should be ashamed for claiming these as empty rituals and at the same time associate ourselves with vedic seers. A graceful gesture would be to completely disassociate with vedas and engage in full time nAma sankIrtan. BTW, if I am right, the pre-requisite for pAncharAtra dIksha is that one has to have undergone upanayana. 3. Mechanical performance Vs bhAva & knowledge: Straw man. It is as if somebody recommends mechanical performance of nitya karma. Apastambha points out the importance of understanding the mantras. There are vedic passages itself that points out the necessity of understanding the rituals (aitarEya brAhmaNa, shathapatha brAhmaNa in the context of mahAvrata, pravargya etc). I don't have the references right now, but can dig them up if necessary. However, non performance of nitya-karmas are categorically condemened in dharma sUtras and smritis. VasishTa & baudhAyana discuss about various pApas that arise out of foresaking nityakarmas (chapter 2 in both?). There are 3 types of pAtakas (paadagam in tamil) - mahApAtaka, atipAtaka and upapAtaka. Nonperformance of nityakarmas is the third type and the others in that list are cow killing, teaching vedas for a person who kills cows, brahmojjha (person who forsakes vedic learning), patita-sAvitrika (who lost the eligibility to learn the sAvitri mantra). One should not give his daughter to such people or perform religious rites for them. This is a sin and has to be atoned through uddAlaka vratam (and chAndrAyanam, if I remember correctly). The conclusion: Performance of the nitya karmas without the proper bhAva may not yield desired result, but non-performance will incur pApam!!!!! Our sampradAyam prescribes performance of them as a kainkaryam to lord. (Attn: Sri SrinivasAchari: The question is for a mumukshu - whether he is bound by the dharmashAstras and whether he will incur sin for non-performance of nityakarmAs. Again, for ordinary souls, this is a non-question.). I disagree with srong terms that rAmAnuja sampradAyam relegates the performance of nitya karmas to optional position. rAmAnuja didn't create a rAmAnuja-smriti or rAmAnuja dharma-sUtra that supercedes the existing kalpa sUtras and declared nityakarmas are unnecessary. (People can think of navyashAstra group - a group of people who want to 'create' a new dharma shastra for hindus :-)) 4. Position of our TK sampradAyam: Thanks for the quotes from lOkAchArya. I also came across maNavALa mAmunigaL's gloss where he says, "the hawk incantation and sorcery rites are allowed for the lowest soul, so much so that he gains belief in our shAstras. Once he crosses that stage, the aforementioned rites are disallowed. Similarly, when a jIva realizes his utter dependency on the lord, the performace of 'shAstra prescribed rites?!' are disallowed". I hope, we are nowhere near that stage. (This in turn mutates into a kalai debate, where our final stance is that the mumukshu should continue to do them for lOka kalyANam etc. etc.). bhAgavatAs may point out my mistakes. In summary - I have not brought in 'yoga-prANAyAma-sandhyA' relations or 'supposed scientific benefits of doing sandhyA' or lowering BP, lowering cholestrol etc. etc. I hope I've stuck to accepted pramANas. If I made any mistakes, I apologize. Regards, Kasturi Rangan --- In ramanuja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, TCA Venkatesan <vtca@xxxx> wrote: > Sri: > Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama: > > Dear Sri Kasturi Rangan and others, > > I think my original post was loosely put together > and was therefore likely unclear. > > I wasn't recommending or suggesting that nitya karmas > be given up. > > Clearly the incident about Bhattar shows that he was > doing his nitya karmas. > > And while Pillai Lokacharyar added the nitya karmas > to the sarva pApa, as far as my knowledge of his > writings goes, I don't think he has recommended that > they be given up. Learned bhAgavats may correct me > on these. > > However, what I was driving at was this: > > 1. What was the pramANam for Sri Ramachandran's > statement that sandhya vandanam alone cannot be > given up while all other nitya karmas can be > given up. He was even suggesting that worship can > be given up. It is my understanding that, even those > who stress that the nitya karmas are to be followed > without question, state that all nitya karmas be > performed and not just one. > > I can understand a practical logic that the sandhya > is one of the simplest rituals to perform at home > needing no special upakaranas, and giving it up means > you have practically given up everything. Therefore, > the injunction 'don't give it up'. But from the post > it sounded like the sastras themselves give it a > special status. That was the clarification I was > seeking. > > It also raises the question as what to do if pressed > for time between sandhya and another service - for eg, > thiruvArAdhanam. > > 2. Thennacharyas don't give it the special status > that Sri Ramachandran was driving at. That was > the point I wanted to make. 6000padi records > that Bhattar said "bhagavad kainkarya niratharukku > sandhyAvandana kaivalya dOsham vArAdhu". Agreed, > that most of us don't qualify to that state, but > we need to be aware of this. 6000padi also states > that to perform nitya karmas while missing bhagavad > anubhavam is against the nature of the soul. > > 3. The post also suggested that there are many > personal benefits that one gets by doing the > sandhya. From the Thennacharya perspective, these > may be incidental but not crux to the matter. The > nitya karmas are to be done only as kainkaryam to > the Lord. Not for personal gains. > > Hope this clarifies adiyEn's earlier post. > > adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan > > > --- amshuman_k <amshuman_k@xxxx> wrote: > > Dear Sri Venkatesan, > > Kindly clarify whether the life incident of bhattar is > > quoted as an > > injunction to TK VaishNavas for the non-performance of > > sandhya? > > Regular performance of nityakarmas are typically ordained > > by dharma > > sUtras of one's vedic affiliation (it may appear in grhya > > sutras in > > some cases; smrti digests elaborate the dharma sUtras). > > > > From my limited understanding rAmAnujAchArya never > > attempted to > > tamper the dharma sUtras, veda pramANas and the > > associated > > paraphernalia (and even sanctions sacrifice of goat in > > the context > > of yAgas in his gIta bhAshya). > > > > If I am right, the ashtAdasha bheda nirNaya discusses > > about > > nithyakarmas - "whether an evolved sould will go to hell > > if he > > doesn't perform them": yes -> vadakalai; no -> thenkalai, > > however > > the evolved soul should continue to do them as an example > > for others. > > This is a non question for unevolved souls! > > > > Accept my apologies if I've commited any mistakes or was > > offensive. > > > > Regards, > > Kasturi Rangan > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. > http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT Click Here --------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ramanuja/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: ramanuja-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |