Dear Sri Vanamalai Padmanabhan Swamin, I agree that the following apercu given by you reflects, by and lage, my humble opinion: Quote. "I hasten to add that before i react, I require the following clarifications/whether my understanding of your post is correct. My understanding is as follows. i. AzhwAr's have tacitly approved dhevatantara bhajana whereas pUrvAchAryas have toed an orthodox line ii. pUrvachAryas have toed the orthodox line -which are inferred from some interpretations which may give room for multiple interpretations-due to time difference between Azhwar-sand AchAryas iii.God is omnipresent and hence other deities can be worshipped. After all this also tantamounts to nArAyanA worship? iv.piLLai perumAL iyengar is a vEra vaishNavite." Unquote. I am grateful that you are in agreement with my spelling of the Sanskrit word "devatantara". The word, used mainly by Sri Vaishnava Acharyas, has been frequently spelt as "devatandhara" and even "devadhandhara", in phonetically sympathy with Tamil speech. To point this out may be visceral, but there is no harm in submitting one's notion of correct spelling. Sriman Thirumanujanam Swamy pointed out my mistake in rendering "Kan'n'inun" as "Kan'n'inum" and what he considered as mistake of many in rendering "mannulagam" as "man'n'ulagam". Sri T.A.Krishnamacharya, the octogenarian doyen of scholars at Tirupati, once told me that he mentioned to Sri PBA Swamy of a scholar's pronunciation of the word "syandana"[chariot] in Sri Varadaraja Panchasat of Sri Desika as "syandhana"[cot]. Sri PBA Swamy humourously replied that since Sri Varadraja temple was not as rich as Tirupati, that scholar perhaps wanted to strengthen it by preferring guttural to velar sound. Sri PBA Swamy himself referred once to a scholar using "khidyate"[becomes sad] to "vidyate"[becomes known], because in Grantha script, the letters, v and kh, look similar.He also pointed out that Sri Brahmatantra Swatantra Peria Parakala Swamy, in his Tiruppavai commentary, rendered "ven'pal tavattavar" in 14th Pasuram as "vambu atra attavar", probably going by sound of recitation, not knowing Tamil as well as he did Kannada. Adiyen,TCASrinivasaramanujan --- ramanuja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > There are 8 messages in this issue. > > Topics in this digest: > > 1. Regarding Kamadeva worship by Andal > From: Nanmaaran <nanmaaran@xxxx> > 2. Devatantara Bhajanam > From: Srinivasaramanujan TCA > <tcasr@xxxx> > 3. Re: Archakas and dirt in temples > From: Vkr4@xxxx > 4. Devatantara > From: "Padmanabhan" <aazhwar@xxxx> > 5. thiruppavai 28 > From: "Padmanabhan" <aazhwar@xxxx> > 6. Re: Regarding Kamadeva worship by Andal > From: TCA Venkatesan <vtca@xxxx> > 7. kAmadEVa discussion > From: "tavaradhan <tavaradhan@xxxx>" > <tavaradhan@xxxx> > 8. Mumukshuppadi - 113 > From: "vtca <vtca@xxxx>" > <vtca@xxxx> > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 21:46:13 -0800 (PST) > From: Nanmaaran <nanmaaran@xxxx> > Subject: Regarding Kamadeva worship by Andal > > Dear Swamins, > Shri TCA Venkatesan has given an example of a > worried father to take his child wherever the cure > is. This example will not suit to Andal as she > clearly expresses her conviction that "narayananE > namakkE paRai tharuvaan". So she cannot be comapared > to people with wandering mind due to agyaanam. > And back end question is that why the pasurams sung > in praise of kamadeva (anya devata) included in > divya prabandams ? > > Regards, > > Nanmaaran > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 00:12:08 -0800 (PST) > From: Srinivasaramanujan TCA <tcasr@xxxx> > Subject: Devatantara Bhajanam > > Dear Fellow Bhagavatas, > The posts of Sri T.C.A.Venkatesan, whether there is > need to worship Srimannarayana through other > Devatas, > when He can be directly worshipped,is > thought-provoking.Probably there is no need. The > question is whether it is bad. > In all Divyadesas the same Lord reveals in different > names. Azhwars worshipped everywhere.There is a > tradition that Tondaradippodi Azhwar said, > Aranganaip > paadiya vaayaal kuranganaip paaduveno.There is a > contrary guidance of Tiruppaanazhwar who sang both, > Aranganaik kanda kangal matrondrinaik kaanaave and > Mandi paai vada vengada maamalai. > The other Devatas can be viewed as > [a]fictitious > [b]false > [c]inferior or subordinate to God > [d]hostile or rivals to God > [e]manifestations of God. > Within the pale of Vedic traditions, [a] and [b] > will > not be tenable. There is no tradition in Itihasas > and > Puranas to justify [d]. Supposing [e] is not > preferred, [c] remains. Perhaps, they can be > propitied > to reach God. Madak kiliaik kai kooppi > vananginene[Thirunduntandagam]. > Adiyen ,TCASrinivasaramanujan > > > ===== > T. C. A Srinivasaramanujan > Email: tcasr@xxxx > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 08:06:45 EST > From: Vkr4@xxxx > Subject: Re: Archakas and dirt in temples > > I believe each one of us have a responsibility to > spend a few minutes to > hours in cleaning temples, or alternatively get > involved in social service as > part of our living, by giving a fraction of our > time, skills and resources to > the community without expecting any reward. > > Regards. V K Ranganathan > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 20:29:24 +0530 > From: "Padmanabhan" <aazhwar@xxxx> > Subject: Devatantara > > DEar sri TCA Srinivasa Ramanujam swami, > It is a pity that no sooner the ink in my pen( in > this case the stress on the keyboard)has dried the > discussion on this subject has cropped up. > It appears that from prima-facie reading of your > post, that I may have to concur only with the > following. > > There has been a lively discussion on Devatantara > bhajana[Devata-God; Antara-Different; > Bhajana-worship. > Eponymous words to Devantara are Bhashantara-Other > languages; Desantara-Other countries; > Namantara-Other > names; Kalantara-Other times; Vishyantaras-Other > interests etc.]. > > > I hasten to add that before i react, I require the > following clarifications/whether my understanding of > your post is correct. > My understanding is as follows. > i. AzhwAr's have tacitly approved dhevatantara > bhajana whereas pUrvAchAryas have toed an orthodox > line > ii. pUrvachAryas have toed the orthodox line -which > are inferred from some interpretations which may > give room for multiple interpretations-due to time > difference between Azhwar-sand AchAryas > iii.God is omnipresent and hence other deities can > be worshipped. After all this also tantamounts to > nArAyanA worship? > iv.piLLai perumAL iyengar is a vEra vaishNavite. > > Is my understanding correct. On your response I > shall react. > aDiyEAn rAmAnuja dhAsan > vAnamAmalai padmanAbhan > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 5 > Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 20:15:00 +0530 > From: "Padmanabhan" <aazhwar@xxxx> > Subject: thiruppavai 28 > > kaRavaigaL pin chenRu > > This pAsuram details the upAuya swarUpam. The next > pAsuram details the upEya swarUpam. > > We do not have sAsthric/vedic knowledge to attain > You(gnAna yOgam).We do not perform our duties > meticulously(karma yOgam).They do not have enough > bhakthi (aRivondrum illAdha).Dont they have enough > devotion? Yes they do have devotion but the devotion > is not considered as a means to attain HIm. We are > going behind the cows and our knowledge is naught. > Is this a qualification for attaining emperumAn? Do > they have anything else? > Yes they have got Lord krishNA Himself.(puNNIyam > yAmudaiyOm). > === message truncated === ===== T. C. A Srinivasaramanujan Email: tcasr@xxxx __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |