Dear Shri Kasturi Rangan, First of all, I would like to make it crystal clear that I don't have even 1% of the knowledge required to answer your questions. Even Thiruvalluvar had written that Kelvi (questioning) is the best way to attain gnAnam. Lord Krishna says that one has to humby submit to a qualified Guru and seek knowledge from him by asking him questions (Tad viddhi prani pAtena....), infact the whole of Bhagavad Gita is nothing but a long question answer session!! Therefore, kindly allow me to laudyou for the wonderful questions. Like I'd written earlier, I can't answer your questions, but I can offer some suggestions, my own humble opinions. * You'd written about Vedas and Upanishads, but I guess you might be awarethat most of the Vedas are either lost or remain unattained: eka-vimsati-bhedena rg-vedam krtavan pura sakhanam satenaiva yajur-vedam athakarot sama-vedam sahasrena sakhanam prabibheda sah atharvanam atho vedam bibedha navakena tu ?Previously the Rg Veda was divided into 21 sections, the Yajur Veda into100 sections, the Sama Veda into 1,000 sections and the Atharva Veda into 9 divisions.? Each division has 4 minor divisions, namely the Samhitas, Brahmanas, Aranyakas and Upanisads. Thus altogether the 4 Vedas contain 1,130 Samhitas, 1,130 Brahmanas, 1,130 Aranyakas, and 1,130 Upanisads. This makes a total of 4,520 divisions. At present, most of these texts have disappeared due to the influence of time. We can only find 11 Samhitas, 18 Brahmanas, 7 Aranyakas and 220 Upanisads which constitutes a mere 6% of the entire Vedas. This is where the beauty and the greatness of the AzhwArs is realized. Theyhave given us the essence of all the Shrutis and the Smrtis in their wonderfuls works, collectively known as the Divya Prabandhams. Any knowledge that is attained in partiality is not complete. I therefore humbly suggest to have complete faith in the 4000. To me personally, anything else fades in comparison to the 4000, beyond doubt. Please try to have faith on the works of "Vedam Thamizh-seidha MARan" and his "colleagues" (if I may). * Having faith is very important, but even gaining faith is not easy. I can't remember the verse which says that it is very very difficult to get complete faith on the lotus feet of the Lord. True, Nirhetuka Kripa is important, but why can't you take your joining this forum itself where you might get knowledge is due to the Nirhetuka Kripa of the lord?? Krishna says, "Janme karma ca me divyam evam yo veti tattvatah | tyaktvA deham puNar janma na iti mAm eti so arjuna ||" which means that if one knows or learns about the past times of the Lord, he is sure to attain Moksha. What does it mean?? Knowing more about Perumal,the AzhwArs and the AchAryAs will ensure one's path to Vaikuntha. * Regarding Sudras and women not being able to learn the vedAs, if one is interested enough to learn the vedas, he should also be interested in understanding the knowledge associated with it. The most fundamental knowledge isthat one is born or a shudra or a woman in just this lifetime. One gets the body of a Shudra, a woman, a kshatriya, a cow, or whatever based on his previous karma. If a person born in a Shudra body or a woman desires to learn the Vedas very sincerely, the Lord will make sure that in his/her next birth, he/she will be born a brahmana. Even better, there is no point in learning the vedas and upanishads if one surrenders to the Lord. * nammAzhwAr was not a brahmana by birth, Tirumangai Mannan was a kaLLar, pAnar was born in a caste even lower than the catur varnas. They are the stalwarts of Vaishnavism. One of rAmAnujA's gurus, Tirukachchi nambigaL was not a brahmin. PiLLai urangAvizhi dAsar, one of rAmAnujA's dear most disciples was not a brahmin. In kaliyuga, it is really superficial to talk about brahmin-nonbrahmin issues, even Lord Krishna in many of his pastimes tore the exclusivity of the Brahmins. Lord gave moksha even to asurAs!! * Regarding queer practices, there is nothing that is happening today that has not happened earlier. There is mentioning of queer practices even in Srimad BhAgavatham, but I personally feel it is totally beyond our goal, and not our aim. Sage Kapila talks about atheism (sAnkhya yOgA), and that is a part of Hinduism too!! Does it mean we should follow atheism?? No. "Hinduism" in its broader sense encompasses all sorts of philosophies, atheism, theism, monotheism, etc... we are not Hindus. We are SriVaishnavas, rather, aspiring SriVaishnavas. * If faith is what the problem is, you are not alone, faith can be achievedonly by the association of the VaishnavAs, engaging your mind more on the leelas of the Lord, the AzhwArs and the AchAryas. If there is a whole sampradayam that is blessed with super intelligent and empowered souls in its lineage, it definitely should have some substance associated with it - in themost scientific or rational of the views, thats how I look at it. I seek your pardon if I had said anything unpalatable or lacking sense. AzhwAr emperumAnAr jeeyar thiruvadigaLe saranam. dasan, Kidambi Soundararajan. amshuman_k <amshuman_k@xxxx> wrote: Dear Shri nappinnai_nc, Thank you for your reply (and encouragement)! Let me summarize your answers and correct me if I am wrong. 1. Most of the doubts will vanish with Lord's Krpaa & (right association (sat-sangam/bhaagavata sangam??) is required for that though. 2. The chatur-vedas in sanskrit are actually not all that important :)!!! We have to accept them only to the extent that it doesn't contradict our VishishThadvaita philosophy or prabandham. 3. The reason for Vedas are actually to inculcate daasatvam/seshatvam. Since shudras & women already have it, they don't need to study Vedas. we can safely eliminate #1, as I am a "lost soul" without Lord's mercy :) I have to disagree with #2. I am aware that TK sampradayam gives equal importance if not more to NDP and considers it on par with Shruthi. However Shruthi is considered to be the supreme authority and Shri Ramanujacharya with considerable effort "proves" that our philosophy is the right interpretation of "Shruthi" and traces purvacharyas like Baudhayana, Bharuchi, Tanka etc. Almost everybody Shaivas/Shakthas etc go to various lengths (in the respective sectarian Puranas) to trace their affiliation with Vedic literature. However reality is indeed different. The "Karma Kaandam" deals with Mantrams attributed to "minor devataas" and "Gnyaana kaandam" deals with unspecified/unnamed Brahman. Exactly because of this, we can foist our own interpretations on Upanishads and declare anything - Supposedly Appayya deekshithar's version of Vishisthadvaita has Rudra- shiva as the supreme Brahman! I'll defer my comments on #3. A general rejoinder though - What about women & shudras who don't have "daasatvam"? Should they be taught Vedas to cultivate it??? :) KK Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. [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 |