Sri Parthasarathi thunai Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha Pranams, In the website www.tirumala.org now the sapthagiri magazine's online version is seen. Adiyen happened to go through an article about the History of Tirupati in the April 2002 and the May 2002 issues. Some of the informations in this article really put me to shock. I would like to put forward some of the sentences of the author to the members of the group. May the learned members of the group please comment on the same. 1. "It is worth pointing out here that neither Sri Alavandar, tirumali nambi,Sri Ramanuja nor his cousin and disciple Embar contributed a taniyan for the thiruvaymoli nor was a commentary written by any one of the above. These acharyas were not perhaps great tamil scholars for one thing. IT IS EVEN DOUBTFUL IF SRI RAMANUJA STUDIED CLOSELY ALL THE VERSES OF THE THIRUVAYMOLI. The thiruvoymoli alone came to be well known as the standard form of devotional literature,..........The works of other alvars were obviously not known, or less known and could not have been classed as philosophical, but only devotional...............Nammazhvar's tiruvoymoli makes no reference to and does not attempt to refute the Advaita philosophy". 2. "The natural inference is that a section of the srivaishnavas felt that thirukurukai-piran pillan's commentary though it had the approval of Sri Ramanuja and was considered the standard one, did not dp full justice to Nammazhvar's Tiruvaymoli, or that it was not illuminative".(The author here shows his view that pillan's commentary was accepted by the vadagalais and the tengalai acharyas from nanjiyar and others did not accept that and hence made other commentaries) 3. "Ramanuja has not quoted a single tamil verse from thiruvaimozhi as authority..............So it could not with justification or in fairness be said that his philosophy was to any extent inspired by the teachings of the thiruvaimozhi". May 2002 1. "The tanians prefixed to the other three works of Sri Nammazhvar and to the other works of the prabhandam show that these works were discovered by later acharyas." 2. "One Tiruvaimozhi pillai alias tirumalai alvan born in 1325 A.d wrote a commentary on periya alvar's Tirumoli. He is the son of Pillai Lokacharya." 3. "Whether the thiruvaimozhi was seriously studied before the appearance of the commentary by pillan and whether the other twenty three works which make up the prabhandam were known to and were studied by Sri Ramanuja are matters open to doubt" 4. " pillan does not say anywhere therein that he executed the work in obedience to Sri Ramanuja's command and that it had the seal of his approval". The author has in many places contradicted his own statements but then there are many things the author has said which will shock all of us. Adiyen would like the learned members to go through the article and throw light on the authority of the author's words. Adiyen Ramanuja Dasyai Sumithra Varadarajan
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |