Reproduced below is the rejoinder from the Divya-desa Paramparya Padu-kappu
Peravai, Srirangam,
to the loud Terminological Inexactitudes attributed to the Kanchi Kamakoti
Sankaracharya
in the matter of Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara Temple, our Holy-of-Holies.
The rejoinder merits the widest publicity in the press that you can possibly
arrange, and in other media and manner.
A mail from you to the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh would also be
appropriate,
so as to highlight the Kanchi Kamakoti's unwarranted attempts at trivialising
the Srivaishnava religion.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Divya-desa Paramparya Padukappu Peravai
214, East Uttara Street,
SRIRANGAM-620006
(District Trichy, Tamil Nadu).
To
The Editor,
Subject: Unwarranted falsehoods of Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya, regarding the
Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara Temple.
Sir,
On his recent visit to Hyderabad, the Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya had made
unwarranted public statements regarding the time-honoured and established
Vaishnava character and administration of the Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara Temple.
We have the privilege of seeking your cooperation in discharging your valued
role as responsible Press, in contradicting the falsehoods contained in the
Kanchi Acharya's statements.
The Press Note prepared by us is attached for your ready reference and use.
Regards from
(A.Krishnamachari)
SECRETARY
Phone: 0431-2434398
kicha19@xxxx
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sri:
Certain unwarranted statements on the administration and worship mode in the
ancient and world-famous Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvara-Srinivasa Temple have been
carried in the Deccan Chronicle (February 29 2004) and the New Indian Express
(February 28 2004). These statements have been attributed to the Kanchi
Kamakoti Sankaracharya when on his visit to Hyderabad.
The Kamakoti personage's statements primarily betray his upstart bid to capture
power and property in the Tirumalai Srinivasa Temple which is amongst the most
venerated and historically well-documented centres of Srivaishnava worship in
India. The statements constitute a paranoid ranting which underline the rabble
doctrine, "The more loud, the more true" and "The more brazen, the more
broadcast". They also betray a compulsive emotional need of this speaker to
keep drawing attention to himself, and to stay centre-stage in the mass media,
however reckless his enunciations or dubious his so-called initiatives for
public peace or plainly moth-eaten his erudition. This manner of peremptory
noise-making is hardly fair or edifying to the common sense and intelligence of
the large number of followers he claims to have.
Some of the Kanchi personality's discoveries are as sensational as they are
simply crass, as when he says that "Ramanuja had nothing whatever to do with
Tirumalai". His another profundity is that "the Vaikhanasa mode of worship is
not in anyway related to the philosophical doctrine of Vishishtaadvaita".
Two other of his statements are carping on Sri Tridandi Sriman Narayana
Ramanuja Chinna Jeeyar, and expose his neurotic jealousy of the venerated
Jeeyar Svami. "Sri Tridandi Jeeyar should not interfere", says the Kanchi
personality, "with Tirumalai temple administration matters. The Jeeyar is not a
mathaadhipati at all but only a Vishishtaadvait preacher, and barely a wayfarer
in Tirumalai !" In targeting the Tridandi Jeeyar svami for his crude attack,
the Kanchi personality has forgotten to produce his own credentials which would
empower him to declare a Srivaishnava institutional head as persona non-grata
in Tirumalai.
The Kanchi personality seems to be the only individual who is ignorant of the
fact that he has no locus standi whatsoever to declaim and decide matters in
respect of the holy Sri Venkatesvara Temple in Tirumalai-Tirupati. Thanks to
the media hype sponsored by his admirers in public life, this neo-Sankaracharya
has come to be just tolerated, but not legitimised, in the four-seat
Convocation of the Sankaracharya-s (Badarinath, Dvarakanath, and
Puri-Jagannath, and Sringeri). None of the pontiffs of these four
Sankara-peethas (which are regarded as having been founded by the venerated
Sankara bhagavat-paada himself) has come out with the hilarious kind of
statements as the Kanchi personality has presently made.
The Kanchi personality's strategy for gaining a foothold in the Sri
Venkatesvara Temple administration is contained in his rather bland statement,
"We Sankaracharya-s too have the right of offering worship-rites in Vishnu
temples." Sri Sankara Bhagavat Paada was self-evidently a Vaishnava saint, but
later-day distortions depict him as an ash-smeared Saiva. Any of the Sankara
mathaadhipati-s is therefore received, as indeed any religious head of vaidika
religion, with temple honours not only in Tirumalai but
also in other temples in the country. But it is one thing to receive temple
honours and a respectful preference to have darshan, and an entirely another
thing (and unwarranted claim) to administer the rites of worship there. The
Kanchi personality attempts to claim the right to administer the rites of
worship in Tirumalai temple with general bland remarks, half-statements and by
confusing the issues.
The totality of available evidence establishes Sri Venkatesvara Temple in
Tirumalai hills as the Srivaishnava temple par excellence, and of great
antiquity. The multi-strand evidence is authenticated in history, classical
literature, inscriptional records, and the unbroken tradition of worship here
and in other temples of the country. The Temple has been the inspiring theme of
not only the ancient Tamil Sangham classics and post-Sangham classics like
Kamban's famed Ramakatha etc, but is also venerated in the rapturous
compositions of the subsequent daasa-saahitya in Kannada language, the moving
songs of Kshetrajna, Annamacharya etc, and down to Sri Tyagaraja.
Sri Ramanujacharya (1017-1137 AD) had visited Tirumalai Sri Venkatesvaram hills
at least three times, and had established the Elder Jeeyar in 1057-58 (with his
residential Matham) in order to oversee the organisation of worship of Sri
Venkatesvara. The Junior Jeeyar was established in 1102.
Sri Ramanuja's first-generation disciple Sri Anantaazhvaan (who hailed from
to-day's Karnataka) was appointed by his mentor to keep the Lord's flower
gardens and orchards. Anantaazhvaan's crucial Sanskrit work, Sri Venkataachala
Itihaasa-maalaa, is a very authentic and comprehensive record of the debate
sponsored by the local ruler Yaadava Naaraayana to put an end to Saiva
importunate claims. It fell to Sri Ramanuja to establish, in this debate, on
unambiguous and unassailable evidence that Sri Venkatesvara was the Vishnu of
the veda-scripture. The streamlined modes of worship identified and
reintroduced in the Temple by Sri Ramanuja were somewhat affected on account of
the ravaging raids (1310 circa) of the Temples in the South by Malik Kafur and
Ulugh Khan. The worship in Tirumalai was eventually restored by Manavaala
Mahaa-muni who became the pontiff of the Srivaishnava capital of Srirangam.
The worship in Tirumalai Temple is rendered as per the (Vaishnava) Vaikhaanasa
Aagama, which is the twin of the (Vaishnava) Pancharaatra Agama which is in
observance in Srirangam Temple. The 108 sanctified Vaishnava Temples of the
country observe one or the other Aagama, and Sri Vedantaachaarya's work,
Paancharaatra-rakshaa, establishes that there is no material conflict between
the two Aagama-s. It is therefore palpably absurd to say, as our Kanchi
personality now fantastically proposes, that the Vaikhaanasa of Tirumalai is
exclusive of the Srivaishnava Vishishtaadvaita religion and doctrine. The
Kanchi research-finding is contradicted by the fact that every Vaikhanasa
temple in the South (Aandaal in Srivilli-puttoor, for instance) is indisputably
corroborative of Vishishtaadvaita metaphysics and has a clear and unique
Srivaishnava in character.
It is to be deplored that with the ostensible objective of widening the space
for festive perambulation, the centuries-old large 'thousand-pillar' mandapam-
pavilion was demolished recently. The demolished mandapam contained stone
sculpting of as many as 164 time-honoured 'Tenkalai' Srivaishnava
Oordhva-pundram (sanctified religious marking). This has simultaneously caused
a triple loss to the Temple traditions, historical evidence, and archaeological
values.
On behalf of the vast Srivaishnava Community of the country,
and as especially the ardent devotees of Lord Sri Venkateswara,
WE APPEAL
to the TT Devasthanam
urgently to consider the following steps
in the interests of the un-vitiated continuance of the fragrant and
time-sanctified worship-modes of Lord Sri Venkatesvara's Temple, which is our
Holiest of Holies ~~
* Give no quarter whatsoever to the Kanchi Kamakoti Sankaracharya in the
administration and organisation of worship of Sri Venkatesvara Temple in
Tirumalai, considering that he has no 'sampradaaya' affiliation to the Temple
at all, and has therefore no locus standi to dictate to the TTD on the Temple
affairs.
* Reconstitute the Temple Board to provide primacy for the Elder ('pedda
keylvi' ) Jeeyar Svami, the Junior ('chinna keylvi') Jeeyar Svami, identified
descendant of Anantaazhvaan, and Sri Tridandi Sriman Narayana Ramanuja Chinna
Jeeyar Svami (whose 'sampradaaya' insight and service are unassailable).
* Constitute a seven-member standing committee to ensure the preservation of
Srivaishnava Vaikhanasa Vishishtaadvaita traditions which had historically
prevailed since ancient times in the Tirumalai Temple. The committee will
provide ex officio for Sri Vaana-maa-malai Jeeyar Svami, one Vaikhaanasa
archaka, three scholars of Veda-Shaastra, and two persons with sound
administrative experience (one retired from Central Government and another
retired from State Government).
"Sri Venkateyso jayatu"
[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 |