Why fear all contraversies?

May 30, 2003

Hi All,

, <panchamukhi@v...> wrote:

> We have had enough controversies over several issues which in no

> way contribute to our understanding of Shri Madhwacharya's

> philosophies.

It becomes a contraversy only if one or both the parties hold on to

their point of view irrespective of whether or not it's based in

Shastras. Hiding Shastric knowledge for fear of 'contraversy' is not

always a benificial in the long run. Parties involved may need to sit

and have Shastric-vada and prove their(disprove other's) points,

rather than trying to evole 'consensus'.

This forum may very well ban such discussions as most of us(not me

atleast) do not have the panditya/yogyata to make a point.

The way Sri Madhva, who is infinitely alpa compared to Sri Hari,

could prove that Sri Hari is sarvottma - a person who is much alpa

compared to Sri Vadirajaru may be able to (dis)prove Rujutva of Sri

vadirajaru, pureley on the basis sat-Shastra.

For those who question 'What is the use of knowing whether or not Sri

Vadirajaru is Ruju or not?', I've a counter question 'What is the use

of knowing whether or not Sri Hari is sarvottama?'.

Like some acharya noted in Sri Sudha magazine, wrong-knowledge is

worse than no-knowledge. Wrong knowledge in this particualr instance

will affect the Taratamya and hence may lead us to andhanTamas

instead of Vaikuntha.

Personally, I've accepted Sri Sri 1008 Satyatmateertha Swamiji as my

swaroopa uddharaka guru and it's only through him that I can get

sadgati, and whatever is his sat-shastric interpretation is for me

too.

Krishnam Vande Jagadgurum,

Anand

May 30, 2003

Dear friends,

The points made by Sri Anand Manvi are unexceptionable and are usually

offered as explanation for any position taken by any one, who " claims "

to have determined the truth. Comparing determination of

Harisarvotthamathva by Acharya Madhva based on Sacchasthras with the

apparent determination by Utharadi Matha scholars that Saint Vadiraja is

not a RJU is frivolous and without any valid basis. Sri Anand Manvi how

ever has frankly accepted that he has no other determinant by himself -

but will accept the verdict of Sri 108 present pontiff of Utharadi

Matha. Again I have no quarrel with his personal decision. But, if some

one else, chooses to believe what he thinks is a statement by that great

Aparoksha Jnani - Sri Vijayadasaru, or the firm belief handed down over

generations of Sode Matha followers, along with a very large mass of

Madhvas in general - pls do not threaten them with Andhanthamas etc in

the next world and direct physical violence in this. The latter

particularly does not behove of a great institution of learning, piety

and devotion that Utharadi matha has always been known to be.

I would have appreciated Mr. Anand Manvi's posting much more if he

joined us all in condemning this ugly development which has caused scars

in the psyche of Madhvas and disturbed their emotional unity. All

rational Madhvas must condemn this atitude of intolerance and stupid

mental complex of " only I am qualified to know the truth " .

NAPSRao

May 30, 2003

Anand Manvi [m_anand_rao]Friday, May 30, 2003 6:03 AM Subject: Why fear all contraversies?

Hi All, , <panchamukhi@v...> wrote:> We have had enough controversies over several issues which in no> way contribute to our understanding of Shri Madhwacharya's> philosophies.It becomes a contraversy only if one or both the parties hold on to their point of view irrespective of whether or not it's based in Shastras. Hiding Shastric knowledge for fear of 'contraversy' is not always a benificial in the long run. Parties involved may need to sitand have Shastric-vada and prove their(disprove other's) points, rather than trying to evole 'consensus'.This forum may very well ban such discussions as most of us(not me atleast) do not have the panditya/yogyata to make a point.The way Sri Madhva, who is infinitely alpa compared to Sri Hari, could prove that Sri Hari is sarvottma - a person who is much alpa compared to Sri Vadirajaru may be able to (dis)prove Rujutva of Sri vadirajaru, pureley on the basis sat-Shastra.For those who question 'What is the use of knowing whether or not Sri Vadirajaru is Ruju or not?', I've a counter question 'What is the use of knowing whether or not Sri Hari is sarvottama?'.

----------------------Please ask this question to Sri Sathyathma tIrtha Swamiji and Sri Mahuli Acharya.Like some acharya noted in Sri Sudha magazine, wrong-knowledge is worse than no-knowledge. Wrong knowledge in this particualr instance will affect the Taratamya and hence may lead us to andhanTamas instead of Vaikuntha.

Personally, I've accepted Sri Sri 1008 Satyatmateertha Swamiji as my swaroopa uddharaka guru and it's only through him that I can get sadgati, and whatever is his sat-shastric interpretation is for me too.

-------------------------------To accept any one as Svarupa Uddarakara Guru, foremost qualification that Guru should possess is that he should know his Svarupa first and then jivas below him.Please ask Sri Sathyathma tIrtha whether he knows his Svarupa and yours.

Please visit Uttaradhi Matha Website:

It claims specifically Sri Sathyathma tIrtha is "Vayu Devara Amsha".Taken from the Website:

"It is an accepted fact that no ordinary soul has occupied the Uttaradi Matha Peetha. Only those with "Vayu Devara Amsha" adorn this Peetha. Many gurus who had appeared ordinary in purvashrama have astounded everybody by the spiritual heights they reached after gracing the Uttaradi Matha Peetha"

Who has accepted this ???Where is the pramana for Such fanatic Claims????Without pramana people have to accept Sri Sathyathma tIrtha as Vayu Devara Amsha and With Pramana from Great AparOxa Haridasas Like Vijayadasaru, people should not accept Sri Vadirajara Rujutva.Great Preachings!!!.This is worser than Aham Brahmasi Claim. At least in case of Aham Brahmasi, there is a misinterpretaion and that can be very well repaired. But this Aham Vayu Claim cannnot be .

I repeat the words in Shrisudha:

Wrong knowledge in this particualr instance will affect the Taratamya and hence may lead us to andhanTamas instead of Vaikuntha.

With this in background (that I am Vayudevara Amsha),, looks like Sri Sathaythma tIrtha has declared himself as the authority to decide Svarupa of Vadiraja . I think some fantatic folks may buy such non sense.For any sensible person, Sri Vijayadasara Vakyas are great Pramana

Accepting Vakhyartha by mortal pundits and Swamijis on Svarupas of Great Saints like Vadriraja will lead directly to Andatamassu not Sadgati.

Please visit Uttaradhi matha website. In the flash representation after Srimadhacarya ,they are showing Sri Sathyadyana tIrtha. I am very much astonished to note the absence of Sri TikAcharya.This speaks very clearly attitude.AprOxa jnanis like Sri Tikacharya have no place in Uttaradhi Matha Parampare.One day Sri Madhacarya will also be removed amidst of personal glorification of Sri Sathyathma tIrtha.

Namaskara

Madhusudan Bheemasenarao.

Krishnam Vande Jagadgurum,Anand

May 31, 2003

Namaskaras to aeveryone and Mr. Anand Manvi,

I have nothing against Mr. Anand Manvi's personal belief of accepting

everything what shri Satyatmateertha swamiji believes. He has been

considered as a great scholar form one and all.

THe point i am trying to make here is not about anyone persons belief but

the attitude of we Madhwas as a group. We have always been trying to fight

amongst ourselves on issues such as which is the moola matha , where is shri

moola rama devaru, whether Shri Vadiraja swamiji is Bhavi sameeraru or not,

and so on and so forth.

According to me, these are not going to help us upgrade our souls but only

satisfy our human nature of bickering and one upmanship. Please correct me

if I am wrong.

I guess if we use the same argument strengths to propogate our philosophy

worldwide, Shri Satyatmateertha swamiji and in turn Shri Madhwacharyaru and

finally Shri Hari will be the happiest atmas around. If we firmly believe in

Dwaita siddhanta, then these wordly issues of who is who and what is what

should be ignored and pursuit of knowledge should be given more stress.

Whether Shri Vadirajaru is a ruju guna or not may not be the end objective

of all us Madhwas but supremacy of Shri Hari is.

All the saint-philosophers in this philosophy have been trying to only prove

the greatness of Shri Hari and the difference between him and us.

Since there is a lineage of following certain taratamya based on of course

the earlier works of great saints, it is not going to lead us anywhere if we

start questioning everything.

That is all I have to say and would like to end this argument and continue

to read more meaningful postings on thsi wonderful medium.

Once again pardon me if i have wrongly hurt someones feelings. My intention

has not been that at all.