What is a billion dollars anyway?

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri RanganAtha BhakthAs :

 

A companion posting from Sri Venakt Kanumalla

to my earlier posting will be of interest to you

to appreciate the gravity of the situation and how

close we are to the finish line and yet how far we are

away from the same finish line.

 

Please help and see the completion of

the home for our Lord of Srirangam in USA .

 

AdiyEn, V.Sadagopan

 

This Note is from Sri Venkat Kanumalla:

>

>My dear devotees of Sri Ranganatha, Pranamas.

>It is indeed very gratyfying to see a Sri ranganaatha

BhakthAs' posting attached to Sri SadagOpan's note.

..

>Yes, we need at least $800,000= to complete the project and open Sri

>Ranganatha Temple to you all latest by may-July 2000.

>So far we have taken personal loans from devotees to a total of $125,000=

>In addition, to come-up with the remaining $800,000= needed to complete the

>project, 4 devotees are taking a second mortgage on their houses, $100,000=

>each and are lending the money to the Temple and another 4 devotees are

>taking a second mortgage of $50,000= each and lending that money to complete

>the Temple. Out of personal privacy I cannot provide their names, but

>cannot thank them enough for their commitment to complete this Temple. But

>still, I want express my deep gratitude to these devotees, RJ of NJ, RJ of

>VT, CS of NY and VK of NY for promising to lend $100,000= each, and to

>MA of NY, PP of NJ, DP of TN and RK of TX for promising to lend $50,000=

>each.

>

>My sincere request to you all is: Please help us with the remaining

>$200,000= needed to complete this Great SriVaishnava Temple, so dear to us

>all and to that great Mahan 44th Jeer Swamy of our Sri Ahobila Mutt. Some

>of you promised in the past and I request you to kindly donate generously to

>complete this glorious Temple of Sri Ranganatha.

>If you need more details, please do not hesitate to call me at 304-424-2745

>during office hours, or at 304-424-6405 at weekday evenings or at

>914-627-6716 on weekends.

>adiyen, venkat kanumalla.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhagavathas:

 

I cannot agree more with the statements Sri Mani makes regarding the

need for jettisoning divisive practices and honoring both Swamy

Desikan and Sri ManavALa mAmunigaL. In fact, in the current day

tradition, I have seen only a few isolated instances where the

divisiveness has been brought to the fore. Most prominent current

day Acharyas/scholars from both kalais have made a concerted effort

to accord due recognition and respect to the contributions of both

swami maNavALa mAmunigaL and dEsikan to our rich heritage, whose

significance (of contributions) cannot be overstated.

 

Sri Mani wrote:

>

>

> > But one must consider, no temple in

> > India recites both saaRRumuRais. All Vadakalai temples

> > (handful though they may be) recite only vadakalai

> > saaRRumuRai and all the thenkalai temples recite only

> > thenkalai saaRRumuRai.

>

> a) During my last trip to Melkote, I was told by a knowledgable

> Melkote local that both saaRRumuRais are recited there.

> I don't know if this is the case all the time, but there is

> precedent for such a practice.

>

> b) Is it good to continue propagating divisive practices,

> even if they are practiced in India? In other words, is

> there anything fundamentally wrong in honoring both

> Swami Sri Desika and Sri Maanmunigal during saaRRumuRai?

>

 

Sri Dileepan wrote:

> Just imagine, you will be leaving behind Sri Rangam for

> our children and their children. How many of them will

> visit India and visit Sri Rangam, let alone the other

> temples that are in bad shape. No doubt many of these

> temples need funding even for nithya ArAdhanai. But,

> is it not those who are from these villages and the

> locals who must take the primary responsibility for

> this? Similarly, Sri Rangam of USA is our village.

> It is our responsibility to see that funding is

> available at this crucial stage. A completed Sri

> Rangam of USA will probably be the only authentic

> Sri Vaishnava temple our grand children may ever visit.

 

Another important point to recognize is that while we are willing to

spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to build a SrI ranganAtha

temple in New York, which is an admirable notion by itself, we tend

to be far less willing to give even smaller amounts (say a few

thousand dollars) to support divya dEsams in India. In this context,

it is necessary to recognize that while a temple in New York or

Houston or San Jose is a valuable resource to the local populace,

equating such temples to a SrI rangam or kAnchipuram or thiruvEngadam

is both incorrect and inaccurate. For such comparisons ignore the

historical facts that support archAvatharam and the inherent divinity

built into each of 106 divya dEsams. Nothing will even come close to

replicating the experience of being in the presence of namberumAL

or thiruvEngaDamuDeyAn.

 

Such comparisons ignore the need for anushTanic and spiritual purity

(almost impossible to replicate livng in the USA) that form the

substratum to provide a permanent basis for perumAL's archAvathAram

in the divyadEsams. The inherent materialism and the accompanying

compromises that are integrated into our lives in the west

invariably tend to detract from the purity of our notions and the

sanctity of our actions built on such a framework.

 

Ultimately, if we truly want to help serve the cause of Sri

VaishNavam, I believe that we should open our hearts and purse

strings to supporting the existing divyadEsams (in India) as much as

we may want to do for local (and self accretive) efforts. And my

experience in this regard has been disappointing, in that, support

for divya dEsam causes in India often produce rather lukewarm

responses while that for local efforts, which are many orders of

magnitude more expensive, seem to find relatively better financial

backing. This is not to say we should not build temples locally. To

the contrary, if we build temples and make a commitment to make these

temples conduits for funding development/maintenance of divya desam

temples, we may have found a just calling for our efforts.

 

Azhwaar EmberumAnAr Jeeyar thiruvaDigaLE sharaNam

 

sridhar

[Guest guest]

This is not to pass any judgment on the worthy cause

of building a Ranganatha temple in the USA, but

this following statement, raises my eyebrows:

> But one must consider, no temple in

> India recites both saaRRumuRais. All Vadakalai temples

> (handful though they may be) recite only vadakalai

> saaRRumuRai and all the thenkalai temples recite only

> thenkalai saaRRumuRai.

 

a) During my last trip to Melkote, I was told by a knowledgable

Melkote local that both saaRRumuRais are recited there.

I don't know if this is the case all the time, but there is

precedent for such a practice.

 

b) Is it good to continue propagating divisive practices,

even if they are practiced in India? In other words, is

there anything fundamentally wrong in honoring both

Swami Sri Desika and Sri Maanmunigal during saaRRumuRai?

> In fact, in many temples including

> Sri Rangam, vadakalais are not permitted even to join

> the gOshti and recite even prabhandham, let alone

> saaRumuRai. Let us not get into the politics of these

> issues.

 

Then we should not bring this up. Politics exists in all

places, it seems, especially when Iyengars are involved.

Its existence neither justifies its propagation, nor does it

mean that we should not discourage it and promote unity when

we can.

 

On this specific point: I have never been to a divya desam

where members of one kalai was "not permitted" to join the gOshti.

In Srirangam specifically, while wearing Vadagalai thirumaN

in 1996, I was invited by a gOshti-kArar to sit and join them

during nityAnusandhAnam recitation in front of Emberumaanaar's

sannidhi. In Tiruvallikkeni, which is as stauch a Thengalai

kOvil as exists in India, I regularly participate in the gOshti

with my Vadagalai thirumaN, and no one has taken any issue.

Problems, if any, only occur when aggressive members of one kalai

or the other try to go to the head of the gOshti, which is usually

reserved for hereditary sthalattaars.

 

I think we should be very careful in avoiding the spread

of misinformation.

 

Mani

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhaktas,

This is just a short note to confirm Sri Mani's point with regard to

Melkote's SaaRRumuRai practice :

> a) During my last trip to Melkote, I was told by a knowledgable

> Melkote local that both saaRRumuRais are recited there.

> I don't know if this is the case all the time, but there is

> precedent for such a practice.

>

 

It is indeed the case all the 365days of the year and is still being

practised.

 

Alwar.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/17/1999 4:33:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mani

writes:

 

<< On this specific point: I have never been to a divya desam

where members of one kalai was "not permitted" to join the gOshti.

In Srirangam specifically, while wearing Vadagalai thirumaN

in 1996, I was invited by a gOshti-kArar to sit and join them

during nityAnusandhAnam recitation in front of Emberumaanaar's

sannidhi. In Tiruvallikkeni, which is as stauch a Thengalai

kOvil as exists in India, I regularly participate in the gOshti

with my Vadagalai thirumaN, and no one has taken any issue. >>

 

Sri Mani's is lucky in having a different experience. I have seen with my own

eyes how during Panguni Uthram day, Sri Anantha narasimhachariar

(ex-principal of SIT Trichy) was physically manhandled and driven out with

harsh words when he attempted to join the Goshti in reciting the Gadhyam by

some of the tenkalai people. I have myself referred to this incident earlier

in connection with the discussions on the unity issue.

 

I believe that this should not, however, deter us from forging unity between

the kalais here in this country lest we should be the laughing stock of

non-vaishnava people. The observance of both can be adopted in all other

temples, wherever there is a concensus on this and is also blessed by the

Acharyas- all in the interest of forging unity.

 

But, the case of Sri Ranganatha Temple is totally different. It is not

because of any hostility towards other sampradayams that the Vadakalai

Tanians and Sattumurai are followed. It is because of the command of the 44th

Azhagiyasinghar who was responsible for the construction of the temple and

who had specified that the temple should follow the Sri Sannidhi Sampradayam.

As true Sishyas of Azhagiyasinghar, nothing is more sacred to them than the

command of the Acharya to obeyed in letter and spirit.

 

Other than this, the temple is open to all irrespective of kalai. As it is

the one and only temple without any Devatantara Sambandam, it is the duty and

privilege of all true Srivaishnavas to put aside petty issues, strengthen the

hands of Paramaikanti Sarvabhouman, Dr. Venkat and make every effort to make

the "Srirangam in U.S.A."

a reality with whatever support we are capable of.

 

Dasoham

Anbil Ramaswamy

[Guest guest]

Sri Ramaswamy wrote:

> Sri Mani's is lucky in having a different experience. I have seen with my own

> eyes how during Panguni Uthram day ...

 

This is a very sad occurrence, and we will need to work

very patiently and prayerfully to overcome such hostility

between the kalais in India.

> But, the case of Sri Ranganatha Temple is totally different. It is not

> because of any hostility towards other sampradayams that the Vadakalai

> Tanians and Sattumurai are followed. It is because of the command of the 44th

> Azhagiyasinghar who was responsible for the construction of the temple and

> who had specified that the temple should follow the Sri Sannidhi Sampradayam.

> As true Sishyas of Azhagiyasinghar, nothing is more sacred to them than the

> command of the Acharya to obeyed in letter and spirit.

 

This is very laudable, and it is understandable that those in charge

of the Sri Pomona Ranganatha Temple wish to carefully follow their

acharyas' wishes, especially as Sri Mukkur Swami (44th jeeyar) was

the impetus behind the temple in the first place. However, since the

traditions in this country are nascent, and there is a willingness

among bhAgavatas to be open-minded, I do feel that we should ask

the present Azhagiya Singar if he would bless the recitation of both

saaRRumuRais one after another in the Ranganatha Temple. This way, we

can see if the acharya would approve this. It is best if we precede

the request by an explanation to Srimad Azhagiya Singar that the

Sri Vaishnava community here is small, and to prevent future hurt

feelings and misunderstandings, we would like to be very inclusive,

so as to avoid the sort of trouble that is prevalent in India.

 

Would someone kindly volunteer to ask Srimad Azhagiya Singar this

next time they speak to him? This way we can have the best of both

worlds -- acharya permission as well as full unity.

 

If the acharya decides otherwise, there is no problem either.

 

To summarize my thoughts, and to clear up any misunderstanding:

 

(a) We should of course support Sri Ranganatha Temple, and I have

never said otherwise. It is a matter of great joy and pride to

me that we will soon have a Ranganatha temple in this country.

 

(b) As we build this and any temple, let us leave all our old

identifications (paNdai kulam tavirndhu, to quote Periyaazhvaar)

as being primarily followers of Ahobila Matham, Munitrayam, Andavan,

Vaanamaamalai, Thengalai, Vadagalai, etc., and focus more on

being Sri Vaishnavas following the Vaidika dharma in the tradition

of Nammalvar and Sri Ramanuja. As so many people have said, if we

banish this narrow-minded consciousness, we will enjoy the entire

temple-going experience more. Otherwise, even our sEvai of Perumaal

will be dominated by questions of "What thirumaN does the arcakar

have? What thirumaN is Perumaal having? Isn't it an injustice how

this temple used to be Vadagalai/Thengalai but now our opponents

took it over?", rather than of the divya-soundarya of the thirumEni.

 

© Let us help build the Ranganatha Temple, but let us also continue

to actively and equally support the many worthy causes in India which

are thirsting for support. It is said:

 

devAlayAnAm nirmANAt puNyakoTi phalam bhavet |

jIrNAlayAnAm uddhAram tataH puNyatamam viduH ||

 

Constructing a new temple is an immensely great act; but renovating

dilapidated ones is an even greater one. I do not buy the argument

that the U.S. is our territory, and India someone else's. As devotees

of the Alvars, it is as much our responsibility as anyone else's to

help every single Divya Kshetram remain a place where daily worship

is offered, and where the paricArakas can to some extent eke out an

existence. I almost feel it is selfish of us to build a temple here

and ignore our heritage in India.

 

Finally, let us also support our local Srinivasa Perumaals in each and

every corner of the U.S., who are standing there patiently waiting

for bhAgavatas to partake of their glory.

 

(d) Let us forget this talk of boycotting Divya Desams if one or the other

acharya is not honored during saaRRumuRai. How can we boycott Perumaal?

As Sri K.M. Narayanan wrote, these temples have developed a tradition

(even if by court order!). It is not appropriate for us to shut off

Perumaal because of such feelings. I am certainly not saying anyone

should boycott our Pomona Ranganathan either, irrespective of saaRRumuRai

practice. However, my feeling is that since the traditions at this temple

are only now developing, we could start off in a way such that all

members of Sri Ramanuja sampradAya feel fully represented.

 

adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,

Mani

[Guest guest]

Ramanbil wrote:

>

> In a message dated 9/17/1999 4:33:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mani

> writes:

>

> << On this specific point: I have never been to a divya desam

> where members of one kalai was "not permitted" to join the gOshti.

> In Srirangam specifically, while wearing Vadagalai thirumaN

> in 1996, I was invited by a gOshti-kArar to sit and join them

> during nityAnusandhAnam recitation in front of Emberumaanaar's

> sannidhi. In Tiruvallikkeni, which is as stauch a Thengalai

> kOvil as exists in India, I regularly participate in the gOshti

> with my Vadagalai thirumaN, and no one has taken any issue. >>

>

> Sri Mani's is lucky in having a different experience. I have seen with my own

> eyes how during Panguni Uthram day, Sri Anantha narasimhachariar

> (ex-principal of SIT Trichy) was physically manhandled and driven out with

> harsh words when he attempted to join the Goshti in reciting the Gadhyam by

> some of the tenkalai people. I have myself referred to this incident earlier

> in connection with the discussions on the unity issue.

>

 

 

srImathE rAmAnujAya namaha

 

The above occurence quoted by Sri. Anbil svAmi is quite normal

in temples of either kalai - For example, in oppiliappan

kOvil, it will be a miracle if a thenkalai is even permitted

to join the gOshti (let alone recite prabhandham as part

of the gOshti - adiyEn has personally experienced this). The

same will hold true for ArAvamudhan sannadhi, and to a slightly

greater extent in thiruvahIndrapuram. Even in kAnchipuram, where

adiyEn grew up and most of the people know me, adiyEn was thrown

out of the vEda pArAyaNa gOshti recently! And all adiyEn was trying

to do was to try to get a recording of the vEda pArAyaNa gOshti

(which, by the way adiyEn thinks is the best vEda gOshti among all

the divya dEsams - so is the prabhandham gOshti). {adiyEn was

allowed to have a recording of the gOshti the next day - just a

young hotheaded srIvaishNava created some trouble - not a reflection

on the gOshti/elders}.

 

On the surface, it seems to be a vadakalai-thenkalai issue because of

our own biases. But, the fact is that in most of the temples, there are

rights held by srIvaishNavAs belonging to certain families to recite

gadyams etc.. during special occasions. Especially on panguni uttiram

day is srIrangam!!. The problems occur when we misunderstand and DEMAND

the right to be part of the gOshti & jump to conclusions that it

might be a vadakalai/thenkalai issue. We also have to ensure

that we respect the sampradAyam of the temple. adiyEn has personally

seen people trying to recite a different thaniyan than the gOshti.

Or worse, a group of people reciting dEsika prabhandham IN the gOshti

when the gOshti is reciting upadEsa rattinamaalai as the traditions

call for in that temple. Or folks in the gOshti not reciting

the thaniyan or vAzhi thirunAmam for maNaVaLa mAmunigaL, but reciting

everything else in the gOshti & demanding to be a part of the gOshti,

AND abruptly leaving the gOshti when the vAzhi thirunAmam is recited.

Now, these folks are asking for trouble. Obviously, they will be

requested to leave the gOshti.

 

The above comments are not meant to disrespect anyone, but adiyEn

wants to make sure that we understand the reasons behind such

"incidents".

 

adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan,

Thirumalai Anandanpillai Varadhan

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Mani and others following this thread,

 

namo narayana,

 

What I think is, the problem is not with a particular system but

with the mentality of the followers (quite a few) of a system. The

problem is not in having two different kalais but in thinking one is

superior to another. We can change the system today but I don't think

that is going to solve the main problem (superiority complex). If this

complex is not removed, the rift between the two kalais is going to

find one way or an other, whatever the modifications we do in the system.

 

For e.g. today we may introduce both saaRRumuRais to be recited one after

another. This may solve the problem temporarily. Tomorrow one may argue

why one kalai need to be recited first than the other? What are we going

to do? Change the system again so that one will be recited first, today

and other tomorrow or both of them together ?

 

Instead, I think it is better to leave the system as it is but change

our mentality. Let us remove from our minds that one kalai is superior

to another. If we remove or do not have this complex then a person

belonging to one kalai goes to a temple where a different kalai

saaRRumuRai is practiced, he should be able to join the goshti and

recite that kalai's saaRRumuRai. If we are able to do this then we can

stay united even though we accept that there two different kalais.

 

ramanuja dAsan,

Narasimha Prasad