Kamba ramayanam

[Guest guest]

Srimathe ramanujaya nama:

 

I have read some of the postings on Kamba ramayanam. I think(pardon me

if I am wrong) there is a general feeling among the people of this group

that Sri. Vaishnavas traditionally looked down upon Kamba Ramayanam and

shunned it for many faults in it such as narasthuthi.

 

I think Vaishnavas always respected and appreciated Kamba Ramayanam.

Kamba Ramayanam is quoted much less and less familier to us because

Kamban was neither an Alvar (even though he is affectionately referred

as kambanattu alvar) nor a member fo the guruparampara.Kamba Ramayanam

is not the original Adikavyam. Kamban retold (very beautifully)

Valmiki's kavyam. Valmiki Ramayanam, alvars' arulich cheyals and

acharyas' srisukthis are read and recited either daily or regularly on

special occasions and so are more familiar and easily quoted and

recognized by many people

 

I think this is the reason for lesser popularity of Kamba Ramayanam when

compared with valmiki's work or other alvar acharyas works and not any

actual fault with kamban's work. I may be wrong, I felt like sharing

my thought. If I have said anything wrong kindly forgive me.

 

Radha Rangarajan

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama:

 

Dear BhAgavatas,

 

A quick look at the vyakhyanam by Sri Periyavaccan

Pillai for Thiruppallandu shows that there is no

mention of Selva Nambi being the acharya of Periyazhvar.

I would venture to guess that if he was, there would

have been an explicit mention of that in the vyakhyanam.

 

Since the issue of Selva Nambi came about because of

the question whether Azhvars have sung about men in

their pasurams, let me add a little to the issue.

 

In the Thirupallandu, Periyazhvar does mention about

Selva Nambi, but only in the context of mentioning his

high bhaagavata nature - that is, he is mentioned for

the sake of comparison only (selvanaip pOla - like Selva

Nambi).

 

Periyazhvar also talks about a Pandiya king later, in

the Senniyongu pasuram, where he says "paruppathaththu

kayal poRiththa pANdiyar kulapathi pOl". But again,

Azhvar is using the example of the Pandiya king for

comparison. Just as the Pandiya king put his fish

symbol atop the Meru mountain, so too You have put

your divine feet on my forehead.

 

Thirumangai Azhvar seems to have praised Pallava, Chola,

and Pandiya kings in his pasurams. However, Azhvar does

not praise them as great kings, lords, courageous

victors, etc. Instead his praise for them is reserved

for their bhAgavata deeds, such as one who surrendered

at His feet or one who built a great temple for the Lord,

etc.

 

This is likely the major difference between Kamban

and the Azhvars. While some of the azhvars praise

kings for their noble deeds in His service, Kamban

seems to have praised someone who was his patron.

 

This is in no way meant as a judgement passed on

Kamban, but only an observation. The two works of

Kamba Ramayanam and SathakOpar Anthathi alone are

sufficient to show the greatness of Kamban.

 

adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan

TCA Venkatesan

 

--- Sadagopan <sgopan wrote:

>

> SrI Selva nampi of ThirukkOttiyUr

> is generally recognized as the AchAryan

> of PeriyAzhwAr prior to the time he was

> commanded by the Lord to go to the Madhurai

> King's sabha to establish NaarAyana Parathvam.

> ...

 

 

 

U2 on LAUNCH - Exclusive greatest hits videos

http://launch./u2

[Guest guest]

> On this subject of Sri Kamban, I have a basic doubt. Forgive me if

> this doubt is improper. Why a prime vaishnava like Sri Kamban

> should name his son as ambikapati, which is the name of Siva. This

> sounds illogical.

 

Not true. AmbikA-patI has many meanings

 

1.) AmbikA-patI = Husband of Ambika = Vichitraviirya of Mahabharata

(Satyavati's son through Santanu)

2.) AmbikA-pati = Husban of Ambika = Can also mean Veda VyAsa Mahamuni.

 

Vichitraviirya dies before any progeny is created in the puru vamsam. Since

there was no heir to the throne of HastinApura, Satyavati requests her son

Veda Vyasa to help in creating the progeny.

 

Many people mistake the Sri Vaishnava stand on Anya DevatAs. Anya devatAs

are highly respected as bhagavatAs. They are highly exalted jiivatmans who

occupy the posts of Rudra, Ganesha, Durga, et al.

 

Rudra is one of the foremost devotees of Sriman Naarayana. It is Rudran who

gave us the Mantra-rAja pada stOtram (King among Mantrams), which is

addressed to Lord Lakshminarasimha. You can still find a vigraha of

Maheshwaran in Ahobilam.

 

-Regards,

 

Malolan Cadambi

[Guest guest]

SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

 

 

- In bhakti-list, TCA Venkatesan <vtca> wrote:

> Sri:

> Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama:

>

> Dear BhAgavatas,

>

> A quick look at the vyakhyanam by Sri Periyavaccan

> Pillai for Thiruppallandu shows that there is no

> mention of Selva Nambi being the acharya of Periyazhvar.

> I would venture to guess

> In the Thirupallandu, Periyazhvar does mention about

> Selva Nambi, but only in the context of mentioning his

> high bhaagavata nature - that is, he is mentioned for

> the sake of comparison only (selvanaip pOla - like Selva

> Nambi).

 

Lert me add some more to this.According to texts like 6000 padi Guru

parambhara prabhaavam (by Sri Pinbazhagaaram PerumaL jeer), selva

Nambi was a Purohith in the court of the Pandya King Sri Vallbha

Devan. It was selva nambhi who arranged for a debate at the behest of

the king to ascertain the 'para tattwam'. The sanmAnam (gold) was

tied in a pole to be gifted to the one who substantiates beyond

doubt.

 

The story goes that Perialwar was directed by the Lord in his dream

to go to the court and decalre the para-tattwam. As the alwar had not

known much about it (not well versed in scriptures etc), he hesitated

initially but was compelled by the Lord (in dream) to go. Selva

nambhi received him and requested him to declare the para-tattwam.

Beyond this there is not much talk about Selva nambj.

 

But the context in which the Alwar makes a mention of Selva nambhi

gives more clues.

 

'Selvanai-p-pola, thirumaalE, naanum unakku pazhavadiyEn.'

 

The inference :-

 

# In those days, selva nambi must have been a well-known devotee of

Thiru maal, well- appreciated for his bhagavatha gunaas.

 

# If he had been alwar's acharyan, the terms used by the alwar would

have become different. He would not have compared himself with him as

no one puts oneself on same plane with the acharyan. Instead the

alwar would have told, 'acharyan aruLAl (krupa) naanum unakku

pazhavadiyen.'

 

# why should the alwar bring in Selvan's name? When some one nurtures

a secret sense of disquiet about someone else being more than equal

to him (no apacharam meant), he will / might talk like this. The 'um'

in 'naanum'is used when one feels that he is no inferior to the other

with reference to the particular contextual idea. This shows that the

alwar must have rated himself a step lower than selvan -something

that goes to prove the contention that he was not well read before

the debate- i.e., before he was ordained by God in his dream.

 

The knowledge flow was sudden as his was comapared with Valmiki and

Dhruvan in having suddenly experienced the upsurge thanks to the

NirhEtiha krupa of the Lord.Only if this explanation is accepted, it

goes logical that he was at pains (once again no apacharam meant -

only to show the point in a way we understand) to declare that he

is not a sudden devotee of the Lord, but one whose bhakti- flow is as

old as that of selvan's or whose bhakti sambhandam is anaadhi.

 

Pardon me for the mistakes.

 

Jayasree sarnathan

 

[ I urge members to avoid entering into expositions or declarations

of the Lord's grace being 'nirhetuka' or 'sahetuka', as these kinds

of discussions are rather out of place on this list. Please once

again base your comments principally on the works of Sri Ramanuja

and the Alvars, and the acharyas' expositions directly thereon.

Thanks -- Moderator ]

[Guest guest]

Srimathe Raamanujaya Namaha

 

Dear Sri Vaishnavas,

 

Yes, Amibika-pathi can have many meaning, and one of them is a title for

Siva. It comes down to which appelation Kamban intended when he chose that

name, something which seems a bit difficult to track so many centuries

later (it seems to me at least).

 

About anya devatas, is their worship forbidden in the Sri Vaishnava

tradition? I am curious as to why Sri Maha Vishnu himself worships Siva on

two specific occasions. If any ones can explain these to me, I would be

grateful...

 

1) In the Ramayana, Sri Ramar performs Siva puja before entering

Lankapuri.

 

2) Sri Anathapadmanabha in Thiruvananthapuram- the moolavar reclines on

Adisesha, and his right hand places a flower on a Siva Linga

 

adiyen,

 

Krishna

 

 

On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Malolan Cadambi wrote:

>

> > On this subject of Sri Kamban, I have a basic doubt. Forgive me if

> > this doubt is improper. Why a prime vaishnava like Sri Kamban

> > should name his son as ambikapati, which is the name of Siva. This

> > sounds illogical.

>

> Not true. AmbikA-patI has many meanings

>

> 1.) AmbikA-patI = Husband of Ambika = Vichitraviirya of Mahabharata

> (Satyavati's son through Santanu)

> 2.) AmbikA-pati = Husban of Ambika = Can also mean Veda VyAsa Mahamuni.

>

> Vichitraviirya dies before any progeny is created in the puru vamsam. Since

> there was no heir to the throne of HastinApura, Satyavati requests her son

> Veda Vyasa to help in creating the progeny.

>

> Many people mistake the Sri Vaishnava stand on Anya DevatAs. Anya devatAs

> are highly respected as bhagavatAs. They are highly exalted jiivatmans who

> occupy the posts of Rudra, Ganesha, Durga, et al.

>

> Rudra is one of the foremost devotees of Sriman Naarayana. It is Rudran who

> gave us the Mantra-rAja pada stOtram (King among Mantrams), which is

> addressed to Lord Lakshminarasimha. You can still find a vigraha of

> Maheshwaran in Ahobilam.

>

> -Regards,

>

> Malolan Cadambi

>

>

>

>

> -----------------------------

> - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -

> To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list

> Group Home: bhakti-list

> Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/

>

>

> Your use of is subject to

>

>

[Guest guest]

About anya devatas, is their worship forbidden in the Sri Vaishnava

tradition?

>>>> Exactly SrEVaishnaVas (infact those who claim to be VEdAnthins)

must not worship anya DevtAs.This is SAsthra Sidham.

 

However during any VaidEka KarmAs..... SrEvaishnava POrvAcharyas have

established that the manthrAs are directed towards the antharyAmi of

these devathAs,who is none other that Shriya Pathi Sriman NArAyanan.

 

How is this reconcilled is another topic of discussion.

**********************************************************************

 

I am curious as to why Sri Maha Vishnu himself worships Siva on two

specific occasions. If any ones can explain these to me, I would be

grateful...

 

1) In the Ramayana, Are Ramar performs Siva puja before entering

Lankapuri.

>>>>>> No this is not true.. rAmA never performs pOja to shivA

anywhere and it is not mentioned anywhere in ValmEkE RAmAyanam or

KambaRAmAyanam.

 

This may be a later "Shaivaite" intrepretation ... or based on some

Sthala PurAna which are not considered to be absolute PramAnas.

 

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

2) Sri Anathapadmanabha in Thiruvananthapuram- the moolavar reclines on

Adisesha, and his right hand places a flower on a Siva Linga.

>>>>>> I am not sure about this... as I havent had the oppourtunity to

visit Thiruvananthapuram.

 

Those who have had the BhAgyam of visiting this Dhivya DEsam please

clarify.

 

regards

Venkat

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Krishna,

 

U Ve V N Gopala Desikachari of Oppiliappan Koyil had written about the

questions you have raised in his book, "A Dialogue on Hinduism". Here is a

link which answers all of your questions:

 

http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/may96/0124.html

 

-Regards,

 

Malolan Cadambi

[Guest guest]

SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

 

The following mail...

 

 

-- In bhakti-list, Shreekrishna Akilesh <sakilesh@a...> wrote:

 

 

> About anya devatas, is their worship forbidden in the Sri Vaishnava

> tradition? I am curious as to why Sri Maha Vishnu himself worships

Siva on

> two specific occasions. If any ones can explain these to me, I

would be

> grateful...

>

> 1) In the Ramayana, Sri Ramar performs Siva puja before entering

> Lankapuri.

 

Doing Pooja for a particular cause has been in vogue and an

acceptable practice too.

 

Sri vachana Bhooshanam justifies even prapatti for 'phala niyamam'.

Sri Rama did prapatti to Samudra Rajan for 'phala niyamam'- to cross

the sea. Therefore there is no particular rule that only certain

people are eligible to be the 'adhikaari' for prapatti. ('sharanam

pugurugaiyaalE adhikaari niyamam ellai':- SVB)

 

If prapatti to a devata like samudra Rajan is justifiable, why

shouldn't it be possible to accept pooja to an anya devata, if it is

for a limited purpose? Rama did shiva pooja at Rameswaram and a

parihara for relief from Brahma haththi dosha for having killed

Ravana at Chem pon sei koil (Thiru naangoor area). This shows that

even gods are not spared of the effects of the deeds.The necessary

propitiation must be done even if it is meant to please an anya

devata.

 

Sri vaishnavites are supposed to worship Lord Narayana and other

murthis of Vishnu only, because the ultimate goal of a Srivaishnavite

is supposed to be that of reaching paramapadam and nothing more.

Since Vaikuntha praapti can happen only through the 'rakshakam' of

Sriman Narayana ('avanudaiya sweekaaramE rakshkam' :- Mumukshuppadi),

sv-s are particular about worshiping Nrayana alone. Sv-s are expected

to renounce every other desire (sarva dharmaan paridhyajya)), but

when it so happens that they have to seek gratification of some other

desire, they have to resort to worshipping anya devatas.

 

jayasree sarnathan

[Guest guest]

>

> Shreekrishna Akilesh [sakilesh]

> Wednesday, November 13, 2002 9:04 AM

> About anya devatas, is their worship forbidden in the Sri

> Vaishnava tradition? I am curious as to why Sri Maha Vishnu

> himself worships Siva on two specific occasions. If any ones

> can explain these to me, I would be grateful...

 

Dear Shreekrishna,

 

Though this reply does not answer the two instances you have quoted, it

is a generic reply to question of Vishnu or his avataras worshipping

Shiva (or any other deity for that matter). I am pasting a part of my

mail I had posted on the dvaita list:

http://www.dvaita.org/list/list_44/msg00112.html (uid/pwd =

dvaita/dvaita).

 

****

Reference: Shanti Parva of Mahabharata. Verses 12.328.5 onwards. In this

dialogue between Lord Krishna and Arjuna, the Lord is the speaker. The

translation is not rigorous.

.....

 

brAhme rAtrikShaye prApte tasya hyamitatejasaH

prasAdAtprAdurabhavatpadmaM padmanibhekShaNa tatra brahmA samabhavatsa

tasyaiva prasAdajaH

 

In the Brahma muhurta, at the end of the night, due to the mercy of the

extremely brilliant Lord, a lotus emerged from His navel and in that

lotus, Brahma was born, ofcourse, due to His grace.

 

ahnaH kShaye lalAtAchcha suto devasya vai tathA

krodhAviShTasya sa~njaGYe rudraH saMhAra kArakaH

etau dvau vibudhashreShThau prasAdakrodhajau smR^itau

 

At the end of the day, the Lord [present as antaryAmi of Brahma *]

created Rudra out of Krodha-guNa, to enable him to be the

'samhAra-kartA'. Thus, these two 'fine-among-wise', Brahma and Rudra,

are known to have been born out of grace and anger respectively.

 

* This interpretation is necessary because in the later sections of

Moxadharma, Brahma addresses Rudra as a son.

 

tadAdeshita panthAnau sR^iShTi saMhAra kArakau

nimittamAtraM tAvatra sarvaprAni varapradau

 

Thus, they carry out the instructed tasks of creation and destruction.

However, they, the givers of boons to all the creatures, are just the

agents.

 

kapardI jatilo mundaH shmashAnagR^ihasevakaH

ugravratadharo rudro yogI tripuradAruNaH dakShakratuharashchaiva bhaga

netraharastathA

 

[Rudra has] braided hair with knot of an ascetic and rest of the head

bald. He dwells in the home of graveyard, steadfast on vigorous penance

as a yogi. He is ferocious to tripurasuras, destroyed daxayaj~na and

took away the eyes of Bhaga.

 

nArAyaNAtmako GYeyaH pANDaveya yuge yuge

 

O Arjuna, know that in every yuga, Rudra is 'nArAyaNAtmaka'. This phrase

can mean: one whose indweller is Narayana, one who is always immersed in

Narayana.

 

tasminhi pUjyamAne vai devadeve maheshvare

sampUjito bhavetpArtha devo nArAyaNaH prabhuH

 

It is the Lord, the prabhu, the Narayana *IN* Maheshvara (the

worshippable, the lord of the devas), who is actually worshipped.

 

ahamAtmA hi lokAnAM vishvAnAM pANDunandana

tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham

yadyahaM nArchayeyaM vai IshAnaM varadaM shivam

AtmAnaM nArchayetkashchiditi me bhAvitaM manaH

 

O Son of Pandu, I am, indeed, the Atma, the indweller of this universe

and the worlds. Therefore, I worship myself first, even when I worship

Rudra. If I did not worship Rudra, the bestower of boons, in such a way

(i.e., worshipping the indwelling Lord first), some would not worship

me, the indwelling Lord, at all - this is my opinion.

 

mayA pramANaM hi kR^itaM lokaH samanuvartate

pramAnAni hi pUjyAni tatastaM pUjayAmyaham

 

Whatever I follow and give due worth as a pramANa, the world follows

that. Such pramANAs have to be duly followed; therefore I follow them.

 

yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo.anu taM sa hi mAm anu

rudro nArAyaNashchaiva sattvamekaM dvidhAkR^itam

loke charati kaunteya vyakti sthaM sarvakarmasu

 

Whoever knows him, knows Me. Whoever follows him, follows me. (Though)

the world, in all its actions, worships two Gods Rudra and Narayana, it

is actually One only who is worshipped.

 

na hi me kenachid deyo varaH pANDavanandana

iti sa~ncintya manasA purANaM vishvamIshvaram

putrArthaM ArAdhitavAn AtmAnaM aham AtmanA

 

O Son of Pandu, there is, of course, nobody who can grant me boons.

Knowing that well, I worhip myself, Who am the beginningless and

universal power, known as Sarveshvara, for the sake of getting sons.

 

na hi viShNuH pranamati kasmai chidvibudhAya tu

R^ita AtmAnameveti tato rudraM bhajAmyaham

 

Indeed Vishnu does not bow to any one and [even when He bows to

Himself], for what sake, but for the sake of showing the path to the

wise. Therefore, it is the truth that I worship myself even when I

worship Rudra.

****

 

I recently noticed that the lines, "tadAdeshita panthAnau sR^iShTi

saMhAra kArakau .." have been quoted in Vedarthasangraha while proving

Vishnu's sarvottamatva: ... iti antarAtmatayAvasthita

nArAyaNadarshitapathau brahmarudrau shR^iShTisaMhArakAryakarAvityarthaH

|

 

Btw, Vedarthasangraha is available online at:

http://homepage3.nifty.com/ajunamar/e-texts/e-texts_eng.html

 

What is the difference in contents of Vedarthasangraha and

Vedaantasaara?

 

Regards,

Krishna

[Guest guest]

DEAr Sri Malolan Kidambi, Respect to anya devatas are subject-specific as

you have mentioned in your post reg.mantra-rAja pada stOtram .

Other Devatas are ,as you say,exalted jivAtmAs.They indeed worship srEman

NArAyaNa when they are in satva GuNa and act as if they are supreme in other

states.

If what you say is correct, then all AzhwAr pAsurams will become totally

wrong. What shall we say then regarding the following few pAsurams and the

corresponding commentaries( sample only)

1. 'maRRumOr deivam vuLadhenRu iruppArOdu vuRRilEAn, vurradhum vun adiyArkku

adimai" thiru mozhi 8-10-3

2.'kalai aRak kaRRa mAndhar, kAnbarO kEtparO thAm' thirumAlai -7

3. 'maRandhum puram thozhA mAndhar' nAnmuGan thiruvandhAdhi-68

 

 

We should also keep in mind periAzhwAr thirumozhi pAsurams 'kAsum kaRaiudai

kORaikkum' 4-6of periyAzhwar thirumozhi, where naming of children has been

dealt by periAzhwAr meticulosly.-

Our philosophy and faith itself veers around emberumAn-s supremacy and

dhivya prabhandham is replete with such instances.

thirumazhisai AzhwAr-s relationship with shivA is well known and thirumangai

AzhwAr has clearly mentioned that 'emberumAn undumzhindha echil thEvar'

thiru mozhi 11-7-2.

 

Hence,for the sake of justifying kamban-s naming his son as ambika-pati, let

us not dilute our principles, which is one of the fundamnetals of our faith.

The vigrahA of other deities in dhivya-dhEsams are related to specific

history of that dhivya-dhEsams. In thirukkurungudi, there is a small temple

for shiva when you enter the temple.We term it as 'pakkam ninnAr' as per

'pakkam niRka ninRa paNBar vOr pOlum' thirumozhi 9-6-1 where Lord-s

greatness

is highlighted by giving a place to shivA by his side. srEvaishnavites do

not go in and worship here when they go to nambi sannidhi.

I would also like to recall here the fact that when namperumAL entered shiva

temple due to rain, udayavar did not enter and he told that, it is okay for

the Lord but not for a sreevaishnavite like me.

It is indeed sad to note that we started discussing kamban, kamba rAmAyaNam

and we end up in accepting other deities (overlooking AzhwAr-s pAsurams),

whcih reiterates my view that what is all good for vaishnavic faith should

be accepted and what is not good should be rejected.

 

vAnamAmalai padmanabhan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

Malolan Cadambi <cadambi

<bhakti-list>

Friday, November 08, 2002 10:24 AM

Re: kamba rAmAyanam

 

>

> > On this subject of Sri Kamban, I have a basic doubt. Forgive me if

> > this doubt is improper. Why a prime vaishnava like Sri Kamban

> > should name his son as ambikapati, which is the name of Siva. This

> > sounds illogical.

>

> Not true. AmbikA-patI has many meanings

>

> 1.) AmbikA-patI = Husband of Ambika = Vichitraviirya of Mahabharata

> (Satyavati's son through Santanu)

> 2.) AmbikA-pati = Husban of Ambika = Can also mean Veda VyAsa Mahamuni.

>

> Vichitraviirya dies before any progeny is created in the puru vamsam.

Since

> there was no heir to the throne of HastinApura, Satyavati requests her son

> Veda Vyasa to help in creating the progeny.

>

> Many people mistake the Sri Vaishnava stand on Anya DevatAs. Anya devatAs

> are highly respected as bhagavatAs. They are highly exalted jiivatmans

who

> occupy the posts of Rudra, Ganesha, Durga, et al.

>

> Rudra is one of the foremost devotees of Sriman Naarayana. It is Rudran

who

> gave us the Mantra-rAja pada stOtram (King among Mantrams), which is

> addressed to Lord Lakshminarasimha. You can still find a vigraha of

> Maheshwaran in Ahobilam.

>

> -Regards,

>

> Malolan Cadambi

>

[Guest guest]

DEAR BHAKTHI GROUP MEMBERS

 

Asmentioned by Sri ks venkat there is no mention of shiva worship in

rAmAyaNam.

 

My grandfather used to say regarding chidambaram GovindarAjar sannidhi

that,when somebody does pUja he does not do on a reclining position..Does

one perform pUja on a reclining position.?

Apart from that, I would like to clarify that there are three dwArAs for

this temple.First is for thirumuGamandalam of the Lord. This is dedicated to

nithya sUrigaL's worship. The second dwAra is emberumAn's nABhikkamalam

which is for worshp by brahmha who came up from this and shiva who was his

progeny and other dhevathAs. The thrid dwArA is embeurmAn's thiruvadi which

is for srEvaishnavites like us.(AchArya hridhayam 185

sasainya, puthra , sishya, sAthya , siddha, bhOsura archanathukku, mugha,

nAbhi, pAdhangaLai dwArathraiythraiyathalE).

 

Besides, I add herein the following few lines:

 

thiru voi mozhi second ten of tens-irandAm pathu- deals with emberumAn's

kAraNathvam-Cause of creation.He is the three causes of creation.

Sri azhagia- maNavALap- perumAL- nAyanAr explains this in detail in AchArya

hridhaym-220-....' kaLvA' 'thErthan' enRu vachana prathyakshangaLaik

kAtti...'.

The Supremacy is being explained:

a.By dialogue=vachanam- ' "kaLvA emmaiyum, yEzhulagum ninuLLE thORRiya

iRaiva"

enRu, veLLERan, nAnmuGan, puLLUrdhi kazhal paNindhu yEthuvaRE" thiru voi

mozhi

2-2-10.

shivA desired that emberumAn should take boon from him. EmberumAn assured

him that he will take boon from him at the appropriate time. Accordingly, as

Lord Krishna,emberumAn approached shivA and asked for a boon as

follows"rukmini pirAttikku oru piLLai vENdum"- I need an issue for rukmani

pirAtti. For this shiva's response was, ' Lo! here is the paramAtmA who has

created the universe, all the jEvarAsigaL, dhevArgaL and so on and He is

asking a boon from me and that too for a son.Is there such a deception and

exclaims as "kaLvA! You have created me and the seven worlds in from YOu".

Thus,by a quote from shiva the Lord's supremacy is being emphasised.

Similarly, by vision the same is being explained in 2-8-6 of

thiru-voi-mozhi.

"thErthan vulagaLandha sEvadi mEal pOndhAmam sErthi, avaiyE sivan mudi mAlE

thAn kaNdu, pArthan thelindhozhindha

paizhnthuzhAzhAn perumai".

 

When arjuna wanted to worship shivA( for obtaining pAsupadhAsthram), Lord

Krishna offered his feet, and arjuna worshpped by offering flowers to Lord

Krishna's feet. On his dream, arjunA saw shivA with the same flowers in his

head and then arjunA realised the supremacy of the LOrd not by words from

reliable sources, not by the verses from sruthi or smrithi but by vision -

prathyaksham. "Apthar sollak kEtkai anRikkE, sruthi smrithigaLAl Adhal

anRikkE,.thAnE kaNdAn AyiRRu" is the Edu vAkyam.

 

 

dhivya prabhandham is a capsule where parathvam, kalyANa guNangaL, AzhwAr's

Arthi, and so many aspects are dealt with. Parathvam is one of the important

aspects which is a basic postulate. Though, we should not get bogged down in

this aspect alone, we should always keep in mind that our philosophy is

built on the premises on emberuman's unquestioned, unparallel supremacy.

vAnamAmalai padmanabhan

 

 

 

b. BY Vision -prathyaksham- 'thErthan vulgaLandha sEvadi mEl

[Guest guest]

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

Dear Sri Padmanabhan,

What Sri Malon Kidambi said was absolutely right. Rudra is one of the

foremost devotees of Sriman Naarayana. Which means Rudra worships Lord

Sriman Narayana. My guess is that you have overlooked his statements. He

also says that the anya devatas are highly respected, but he never said that

they are worshipped. These two are completely different.

 

In fact I have another point which cannot be(I guess) denied by any one. If

we worship Shri Ramanujar, Shri Manavala Maamunigal and Shri Desikan then

there is nothing wrong in worshipping Shiva who is also a great Vaishnava.

If one says he just respects the acharyas then he could also respect Shiva.

The Vaishnava point is that the supreme is more prominent or likes to be

addressed himself as Shri Maha Vishnu or Para-Vasudevan or Shriman Narayanan

We have to stick to only one form and at the same time we should go by

vedas. Since it has been justified by great acharyas that the vedas say that

Shriman Narayana is the right word to describe the paramatma, and the

form(with 4 hands, holding changu, chakkaram etc) is his form we worship

that form. Please do remember that a true vaishnava who realises the

Vichistadvaita philosophy sees god in everyone. The bottom-line is worship

the paramatma. And the form he likes the most is of the Para-Vasudevan, the

place he stays in the form is Shri Vaikuntha and the name he likes the most

is Shriman Narayanan. This has been justified by our acharyas. Anyways, I

don't want to deviate from the subject, because this would lead to lots of

arguments. I agree that Shri Vaishnavites stand point is to worship only

Shriman Narayana and 'Mattrumor deivamunde madhiyila manidangal' is

absolutely true. But, it all depends on the level from which we see or

realize the ultimate. People like our great acharyas can see that i.e they

don't actually distinguish between the different forms of the ultimate. Shri

Ramanujar stood outside the Siva temple only to prove to people that he

sticks to one and only one great form of the lord. He did not disrespect

Siva nor did he say worshipping siva is wrong:) But, us the normal jivatmas

should stick only to one form i.e the Shriman Narayana form and this is

according to the vedas.

 

Sri Malolan Kidambi has been one of those contributors who is a valuable

Shri Vaishnavite this list has got(of-course you too) and we should try to

keep our comments to minimum level i.e please send these comments to the

individual person instead of the group. Any member of the group who reads

the mail would completely mis-understand where Shri Kidambi is coming from.

All that I request is that please don't over-look. I know overlooking

happens in many of our cases, but by sending the mail just to the mail

originator, we can avoid confusion and wrong impressions about people.

I meant no offense and please accept my apologies in case I've hurt you.

Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,

Lakshmi Narasimhan

 

----

 

bhakti-list

Monday, November 18, 2002 20:59:21

bhakthi

Re: kamba rAmAyanam

 

DEAr Sri Malolan Kidambi, Respect to anya devatas are subject-specific as

you have mentioned in your post reg.mantra-rAja pada stOtram .

Other Devatas are ,as you say,exalted jivAtmAs.They indeed worship srEman

NArAyaNa when they are in satva GuNa and act as if they are supreme in other

states.

If what you say is correct, then all AzhwAr pAsurams will become totally

wrong. What shall we say then regarding the following few pAsurams and the

corresponding commentaries( sample only)

1. 'maRRumOr deivam vuLadhenRu iruppArOdu vuRRilEAn, vurradhum vun adiyArkku

adimai" thiru mozhi 8-10-3

2.'kalai aRak kaRRa mAndhar, kAnbarO kEtparO thAm' thirumAlai -7

3. 'maRandhum puram thozhA mAndhar' nAnmuGan thiruvandhAdhi-68

 

 

We should also keep in mind periAzhwAr thirumozhi pAsurams 'kAsum kaRaiudai

kORaikkum' 4-6of periyAzhwar thirumozhi, where naming of children has been

dealt by periAzhwAr meticulosly.-

Our philosophy and faith itself veers around emberumAn-s supremacy and

dhivya prabhandham is replete with such instances.

thirumazhisai AzhwAr-s relationship with shivA is well known and thirumangai

AzhwAr has clearly mentioned that 'emberumAn undumzhindha echil thEvar'

thiru mozhi 11-7-2.

 

Hence,for the sake of justifying kamban-s naming his son as ambika-pati, let

us not dilute our principles, which is one of the fundamnetals of our faith.

The vigrahA of other deities in dhivya-dhEsams are related to specific

history of that dhivya-dhEsams. In thirukkurungudi, there is a small temple

for shiva when you enter the temple.We term it as 'pakkam ninnAr' as per

'pakkam niRka ninRa paNBar vOr pOlum' thirumozhi 9-6-1 where Lord-s

greatness

is highlighted by giving a place to shivA by his side. srEvaishnavites do

not go in and worship here when they go to nambi sannidhi.

I would also like to recall here the fact that when namperumAL entered shiva

temple due to rain, udayavar did not enter and he told that, it is okay for

the Lord but not for a sreevaishnavite like me.

It is indeed sad to note that we started discussing kamban, kamba rAmAyaNam

and we end up in accepting other deities (overlooking AzhwAr-s pAsurams),

whcih reiterates my view that what is all good for vaishnavic faith should

be accepted and what is not good should be rejected.

 

vAnamAmalai padmanabhan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

Malolan Cadambi <cadambi

<bhakti-list>

Friday, November 08, 2002 10:24 AM

Re: kamba rAmAyanam

 

>

> > On this subject of Sri Kamban, I have a basic doubt. Forgive me if

> > this doubt is improper. Why a prime vaishnava like Sri Kamban

> > should name his son as ambikapati, which is the name of Siva. This

> > sounds illogical.

>

> (Moderator: 1. Original message truncated; please refer to the bhakti list

message index for the original.

2. I would like to request that we quote authentic AcAryas and their views as

far as possible when we discuss issues such as anya-devatA worship, instead of

sharing what "we think". All of us as individuals have our views on these

isssues. If these are based on knowledge of SAstra-s, plese quote the relevant

passages. We can all learn better if we share excerpts from discourses of

revered AcArya-s etc. This is just a general request, and is not necessarily

applicable only for this message).

[Guest guest]

-

"Padmanabhan" <aazhwar

> If what you say is correct, then all AzhwAr pAsurams will become totally

> wrong. What shall we say then regarding the following few pAsurams and the

> corresponding commentaries( sample only)

 

You have misunderstood what i wrote. Clearly, anya-devatA aradhana is not

sanctioned for us Sri Vaishnavas.

> It is indeed sad to note that we started discussing kamban, kamba

rAmAyaNam

> and we end up in accepting other deities (overlooking AzhwAr-s pAsurams),

> whcih reiterates my view that what is all good for vaishnavic faith should

> be accepted and what is not good should be rejected.

 

Point 1: We never ended up accepting other deities, this was never mentioned

in any thread, either implicitly or explicitly.

 

Point 2: I reiterate this point, since the Sri Vaishnava position on

anya-devAtas has not been clearly understood by a vast majority of Sri

Vaishnavas and other non-Sri Vaishnavas as well.

 

This old post should clarify all points once again:

http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/may96/0124.html

 

Please concentrate on the questions that explain the creation of Rudra,

Indra, Agni and other devatAs from the purusha.

 

Hope this helps.

 

-Regards,

 

Malolan Cadambi

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Malolan Cadambi Swami,

We agree on the point that Shiva is an exalted JivAtma. We also agree on the

point that anya-devta worship is not sanctioned by vaishnavites.

Then, where do we disagree?

The whole thing came up, on justifying kamban's son's naming ambika-pati

with multiple meanings and the consequent discussion on shiva's vigraham at

AhObilam and thiruk-kurun-kudi. The question of disrespect and respect then

came up,

and anya-devtAs as highly respected bhAgvatAs. Here also I agreed in my

first sentence of my message. Then again where do we disagree?

The discussion came up for accepting the name' ambika-pati' being named by

kamban and sree

vaishnavic stand. Do you mean to say that Ambika-pati being named should be

accepted just for sake of justification for kamban's naming and respect to

shiva as an exalted deity? Do we as sreevaishnavites are wrong in naming

our children only God's thiru-nAmangaL -refer kAsum -kaRaiyudai-periyAzwAr

thirumozhi 4-6?-why this reference has not been accepted/rejected?Am I

disrespecting dEvtAs when I name children as per this dictum?Hence, since

the question of

respect/disrespect to anya-dEvtAs came up in the context of kamban naming

his son as ambikA-pati vis-a-vis srivaishnavic stand being grossly

misunderstood, that naturally implies that we have to accept kamban's naming

ambikapati as a respect to shiva and accept the action as correct. Further,

the comment was not just restricted to kamban's naming but also was a

general one being that majority of srivaishnavic stand being incorrect.

Hence, my response. My response was subject -specific in relation to

kamban's naming his son and your response,and nothing else.Why should we

accept kamban naming his son in the name of other deities? This is where we

differ.Let us agree to disagree.That covers the first point.

As far as second point is concerned It is a general comment not bearing any

direct

relation to the above issue. However, I had given few quotations which have

to be looked into

1. thirumazhisai AzhwAr's relationship with shiva.He had a quarrell with

shivA and pArvathi and out of anger shiva open his third eye and the fire

was doused by water from AzhwAr's thiruvadi. Does not thirumazhisai Azhwar

know that shivA is a devotee of Lord Sriman NaryaNA? Does it mean that he

had disrespect towards them? The point here is, we are following our faith

and when we do so, it does not tantamount to disrespect to others.

2. 'kalai aRak kaRRa mAndhaR,kANbarO kEtparO thAm' -thiurmAlai-7

We should not even research in our mind all the faiths which are not ours

including pAsupadam, sAnkyam, vaiseshikam etc.

Here, kOrathAzhwAn's brief concentration in a work called 'ishta-siddhi' of

sAnkhya madham was reprimanded by his father kOrathAzhwAr, has been referred

to.(swAmi periya vAchAn piLLai's vyAkyAnam)

That is, our faith is total concentration on our bhagwadh vishayam without

even deviating an iota-engum pakka nOkkAmal- undivided concentration-is

prescribed for us.

3. Other two quotes namely' maRandhum puran thozhA mAndhar' of nAnmugan

thiuruvandhAdhi 68 and thiru-mozhi 8-10-3 has been referred to my be to

highlight that AzwArs and pOrvAchAryAs have been uncompromising in this

regard.

4. I also mentioned that shiva and other dEvtAs are bhAgwadhas in their

satvA state but are not when they are in other states.

 

I would also like to repoduce Edu vyAkyanam for thiru-voi-mozhi -4-8-1

pAsuram yERALum iRaiyOnum in this regard:

" yERALum " nAn nAn" enbArkum anailAmbadiAna vudambaik kidEr nAn

iyandhirukkiradhu.kaNda kAbAli kandhar peRRup pOgiradhu kidEr enakku

aridhAgiradhu engirAL"

"iRaiOnum" avan ubhaya vibhOdhikkum kadavanAi sarvEswaranAi

irukkum;kaLLiyai'mahA vriksham' enRavObhAdhi,thAnum Eswaran enRu

abhimAnithirukkum.

You have posed a question that stand on anya-devta is grossly misunderstood

and have also explained that they are respected entities. Can you please

tell me where did the question of disresepect come up? Neither I nor you

mentioned that we should disrespect anybody leave alone other dEvtAs. Then

where do we disagree? There is only a discussion here and not much of a

disagreement. Since, you mentioned that stand on anya-dEvtAs of

srivaishnavites have been misunderstood, you only have to tell what is the

misunderstanding and then we can conclude whether such misunderstanding

indeed exists among majority of srivaishnavites.You have brought an

accusation. The onus of proof is on you. Please clarify what is the

misunderstanding precisely and what is the disrespect. Unless this is clear,

one can go on discussing.

That covers the second point .

(PERSONAL NOTE: When I write messages to this or other groups or respond, I

do so on reading the messages and their contents irrespective of who has

written that. I have got regards to all the members.Hence, when I respond to

your message, Shri Malolan Cadambi swami, I emphasise that there is nothing

personal here and I have the highest regards for one and all. I am writing

this because,Sri Lakshi Narasimhan has written that I should restrict my

comments to perosnal mails and not in this forum. I do not think so. If

everybody start doing so, then there will be no discussion. If however, you

feel that I should not respond so, You may write so and I shall stop

henceforth. I request the moderator to give me a list of names to whom I

shall respond and to whom I shall not. I shall act accordingly.)

I reiterate that my comments are message specific and personally I have got

highest regards to you and other bhakthi group memebrs.Thank You.

dhAsan

vAnamAmalai padmanabhan

 

 

-

Malolan Cadambi <cadambi

<bhakti-list>

Cc: <aazhwar

Tuesday, November 19, 2002 12:45 PM

Re: kamba rAmAyanam

 

>

> -

> "Padmanabhan" <aazhwar

>

> > If what you say is correct, then all AzhwAr pAsurams will become totally

> > wrong. What shall we say then regarding the following few pAsurams and

the

> > corresponding commentaries( sample only)

>

> You have misunderstood what i wrote. Clearly, anya-devatA aradhana is not

> sanctioned for us Sri Vaishnavas.

>

> > It is indeed sad to note that we started discussing kamban, kamba

> rAmAyaNam

> > and we end up in accepting other deities (overlooking AzhwAr-s

pAsurams),

> > whcih reiterates my view that what is all good for vaishnavic faith

should

> > be accepted and what is not good should be rejected.

>

> Point 1: We never ended up accepting other deities, this was never

mentioned

> in any thread, either implicitly or explicitly.

>

> Point 2: I reiterate this point, since the Sri Vaishnava position on

> anya-devAtas has not been clearly understood by a vast majority of Sri

> Vaishnavas and other non-Sri Vaishnavas as well.

>

> This old post should clarify all points once again:

> http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/may96/0124.html

>

> Please concentrate on the questions that explain the creation of Rudra,

> Indra, Agni and other devatAs from the purusha.

>

> Hope this helps.

>

> -Regards,

>

> Malolan Cadambi

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Sri:

SrimatE rAmAnujAya nama:

>Sri vaishnavites are supposed to worship Lord

>Narayana and other murthis of Vishnu only, because

>the ultimate goal of a Srivaishnavite Sv-s are

>expected to renounce every other desire (sarva

>dharmaan paridhyajya)), but when it so happens that

>they have to seek ratification of some other desire,

>they have to resort to worshipping anya devatas.

 

Srimad Azhagiyasingar in one of his upanyAsams

mentioned that even if a Srivaishnava desires for

sense gratification (which normally no one would want)

Sriman nArAyana can fulfill their desire. When He can

grant the highest purushArtham of mOksham for doing

kaimkaryam in Srivaikuntam why can't He satiesfy His

devotees desires and why one would want go for anya

dEvathAs.

 

adiyEn

rAmasAmy rAmAnuja dAsan

 

 

 

 

 

Mail Plus – Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.

http://mailplus.