Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Vol. I/022 d/02/20/01

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

SrIman! SrI Ranga Sriyam anubadravam anudhinam samvardhaya/

SrIman! SrI Ranga Sriyam anubadravam anudhinam samvardhaya//

KAvEri VardhathAm kAlE, kAlE varshathu vAsava:/

SrI RanganAthO jayathu SrI Ranga SrIs cha VardhathAm//

===========================================================

SRI RANGA SRI VOL. I / 022 DATED 20th February 2001

===========================================================

EDITORIAL:

We are glad to present the 22nd Issue of "Sri Ranga Sri"

IN THIS ISSUE:

1. "GREATNESS OF BHAGAVAD RAMANUJA DARSANAM"

We present Part 4 of this Series containing a critical review of the

Advaitiic concept of NIR GUNA, NIR AAKARA, NIR AVAYAVA, NIR VISESHA

BRAHMAN (Brahman who has no attributes, no parts, no qualities, no

form, no name)

2. "QUESTION BOX ANSWERS"

You will remember that we had announced the opening of a new feature -

"Question Box" to answer specific doubts, suggestions and questions

relating to the philosophy and practices of our tradition received

addressed to "Sri_Ranga_Sri".

(and NOT to the "" address)

 

With the steady increase in membership, we are receiving increasing

number of queries almost daily. Every effort is made to answer them

ASAP with appropriate authority. Where a ready answer cannot be

provided immediately, we refer them to our AchAryas and Scholars back

home to secure authoritative explanations. This, naturally, takes

some more time.

 

Some of the queries are too personal and / or are too general. There

are, however, many others that might interest the other members. We

collect these latter and publish our responses for the information of

our readers in a special issue, say once in a month.

This is the first of such special issues.

 

Hope you will find them interesting. You may feel free to offer your

inputs on the various questions but address them to

Sri_Ranga_Sri

and NOT to the " address.

 

3. "KNOW THIS ACHARYA"

We celebrate the Tirunakshatram day of Sri MadhurAntakam Swami (Masi-

Avittam) falling on on 22nd February 2001. A short write up on this

AchAryan finds a place in this issue.

Dasoham

Anbil Ramaswamy

Editor & Publisher

"Sri Ranga Sri"

===============================================================

1. GREATNESS OF BHAGAVAD RAMANUJA DARSANAM (GRD 4)

SECTION 3 (B) NIR GUNA, NIR AAKARA, NIR AVAYAVA, NIR VISESHA BRAHMAN

(Brahman who has no attributes, no parts, no qualities, no form, no

name)

===============================================================

[Please read the note and request given while introducing the

subject. if anything has been expressed forcefully, it is only to

bring home the points more graphically and is not meant to hurt

anyone's feelings.]

Dasoham

Anbil Ramaswamy

===============================================================

The Advaitins hold that there is only one Brahman that was real- the

Parabrahmam without qualities, without attributes, without form,

without name, without any thing to denote it. All others simply did

not exist (including the "Apara Brahman" or "Saguna Brahman").

 

In other words, the Nirguna Brahman is the nondescript ParamAtman -

which is 'Bare existence' (SanmAtra). The "Saguna Brahman" which they

identified with Sri Narayana was only a stepping stone to facilitate

the realization of the "Nirguna Brahman". Thus, the "Nirguna Brahman"

is the seat of 'Avidya' or 'AjnAna' (i.e.) Nescience or Ignorance -

a negation of all the positive qualities attributed to the "Saguna

Brahman"

 

(i) The Advaitins draw inspiration from the Vedic statement 'Neti,

Neti' which literally means 'Not this, Not this' to conclude that

ParamAtma is indescribable. True, ParamAtma is indeed indescribable

in the sense that He defies description.

 

"The words 'Neti, Neti' only means that you cannot limit his infinite

qualities as 'this or this' either in its nature, quality, time or

place or otherwise quantify them. Any auspicious epithets employed

suits it, but falls far short of the actual qualities and this is

dramatically portrayed in the expression 'Neti, Neti'. Otherwise, the

resulting nihilism would only be a logical incongruity. " (Sri R.

Kesava Iyengar)

 

Prof. Narayanachariar clarifies:

"Brahma Sutra III-2-11to 29 comprising the "Ubhayalinga AdhikaraNa

and AhikuNDala AdhikaraNa treat this topic in one continuous stretch.

Sutra III-2-11 is a grand preamble to the entire Upanishad. It

says "SthAnatOspi parasya ubhayalinga Sarvatra Hi." Here "SthAna"

means position of God ensouling Jeevas, "Sarvatra" means everywhere

and "Hi" means "This is well known, indeed". and confirms clearly

that -

(i) God possesses all the auspicious qualities. Sarva KAma, Sarva

Gandha, Sarva Rasa, Sarvajna - fulfills all desires, all fragrances,

all tastes, omniscient etc. and that

(ii) God is free from all forms of imperfections - Niranjanah,

Nishakalam, Niravadhyam etc. - free from all taints, free from all

black marks, free from all evils, free from all imperfections etc.

Since both aspects are mentioned by Sruti only, a reconciliation of

them is truly binding on anyone who holds Sruti in respect".

 

Thibaut observes-

" None of the Sutra decidedly favors the interpretation proposed by

Shankara" ..."I decidedly prefer, for instance, RamAnuja 's

interpretation of Sutra 22 as far as the sense of the entire Sutra is

concerned and more especially with regard to the term "prakriyA

tattvam" whose proper form is brought out by RamAnuja's explanation

only" (p.xcvi of his translation of Sankara Bashya-Vol.1 in the

series "Sacred Books of the East" Volume 34)

 

When the Upanishads say that he is without qualities, it only means

that he is without any bad qualities. This has to be viewed in the

light of other Vedic statements which confirm that the ParamAtma is

the Lord, the protector.* If he has no qualities, what would he lord

over and whom would he protect?*

 

(ii) The Advaitins claim that the "Nirguna Brahman" is a mere witness

to nescience during the continuance of samsAra. It is self-defeating

to say that Nirguna Brahmam has no 'consciousness attribute' and to

hold in the same breath that it is a 'witness'. *When it has no

consciousness at all (in other words, it is unconscious) how can

it 'witness' anything at all and worse still, when there is

objectively 'nothing real' to witness*

 

(iii) Also, all negatives are the opposites of positives and should

have the characteristics of these opposites which are themselves

positives. Otherwise, there can be no negatives at all. *So, the

concept of "Nirguna Brahman" itself is Self-contradictory.

The illumination of a 'Negative bare being' is a mere euphemism for

blurred vision*(Sri R. Kesava Iyengar)

 

(iv) The Upanishads lay down Bhakti (Devotion). This implies two

entities that are real the lower one that offers devotion and the

other, a higher one to which the devotion is directed. *Why would the

scriptures prescribe Bhakti at all if there is only one real and the

others are unreal and how can it expect a `nonentity' to take to

devotion as enjoined by the Saastras?*

 

(v) The Vedas describe in elaborate detail the process of

PancheekaraNam while describing the creation of the worlds. *When

the "Nirguna Brahman" has no qualities creative or otherwise, no

attributes, nothing to claim to be causative of anything, - how can

it create the worlds as described in the Vedas?*

 

(vi) The Vedas declare Brahman as 'exalted and exalting'. How can a

Nirvisesha Brahman be exalted since exaltation implies two entities

of one that is exalted and the other being much lower than the

exalted one (and perhaps requiring to be exalted). *When nothing else

is there, where is the question of its being exalted and whom or what

can it exalt? It is like asking one to stand in a line when one is

alone and none else is there to stand next *

 

As per Troy Wilson ORGAN (p.28 in Hinduism - Its historical

Development-Barron's Educational Series Inc. N. Y 1970-74t :

*"Every relationship have at least two relata, two things that

partake of the relationship. If there are no two relata, there cannot

be a relation"*

 

Having propounded the Nirvisesha Brahman which practically could thus

do nothing, they had to resort to what is called a 'Saguna Brahman'

to create, sustain, and destroy the world when due, having a divine

body with the capacity to take 'AvatArs'. And, not willing to accept

the supreme position of the "Saguna Brahman" they had to qualify

the "Saguna Brahman" as subservient to their favorite "Nirguna

Brahman" which alone they maintained was 'real'.

 

The only real thing was the creation of TWO (Dvaita) in Brahman

Himself, demolishing in the process the ONE (Advaita) Brahman they

sought to establish, for negating the existence of two entities of

ParamAtma and JeevAtma!.

 

Nowhere does Sruti hold two kinds of Brahman, like "Suddha Brahman"

(the terminology is foreign to Upanishads) and an "Asuddha Brahman"

In this context, we are left to guess which one of the two

viz. "Saguna" or "Nirguna" is the "Suddham", the other

being "Asuddham"!

 

"NIRAKARA" and "NIRAVAYAVA" BRAHMAN

Prof. NarayanAchArya:

"In Sri Bashyam 2-1-14, Bhagavad RamAnuja clearly explains how the

SutrakAra holds that God *does* have a body, but that is very much

unlike the soul's possessing one due to its earning of `karma' - sin

and merit. For that matter, it is not the very idea of possessing a

body that drives even the Jeeva to happiness or misery as a rule.

Only if such body is the result of sin and merit it becomes a

potential source of joy or misery. Otherwise, bodies taken of will,

as in the state of emancipation, are all instruments of permanent

bliss only as Sruti states: He possesses a single body, nay, three or

multiple ones (sa ekadhA bhavathi, tridhA bhavathi- cha Chand.up. VII-

26)"

===============================================================

GRD 5: SECTION3© Concept of MAya Or Illusion - will follow.

==============================================================

2. "QUESTION BOX ANSWERS" Part 1

===============================================================

(1) HOW TO PERFORM SRADDHA WHEN WIFE OF THE KARTHA IS "OUT OF DOORS"

(BAHISTAI)

Question : Sri Ramanujam Raghavan

Answer by: Sri D. Soundararajan Swami

==========================================

When the wife is "out of doors", she will not be available for

apportioning rice (amindri) for offering to fire (agnisanthAnam).

Also, it is not possible to perform ceremony with cooked food

(annasrAddham) and the SAstras prohibit doing it by gifting rice,

plantains, jaggery, colocosia (Seppan kizhangu), green dhall etc

called "Sankalpa" or "Aama-srAddham" (nor can any of these be done on

the 5th day after her ceremonial bath, as some hold). But, it can and

must be done only with cooked food (annasrAddham) on the day of the

next "thithi"

(Vide page 53 of "KELvi- Badil" by Sri U.Ve. MahAvidwAn Melpakkam

NarasimhAchAriar Swami published by Sri Nrisimhapriya trust, 1996

==============================================================

(2) DO THE VEDAS APPROVE OF SUICIDE?

Question: Sri Krishna Kalale

Answer by: Anbil Ramaswamy

==================================

There is no reference in the Vedas approving of suicide. Even

abortion is prohibited as "Sisuhatya" and suicide definitely cannot

carry any approval. On the other hand, suicide is discouraged as a

means to end problems in this life. When Sri Sita wanted to commit

suicide in AsoOa Vana, AnjanEya appeared before her with the happy

tidings of Lord's arrival. Similarly, when Bharata was about to self

immolate himself he appeared with the happy tidings again. Whether it

is mundane or spiritual, one's problems can hope to be solved, if

only one lives, not when one is dead. The only way out in any

circumstance is to offer prayers to the Lord. Indeed," More things

are wrought by prayer than this world dreams of" and where do we meet

God except in prayer?

==============================================================

(3). IS THERE ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR SRI RAMA'S ABANDONMENT OF SRI

SITA WITHOUT A TRIAL?

Question: Sri Krishna Kalale.

{This question raised on26th December 2000 was answered by me on 2nd

January 2001 based on the reply of H.H. Srimad ANDavan of

PounDarikapuram Ashramam. The following answer is a supplement by Sri

M.K. Ramaswamy Swamin, (Retd. Secretary, Govt. of India) He is giving

a 2 part series in answer to this question. Here is the first part.

The 2nd will appear as soon as it is received -- Editor}

========================================

"This is an important question. When Sri Rama took the decision to

desert Sri Sita, was he acting like a God or was He acting like a man?

The answer is clear. He was acting as a human being. Throughout this

AvatAr, He acted with this consciousness.(VI.120.11).

 

If Sri Rama was acting like a human being, how do we go about to

understand Him? In inter-personal relationships, we try to under

stand another person, his statements or actions by grappling with

them with the aid of our intellect. Thus, we try to understand by

(a) arriving at a conclusion or a judgment

(b) treating the person with sympathy and

© treating the person with empathy (the power of projecting one's

personality into and so fully comprehending the object of

contemplation)

(a) To arrive at a judgment would amount to a show of gumption where

one had not been called upon to venture either to express or act.;

(b) To sympathize would show, quite erroneously that somehow we are

all superior with greater command of our faculties.

© To empathize and stay empathized is, perhaps, what might be

appropriate here.

But, even empathy might be inadequate.

Sri Aurobindo would say that AvatArs is a dual phenomenon of divinity

and humanity. There are at least two instances where Sri Rama looked

unmistakably like a divine conscious being, more like such a one than

a "DasrAtmaja".

1. In BAlakhANDam, ParasurAma identified Him as the Supreme Param

purusha, Sri NArAYaNa. He said words to such an effect: "akshayyam

madhuhanthAram jAnAmi tvAm surEswaramtvayA tralOkhya nAthEna"

(I.17.76.17 and 19) Sri Rama who was just 13 listened without moving

a muscle. He neither accepted ParasurAma's words nor did He reject

them. He was also not puzzled!

2. His granting "mOksha" to JaTAyu. That was no ordinary event. That

was also from the man, which Sri Rama was! It is not within the power

of great Kshatriyas, even as great as Rama to grant a life in Svarga.

It must be noted that Sri Rama was not praying for JaTAyu's Svarga;

He was actually dispatching him there (III.68.27.30)

 

Therefore, even if we empathized with Rama and proceeded on the basis

that he was a manushya born in the manushya lOka (as said by Sri

MahAVishNu Himself) "vatsyAmi mAnushE lOkE pAlayan prithveem

imAm"(I.15.30), we cannot know Him completely. We would be clueless

as to when He would act by resuming His contact with His divine

consciousness. On the other hand, if we were to hold stubbornly to a

premise that He was a divine being, we would remain clueless even

then as to where was the divine door located and what went behind

that door!

 

What this would mean is that we cannot treat Sri Rama, Srimad

RAmAyaNam, their words, values and the incidents strictly in a

terrestrial and temporal sense. Sri Rama and Srimad RAmAyaNam are for

the spirit to explore. God is realized through experience, not

through sermons, books and annotations. Similarly, for a true

realization one should aim to internalize. Srimad RAmAyaNam is NOT

meant to be "known" or "understood"; It has to be "realized". For

this purpose, it has to be approached with that unique tool – the

indwelling consciousness.

 

God likes to reveal Himself; God likes to deliver Himself. But, for

that to happen, the seeker has to be a believer and an aspirant. With

the giving up of one's whole consciousness into the divine, one would

be able to perceive God and the rationale behind His actions"

 

Sri M.K. Srinivasan Swamin adds-

"Though Sri Rama had said "I consider myself as a mere human"

(AathmAnam mAnusham manyE), WE should not judge Him by human

standards and apply human laws of jurisprudence. It is just like

understanding quantum mechanics and the latest string theory (of

Stephen Hawking) through the elementary popular Newton's laws of

motion".

===============================================================

(4) WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF ASWAMEDHA AND RAJASUYA YAGAS?

Question: John Marshall / Jaya Tiirtha Charan Dasa

Answer: Anbil Ramaswamy

=============================================

"ASWAMEDHA" means "horse Sacrifice". In Vedic times, it was performed

by Kings who desired offspring. At the end of the yAga, the horse

was killed with certain ceremonies. In the time of MahAbhAratha, it

was performed only by kings. This implied that he who instituted it

was a conqueror and king of kings. It was believed that a 100 such

yAgas performed could help an ordinary mortal king to overthrow the

throne of Indra and to become the ruler of the universe and sovereign

of the gods. A horse of a particular color was consecrated and was

turned loose to wander at will for one year. The King or his men

followed the horse with a battalion and when the animal entered a

foreign territory, the ruler thereof was bound either to fight or

submit. If the one who instituted returned triumphantly after the one-

year period, the vanquished kings accompanied him as his

tributaries; But, if he failed, he was disgraced and his pretensions

exposed. At the end of the triumphant tour, the horse was sacrificed.

=================================

"RAJASUYA" was performed at the time of installation of a King,

religious in nature but political in its operation, because it

implied that he who instituted the sacrifice was a supreme lord, a

king over kings and his tributary princes were required to be present

at his coronation.

(Authority: "A Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology and Religion,

Geography and literature" by John Dowson Heritage Publishers, New

Delhi,1992)

==============================================================

(5) "IDOL" OR "ICON"- WHICH IS CORRECT?

Question and Answer by: Sri Rami Sivan.

{In the series "Sri Ranga Vijayam", references were made as to how

the ArchA vigraha of Lord Sri RanganAtha came into the hands of

IkshvAghu dynasty, then on to VibheeshaNa and how it came to be

consecrated in Srirangam. A western member of "Sri Ranga Sri" from

Sydney, Australia was upset over the use of the word "idol" with

reference to the "ArchA vigraha" of the Lord. Please read our reply

and his further comments thereon and favor us with your feedback to

Sri_Ranga_Sri

and NOT to the "" address. -- Editor}

==============================================

He wrote:-

"Dear Sir

Adiyen dasanudasan

I am a westerner who was given SamAsrayaNam by His Holiness Yatiraja

Jiyar Swamigal of Sriperumbudur. Some years back I was appointed as

AchArya of the Ten Sampradaya by His Holiness. Here in Sydney

Australia we have established a branch of the Yatiraja Jiyar Matt

with both Indian and western members, and are having regular

programs, Bhagavad aradhanai, upanyasa and kAlakshEpams, utsavams

etc. We have jokingly called ourselves "Metgalai" Sampradaya, because

there are certain points of the Vadakalai Sam. which we consider as

correct and some points of the Tengalai Same of which are more valid.

The long -standing conflict between the two branches of the

Sampradaya should be bridged, we feel, Swami Desikan was indeed one

of the greatest luminaries that appeared post Bhashyakara, but

Manavalamamuni was not without greatness and wisdom. We in Australia

study the works of both the AchAryas with equal reverence.

 

I have a great regard for your journal but there is one thing that

disturbs me greatly being a westerner; - the use of the word IDOL.

This is a horrible, pejorative term coined by missionaries to

denigrate the practice of ArchA Aradhana - it is a term of

colonialism, cultural oppression and religious imperialism that

should never be used by us. The correct term to use is ICON, it is a

neutral term in modern society and is also the name which the

Catholics apply to their own ArchA.

Yours humbly

in the service of Srimannarayana and the prapannas.

Sri Rama Ramanuja Acharya

=================================================

Our Reply:

Dear Swamin:

I am so happy to learn about the unity efforts in Sydney and your

multifaceted kainkaryams. I am also trying my best in this regard in

the U.S.A.

You have observed-

"there is one thing that disturbs me greatly being a westerner; the

use of the word IDOL. This is a horrible, pejorative term coined by

missionaries to denigrate the practice of ArchA Aradhana - it is a

term of colonialism, cultural oppression and religious imperialism

that should never be used by us. The correct term to use is ICON, it

is a neutral term in modern society and is also the name which the

Catholics apply to their own ArchA".

 

I appreciate the spirit in which you have advised the use of the

word "Icon" in the place of "Idol". As per the standard dictionaries,

both the words are synonymous and nothing pejorative about the

word "idol" (Vide "Roget's Thesaurus of English words and phrases"

pages 940-941)

The meanings of the word "Idol" are as follows:

Image, Exceller, Desired object, Person of repute, Loved one,

Favorite, Good man, God, etc.

The meanings of the word "Icon" are as follows:

Copy, Image, Picture, Ritual object etc.

You may kindly review with reference to the above and if you still

feel that "Idol" may not be used, please feel free to inform me.

==================================================

His further Comments:

Dear Anbil

Adiyen Dasanudasan!

Thank you very much for replying to me in spite of your busy schedule.

I refer to your dictionary definitions. The use of language is not

only according to the literal dictionary definitions - but also

culturally based.

 

I know that in India alone it is very common for Hindus to refer to

Archas as Idols. In the west the same Archas in churches and

religious establishments are never referred to as idols but as icons.

So although this usage is common amongst Hindus and perfectly

acceptable - to westerners this is a very negative term used to

denigrate, never to appreciate. So in my teaching I have always found

it useful to use the culturally based language of the masses. I teach

many westerners and whenever they hear this word idol they cringe.

 

If you read the bible you will find this term used pejoratively

against the gods of the pagan masses and it states quite clearly the

God of the bible hates idol worship and idolaters. So, Western

culture is informed by biblical ideas and concepts and hence the

discomfort with this term.

 

If your magazine and upadeshams are directed only at expatriate

Srivaishnavas - there is no problem and my well-intentioned remarks

are merely superfluous but if you anticipate reaching out to western

readers and potential prapannas - then I think you should consider

changing terms. For your interest I am including some quotes from the

Bible.

Thank you for your time

Dasanudasan RamAnuja Dasan

==============================================================

IDOLS AND THE BIBLE:

Jehovah¹s views on idol worship

Ex 20:3-5 "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of

anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters

below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the

LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin

of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate

me,

 

Ex.17:7 They must no longer offer any of their sacrifices to the goat

idols to whom they prostitute themselves. This is to be a lasting

ordinance for them and for the generations to come.'

 

Eze 23:49 And they shall recompense your lewdness upon you, and you

shall bear the sins of your idols: and you shall know that I [am] the

Lord GOD.

 

Ex 20:23 Do not make any gods to be alongside me; do not make for

yourselves gods of silver or gods of gold.

 

Ex 23:24 Do not bow down before their gods or worship them or follow

their practices. You must demolish them and break their sacred stones

to pieces.

 

Ex 32:31 So Moses went back to the LORD and said, "Oh, what a great

sin these people have committed! They have made themselves idols of

gold.

 

De 32:16 They made him jealous with their foreign gods and angered

him with their detestable idols.

 

As you can see from the foregoing the term IDOL always has negative

associations in the Judeo-Christian culture.

 

Jehovah¹s views on other religious groups (Hindus, Buddhists, jains

etc)

 

Ex 23:33 Do not let them live in your land, or they will cause you to

sin against me, because the worship of their gods will certainly be a

snare to you."

 

Ex 34:15 "Be careful not to make a treaty with those who live in the

land; for when they prostitute themselves to their gods and sacrifice

to them, they will invite you and you will eat their sacrifices.

 

De 7:16 You must destroy all the peoples the LORD your God gives over

to you. Do not look on them with pity and do not serve their gods,

for that will be a snare to you.

 

De 7:25 The images of their gods you are to burn in the fire. Do not

covet the silver and gold on them, and do not take it for yourselves,

or you will be ensnared by it, for it is detestable to the LORD your

God.

 

De 12:2 Destroy completely all the places on the high mountains and

on the hills and under every spreading tree where the nations you are

dispossessing worship their gods.

 

De 12:3 Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones and burn

their Asherah poles in the fire; cut down the idols of their gods and

wipe out their names from those places.

 

Jos 24:23 "Now then," said Joshua, "throw away the foreign gods that

are among you and yield your hearts to the LORD, the God of Israel."

 

1Sa 15:23 For rebellion [is as] the sin of witchcraft, and

stubbornness [is as] iniquity and idolatry.

 

1Co 10:14 Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.

 

Jehovah on Non Judeo/Christian spiritual masters (Hindu, Buddhist,

Jain etc.)

De 18:20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I

have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of

other gods, must be put to death."

 

Jehovah¹s views on Conversion to another religion

De 13:6 -11 If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or

the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you,

saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods that neither you nor

your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near

or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to him

or listen to him.

 

Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly

put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to

death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone him to death,

because he tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought

you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. Then all Israel will

hear and be afraid, and no-one among you will do such an evil thing

again.

 

12-16 If you hear it said about one of the towns the LORD your God

is giving you to live in that wicked men have arisen among you and

have led the people of their town astray, saying, "Let us go and

worship other gods" (gods you have not known), then you must enquire,

probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has

been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, you

must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. Destroy it

completely, both its people and its livestock. Gather all the plunder

of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn

the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to the LORD

your God. It is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt.

 

Ga 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath,

strife, seditions, heresies,

======================================================================

More Questions and Answers will follow in Part 2

======================================================================

3. "KNOW THIS ACHARYA"-

MahAvidwAn MADURANTAKAM Tirumalai EechambADi

Veera RAghava MahA Desikan SwAmi (VikAri -Masi- AviTTam)

Anbil Ramaswamy

=====================================================

He was born on 28th February 1900 in VasishTa KouNDinya GOtram. You

will remember our celebrating his Centenary on 4th March 2000.

 

Born in the family entitled to "first water" (agra-theertham) at the

temple of "YEri kAtharAman" at MadurAnthakam, he obtained proficiency

in Vedas and Prabandams through Adhyayanam, SAstrAbhyAsam etc. He

learned `PrAmANya vAdam" under the great "Swachchandham SwAmi", an

authority in "NyAya SAstra" and came out in flying colors in the very

first attempt at the Colleges at PudukkoTTai and Tiruvananthapuram.

 

He did kAlakshEpams in Ubhaya VedAntham and Bhara-samarpaNam at the

feet of the great AchArya known as "GaruDapuram SwAmi". He worked as

the Head of Department of NyAya at TiruvaiyAru College..

 

He was honored with several titles like "NyAyavisishTAdvaita

SirOmaNi", "Tharka Rathnam" (AyOdhya Sabha), "NyAya VedAnta kEsari"

(Tirupathi Sabha), and "Desika Darsana RatnAkaram" (Madurai Sabha).

His works:

1. NyAya Parisuddhi VivaraNam

2. VyAkhyAtraya ParitrANam

3. GitA VyAkhyAnam

4. JitantA VyAkhyAnam

5. SampraDaya SudhA

6. RakshA Vimarsam

7. PoorvAchArya Darsanam

8. TirumaDal VivaraNam

9. Essays in bot languages (Sanskrit and Tamil) running to thousands

of pages

10. Several poems on SampradAya ( Not come out in print)

===============================================================

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...