Srimathe Ramanujaya Namah

[Guest guest]

Dear All,

 

I am one of the silent observers of this group. I re-located from

the US to London an year back. Can any one guide me if we have any

Srivaishnava activities in and around London?

 

Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,

Balaji Anbil.

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Balaji Anbil,

 

I am not aware of any Shri Vaishnava groups or organisations in

London, but there is a Mahalakshmi temple in East Ham (which you may

have already come across) at which worship is conducted according to

Paancharaatra aagama - the main sannidhi is Balaji and Padmavathi,

although there are small sannidhis for Ganapathy and other deities as

well. Both Sri Vaishnava and Smaarta/Iyer priests serve there, I

think.

 

I have only been once myself as it's a little far from where I

live (south west London, near Wimbledon) and was in India over the

new year so I'm not aware if they had any big programme for Maargazhi

maasam - I don't think many of the locals are Shri Vaishnavas.

 

I think it's unlikely you'll find a "Vishnu-only" temple in the

UK (apart from ISKCON temples) - but I could be wrong. However, the

sizeable Sri Lankan Tamil community in many parts of London have

retained their Shaiva temple culture to a relatively high degree and

have constructed many 'south-indian' style temples, if you were

interested in seeing them for interest. Many have a sannidhi for

Lakshmi/Naaraayana as well.

 

If you have time to go a little north then there's the Tividale

Tirupati Balaji temple near Birmingham (which is presumably

Vaikhanasa), which I understand is still under construction. Hope

that helps. Any other members in London/UK who have more info?

Sorry if this was information you already knew!

 

best wishes,

 

Ranjan

 

, "Balaji Anbil" <baji20@h...>

wrote:

>

>

> Dear All,

>

> I am one of the silent observers of this group. I re-located from

> the US to London an year back. Can any one guide me if we have any

> Srivaishnava activities in and around London?

>

> Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,

> Balaji Anbil.

[Guest guest]

, "rvv21" <ranjanvv@h...> wrote:

>> I think it's unlikely you'll find a "Vishnu-only" temple in

the > UK (apart from ISKCON temples) - but I could be wrong.

However, the > sizeable Sri Lankan Tamil community in many parts of

London have > retained their Shaiva temple culture to a relatively

high degree and > have constructed many 'south-indian' style temples,

if you were > interested in seeing them for interest. Many have a

sannidhi for > Lakshmi/Naaraayana as well.

 

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

Dear members,

 

This is a very interesting thread of discussion and I like your

exchanges.

 

One of the odd things I have noticed about Hindu temples abroad is

this: they are designed to accommodate and built to serve the

sentiments of all denominations of Hindu religous society. Such

design and architecture is no doubt well-intentioned but the results

are sometimes a mixed bag.

 

I toured parts of USA East Coast last year. My host was kind enough

to take me to a very beautiful temple in Maryland. It was called

Shiva-Vishnu temple but inside I was surprised to see many more

special "sannidhi-s" (shrines or sanctums) for a number of other

deities in the Hindu pantheon -- Ganesha, Murugua, AmbAL, AyyappA,

Venkateshwara, Krishna... I saw devotees come in throngs and each

proceeded straight to that shrine he or she wanted to particularly

worship. Thereafter he or she spent a few moments at other shrines

before exiting. I couldn't help thinking it all vaguely resembled the

modern and convenient "multi-cuisine cafeteria" concept applied to

temple architecture i.e. you come shuffling in a long queue with a

plate in hand, go slowly around the table and help yourself

generously to the dish you particularly like, and just a little bit

of everthing else in the spread.

 

Don't get me wrong. It's not that I want to be critical of "Shiva-

Vishnu" temples, I hasten to add. Who knows, perhaps the "Agama

sAstras" themselves do, in fact, permit such "cafeteria" design of

temples. But I must say this: I cannot help sometimes wondering if

the presence of more than one Deity within a temple-precinct does not

go against the essentially monotheistic grain of Hindu religious

thought and practice. My own personal experience is that when I am in

the presence of the main Deity inside a temple I'd rather fully

concentrate on worshipping that one Divine Entity alone. But instead,

I often find that, at the back of my mind somewhere, I'm being

distracted by the anxious thought of having to rush for "darshan" to

the "next crowded counter" -- viz. other satellite shrines

or "sannidhi-s". The result is that a temple visit, far from

affording one an opportunity for experiencing a certain sense of

abiding One-ness with God, leaves the devotee with a strange feeling,

instead, he's just concluded a long and hectic series of business

appointments.

 

Let me confess to one more thing. I always come away from a temple

feeling a little guilty and disappointed if, after I've had "darshan"

of the main Deity first, for some reason or other, I've been unable

to offer worship at subsidiary "sannidhi-s". I've never relished such

a feeling. It has always robbed the first experience a little of its

joy.

 

An exclusively Vishnu temple (with His other divine forms serving

perhaps as smaller satellite "sannidhi-s") seems to me OK. An

exclusive Shiva temple too seems OK. An exclusive Devi or AmbAl

temple is OK too. But a "Shiva-Vishnu temple", and many of similarly

newly-built, multi-themed, composite "designer temples" (in India and

abroad we come across these days) -- they all seem to me to be

somehow straying far from the central monotheism of that very Faith

they are actually meant to reflect and enshrine.

 

What do members think? I'd like to hear your learned comments.

 

respectfully,

dAsan,

Sudarshan

[Guest guest]

 SRIMATE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA

According to agama shastras ,you can have shrines of parivara devatas of the

main deity.Shiva cannot be parivara devata of

Vishnu.Garuda,Vishvaksena,Dhanvantri,Chakratalvar,Hanuman are the parivara of

Vishnu.Similarly other deities have their own parivara devatas.Hence it is

totally against the agama shatras to have multiplex form of temples.It is a

sorry state.This is done please everybody at the cost of agama praamaniam.

dasan

 

 

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 Sudarshan K Madabushi wrote :

>

>

>

>, "rvv21" <ranjanvv@h...> wrote:

> >> I think it's unlikely you'll find a "Vishnu-only" temple in

>the > UK (apart from ISKCON temples) - but I could be wrong.

>However, the > sizeable Sri Lankan Tamil community in many parts of

>London have > retained their Shaiva temple culture to a relatively

>high degree and > have constructed many 'south-indian' style temples,

>if you were > interested in seeing them for interest. Many have a

>sannidhi for > Lakshmi/Naaraayana as well.

>

> ****************

>Dear members,

>

>This is a very interesting thread of discussion and I like your

>exchanges.

>

>One of the odd things I have noticed about Hindu temples abroad is

>this: they are designed to accommodate and built to serve the

>sentiments of all denominations of Hindu religous society. Such

>design and architecture is no doubt well-intentioned but the results

>are sometimes a mixed bag.

>

>I toured parts of USA East Coast last year. My host was kind enough

>to take me to a very beautiful temple in Maryland. It was called

>Shiva-Vishnu temple but inside I was surprised to see many more

>special "sannidhi-s" (shrines or sanctums) for a number of other

>deities in the Hindu pantheon -- Ganesha, Murugua, AmbAL, AyyappA,

>Venkateshwara, Krishna... I saw devotees come in throngs and each

>proceeded straight to that shrine he or she wanted to particularly

>worship. Thereafter he or she spent a few moments at other shrines

>before exiting. I couldn't help thinking it all vaguely resembled the

>modern and convenient "multi-cuisine cafeteria" concept applied to

>temple architecture i.e. you come shuffling in a long queue with a

>plate in hand, go slowly around the table and help yourself

>generously to the dish you particularly like, and just a little bit

>of everthing else in the spread.

>

>Don't get me wrong. It's not that I want to be critical of "Shiva-

>Vishnu" temples, I hasten to add. Who knows, perhaps the "Agama

>sAstras" themselves do, in fact, permit such "cafeteria" design of

>temples. But I must say this: I cannot help sometimes wondering if

>the presence of more than one Deity within a temple-precinct does not

>go against the essentially monotheistic grain of Hindu religious

>thought and practice. My own personal experience is that when I am in

>the presence of the main Deity inside a temple I'd rather fully

>concentrate on worshipping that one Divine Entity alone. But instead,

>I often find that, at the back of my mind somewhere, I'm being

>distracted by the anxious thought of having to rush for "darshan" to

>the "next crowded counter" -- viz. other satellite shrines

>or "sannidhi-s". The result is that a temple visit, far from

>affording one an opportunity for experiencing a certain sense of

>abiding One-ness with God, leaves the devotee with a strange feeling,

>instead, he's just concluded a long and hectic series of business

>appointments.

>

>Let me confess to one more thing. I always come away from a temple

>feeling a little guilty and disappointed if, after I've had "darshan"

>of the main Deity first, for some reason or other, I've been unable

>to offer worship at subsidiary "sannidhi-s". I've never relished such

>a feeling. It has always robbed the first experience a little of its

>joy.

>

>An exclusively Vishnu temple (with His other divine forms serving

>perhaps as smaller satellite "sannidhi-s") seems to me OK. An

>exclusive Shiva temple too seems OK. An exclusive Devi or AmbAl

>temple is OK too. But a "Shiva-Vishnu temple", and many of similarly

>newly-built, multi-themed, composite "designer temples" (in India and

>abroad we come across these days) -- they all seem to me to be

>somehow straying far from the central monotheism of that very Faith

>they are actually meant to reflect and enshrine.

>

>What do members think? I'd like to hear your learned comments.

>

>respectfully,

>dAsan,

>Sudarshan

>

>

>

>

>

>

Links

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Representationally Hinduism is polytheistic; with this state of

affairs it is hard to see that Hinduism is monotheistic. Also the

modern Hindu communities developing the in the alien land cannot

afford to have a specific deity in every street corner. Thus we have

all different facets of the One God concentrated in one Super temple

in each major city these days. If only we could teach people that

there is only One God living as the antharyAmi despite all the

outward differences, we would have successfully portrayed the true

aspects of the upanishadic truths. But the practical situation is

quite different! The wishes of the people as well as the Agamas have

complicated the matter way too much. Probably we can choose to a

different sannidhi each time we visit the temple, and experience the

anubavam of the Lord in the specific at the specific visit. When the

gyana matures, we can all the One God through the Vishnu tatvam.

 

dAsan

Rajan

 

, "Sudarshan K Madabushi"

<mksudarshan2002> wrote:

>

>

> , "rvv21" <ranjanvv@h...> wrote:

> >> I think it's unlikely you'll find a "Vishnu-only" temple

in

> the > UK (apart from ISKCON temples) - but I could be wrong.

> However, the > sizeable Sri Lankan Tamil community in many parts

of

> London have > retained their Shaiva temple culture to a relatively

> high degree and > have constructed many 'south-indian' style

temples,

> if you were > interested in seeing them for interest. Many have a

> sannidhi for > Lakshmi/Naaraayana as well.

>

> ****************

> Dear members,

>

> This is a very interesting thread of discussion and I like your

> exchanges.

>

> One of the odd things I have noticed about Hindu temples abroad is

> this: they are designed to accommodate and built to serve the

> sentiments of all denominations of Hindu religous society. Such

> design and architecture is no doubt well-intentioned but the

results

> are sometimes a mixed bag.

>

> I toured parts of USA East Coast last year. My host was kind

enough

> to take me to a very beautiful temple in Maryland. It was called

> Shiva-Vishnu temple but inside I was surprised to see many more

> special "sannidhi-s" (shrines or sanctums) for a number of other

> deities in the Hindu pantheon -- Ganesha, Murugua, AmbAL, AyyappA,

> Venkateshwara, Krishna... I saw devotees come in throngs and each

> proceeded straight to that shrine he or she wanted to particularly

> worship. Thereafter he or she spent a few moments at other shrines

> before exiting. I couldn't help thinking it all vaguely resembled

the

> modern and convenient "multi-cuisine cafeteria" concept applied to

> temple architecture i.e. you come shuffling in a long queue with a

> plate in hand, go slowly around the table and help yourself

> generously to the dish you particularly like, and just a little

bit

> of everthing else in the spread.

>

> Don't get me wrong. It's not that I want to be critical of "Shiva-

> Vishnu" temples, I hasten to add. Who knows, perhaps the "Agama

> sAstras" themselves do, in fact, permit such "cafeteria" design of

> temples. But I must say this: I cannot help sometimes wondering if

> the presence of more than one Deity within a temple-precinct does

not

> go against the essentially monotheistic grain of Hindu religious

> thought and practice. My own personal experience is that when I am

in

> the presence of the main Deity inside a temple I'd rather fully

> concentrate on worshipping that one Divine Entity alone. But

instead,

> I often find that, at the back of my mind somewhere, I'm being

> distracted by the anxious thought of having to rush for "darshan"

to

> the "next crowded counter" -- viz. other satellite shrines

> or "sannidhi-s". The result is that a temple visit, far from

> affording one an opportunity for experiencing a certain sense of

> abiding One-ness with God, leaves the devotee with a strange

feeling,

> instead, he's just concluded a long and hectic series of business

> appointments.

>

> Let me confess to one more thing. I always come away from a temple

> feeling a little guilty and disappointed if, after I've

had "darshan"

> of the main Deity first, for some reason or other, I've been

unable

> to offer worship at subsidiary "sannidhi-s". I've never relished

such

> a feeling. It has always robbed the first experience a little of

its

> joy.

>

> An exclusively Vishnu temple (with His other divine forms serving

> perhaps as smaller satellite "sannidhi-s") seems to me OK. An

> exclusive Shiva temple too seems OK. An exclusive Devi or AmbAl

> temple is OK too. But a "Shiva-Vishnu temple", and many of

similarly

> newly-built, multi-themed, composite "designer temples" (in India

and

> abroad we come across these days) -- they all seem to me to be

> somehow straying far from the central monotheism of that very

Faith

> they are actually meant to reflect and enshrine.

>

> What do members think? I'd like to hear your learned comments.

>

> respectfully,

> dAsan,

> Sudarshan

[Guest guest]

 Dear Swami,

The agamas have not overcomplicated the matter but we have oversimplified the

matter.Our acaryas hold the worship of SAAKSHAT BHAGAVAN superior to that of

antaryami aspect of HIM.

dasan

 

 

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 rtvrajan wrote :

>

>

>

>

>Representationally Hinduism is polytheistic; with this state of

>affairs it is hard to see that Hinduism is monotheistic. Also the

>modern Hindu communities developing the in the alien land cannot

>afford to have a specific deity in every street corner. Thus we have

>all different facets of the One God concentrated in one Super temple

>in each major city these days. If only we could teach people that

>there is only One God living as the antharyAmi despite all the

>outward differences, we would have successfully portrayed the true

>aspects of the upanishadic truths. But the practical situation is

>quite different! The wishes of the people as well as the Agamas have

>complicated the matter way too much. Probably we can choose to a

>different sannidhi each time we visit the temple, and experience the

>anubavam of the Lord in the specific at the specific visit. When the

>gyana matures, we can all the One God through the Vishnu tatvam.

>

>dAsan

>Rajan

>

>, "Sudarshan K Madabushi"

><mksudarshan2002> wrote:

> >

> >

> > , "rvv21" <ranjanvv@h...> wrote:

> > >> I think it's unlikely you'll find a "Vishnu-only" temple

>in

> > the > UK (apart from ISKCON temples) - but I could be wrong.

> > However, the > sizeable Sri Lankan Tamil community in many parts

>of

> > London have > retained their Shaiva temple culture to a relatively

> > high degree and > have constructed many 'south-indian' style

>temples,

> > if you were > interested in seeing them for interest. Many have a

> > sannidhi for > Lakshmi/Naaraayana as well.

> >

> > ****************

> > Dear members,

> >

> > This is a very interesting thread of discussion and I like your

> > exchanges.

> >

> > One of the odd things I have noticed about Hindu temples abroad is

> > this: they are designed to accommodate and built to serve the

> > sentiments of all denominations of Hindu religous society. Such

> > design and architecture is no doubt well-intentioned but the

>results

> > are sometimes a mixed bag.

> >

> > I toured parts of USA East Coast last year. My host was kind

>enough

> > to take me to a very beautiful temple in Maryland. It was called

> > Shiva-Vishnu temple but inside I was surprised to see many more

> > special "sannidhi-s" (shrines or sanctums) for a number of other

> > deities in the Hindu pantheon -- Ganesha, Murugua, AmbAL, AyyappA,

> > Venkateshwara, Krishna... I saw devotees come in throngs and each

> > proceeded straight to that shrine he or she wanted to particularly

> > worship. Thereafter he or she spent a few moments at other shrines

> > before exiting. I couldn't help thinking it all vaguely resembled

>the

> > modern and convenient "multi-cuisine cafeteria" concept applied to

> > temple architecture i.e. you come shuffling in a long queue with a

> > plate in hand, go slowly around the table and help yourself

> > generously to the dish you particularly like, and just a little

>bit

> > of everthing else in the spread.

> >

> > Don't get me wrong. It's not that I want to be critical of "Shiva-

> > Vishnu" temples, I hasten to add. Who knows, perhaps the "Agama

> > sAstras" themselves do, in fact, permit such "cafeteria" design of

> > temples. But I must say this: I cannot help sometimes wondering if

> > the presence of more than one Deity within a temple-precinct does

>not

> > go against the essentially monotheistic grain of Hindu religious

> > thought and practice. My own personal experience is that when I am

>in

> > the presence of the main Deity inside a temple I'd rather fully

> > concentrate on worshipping that one Divine Entity alone. But

>instead,

> > I often find that, at the back of my mind somewhere, I'm being

> > distracted by the anxious thought of having to rush for "darshan"

>to

> > the "next crowded counter" -- viz. other satellite shrines

> > or "sannidhi-s". The result is that a temple visit, far from

> > affording one an opportunity for experiencing a certain sense of

> > abiding One-ness with God, leaves the devotee with a strange

>feeling,

> > instead, he's just concluded a long and hectic series of business

> > appointments.

> >

> > Let me confess to one more thing. I always come away from a temple

> > feeling a little guilty and disappointed if, after I've

>had "darshan"

> > of the main Deity first, for some reason or other, I've been

>unable

> > to offer worship at subsidiary "sannidhi-s". I've never relished

>such

> > a feeling. It has always robbed the first experience a little of

>its

> > joy.

> >

> > An exclusively Vishnu temple (with His other divine forms serving

> > perhaps as smaller satellite "sannidhi-s") seems to me OK. An

> > exclusive Shiva temple too seems OK. An exclusive Devi or AmbAl

> > temple is OK too. But a "Shiva-Vishnu temple", and many of

>similarly

> > newly-built, multi-themed, composite "designer temples" (in India

>and

> > abroad we come across these days) -- they all seem to me to be

> > somehow straying far from the central monotheism of that very

>Faith

> > they are actually meant to reflect and enshrine.

> >

> > What do members think? I'd like to hear your learned comments.

> >

> > respectfully,

> > dAsan,

> > Sudarshan

>

>

>

>

Links

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hello Everybody,

I would like to point out, that, the kovil at Sri

Rangam has umpteen number of Sannadis. Maybe, they are

all pareevara gods... but, the fact is that there are

many sannadis in the Sri Rangam kovil.

 

Also, we must finally remember, that we might sit down

and pray in front of any deity, but the truth of the

matter lies in realising the Nirguna Brahman. " To

worship a symbol as God is idolatory. But to worship

God through a symbol is a legitimate means of divine

communion ( extract from 'The Upanishads' )."

 

What we see and understand is the Saguna Brahman. For

putting bounds and giving characteristics to nirguna

brahman produces saguna brahman. If one can concentrate

totally upon only deity at one sannadi, then i guess,

we are on our way to realising the ultimate Brahman.

 

 

 

--

Best regards,

Arvind arvind

[Guest guest]

Om namo narayanaya.

 

 

It is very surprising. We as vaishnavaites, believe

the omnipresence of Srimannaaraayana. When souls

have Him as antaryami, why are we developing such a

strong reservation towards Shiva? Many of our close

relatives are following the so called Babas and have

live portraits of these Babas with very grand garlands

in their pooja rooms. When the whole world is going

towards one village and we are facing a threat to

hinduism let us promote a liberal view of agama and a

liberal mosaic of hinduism.

Let us see the current topic.

I completely disagree with the argument that Agamas

have complicated the issue. Agamas are not to

complicate but only to have a system where people can

be provided a better way of worship. We are not

understanding ( in fact not trying to understand) the

Agamas. Agamas are not against having murthis of

shiva and related devatas in the temple of Vishnu.

In Saptapraakaara system, we can see other dieties

also.

 

MARICHI’S VIMANARCHANA KALPA

Here are the parishaddevatas( non vaishnavaite) in a

vishnu temple in seven prakaaras.

Dvitiyaavarana: shiva

Triitiyaavarana: Ishana, Gangadhara

Chaturthavaranam: Shiva, Bhutanayaka, subrahmanya

Panchamavarana: Sapta maatrukas, sapta rohinis, Sata

Rudras, Ekadasa Rudras,

Saptamavaranam: Rudra and Rudranuja

 

VAASTU VIDYA MAHODADHI

Garuda, Vishvaksena, Akrura, Bali, Naarada,

Kshetrapaala, Shiva, Brahma, Mukunda, Gadaadhara,

Prahlaada, Aanjaneya, Shounaka, Vibhishana, Shuka,

Arjuna, Paraasara, Seshaa are vishnu parivara.

 

You can even look into MAYAMATA

 

We are not to develop a liberal view of agama or

hinduism but the hinduism itself is the most liberal

religion. Let us not compartmentalise a system which

is a very liberal concept and because of the

liberalism, hinduism has still remained as the oldest

living religion. Let us not do any harm to hinduism

and instead bring all people in one stream

 

 

 

--- Vasan Sriranga Chari

<vasan_chari_hk wrote:

 

>

> SRIMATE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA

> According to agama shastras ,you can have shrines of

> parivara devatas of the main deity.Shiva cannot be

> parivara devata of

>

Vishnu.Garuda,Vishvaksena,Dhanvantri,Chakratalvar,Hanuman

> are the parivara of Vishnu.Similarly other deities

> have their own parivara devatas.Hence it is totally

> against the agama shatras to have multiplex form of

> temples.It is a sorry state.This is done please

> everybody at the cost of agama praamaniam.

> dasan

>

>

> On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 Sudarshan K Madabushi wrote :

> >

> >

> >

> >, "rvv21"

> <ranjanvv@h...> wrote:

> > >> I think it's unlikely you'll find a

> "Vishnu-only" temple in

> >the > UK (apart from ISKCON temples) - but I could

> be wrong.

> >However, the > sizeable Sri Lankan Tamil community

> in many parts of

> >London have > retained their Shaiva temple culture

> to a relatively

> >high degree and > have constructed many

> 'south-indian' style temples,

> >if you were > interested in seeing them for

> interest. Many have a

> >sannidhi for > Lakshmi/Naaraayana as well.

> >

> > ****************

> >Dear members,

> >

> >This is a very interesting thread of discussion and

> I like your

> >exchanges.

> >

> >One of the odd things I have noticed about Hindu

> temples abroad is

> >this: they are designed to accommodate and built to

> serve the

> >sentiments of all denominations of Hindu religous

> society. Such

> >design and architecture is no doubt

> well-intentioned but the results

> >are sometimes a mixed bag.

> >

> >I toured parts of USA East Coast last year. My host

> was kind enough

> >to take me to a very beautiful temple in Maryland.

> It was called

> >Shiva-Vishnu temple but inside I was surprised to

> see many more

> >special "sannidhi-s" (shrines or sanctums) for a

> number of other

> >deities in the Hindu pantheon -- Ganesha, Murugua,

> AmbAL, AyyappA,

> >Venkateshwara, Krishna... I saw devotees come in

> throngs and each

> >proceeded straight to that shrine he or she wanted

> to particularly

> >worship. Thereafter he or she spent a few moments

> at other shrines

> >before exiting. I couldn't help thinking it all

> vaguely resembled the

> >modern and convenient "multi-cuisine cafeteria"

> concept applied to

> >temple architecture i.e. you come shuffling in a

> long queue with a

> >plate in hand, go slowly around the table and help

> yourself

> >generously to the dish you particularly like, and

> just a little bit

> >of everthing else in the spread.

> >

> >Don't get me wrong. It's not that I want to be

> critical of "Shiva-

> >Vishnu" temples, I hasten to add. Who knows,

> perhaps the "Agama

> >sAstras" themselves do, in fact, permit such

> "cafeteria" design of

> >temples. But I must say this: I cannot help

> sometimes wondering if

> >the presence of more than one Deity within a

> temple-precinct does not

> >go against the essentially monotheistic grain of

> Hindu religious

> >thought and practice. My own personal experience is

> that when I am in

> >the presence of the main Deity inside a temple I'd

> rather fully

> >concentrate on worshipping that one Divine Entity

> alone. But instead,

> >I often find that, at the back of my mind

> somewhere, I'm being

> >distracted by the anxious thought of having to rush

> for "darshan" to

> >the "next crowded counter" -- viz. other satellite

> shrines

> >or "sannidhi-s". The result is that a temple visit,

> far from

> >affording one an opportunity for experiencing a

> certain sense of

> >abiding One-ness with God, leaves the devotee with

> a strange feeling,

> >instead, he's just concluded a long and hectic

> series of business

> >appointments.

> >

> >Let me confess to one more thing. I always come

> away from a temple

> >feeling a little guilty and disappointed if, after

> I've had "darshan"

> >of the main Deity first, for some reason or other,

> I've been unable

> >to offer worship at subsidiary "sannidhi-s". I've

> never relished such

> >a feeling. It has always robbed the first

> experience a little of its

> >joy.

> >

> >An exclusively Vishnu temple (with His other divine

> forms serving

> >perhaps as smaller satellite "sannidhi-s") seems to

> me OK. An

> >exclusive Shiva temple too seems OK. An exclusive

> Devi or AmbAl

> >temple is OK too. But a "Shiva-Vishnu temple", and

> many of similarly

> >newly-built, multi-themed, composite "designer

> temples" (in India and

> >abroad we come across these days) -- they all seem

> to me to be

> >somehow straying far from the central monotheism of

> that very Faith

> >they are actually meant to reflect and enshrine.

> >

> >What do members think? I'd like to hear your

> learned comments.

> >

> >respectfully,

> >dAsan,

> >Sudarshan

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Links

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been

> removed]

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

=====

 

Deekshith Parasaram PhD

Hindu Temple and Cultural Center.

3818, 212 st SE Bothell wa

ph. 425-482-9426

-

 

 

 

 

 

The all-new My - What will yours do?

 

[Guest guest]

Dear all,

 

Perhaps the question 'can an anya devata shrine be

constructed in a Vishnu temple according to the aagamas' is subtly

different to the question of 'what is the best option for temple

construction in mixed-sampradaaya communities, such as those in the

west'.

 

It shouldn't be forgotten that the Shrivaishnava communities

in India (and to a lesser extent the US, I'm guessing?) are often

lucky to be of sufficient size such that they can organise

their 'satsang' and maintain a degree of authenticity in the

preservation of their philosophy. I can say from experience in the

UK, for example, that not all of us are so lucky.

 

The Shrivaishnava population here is very small - and

most of those that are here have probably become philosophically

aligned to the 'Advaita-lite' that most westerners would associate

with Hinduism and see Vaishnava/Shaiva/Smaarta distinctions

as 'divisive' or 'obsolete' etc. In fact even some Iyengars in

India these days do not know that they are affiliated to

Shrivaishnavism!! With this in mind, it should not come as a

surprise that in a country like the UK, the philosophy will tend to

be even more diluted. This is certainly a shame, but in this

situation what are the observant Shrivaishnavas to do? Close

themselves off from everybody else? One should be aware that this

will seem like 'Hindus discriminating against Hindus' to the local

folk, which may give people a negative perception of our

sampradaayam - that's surely not a good thing.

 

So perhaps for those of us who do call ourselves

specifically 'Srivaishnava', the best option available is to try and

be true to our principles/traditions within ourselves, while trying

to engage with those of other sampradaayas/religions in some

constructive way. If the only temple in the area is a Shiva temple

with a Vishnu shrine at the side, perhaps we need to try and search

for those noble aspects of Shaivism that echo our Shrivaishnava

belief system? I don't know - of course this may be against our

shaastras and aagamas - but isn't interaction the only way that

people will learn about each others' cultures?

 

For example, when I mentioned the Vishnu shrines in Shaiva

Siddhaanta temples earlier, I was not necessarily saying that a

Srivaishnava has to go and pray there - but perhaps, it is possible

to walk into one without thinking "oh no, I am in an anya-devata

shrine where worship is carried out against our aagamic principles" -

and perhaps it is more constructive to think "look - they also recite

the Vedic hymns to Vishnu, they also offer the various upaachaaras

with devotion, etc. - that's something at least".

 

Another issue is what type of community you are serving - if

you build a Hindu temple in a UK city (or anywhere for that matter),

you need to demonstrate that you are serving the religious needs of

the local Hindu community. One may suggest that "this is no excuse

to violate the injunctions of the aagamas and build a Ganapati

sannidhi in a Paancharaatra temple". Perhaps not. But if, in

a particular city, you can count the number of people following a

particular aagamic tradition on one hand, then it is obvious that

such a temple would not be viewed as "serving the community's

religious needs". OK, so arguably the purpose of a temple is to

serve God rather than the other way round, but let's be realistic.

Without patrons, how will the service be funded? While the 'multi-

cuisine cafeteria' mentality is no doubt an important factor, as Sri

Sudarshan put it, I would suggest that this isn't the whole story -

these temples are also a genuine attempt to keep *some* form of Vedic

practice alive, in countries where by rights, it probably shouldn't

stand a chance of surviving in the first place. Then there is the

interesting question of: given the choice between an 'anya-devata'

temple/'diluted Vishnu temple' and no temple at all, which is

better? I haven't decided myself :-)

 

My point basically, is that while the aagamas and shaastras

may be very clear on the issue, it is not always as simple to follow

them in all social backdrops - and would just ask for a little

understanding from the more faithful followers our tradition

elsewhere - we are trying our best out here! :-) I was once talking

to Sri Shaunaka Rishi Das, head of the Oxford Centre of Hindu

studies, himself a staunch Gaudiya Vaishnava. His background is

Irish, where many will know that sectarian violence between Catholics

and Protestants has ripped apart the nation in recent history. On

the issues of engaging with other sampradaayas and paying homage to

anya-devatas in a Vaishnava context, he said it far better than I

could - 'In Northern Ireland, if you weren't prepared to engage with

people of other religions, you'd get shot' (paraphrased). Ok so this

may not be an immediate danger with Hindus, but it's something to

think about nevertheless :-)

 

Sorry for this long posting and hope no offence was caused (none was

intented of course)!

 

best wishes

Ranjan