non Sri vaishNava hymns

November 20, 2005

SrI:

SrImatE rAmAnujAya nama:

SrI lakshmI narasimha parabrahmaNE nama:

dear vaishNavas,

Respect others, worship yours.

This is a simple suggestion with its meaning being

very deep.

SrI AchArya’s instruction can be analyzed as

Respect all other’s even if it is unacceptable to you,

as it is other’s; but nevertheless worship yours only.

-> ‘Tolerate’ others in all circumstances even if

theirs is against yours; but nevertheless continue to

worship yours only.

And this simple instruction also suggests us not to

accept other’s simply because you have to respect

others; but ‘practice yours ONLY’.

However, most people take it as accepting other’s

views for us to respect theirs. In reality, we can

respect other’s views without accepting them. A Hindu

can respect a Christian without accepting

Christianity. A Christian can respect a Muslim without

accepting qurAn. There is no necessity for people to

accept other’s views to respect their views. So is the

case within the beliefs within Hindus.

We can respect shankara AchArya followers without

accepting advaita. Respect is two fold, one being mere

diplomacy wherein one has to just follow some

protocols to exhibit it; in the latter, one has to

exhibit a genuine respect for the fellow person deep

in the heart. As we all know, vaishnavism is all about

being devoid of duplicity, we do respect people coming

from all religions and beliefs to the core of our

hearts; but we do not accept their philosophies unless

they are in line with Emperumanar’s. And if we have

problem with this, we have to check if we are truly

believing in Yati rAja.

Here our context is to read the slokas written by non

SrI- Vaishnavas. Our context is also to check the

anology shown between established hymns(with

non-sAmpradAyic commentaries) and the non-sAmpradAyic

slokas.

1. ‘SrI vishNu sahasranAmam has even non SrI

vaishNavic commentaries, but for that reason, we are

not discarding it’:::: So there is no harm in reading

to the slokas of AchAryas of other sAmpradAyams.

This argument appears to be substance-less in light of

the author of this hymn being Sri vEda vyAsa Himself.

‘vyAsAya vishNu rUpAya. vyAsa rUpAya vishNavE’. SrI

vyAsa dEva Himself has written Lord vishNu’s 1000

names, for which some people have given explanation

which is not sAmpradAyic. This is akin to, ‘if some

one attempts to give an advaitic commentary to AchArya

rAmAnuja’s gadya trayam, we cannot reject gadya trayam

as advaitic’. Some times, some of the Sri vaishNava

scriptures are commented by non sAmpradAyic people,

but their commentaries are invalid, and for that

account only our AchAryas have given us correct

commentaries, discarding the wrong ones. If the person

who attempted to give wrong interpretation of

rAmAnuja’s gadya trayam has also written another set

of slokas, we cannot argue that because we cannot

reject gadya trayam, we cannot reject this new set of

slokas also. This person’s wrong connection to

rAmAnuja doesnot approve his other works, because his

connection with the rAmAnuja’s work itself is invalid.

>From this we can safely conclude that, if some one

composes a work not in line with emperumanar, all his

other works lose their ground to be acceptable to a

sri vaishNava. Nevertheless, SrI vaishNavas respect

all others; although worship theirs own. Please do not

promote non vaishnavism and duplicity. Respecting

others doesnot mean accepting others and following

them.

Then the question remains, ‘ why do we want to chant

the slokas written by non sri vaishnavas? Are there no

sufficient works of Sri vaishNava Acharyas that we

have to resort to other sAmpradAyas????????’

If we mean to chant the slokas to praise SrImAn

nArAyaNa, it is best for us to learn the meanings of

the slokas, because praising SrImAn nArAyaNa cannot be

mere ritualistic. When one doesnot have the

possibility to learn the meanings of the slokas, then

it is atleast better to chant them; in that case, one

should strictly take the hymns written by SrI

vaishNava AchAryas if one truly believes in

sAmpradAya. This is called pAti vratya (chastity

towards the Master). Let us promote the works of SrI

AchAryas who are infinitely compassionate and are

sacrificing everything for the welfare of badha jivAs

(conditioned beings). We do have innumerable hymns

from our pUrva AchAryas. Please, let us not go out of

sAmprAdaya fold and be disloyal to our AchArya

parampara. Please do not promote wrong meanings to

secularism. Secularism means ‘Respect others, worship

yours’.

dAsOham,

SrIperumbUdUru vEnkaTa vinOd.

November 20, 2005

teachings of Ramanuja and other archaryas in the parampara are a true and

complete broadcast of the Vedas...However to respond fully to your question i

would ask if the context of my original post is taken into consideration. I am

a British born Gujarati, i have very basic knowledge of Hindi and Gujarati let

alone Tamil and Sanskrit which are the two main languages Srivaishnava hyms

have been composed in. Due to my knowledge of Hindi/Gujarati i am able to

recite Sanskrit hyms but with great difficulty. Therefore i feel the need to

recite bhajans and Keertans in Hindi and Gujarati (such as tulasidas and

Narsihn mehta).. Another point i must make is that here in the Britian there

very few Srivaishanavas, so even though i follow Ramanuja Sidhanta, ISKCON

which is more larger remains a major part in developing my bhakthi. Due to

fewer language barriers i

find the ISKCON keertans easier to sing and have expreinced great joy and Hari

bhakthi whilst doing so. Again thanks for all your kind replies Jai Sri

Krishna. vinod sv <winode_sv (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote: SrI:SrImatE rAmAnujAya

nama:SrI lakshmI narasimha parabrahmaNE nama:dear vaishNavas,Respect others,

worship yours.This is a simple suggestion with its meaning beingvery deep. SrI

AchArya’s instruction can be analyzed asRespect all other’s even if it is

unacceptable to you,as it is other’s; but nevertheless worship yours only.->

‘Tolerate’ others in all circumstances even iftheirs is against yours; but

nevertheless continue toworship yours only.And this simple instruction also

suggests

us not toaccept other’s simply because you have to respectothers; but ‘practice

yours ONLY’. However, most people take it as accepting other’sviews for us to

respect theirs. In reality, we canrespect other’s views without accepting them.

A Hinducan respect a Christian without acceptingChristianity. A Christian can

respect a Muslim withoutaccepting qurAn. There is no necessity for people

toaccept other’s views to respect their views. So is thecase within the beliefs

within Hindus.We can respect shankara AchArya followers withoutaccepting

advaita. Respect is two fold, one being merediplomacy wherein one has to just

follow someprotocols to exhibit it; in the latter, one has toexhibit a genuine

respect for the fellow person deepin the heart. As we all know, vaishnavism is

all aboutbeing devoid of duplicity, we do respect people comingfrom all

religions and beliefs to the core of ourhearts; but we do not

accept their philosophies unlessthey are in line with Emperumanar’s. And if we

haveproblem with this, we have to check if we are trulybelieving in Yati

rAja.Here our context is to read the slokas written by nonSrI- Vaishnavas. Our

context is also to check theanology shown between established

hymns(withnon-sAmpradAyic commentaries) and the non-sAmpradAyicslokas.1.

‘SrI vishNu sahasranAmam has even non SrIvaishNavic commentaries, but for that

reason, we arenot discarding it’:::: So there is no harm in readingto the

slokas of AchAryas of other sAmpradAyams. This argument appears to be

substance-less in light ofthe author of this hymn being Sri vEda vyAsa

Himself.‘vyAsAya vishNu rUpAya. vyAsa rUpAya vishNavE’. SrIvyAsa dEva Himself

has written Lord vishNu’s 1000names, for which some people have given

explanationwhich is not sAmpradAyic. This is akin to, ‘if someone

attempts to give an advaitic commentary to AchAryarAmAnuja’s gadya trayam, we

cannot reject gadya trayamas advaitic’. Some times, some of the Sri

vaishNavascriptures are commented by non sAmpradAyic people,but their

commentaries are invalid, and for thataccount only our AchAryas have given us

correctcommentaries, discarding the wrong ones. If the personwho attempted to

give wrong interpretation ofrAmAnuja’s gadya trayam has also written another

setof slokas, we cannot argue that because we cannotreject gadya trayam, we

cannot reject this new set ofslokas also. This person’s wrong connection

torAmAnuja doesnot approve his other works, because hisconnection with the

rAmAnuja’s work itself is invalid.From this we can safely conclude that, if

some onecomposes a work not in line with emperumanar, all hisother works lose

their ground to be acceptable to asri vaishNava. Nevertheless, SrI vaishNavas

respectall

others; although worship theirs own. Please do notpromote non vaishnavism and

duplicity. Respectingothers doesnot mean accepting others and

followingthem.Then the question remains, ‘ why do we want to chantthe slokas

written by non sri vaishnavas? Are there nosufficient works of Sri vaishNava

Acharyas that wehave to resort to other sAmpradAyas????????’If we mean to chant

the slokas to praise SrImAnnArAyaNa, it is best for us to learn the meanings

ofthe slokas, because praising SrImAn nArAyaNa cannot bemere ritualistic. When

one doesnot have thepossibility to learn the meanings of the slokas, thenit is

atleast better to chant them; in that case, oneshould strictly take the hymns

written by SrIvaishNava AchAryas if one truly believes insAmpradAya. This is

called pAti vratya (chastitytowards the Master). Let us promote the works of

SrIAchAryas who are infinitely compassionate and aresacrificing

everything for the welfare of badha jivAs(conditioned beings). We do have

innumerable hymnsfrom our pUrva AchAryas. Please, let us not go out

ofsAmprAdaya fold and be disloyal to our AchAryaparampara. Please do not

promote wrong meanings tosecularism. Secularism means ‘Respect others,

worshipyours’.dAsOham,SrIperumbUdUru vEnkaTa vinOd.

Win a Vespa NEW - Cars has 3 Vespa LX125s to be won Enter Now!

November 20, 2005

Vedic scriptures give lots of enlightenment ."Aakshaat Patitum Toyam, Sagaram

Prati Gachchati"-All water (rains) from the sky join the Ocean.Srivaishnavism

is one arm of the Indian civilisation. Regards Ananthakrishnan Parthasarathy

short name: Ananthpritesh patel <tesh_tel (AT) (DOT) co.uk> wrote: Ja Shri Krishna,

i originaly stared this discusion. Firstly i would like to offer my Pranams and

thanks all the bhakthas who have kindly replied, you have all given very nice

replies which i am greatly satisfied with. However i would like to respond

to a comment made my Bhaktha Vinod who mentioned "Then the question remains, ‘

why do we want to chantthe slokas written by non sri vaishnavas? Are there

nosufficient works of Sri vaishNava Acharyas that wehave to resort to other

sAmpradAyas????????’ " In response to this comment i would firstly like to

say, yes the works of the Sri Vaishnava Achayaras are sufficient for spiritual

progress, if this was not the case i would not look to Sri Vaishanavam as a

bonofide path. I am in full conviction that the teachings of Ramanuja and

other archaryas in the parampara are a true and complete broadcast of the

Vedas...However to respond fully to your question i would ask if the context

of my original post is taken into consideration. I am a British born Gujarati,

i have very basic knowledge of Hindi and Gujarati let alone Tamil and Sanskrit

which are the two main languages Srivaishnava hyms have been composed in. Due

to my knowledge of Hindi/Gujarati i am

able to recite Sanskrit hyms but with great difficulty. Therefore i feel the

need to recite bhajans and Keertans in Hindi and Gujarati (such as tulasidas

and Narsihn mehta).. Another point i must make is that here in the Britian

there very few Srivaishanavas, so even though i follow Ramanuja Sidhanta,

ISKCON which is more larger remains a major part in developing my bhakthi. Due

to fewer language barriers i find the ISKCON keertans easier to sing and have

expreinced great joy and Hari bhakthi whilst doing so. Again thanks for all

your kind replies Jai Sri Krishna. vinod sv <winode_sv (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote:

SrI:SrImatE rAmAnujAya nama:SrI lakshmI narasimha parabrahmaNE

nama:dear vaishNavas,Respect others, worship yours.This is a simple suggestion

with its meaning beingvery deep. SrI AchArya’s instruction can be analyzed

asRespect all other’s even if it is unacceptable to you,as it is other’s; but

nevertheless worship yours only.-> ‘Tolerate’ others in all circumstances even

iftheirs is against yours; but nevertheless continue toworship yours only.And

this simple instruction also suggests us not toaccept other’s simply because

you have to respectothers; but ‘practice yours ONLY’. However, most people take

it as accepting other’sviews for us to respect theirs. In reality, we canrespect

other’s views without accepting them. A Hinducan respect a Christian without

acceptingChristianity. A Christian can respect a Muslim withoutaccepting qurAn.

There is no necessity for people toaccept other’s views to respect their views.

So is

thecase within the beliefs within Hindus.We can respect shankara AchArya

followers withoutaccepting advaita. Respect is two fold, one being

merediplomacy wherein one has to just follow someprotocols to exhibit it; in

the latter, one has toexhibit a genuine respect for the fellow person deepin

the heart. As we all know, vaishnavism is all aboutbeing devoid of duplicity,

we do respect people comingfrom all religions and beliefs to the core of

ourhearts; but we do not accept their philosophies unlessthey are in line with

Emperumanar’s. And if we haveproblem with this, we have to check if we are

trulybelieving in Yati rAja.Here our context is to read the slokas written by

nonSrI- Vaishnavas. Our context is also to check theanology shown between

established hymns(withnon-sAmpradAyic commentaries) and the

non-sAmpradAyicslokas.1. ‘SrI vishNu sahasranAmam has even non

SrIvaishNavic commentaries, but for that reason, we arenot discarding it’:::: So

there is no harm in readingto the slokas of AchAryas of other sAmpradAyams. This

argument appears to be substance-less in light ofthe author of this hymn being

Sri vEda vyAsa Himself.‘vyAsAya vishNu rUpAya. vyAsa rUpAya vishNavE’. SrIvyAsa

dEva Himself has written Lord vishNu’s 1000names, for which some people have

given explanationwhich is not sAmpradAyic. This is akin to, ‘if someone