Thengalai & Vadagalai Iyengars
Parthasarati Dileepan
a...@acsu.buffalo.edu (Ajit K Ranganathan) writes:
>
>
>From what little i know, the vadagalai iyengars are followers of vedantha desikar and the thengalai
>iyengars are more towards ramanujam.
This is WRONG. Ramanujaa is common to both
vadakalai and thenkalai and vEdhantha dEsikar
is much respected by both sects. Vadakalais
consider vEdhaantha dEsikar as the most important
guru after sri raamaanuja's time and for thenkalais
this status is given to maNavaaLa maamunigaL.
>one significant difference between them is vadagalai iyengars have sanskrit as their
>prominent language, that is, the slokas are in sanskrit and the thengalai iyengars have
>tamil...
>like dhivyaprabhandam and things like that...
This is partially correct. However, both sects consider
both Thamizh and Sanskrit works as improtant. While
thenkalais specialize in prabhandams vadakalais
specialize in sanskrit based texts. Mani speculated
that this may be due to vadakalai having to defend
sri vasihnavam in Kaanchi where sanskrit was the
language of debates.
Once again, the differences are very minor compared
to the common beliefs and tradition. Up to the
time of the 4th azhagiya singar of sri ahObila
madam (1485 - 1499 A.D.) sri vasihnavaas were
together without difference. The differences
are very highly technical concerning the nature
and need for saraNaagathi, role and status of Lakshmi, etc.
If I can get hold of a post I had prepared sometime ago
I will post it here.
Parthasarati Dileepan
MF...@utcvm.utc.edu (Parthasarati Dileepan) writes:
> If I can get hold of a post I had prepared sometime ago
> I will post it here.
============================
Thanks Mani for your excellent reply. After my first post I
remembered reading about this subject in the book entitled "A
Dialog on Hinduism" by Sri. V.N. Gopala Desikan, (1990)
published by Sri Visishtadvaita Research Center, 66, Dr.
Rangachari Road, Madras 600 018. Chapter 13 of this book deals
with this subject and it starts out saying "There is no fundamental
or basic difference in the philosophy, between the two schools,
Vadakalai and Tenkalai." The chapter states there are 18 points of
difference, but lists only 12. These are given below. I have
paraphrased many of them in order to be brief. In this process I
may have introduced imprecision. Please pardon me for this and
feel free to correct gross mistakes.
1. Role of Lakshmi: Both V and T consider Lakshmi as
"mediator" and "she, along with Narayana, is the object of
attainment, Paramapada." V views Laksmi as a means of attaining
Paramapada, i.e. upaya, and T does not.
2. T views Laksmi as Jivatma.
3. T views Lakshmi as atomic in nature.
4. Both T and V hold Kaivalya (perceiving and enjoying one's
own soul through Jnana yoga) inferior to Paramapada. According
to V, Kaivalya is outside Sri Vaikunta, for T it is in Sri Vaikunta's
outer most parts.
5. V accepts bhaki as a means (upaya) and T does not.
6. Prapatti is necessary for V, for T it is not.
7. This is related to the concept of prapatti. According to V,
Lord's grace has to have a reason, like the efforts by the individual
soul. T holds that the Lord's grace is spontaneous.
8. T holds that the sins of devotees are pleasing to the Lord,
like the misdeeds of young children. According to V, the Lord
ignores these sins.
9. According to T, exalted persons need not perform duties
such as sandya, etc., they do so only to set good example. For V,
these duties must be performed even by the exalted.
10. For T, the giving up of all dharma stated in the carama
sloka refers to an explicit act of giving them up, for V it is a
statement of fact, i.e. when you are ready for prapatti, you have
already given them up.
11. T believes the Lord also grieves when a person is suffering,
like Rama and Krishna avatharams. V says the Lord being
satyasangalpa will remove the suffering and won't grieve.
12. This one is about the Lord being "smaller than the smallest
and bigger than the biggest." Both V and T interpret "smaller than
the smallest" as He is inside even the smallest particle in the
universe. For "bigger than the biggest," T says the Lord envelops
the infinite things, such as Time, and V says the Lord is also
present with infinite things.
As you see, the differences are highly technical and IMHO not
important to ordinary folks like myself. I for one would like to see
the two schools merged. Recently I read in Sri Nrisimha Priya
that azhagiya singar met with a thenkalai jeer, (sorry, I am unable
to recall the name of the madam) and discussed cooperation. I
wish for more such meetings and joint endeavors.
P.S. This book "A Dialog on Hinduism" is an excellent primer for
understanding the basic differences among the many schools of
Indian philosophy. It is written as a dialog between a father and a
child. The discussion is at a level that even I was able to follow
most of it.
Natu Ranganathan
Interesting..... For the record... I am (or supposed to be a
vadagalai Iyengar), also the 27 geer of Ahobila madam was a Great...
great.... grand dad of mine... (actually from our family) and from
another side... I am a decendant of Alavandar, Thirumail kumara (uncle
of Ramanuja)... Never in my life have I heard these points being
made... But to my knowledge (as heard from one my grand uncles)...
The basic split began with Ramanuja... and vadgalai Iyengars regard
Vedanta Desika as some kinda revered person....
The only difference that I can think of is the Namam or
SriChuarnam (Y for Thengalai and U for Vadagalai) :)
Anyways... that is my 2 cents worth :)
Ranganathan Pillaipakkam Natu
PS: I really don't believe in religion let alone V vs. T :) Just
thought that I'd post (Deserve it due to lineage I guess :) )
--
na...@netcom.com
Geetha Ramaswami
******poruLadakkam*******************CONTENTS*******************
0.0 munnuRai
1.0 aangila ezhutthil tamizh ezhuthuvathu eppadi?
2.0 thamizh kalvi menporutkaL
3.0 thamizh ilakkiyam (by ftp/Gopher)
4.0 WWW page
5.0 thamizh paththirikaikal mukavari
6.0 thamizh ezhuththu menpoRutkaL (pakuthi - II)
0.0 Preamble
1.0 How to write Tamil using Roman alphabets?
2.0 Tamil Education
3.0 Tamil Literature (by ftp/Gopher)
4.0 WWW pages - TamilNadu Home Page and Tamil Eelam Page
5.0 Address of tamil magazines
6.0 Tamil typesetting software (Part -II)
=============================================================================
0.0
naNparkaLE,
vaNakkam!
ellorukkum Pongal VazththukkaL!!
I propose this to be a kind of Welcome package for new
comers to the net. Experienced hands are welcome to
write short general advice to new comers.
[Original Author was Ravi Sundaram]
The FAQ file has been modified to include the SCT charter
and latest softwares. Thanks To Sundhar Soma <som...@server.uwindsor.ca>
for a copy of the charter. Also thanks to Gnanasekaran Swaminathan
<sys...@tesv01.nsc.com>, Vasu Renganathan <va...@umich.edu> and
K. Srinivasan <sr...@ireq.hydro.qc.ca>.
Since there are many soft-wares to include, I have appended them at the last
and will appear as second part of FAQ - mainly to make the file readable.
Any suggestions/comments/info welcome.
Geetha Ramaswami
g...@amtp.cam.ac.uk
14/1/1995
Thanks to K.Srinivasan and P. Dileepan for pointing out the errors in previous
Version.
21/1/1995
This version includes info. about Nalayira Thivya Prabhandam which was recently
typed into Computer by a group of volunteers from SCT. P. Dileepan
<MF...@utcvm.utc.edu> Co-ordinated the whole project. These files are
now available by ftp and Gopher. Details see below (3.1).
29/1/1994
Check Out A.Rajkumar's Tamilnadu Home page - Very well done
in my opinion.
14/2/1995
I have included more address for WWW pages which has been posted
in the newsgroup recently. Also the address of FTP site where
2 tamil songs (audio) can be found at the moment. thanks to all
the authors. It was proposed to include addresses where one can
obtain tamil magazines in US, UK and Canada. I have got address
only for Ananda Vikatan which I have included. If anyone has
addresses for others email me the info.
And a request if anyone is posting information
which is relevant to FAQ, Can you email me a copy please?
My server these days seem to be missing many articles.
Thanks.
Geetha Ramaswami
13/3/1995
Thanks to C.R.E. RAJA <cre...@tifrvax.tifr.res.in> for
kumudam and ananda vikatan's addresses. I also had the address for
subhamangala which can be ound at the end of this part.
Geetha
20/3/1995
=============================================================================
0.1###############################################################
Charter For Soc.Culture.Tamil
Charter:
---------
Tamil Culture and Tamil language are estimated 5000 years
old and Tamil is one of the living classical language of the world.
Native to south asia, Tamil is recognized as one of the national
languages in India, Sri Lanka, Malaysia and Singapore. It is also spoken
widely in other Indian ocean Islands like Mauritius, Fiji, as well as in
U. K., U.S.A, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa etc.
Tamil speaking population around the world is about 65 million.
As per the linguistics, Tamil is a member in the Dravidian
family of languages comprising about 21 languages. The earliest Tamil
work available dates back to the pre-Christian era [300 B.C.]. Tamil
is very rich in its classical and modern literary tradition. The
highly acclaimed Tamil moral work `Thirukkural' by Thiruvalluvar dates
back to 50 B.C and indicates the existence of highly civilized and
consolidated society of origin, a few thousand years earlier to that.
What made this culture and language to survive milennium interests
everyone. Also, the Tamil epic poem Manimegalai [200 A.D.] gives a
summary of six systems of philosophy which is interestingly the earliest
comparitive account we have of the ancient schools of Hindu philosophy.
What would be the role of Tamil language for the next millennium?
Tamils around the world have a strong desire to establish a newsgroup
on the Usenet to share their views on Tamil history, ancient and
modern literature, ancient Tamil civilization, Tamil culture, religion,
art, drama, philosophy and related topics. The proposed newsgroup is
intended to serve as a niche for the Tamil language and culture in the
electronic communication network.
Activities in the proposed newsgroup :
--------------------------------------
I. Electronic News Magazine.
----------------------------
* Discussions on Ancient Tamil, Literature, Culture,
Philosophy, etc....
* Book, Movie, Magazine , Drama reviews, Poems, Stories,
Essays , Jokes etc...
* Current news from the Tamil region
* Current news about events of Tamil interest in North America
* Projects pertinent to Tamil interests
* Matters related to investments in Tamil region
* Matters of interest to Tamils born outside the native region.
II. Computer Language Society
-------------------------------
* Software announcements, reviews, discussion
* News about Computer Software for Tamil language printing
* Learning Tamil transliteration software
* Joint effort to develop software for on-screen display and editing
* Effort for usage of Tamil language in multimedia
* Development of word processing packages for Tamil
III Cultural and Social forum for Tamils
------------------------------------------
* SCT will become nerve center for all Tamils who have access to the
network all over the world.
* Meeting place for old friends and acquainting new friends.
* News about concerts, seminars, festivals and other programs
* To seek and help others in education, job or travel.
* Matrimonial discussions
* Discussion on Religion, Religious personalities
* Discussion on philosophy
IV . Tamil Literature Society.
-------------------------------
* Translation of Tamil novels ,short stories and poem in English.
(Contemporary literature) 1950 - present
* Translation of Tamil literature of 19 th century and early 20
th Century. 1800- 1950
* Translation of Ancient Tamil Literature. 300 B.C to 1800 A.D.
=============================================================================
1.0###############################################################
Transliteration Table for Tamil phonemes in Roman alphabets.
When one writes tamil words using the English alphabets
there are some minor problems. Take the word
vellam (jaggery) and vellam (flood). English has just
one l and one n. Tamil has three 'l's (counting zha)
and three 'n's. So we need a way to write them without
ambiquity and it should be standardised so that any one
who reads it can figure it out easily. The most common
solution is to use L and l differently. veLLam=flood
vellam=jaggery.
The ambiquity is more common with vowels because, English
has only 5 vowels which are used to represent the 12 tamil
vowels.
A transliteration scheme is a set of rules that resolves
the ambiquities in representation.
There are three popular translit schemes. They are
associated with three software packages. They are
AATHAMI, ITRANS and MADURAI. The schemes are quite
similer to one another. Presently most of the postings on the
net are displayed mostly in plain character terminals.
So most of the transliterated message are intrepreted
by humans so the differences are not important. Users
who use xrn with libtamil see tamil output directly and
mistakes in transliteration will be annoyingly visible
to them.
Output of MADURAI is an ascii file that can be viewed
in plain character terminals. Though it is not "print
quality" it is a very useful tool to practice
transliteration and iron out common mistakes. So new users
are advised to get this package and practice a little
if they lack other facilities like postscript printers
and graphics terminals.
The scheme used by MADURAI is a superset of the other two
and it is the scheme used by libXtamil. So the software
Xtalk, Xmail, Xedit, Xrn etc use the same scheme.
AATHAMI is a Tamil Word Proc package for IBM PC by
sr...@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Srinivasan K.)
ITRANS is an Indian language typesettor
by Avinash Chopde avi...@contex.com
uses the WNTML font developed by U of Washignton.
MADURAI is a code that constructs Tamil characters
using ASCII symbols developed by
Bala Swaminathan (b...@wucs1.wustl.wdu)
It has a on-line mode for gnu-emacs editor and has
a hard copy assistant m2t to get laser quality printout.
m2t stands for Madurai-to-TeX. This code would allow
users to embed madurai tranliteration scheme in LaTeX
and TeX files and do the font switching and loading.
LaTeX and TeX users can use m2t independantly. The
libtamil files are also largely compatible with madurai
and m2t.
Xtamil is a package of programs, libraries and fonts
that allow X-windows to use Tamil fonts and letters.
Presently xrn, xedit, xmail and xtalk can use these
fonts. Written by Gnanasekaran Swaminathan
they use the same translit scheme as madurai and the
ASCII files can be exchanged with madurai package.
------------Transliteration scheme used by software:
madurai, m2t, xedit, xrn, xtalk, xmail
Usage:
------
The Transliteration
The UYIR-ezhuththukkaL
_____________________________________________________________________
| | |
| o | _____ |
| ___\_| | ( | |
| \__/ | a | O | E |
| | / |
| | |
| | |
| o | _._._ |
| ___\_| | (__|__) |
| \__/ |. aa, A | (_.)(.) ai |
| o_) | |
| | |
| ____ | ._. |
| / o \ | / \ |
| _|__\_ | | () ._) |
| \_\_// | i | \ o |
| | \__/ |
| | |
| | ._. |
| .____ | / \ |
| |o | o | () ._) |
| | | ee, I | o \ O |
| | \__/ |
| | |
| | ._. |
| o. | / \ _ ___ |
| _) | () ._)( \| | |
| (_____ u | o \ O | | au, ow |
| | \__/ |
| | |
| | |
| o. | 0 |
| _) | |
| (__oTT_ oo, U | 0 0 q, ah |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| _____ | |
| ( | | |
| O | e | |
| | |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The MEI-ezhuththukkaL
___________________________________________________________________________
| .___ | .__ . | . . | _ _ _ |
| |_|_ Ka,ka | | |_ | | | | | Ya | / \ / V \ Ha |
| (_./_) Ga,ga | | )_| nga | v_/|__) ya | O |_| |_| ha |
| | | | / |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| .___ Cha,cha | _____ | .____ | _._._ |
| |_|_ Ca,ca | ( |_ NYa | | | | ()_|__) Ja |
| (__) sa | O __) nya | | | ra | (_./_.) ja |
| | | / | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| . Ta, ta | ________ | _ . | _ _ . |
| | Da, da | / /\ /\ | | ( \ | | / V \ | |
| |____ | O \/ \/ | Na | O \_/ la | O | (_/ Sa |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| .___ Tha, tha| .___ | ___ . | ___ |
| |_|_ Dha, Dha| | |_ | ( / | Va | ( / /\ |
| (_./ ) | | _) n^a | O L__| va | O L_\/__ sha|
| / | | | / |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| . . Ba, ba | . __ | . . Zha | 0 . . |
| | | Pa, pa | | | | Ma | |_( )_ zha | | | Fa |
| |___| | |__|__| ma | \. za,Za | 0 0 |___| fa |
| | | / | |
| | | | _o |
| ._ _ Ra | ______ | _ ___ | , . _(_ |
| ( V ) | / /\ | | ( \| | | | |`| |_ sri |
| ____/ | O \/ | na | O | | La | |_|_| | ) Sri |
| / | | | (______/ |
|___________________|__________________|_________________|_________________|
=============================================================================
2.0 Tamil Educational Software
2.1 Tamil Pulavan
.--. o o o
.___ . |_ |. . . . . . _ _ _ . ______
|_|_ | | \||_(_)| | | |/ \ \0 ) |/ /\ |
(_./ )|__|__| _} |___| |___|\O \_/ /__|O \/ |
/ |
(Tamil Pundit)
(version - 2)
Pulavan is a Tamil learning software package for IBM PC compatibles of 386
and higher configurations. This package may be useful for those who learn
Tamil in intermediate level. A prototypical morphological and syntactic
processors for Tamil are designed in this system to facilitate further
research in natural language processing and computational linguistics for
Tamil. To run the programs in this package your computer must have either a
386 or higher configuration with at least 2 MB of RAM and a (S)VGA monitor.
This package is available for ftp in the following ftp cites.
wuarchive.wustl.edu under the directory /doc/misc/tamil/pulavan
clr.nmsu.edu under the directory CLR/multiling/indian/Tamil
Following are the executable stand-alone programs included in this package.
1) Inflex.exe (For Tamil verb conjugations).
2) translat.exe (A sample English to Tamil translation system)
3) bharathi.exe (English to Tamil translation with Adami interface. See
the document bharathi.doc for details).
talktaml.doc gives more information about this program).
4) flashcar.exe (Tamil vocabulary drill).
5) datafile.exe (To create data files for flash card program).
6) update.exe (To update the data files for flash card program).
7) tamil.com (Tamil ASCII font driver to be used with inflex.exe,
translat.exe, and flashcar.exe)
Vasu Renganathan
va...@umich.edu
==========================================================================
2.2 kalvi
---Prices from a mail from Kuppusamy(12-MAr-1994)
Kalvi - Tamil Teaching Software
===============================
1. akaram Level: basic $ 19.95
1. akaram Level: basic $ 10
----------
Introduces Tamil vowels with sound (pronounciation) and transliteration in
English. The game targets on letter recognition.
2. alpha-bets Level: intermediate $ 19.95
2. alpha-bets Level: intermediate $ 10
--------------
Teaches how Tamil compound letters (uyirmei ezhuththukkaL) are formed and
their grammatical classifications using a video-game format. The complete
alphabet chart (aricchuvadi) is also displayed.
3. drops Level: advanced $ 19.95
3. drops Level: advanced $ 10
---------
A tetris-type of Tamil word game. The game teaches formation of two
letter Tamil words, with English meaning. It uses a library of over 450
two-letter Tamil words. The object of the game is to guide and drop the
falling letter into the appropriate slot at the base, to make the correct
two-letter word that corresponds to the shown English meaning.
4. CONSONANTS $10 | Contact address given below for details
5. NUMBERS $10 |
6. TRIPLETS (6 vol) $30 |
7. ANANKU TAMIL FONT $15 |
Technical details:
-------------------
Works on all IBM or compatible PCs
Works with any PC key-board or mouse
Works with any PC color or monochrome (CGA, MCGA, HGA, EGA or VGA)
displays. Autodetects your display type.
Tamil sounds (pronounciation) for the Tamil letters are provided through
PC's internal speaker.
Right now, there is an introductory offer by which you can get all three
programs together for 50 % of its price. i.e. 30 $ for the whole set.
(shipping & handling $ 5). For purchasing or additional details contact the
following address. In case of purchase, you have to mention the diskette size.
E 4
Softech Creations
(attn: P. Kuppusamy)
2910 Brightwater Lane
Abingdon, MD 21009
(Phone: 410-515-3611)
=============================================================================
3.0 Tamil Literature (by ftp/Gopher)
3.1 Institute of Indology and Tamil Studies: Germany: (GOPHER RESOURCE)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
gopher linus.informatik.uni-koeln.de
Email: am...@s1.rrz.uni-koeln.de (Thomas Malten)
Address: Pohlingstr. 1, 50969 Koeln, Germany.
Internet Gopher Information Client v2.0.16
Institute of Indology and Tamil Studies (IITS), Koeln University, Germany
1. Allgemeine Informationen - General Information/
2. Dravidian Studies/
3. EMDEN Tamil Dictionaries/
4. IITS Library Catalogues/
5. Lehrveranstaltungen/
6. Tamil Bibliography/
7. Tamil Studies: Announcements, Notes, Reviews, etc./
8. Tamil Text Thesaurus (TTT)/
9. Tamilnadu Geographical Names Server/
10. Tamilnadu Tribes and other Minorities/
11. The South Asia Gopher, Columbia University N.Y./
12. \BT oTukkalAm \et KWIC Concordances of Classical Tamil Texts/
PS: gopher.cc.columbia.edu (Columbia University South Asia gopher address)
=============================================================================
3.2:
Also A list of Tamil Names and Tiruppavai (by ANdal) is available by ftp
at wuarchive.wustl.edu at /doc/misc/tamil.
=============================================================================
3.3:
Nalayira thivya Prabhandam is available from the follwing sites.
ftp://ftp.etext.org/pub/Religious.Texts/Vaishnavam
and
gopher://gopher.etext.org:70/11/Religious.Texts/Vaishnavam
Files Include:
README.TXT This file
PRABAND.ZIP Archive of the Pasuram files - unzip it ti get the
individual files
FLIST.TXT List of prabhandam file names for use with TAMILVU.
TAMIVU.EXE Viewing software
=============================================================================
4.0 WWW page
4.1 Tamil Nadu Home Page
I. http://aremis.aux.mtu.edu/tcewing/arajakum.html
Other http sites:
II. www.webindia.com
[Announcing a New WWW site - www.webindia.com
The site is still under construction so they may not be up all the
time. They are the official home for Tamilnadu Newsletter.
Article taken from SCT
Author: acc...@alpha.netusa.net]
III. http://www.aux.mtu.edu/arajakum/pop.html
[Hello:
If anyone has access to Mosaic/Netscape or similar software you
can go to this site and download tamil songs (snd files). But you need an
snd file player... If you use OmniWEB it has a package that allows you to
play SND files. Have Fun!!
I am pretty sure you can just FTP the files at the site above...
But make sure you just type the site addresss & that is "www.aux.mtu.edu"
..
Article taken from SCT
Author: VENKATASUBRAMANIAM GUHESAN [Venkat] <gve...@wam.umd.edu>]
IV. FTP SITE FOR TAMIL SONGS-NIC.FUNET.FI
nic.funet.fi:/pub/culture/music/indian/samples-tamil/
Right now there are 2 songs.
[madaththilae_kanni take_it_easy]
[Taken from SCT
Author: Ravichandran Mahalingam, , ravi...@engr.latech.edu>
=============================================================================
4.2 Tamil Eelam Page
From: rsub...@chat.carleton.ca (Rajkumar Subramaniam)
ftp: aurora.carleton.ca
directory:/ pub/tamil-eelam
Tamil Eelam's WWW Page: http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~janahan/tamil.html
http://chat.carleton.ca/~rsubrama & find about our GAncthi
=============================================================================
5.0 Address of tamil magazines
1. Kumudam
151, PURASAIVAKAM NETUNJALI,
MADRAS-600 010.
2. ANANDA VIKETAN
757, ANNA SALAI,
MADRAS-600 002.
3. Subhamangala
21, Mahalakshmi Street
T. Nagar
Madras 600 017
=============================================================================+
muthal pakuthi niraivu
--
Geetha Ramaswami,
DAMTP,
Silver Street,
Cambridge CB3 9EW
Cambridge CB3 9JL.
Phone: +44 1223 337892
email: g...@amtp.cam.ac.uk
fax : +44 1223 337918
Meenaradchagan Vishnu
Prasena K Gudaloor <pkg...@tntech.edu> wrote:
>hi,
>
> I would like to know about the differences between "Thengalai" and
>"vadagalai" Iyengars.
>
> Knowledgable netters , pl. post.
There are more similarities than differences:
They are both brahmin class -- which makes a living using the
trademark of God/gods.
>Prasena kumar
Meenan Vishnu
Parthasarati Dileepan
na...@netcom.com (Natu Ranganathan) writes:
>
>
> Interesting..... For the record... I am (or supposed to be a
>vadagalai Iyengar), also the 27 geer of Ahobila madam was a Great...
>great.... grand dad of mine... (actually from our family) and from
>another side... I am a decendant of Alavandar, Thirumail kumara (uncle
>of Ramanuja)... Never in my life have I heard these points being
>made... But to my knowledge (as heard from one my grand uncles)...
>The basic split began with Ramanuja... and vadgalai Iyengars regard
>Vedanta Desika as some kinda revered person....
[1] It is completely false that the split occurred during
the time of Sri Ramaanujaa. It is well known among
sri vaishnavaas that maNavaaLa maamunigaL, the primary
later day saint for thenkalais, was initiated into
sanyaasam by the founder of sri ahObila madam which is
a vadakalai madam today. Further, sri vasihnavaa
guru parampara texts claim that the split occurred
only during the time of 4th azhagiya singar. Differences
of opinion must have begun from the time of vEdhaantha
dhEsikar. That would be about 300 years after
sri raamaanujaa.
[2] There seems to be an implication, unintended perhaps,
that vEdhaantha dhEsikar is exclusively vadakalai.
This is also wrong. It is true that vEdhaantha dhEsikar
is considered the primary later-day guru (later to sri
raamaanujaa) by the vadakalais, but he is revered by
thenkalais as well. If you want to verify this, visit
sri Parthasarathy permuaaL kovil in ThiruvallikkENi and
look up Sri vEdhaantha dhEsikar sannithi with thenkalai
naamaam on his forehead.
[3] vEdhaantha dhEsikar spent his life time defending sri
raamaanujaa's vedhaanthaa. Read piLLaiandhaathi, 20
verses composed by dhEsikar's son Varadhaachaarya in
praise of his father, to get a glimpse of dhEsikar's
devotion for sri raamaanuja.
There seems to be lots of misconceptions about
this topic. Many hold views that are completely
unfounded. My request to the interested is to
look up some of the references given in an earlier
post and form a well informed opinion. Another
source that you may be able to readily check is
"Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy,
Vol. 2, page 706."
-- Dileepan
Nathan Parker
: I have been told that the sects came into existence when Ramanuja
: converted other caste people into iyengars. Does the book say anything
: about it?
Once I was told that Mysore (originally tribals) Iyengars are considered
superior to Sri Rangam Iyengars. Can someone confirm or deny this?
Geetha Ramaswami
>In article <1736511A6...@utcvm.utc.edu>
>MF...@utcvm.utc.edu (Parthasarati Dileepan) writes:
>> If I can get hold of a post I had prepared sometime ago
>> I will post it here.
>
>
> Here it is; this was prepared about 6 months ago.
>
>
I have been told that the sects came into existence when Ramanuja
converted other caste people into iyengars. Does the book say anything
about it?
>As you see, the differences are highly technical and IMHO not
>important to ordinary folks like myself. I for one would like to see
>the two schools merged. Recently I read in Sri Nrisimha Priya
>that azhagiya singar met with a thenkalai jeer, (sorry, I am unable
But do ordinary folks really differentiate between vadakalai and
thenkalai? Except for some dis-similar ways in which both do the
rituals I don't think so. I have relatives in both sects and have
visited madams belongin to both sects. Inter-marriage is also very
c'mon between both sects. Don't you think the merger
is already happening atleast among c'mon folks?
With the schools, it is probably more difficlut b'coz both might not
be willing to give up their own traditions which they have been
maintaining for so long? I don't seen any reason why they shdn't maintain
distinct traditions as long as they don't start fighting we are doing
*THE* right way. and one is *superior* to other.
>to recall the name of the madam) and discussed cooperation. I
>wish for more such meetings and joint endeavors.
true, like refurbishing old vaishnavite temples in complete ruins.
Has anyone seen visited kallazhakar koil (near Madurai) recently
noticed how the temple is falling apart?
Regards,
Geetha.
Ranga
> Hi,
> I wonder why there has been no reply to your query? Basically these are two sects
> descending from maybe two groups of sages., but now the difference is in the location
> of these groups. Vadagalai Iyengars are mostly concentrated in and around Srirangam.
> There are also lots of differences in the traditions - 1) savikeradhu-Thengalais do
> it once whereas Vadagalais do it four times.2)naamam - Vadagalais have a U shaped one
> whereas Thengalai's naamam almost close their eyes. There are lots more but how come youare interested?
> Yamini.
>Hi Yamini
It looks to me as if you are a Vadagalai Iyengar. Am I correct
Ranganath
Parthasarati Dileepan
G.P.Ra...@amtp.cam.ac.uk ( Geetha Ramaswami) writes:
>
>I have been told that the sects came into existence when Ramanuja
>converted other caste people into iyengars. Does the book say anything
>about it?
>
there is no evidence to support this conjecture. Let
me quote two passges from this book.
"Question: When did this division, Vadakalai, Tenkalai
actually take place?
Answer: We cannot say for sure. There were differences
of opinion, on some minor issues. In due course,
these developed into two separate schools of
thought, called Vadakalai and Tenkalai.
The differences are more academic in nature.
Each school stresses importance on some aspects.
The minor differences of opinion arose, becasue
of the degree of emphasis laid on some points,
by each school. These minor differences need
not be given importance."
......
"Sri Desika has also mentioned as follows: Among
Sri Bhashyakara's (Ramanuja's) disciples, there
are no differences on essential points. There
are only differences in interpretation."
(A Dialog on Hinduism, Sri. V.N. Gopala Desikan
Sri Visishtadvaita Research Centre, 66 Dr. Rangachari
Road, Madras 600 017, 1990)
From the above it is abundantly clear that the
difference between the two schools is in the POV
and not, whether they were converted or not by
Sri Raamaanujaa. I must acknowledge that the
erroneous view you refer to is held by more than
just a few.
>
>But do ordinary folks really differentiate between vadakalai and
>thenkalai? Except for some dis-similar ways in which both do the
>rituals I don't think so. I have relatives in both sects and have
>visited madams belongin to both sects. Inter-marriage is also very
>c'mon between both sects. Don't you think the merger
>is already happening atleast among c'mon folks?
period, I think, there was elevated level of rivalry,
caused by lesser individuals.
-- Dileepan
Mani Varadarajan
> Ravichandran Mahalingam (ravi...@engr.latech.edu) wrote:
> * the thengalai iyengars are from the south india. the vadagalai iyengars
> * were from the norhthern india. they migrated to the south as late as
> * 400 years ago. the thengalai iyengars were present in s. india for a longer
> * duration of time.
>
> * this was told me to by my iyengar friends. i am not an iyengar.
>
> The above is completely wrong. Perhaps Mani Varadarajan
> can post the discussion (that happened elsewhere) on this
> topic here.
>
> --badri
Here is the genesis of the Vadagalai/Tengalai split as I understand it.
Tengalais and Vadagalais are two subsects of Srivaishnavas, the dominant
Vaishnavite sect in the Tamil country and parts of Andhra and Karnataka.
They are *not* separate castes; they have almost always socialized freely,
intermarry somewhat freely, and go to the same temples, honor
most of the same gurus and worship mostly the same way. (Caste in any
sense is a misnomer in this case, since one can be a non-brahmin Tengalai
and be brahmin Vadagalai; it is not restricted to the "4-fold" caste
system either). However, for a few centuries, there has existed
a rivalry and animosity between certain members of the sects, so much
so that they appear to belong to different traditions.
The origin of this rivalry is complex, but is rooted in the expansion
of Srivaishnavas after their principal acharya, Ramanujacharya (c. 11th-12th
centuries AD) passed away. The split into identifiable camps, however,
did not come until perhaps the 16th century, and from then on, the
vitriol became quite harsh.
Historical accounts indicate that the rivalry reached
its peak after the British arrived, sometime in the 17th and 18th
centuries, when some ambitious people realized that they could
get control of temples and get temple honors through the
British-introduced court system.
There was a tremendous court battle over most of the major divya
ksetras (holy temple sites), especially the Triplicane Parthasarathy
Svami Temple. In places where a particular temple was controlled by
Tengalais, prominent Vadagalai members of the surrounding community
rose to challenge their authority, and vice versa. Often, court cases
were filed simply over how the ThirumaN would look on the Lord's
forehead.
The ThirumaN is the mark traditional male Srivaishnavas place
on their forehead. It represents the feet of PerumaaL and the essence
of Lakshmi thaayaar. For Vadagalais, the thirumaN looks like a U.
For Tengalais, it is Y-shaped, the stem of the Y extending 1/3 to 1/2
the way down the nose. Most who argue over this do not even know
the philosophical significance of the thirumaN, which is that all
Srivaishnavas should consider themselves the slaves of the Lord and
should wear "his feet on their forehead" (a statement from an aazhvaar
paasuram somewhere). However, in spite of their ignorance, it has become
a source of major contention.
This is quite unfortunate, since at its heights, such acrimony
was motivated not by any doctrinal or intellectual difference. It
was essentially a fight for power and prominence.
Historians say that the deep division that is sometimes witnessed is a
product of lesser minds a century or two after Manavala Mamuni's
death. Manavala Mamuni is the leading acharya of the Tengalai
division, and lived in the 15th century. He revolutionized and
reorganized the Srivaishnava movement, especially in the southern
part of the Tamil country, but gaining many followers and establishing
regular worship at many temples. He is also very much responsible for
popularizing Nammaazhvaar's great poem, the thiruvaaymozhi, among the
masses. Anyway, more on this later.
Philosophically, the differences between the two sects centers around
the issue of the Lord's grace, and the nature of the soul's surrender
(prapatti) to Him. However, the greatest teachers
on either side had no intention of causing a split. In fact
Vedanta Desika (considered the principal fountainhead of the Vadagalai),
says in one of his works that "In the tradition of
Yatiraja (Ramanuja), there is no division; there is only a small
difference in opinion." Similarly, Manavala Mamuni (the main
post-Ramanuja acharya for Thengalais, who lived a century after
Desika) quotes Desika in his works and refers to him very
respectably as "abhiyuktar". I believe this term was used only
for respected members of one's own community.
First, let me go into the origin of the doctrinal differences,
and then I'll deal briefly with the differences themselves. One
recent author, instead of using the words "Thengalai" and
"Vadagalai", used the terms "Srirangam Acharyas" and "Kanchi
Acharyas", since a difference in opinion existed long before the
"---galai" words came to prominence.
There are several reasons for this difference. First, Ramanuja
never definitively put down his words on the nature of SaraNaagati,
taking refuge in the Lord. Since Ramanuja's words were always
considered final, it may have been part of his genius to leave
this unresolved since it was such an intensely personal matter.
At any rate, there were two sets of Srivaishnava scholars left
after Ramanuja passed on. One group, located in Kanchi (where
Desikar later grew up), became known for its vast Sanskrit
scholarship, probably because Kanchi was a great center of
Sanskrit learning of all sorts. People of all religious
traditions lived there, and debate between Srivaishnava and
non-Srivaishnava was probably very active and prominent. Hence,
the greater of use of Sanskrit and Sanskrit ideas by the "Kanchi
Acharyas", the Northerners, and eventually the "Vadagalai".
The other group was located in Srirangam, essentially a purely
Vaishnava center. Here, popular Vaishnavism was more prominent
than Sanskrit-oriented debate with other schools. Hence, there
must have been great occasion for public lecture (Katha
Kaalakshepam, Upanyaasam, etc) of the Prabandhams and general
bhakti literature, as opposed to the abstruse Sanskrit Vedanta.
Therefore, there was greater usage of the Tamil Prabandham,
language and more radical metaphors (when viewed from a Sanskrit
perspective), as befits expositions of the Azhvar literature,
which are more 'anubhavam' (experience) than doctrine. This is
probably also why there are more Thengalais (of all castes) than
Vadagalais.
Naturally, with this difference in geography, intellectual
climate, and language came some differences in emphasis. The
Kanchi Acharyas, carefully guarding the doctrine of karma, etc.,
emphasized the need of the individual soul to actually perform
the act of surrender to the Lord, with its associated attitudes,
etc. The Srirangam Acharyas, taking many of the words of the
Azhvars and the stotra literature to heart, emphasized the
greatness and overwhelming grace of the Lord to "save His own",
and therefore spoke more of the *attitude* than the act. The
Srirangam acharyas felt that *performing an act* of surrender was
an act of self-exertion, which was not in line with the
individual soul's svaroopa as being completely dependent on the
Lord. Furthermore, they felt that such an *act* was 'amaryaada',
i.e., was disrespectful, since (i) the soul was offering itself
when it in actuality eternally belonged to the Paramaatma, and
(ii) not even the physical act of surrendering can force the Lord
to save the soul. He saves the soul on His own initiative; rest
assured that He *will* save you, but don't try to force Him.
The Vadagalais counter with the argument, "If you leave everything
up to the Lord, then there is no sense of fairness. The Lord
can save whomever he wants at any time, without respect to merit
or demerit, or whether they even wish to attain moksha. Truly
this cannot be the nature of the Paramaatma." As you can see,
it is a complex issue.
Therefore, there is no separate 'prapatti' or 'SaraNaagati' for
Thengalais, like there is for Vadagalais. Thengalais also do not
admit bhakti-yoga (loving meditation whereby the soul gradually
realizes the nature of the Supreme and its relationship to It)
as a separate means, with the idea that it is
only prapatti (which is essentially non-resistance to the grace
of the Lord) that "achieves" moksha. (Thengalai Acharyas would probably
even object to my usage of the word "achieve".)
So this is the distinction. Naturally, many other beliefs follow
from this difference, but what is outlined above is primary. The
concept of caste, etc., was much more liberally interpreted in
the Thengalai acharyas' works in consequence, but it appears that
such doctrines did not have a lasting impact on the
community. Orthodox Thengalai Brahmins are as staunchly casteist
as any Vadagalai that I know.
Yours,
Mani
Mani Varadarajan
> They are both brahmin class -- which makes a living using the
> trademark of God/gods.
>
>
This is a tad bit misleading. As I pointed out in another post,
while the term "Iyengar" may *now* be used exclusively for brahmins,
Thengalai and Vadagalai do not imply any caste (though Vadagalai
probably means brahmin). Go to Thiruvallikeni in Madras, or
Azhvaar Thirunagari, or any other major Srivaishnava center, and you
will find many, many people who do not wear the sacred thread, but
who participate in temple functions, who eat and behave the same
way as brahmin Srivaishnavas, who wear the thirumaN, and who sometimes
even sport a kudumi!
Some of these people have the suffix Chettiar or Reddiar in
their names, but many do not. I do not know to which community they
belong.
If it weren't for the absence of the sacred thread, they would look
identical to the members of the "brahmin class".
There is also many non-brahmin Srivaishnava sannyaasis, including
Tridandi SrimannaaraayaNa Jeeyar of Tirupati.
Mani
Mani Varadarajan
> Once I was told that Mysore (originally tribals) Iyengars are considered
> superior to Sri Rangam Iyengars. Can someone confirm or deny this?
>
It is *highly* unlikely that Mysore Iyengars were originally
tribals, at least most of them. I do think that many have
been converted from other castes, but tribals is a tad bit
inconceivable.
Being a Mysore Iyengar myself, I visited my father's village (Hemmige)
on my last trip to India. The old temple priest there said that
in the 12th century, the king of the Mysore area asked for several
groups of Srivaishnavas to come from the Tamil country, and that we
originated from the Kanchipuram area. The king gave several graamas
(villages) to these Srivaishnavas, and that is why there are many
villages near the Mysore area where the brahmins are exclusively
Srivaishnava.
Every group of Iyengars has traditionally thought that they were
better than any other. In the popular imagination, this kind of
parochialism is not restricted to any particular group. However,
these days there is in general no such opinion. Though Iyengars
still think themselves superior to all others! ;-)
Mani
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
Mani Varadarajan <ma...@sgi.com> wrote:
>
>Here is the genesis of the Vadagalai/Tengalai split as I understand it.
>This is quite unfortunate, since at its heights, such acrimony
No, it is not unfortunate, it is fortunate! If people have
even an iota of spiritual sense, they'll disown these manipulators!
I think it is a blessed lesson if we think.
>was motivated not by any doctrinal or intellectual difference. It
>was essentially a fight for power and prominence.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Right.
>
[..]
>
>First, let me go into the origin of the doctrinal differences,
>and then I'll deal briefly with the differences themselves. One
>recent author, instead of using the words "Thengalai" and
>"Vadagalai", used the terms "Srirangam Acharyas" and "Kanchi
>Acharyas", since a difference in opinion existed long before the
>"---galai" words came to prominence.
>
>There are several reasons for this difference. First, Ramanuja
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you carefully see there is only one reason !
[..]
>language and more radical metaphors (when viewed from a Sanskrit
>perspective), as befits expositions of the Azhvar literature,
>which are more 'anubhavam' (experience) than doctrine. This is
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What matters is ONLY anubhavam and doctrines are of no use
except for politics. One anubhavam can give thousands of doctrines
not one of these doctrines will be in the least bit, in the vital sense,
'comprehensible' for the doctrine-only religionists.
( is this a doctrine ? :) )
Your summary above is indeed very laudable ( considering the volume of
literature on this) !
What thenkalais say are indeed very true, but as is often the case
Vadakalais also have a point though their view is basically
flawed as stated above. True this can not be proved by a debate.
Hence please ignore my posting if some nettors disagree.
The right point about Vadakalais is : 'we have to strive', but
one has to properly understand what is meant by 'striving'; their
reason and understanding for striving is quite 'interesting'!
The striving is about sincerity and honesty. The striving itself can be
a roadblock if it is not 'properly' done ! Apparently there is no striving
in some cases as well and yet it is right to insist on right
striving ! The representative views as reflected in the statements
"Truly this can not be the nature of Paramaatma",
"If you leave everything up to the Lord, there is no sense of fairness"
etc. clearly show the
problem in the Vadakalai thinking! If you or somebody can quote
Sri Vedanta Desikan avarkaL's exact words or some really 'authoritative'
person's ( not some heads of religious mutts, unless they are considered
'authoritative' in the true spiritual sense of the word ),
it would be interesting to look at what they say.
I'll be thankful for your help. If it is
in Sanskrit I would appreciate both the original skt and a tamil/english
translation.
>
>Therefore, there is no separate 'prapatti' or 'SaraNaagati' for
>Thengalais, like there is for Vadagalais. Thengalais also do not
>admit bhakti-yoga (loving meditation whereby the soul gradually
>realizes the nature of the Supreme and its relationship to It)
>as a separate means, with the idea that it is
>only prapatti (which is essentially non-resistance to the grace
>of the Lord) that "achieves" moksha. (Thengalai Acharyas would probably
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>even object to my usage of the word "achieve".)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Quite right !! ( I'm not a thenkalai aacharyar :) )
This view of the thenkalai aacharyars is not some fake extreme view
of humility, but a vitally valuable thingy worthy of 'hearing'.
From what you say Mani, it appears that Thenkalais have a 'better'
understanding and attitude. Vadakalais don't have a clue
except one point about 'striving'. About even this 'striving'
their view appears to be dangerously ill-founded.
[..]
>
>Yours,
>Mani
anbudan -selvaa
"paRaiyanaar anban"
K.Srinivasan
(Ajit K Ranganathan) says:
>
>From what little i know, the vadagalai iyengars are followers of vedantha desikar and the thengalai
>iyengars are more towards ramanujam.
>prominent language, that is, the slokas are in sanskrit and the thengalai iyengars have
>tamil...
>like dhivyaprabhandam and things like that...
>any body to clarify this..
>ajit.
>
This also is not quite correct. vEdhantha dhEsikar, whom the vadagalai followers
consider as a main acharya, himself states that "he is the follower of the Draavida
vEda (the Tamil compositons of the aazhvaars).". Also the "daily prayer ritual"
of the vadagalai also has abundant Tamil verses, and that of thengalai Sanskrit
verses. Both subsects respect Sri Ramanuja equally well.
The philosophical differences are known only to the learned few. In general,
the vadagalai philosophy is "stricter", (more number of sEvippu for example).
The anology of the "monkey" for vadagalai and "cat" for the thengalai is
well known. (Even A.L. Basham mentions it in Wonder that was India).
A monkey expects the the little one to cling on to the mother, while the
mother goes happily jumping across trees. The cat carries the little one
with extreme caution, when it runs around.
Vadagalai philosophy is also closer to the smartha (Iyer) philosophy than
the thengalai philosophy.
In the social scene, intermarriages are very common today, as well as 100s
of years ago. The kalai of the man is adopted by the lady immediately. Giving
a thengalai girl to a vadagalai boy family is considered "more normal"
than the otherway around, even in the past 4 generations.
There is of course a small set who would claim to be as "purely" vadagalai.
Even that is questionable since they ignore the kalai from the lady's side!
In 12th century AD, there was no distinction. There were Sri Ramanuja's
followers of all castes. The differences must have remained subdued
and re-surfaced several hundred years later. But by that time, there was
some mixture among group already. So the divisions are not quite ethnic today.
Srinivasan K
swaminathan,kashi r
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering <selv...@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> What thenkalais say are indeed very true, but as is often the case
> Vadakalais also have a point though their view is basically
> flawed as stated above. True this can not be proved by a debate.
> understanding and attitude. Vadakalais don't have a clue
> except one point about 'striving'. About even this 'striving'
> their view appears to be dangerously ill-founded.
Looks like this has turned into another
North vs. South issue.-
Nathan Parker
an Iyer?
Raghu Seshadri
: From what you say Mani, it appears that Thenkalais have a 'better'
: understanding and attitude. Vadakalais don't have a clue
: except one point about 'striving'. About even this 'striving'
: their view appears to be dangerously ill-founded.
: anbudan -selvaa
: "paRaiyanaar anban"
What about the charge that the Tenkalai attitude is mere
passivity; it does not promote enthusiasm for performing
good karma, because "Narayana will do it all"; that
even the humility and the resignation ( which is a
kind of wisdom ) should be the culmination of a lifetime
of personal striving - not the premature inaction of lazy
persons taking refuge in philosophy ?
The striving that the Vadakalais promote is that of
inner purification thru external good acts - what can
be dangerous about that ?
Some clarification of your statements will probably
make your meaning more understandable, Selva.
RS
Nathan Parker
In this thread on s.c.tamil someone mentioned the analogy of the monkey
and its child and the cat and the kitten to explain the role of prappatti.
I thought I would mention the following article that explains the
acintya-bheddAbheda-tattva view of surrender to the Lord, which in my view
seems to synthesize both views of the North and South school.
The following is from the magazine "Sri Guru mukha padma vakya"
(published in Bangalore):
"I was reading the example given by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati
Thakura, about the kitten philosophy and the monkey philosophy. When the
kitten is picked up by the mother cat, the kitten does nothing - it just
hangs there. The mother does everything; the kitten just hangs there like
a bag, and the mother moves it from one place to the next.
The Baby monkey has a totally different way of dealing with his mother.
The baby monkey hangs on to the mother and the mother does nothing about
the baby. The mother jumps from one tree to the next, swinging from the
vines, and the baby just holds on to the mother for his dear life.
The two babies act in totally opposite ways. The kitten depends totally
on the mother, while the baby monkey depends on his own effort, and not
at all on the mother, for any help.
These are two types of philosophies. There is the kitten philosophy which
says that we should simply depend on the mercy of the Lord, because there
is nothing we can do for ourselves; there is no effort that we can make,
for we are too fallen and hopeless. We simply need to depend on the mercy
of the Lord, and He will do everything.
The other philosophy called the monkey philosophy says that our success
simply depends on our sadhana. If we do good sadhana, good religious
practices, then the Lord is obliged to reciprocate with us. He will give
us exactly according to what we deserve, so what is the need of any
special mercy from the Lord? We should just do our devotional service
perfectly, and we will get our result. What is all this begging the Lord
for mercy and all that? We should just hang on through our practice of
sadhana, and that will be good enough.
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura said that actually our philosophy
is neither of the two, but what is known as the "the rope in the well
philosophy." When somebody falls into a well, he cannot climb out on his
own accord. He cannot get out with his own effort. He needs someone to
throw him a rope, and he also has to cooperate by grabbing it. SO the
combination of our grabbing the rope and someone pulling us out is what
will get us out of the well very quickly. This is the examply that Srila
Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura gave. We are in a hopeless condition.
We cannot get out simply by our own efforts, even if we try. We need the
help of a spiritual master. We need the help of Krishna. Krishna throws
the rope down. (Sometimes the rope is considered to be the guru.) The
guru is the one who pulls us out. So Krishna gives us the rope, and we
should hold onto the rope by following the instructions of the guru and
trying our level best to do devotional service, even though we may not be
so expert at it. In this way we get pulled out of the well.
The monkey philosophy and the kitten philosophy are two extremes. The
actual situation is the combination of our effort and Krishna's mercy.
This has also been expressed by the Gosvamis, in the Damodara lila.
Everytime Yashodamayi tried to tie Krishna, she was two fingers short.
She brought longer ropes and tied Him again and again, but everytime it
fell two fingers short. She was sweating in anxiety, "How shall I do
this? What is going wrong? How is this possible, it is two fingers
short." Finally, Krishna allowed her to tie Him.
The sages tried to figure it out, "Why two fingers?" Everything Krishna
does has got significance. The shAstra says, "Two fingers, two fingers,
two fingers," - three times. That means there is something in it. Then it
was somehow revealed, what these two fingers mean. One finger signifies
the desire of the devotee, the devotee has to want to serve the Lord. The
second finger signifies the mercy of the Lord. We cannot get out simply
by our sadhana. Nobody can say that their sadhana is so perfect and free
from all offences."
Balaji Thirumalaikumara
joke in a play, that was subsequently removed fearing protests ...
Sunda: Enna Paa, Nee Iyer Ootu Pillai-nnu Solraange.
En Ponne Kadalikkire. Neenga _VADAMA_va, _UPPUMA_Va ?
Sensing that Sunda is an Iyengar.....
S.V.Sekar: Neenge _VADAGALAI_Ya _ECHHAKALAI_Ya ?
Being an Iyengar Myself, everytime someone asks me
the inevitable question, I am reminded of this joke.
---
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Balaji ThirumalaiKumara
Intergraph ELectronics Tel: Off: (415) 691-6497
381 E.Evelyn Ave. Res: (415) 965-2316
Mountain View, CA 94041. Fax: Off: (415) 691-0350
Email: bthi...@crescent.edaca.ingr.com
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ranganathan Srikanth
Aside from the fact, that there may be different rituals for both of them,
a fundamental difference can be illustrated with an example.
If one observes the way in which monkey's and cat's treat their offsprings
a difference can be seen.
It is the baby monkey's responsiblity to hold on to its mother tightly
while the mother cat takes the responsiblity of protecting its offsprings.
Same is said of the disciple - guru relationship. For one of them(I do not
know which) the intent is to find the correct guru, and for the other guru
is pointer towards salvation.
My 2cents. Pls. do not flame me for comparing with monkey's and cat's.
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
Raghu Seshadri <sesh...@cup.hp.com> wrote:
>C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering (selv...@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca) wrote:
>
>: From what you say Mani, it appears that Thenkalais have a 'better'
>: understanding and attitude. Vadakalais don't have a clue
>: except one point about 'striving'. About even this 'striving'
>: their view appears to be dangerously ill-founded.
>: anbudan -selvaa
>: "paRaiyanaar anban"
>
>What about the charge that the Tenkalai attitude is mere
>passivity; it does not promote enthusiasm for performing
>good karma, because "Narayana will do it all"; that
>even the humility and the resignation ( which is a
>kind of wisdom ) should be the culmination of a lifetime
>of personal striving - not the premature inaction of lazy
>persons taking refuge in philosophy ?
I think your paraphrasing of Tenkalais' attitud as 'mere passivity'
is incorrect; I would request any knowledgeable person ( Mani ?)
who might know Tenkalai philosophy to correct me.
Although it might sound oxymornonic it is
actually an 'active non-action'. It, in effect, means rapt
attention with deep love; everything else follows from this.
If it is 'mere passivity' every tenkalai vaishnavite will
attain moksham almost instantanesouly, no ? And the
Vadakalais will dissolve their sect ( kalaiththuviduvArkaL ) ?
To do a good (external) action, propelled by
great good inside ( n^alluNarvu), is not discouraged in Tenkalai
philosophy, I think.
>
>The striving that the Vadakalais promote is that of
>inner purification thru external good acts - what can
>be dangerous about that ?
A Good act is done for the Good act's sake and the good it generates.
What is the danger in this as the Vadakalai philosophy advocates?
The danger is the thought that 'you are striving; your are purifying
and you are offering the service to the Lord; you are earning'.
These thoughts so silent in the minds can can keep the 'doer' as far
as they started from the Lord.
It is said that even altruism is very much a 'self-centred' act !
This does not at all mean that one should not do good acts and
not strive to do good acts etc.
but only signifies that one should be in rapt attention when doing these
( what you call 'mere passivity' ).
>
>Some clarification of your statements will probably
>make your meaning more understandable, Selva.
I hope it is satisfactory, at leat to some extent.
>
>RS
anbudan -selvaa
P.S. The example of monkey, cat, giving-rope, 'tying' are all fine.
Each example beautifully illustrates certain things, but
one can not take them too seriously.
There is another story I've heard ( may not be vaishnavite;
also not about mOksham)
\bt Or ejamaanar, than n^ayay, nALthORum, veLiyE n^adaththic
chelvAr. n^Ay saRRu munnAlum sila n^ErangaLil Odum.
than ejamAnar inkuthAn thirumbvAr enRu n^inaiththu, oru theru vazhiyE
thirumbi n^ay VegamAgap pOkum. saRRu tholaivu pOnavudan, thirumbip
pArkkum. than ejamAnar vara villai enRAl, thriumbi Odi vanthu, avar
engu n^adakkiRAr enRu pArththu, vAlaik kuzhaiththuk koNdu,
pinnaalEyE pOgum. ithE pOla avvap pozhuthu n^adakkum.
n^Aykkuth theriyAthu ejamAnar engu pOvAr enRu,
AnAlum muNdi adiththuk koNdu Odum, therinthaaR pOla. \et
Parthasarati Dileepan
adaikkalappatthu describes the five angams
(prerequisites) for prapatti, i.e. surrender to Lord.
\bt
ugakkum avai ugandhu ugavaa vanaitthum ozhindhu uRavu guNa
miga thuNivu peRa uNarndhu viyan kaavalena varitthu
jagatthil oru pugal illaath thavam aRiyEn madhitkacchi
nagar karuNai naathanai nal adaikkalamaay adaindhEnE
\et
1. ugakkum avai ugandhu
be determined to do that which is pleasing to
the Lord -- anukoolya sangalpam.
2. ugavaa vanaitthum ozhindhu
spurn that which displeases the Lord -- praathi
koolya varjanam
3. uRavu guNam uNarndhu; miga thuNivu peRa
understand the nature of Lords relationship to
us jeevaathmaas develop unflinching faith that
He will overlook our faults and grant us
mOksham -- mahaa visvaasam
4. viyan kaaval ena varitthu
clasping the Lord's lotus feet as the only
protection -- gOpthruthva varaNam
5. jagatthil oru pugal illa thavam aRiyEn
seeking His lotus feet with intense feeling of
helplessness, convinced of one's inability to
pursue other more arduous methods such as
karma and bhakthi -- kaarppaNyam
Fulfilling these five prerequisites, Swami Sri dhEsikan
pleads to the madhitkacchinagar karuNai naathan and
surrenders to Him.
If a person fulfills these five principles then the
distinction between asking to be saved and being
content that the Lord will definitely save even without
asking, are just two lovely states of mind. The later
state of mind is quite appealing for the obvious
universality. However, the former has its own
practical significance. The overt action of surrender,
performed with utmost humility as prescribed by
swmi sri dhEsikan, can usher in a completely new
outlook for the individual. Further, there is no
blemish in offering our souls to the Lord that belongs
to Him to begin with.
All bhakthi traditions emphasize offerings to God. It
may be just a piece of thuLasi or it may be 1 crore of
rupees. What we offer, small or big, is something that
already belongs to the Lord. Yet we make the
offering. For some this may seem vain. But that view
is foolish, IMHO. A child buying a gift for the parent
using the parent's money is very pleasing to the
parent. Likewise, it is pleasing to the Lord to see us
offer something to Him that already belongs to him.
We are His possession, and yet, in an act of surrender,
we offer ourselves to Him. That must surely be
pleasing to Him.
Prapatti is not something that we do with the thought
that this act is the cause for attaining mOksham. Our
prapatti is successful not because *we* performed
prapatti, but because our Lord overlooks our
shortcomings owing to His kalyaaNa guNaas such as
sowseelyam, kaaruNyam, vaatsalyam, etc.
Further, the act of prapatti, called baran^yaasam or
bara samarpaNam among vadakalai iyengaars, has
wonderful significance. In many instances, the action
transforms an individual's thinking fundamentally.
Interested individuals may consider the following,
easy to read book for more information: "Vaishnavam:
Its Philosophy, Theology, and Religious Discipline,"
S.M. Srinivasa Chari, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers
Private Limited, Delhi, 1994.
Each of the two traditions of sri vaishNavam is
beautiful in its own way. We may choose to follow
one particular tradition, but praising one and
disparaging the other is a sign of delusion.
Raghu Seshadri
: >What about the charge that the Tenkalai attitude is mere
: >passivity; it does not promote enthusiasm for performing
: >good karma, because "Narayana will do it all"; that
: >even the humility and the resignation ( which is a
: >kind of wisdom ) should be the culmination of a lifetime
: >of personal striving - not the premature inaction of lazy
: >persons taking refuge in philosophy ?
: I think your paraphrasing of Tenkalais' attitud as 'mere passivity'
: is incorrect; I would request any knowledgeable person ( Mani ?)
: who might know Tenkalai philosophy to correct me.
This charge is not mine; I am merely reporting a traditional
vadakalai argument.
: Although it might sound oxymornonic it is
: actually an 'active non-action'. It, in effect, means rapt
: attention with deep love; everything else follows from this.
Active non-action is described very well in the
Bhagavad-gita also, and Sri Ramanuja has given us
a cogent and beautiful explanation of this oxymoron
as well. The Tenkalai position surely has a sound
footing here.
: To do a good (external) action, propelled by
: great good inside ( n^alluNarvu), is not discouraged in Tenkalai
: philosophy, I think.
True, it is not discouraged. But isn't this slightly
different from active encouragement ?
: >
: >The striving that the Vadakalais promote is that of
: >inner purification thru external good acts - what can
: >be dangerous about that ?
: A Good act is done for the Good act's sake and the good it generates.
: What is the danger in this as the Vadakalai philosophy advocates?
: The danger is the thought that 'you are striving; your are purifying
: and you are offering the service to the Lord; you are earning'.
: These thoughts so silent in the minds can can keep the 'doer' as far
: as they started from the Lord.
: It is said that even altruism is very much a 'self-centred' act !
: This does not at all mean that one should not do good acts and
: not strive to do good acts etc.
: but only signifies that one should be in rapt attention when doing
: these ( what you call 'mere passivity' ).
: >
In other words, you suspect that the conscious striving will
lead to ego - the thought that "I" am doing all this, and
therefore I can demand Mukti as my right. I agree that
if this happens, it is pernicious. But the Gita gives us
a good solution to this - it is the principle of
action without attachment, offering all the fruits of
karma to Krishna, living in this world as a lotus-leaf
lives in the water ( as the Tamil poets say ). Krishna
in fact emphasizes that mere non-action is not only
undesirable, but it is not even possible. Fear of ego
cannot make us live in enforced detachment from this
world thru inactivity. This is the vadakalai argument,
: I hope it is satisfactory, at leat to some extent.
Thank you for your reply; i enjoyed reading it.
RS
: P.S. The example of monkey, cat, giving-rope, 'tying' are all fine.
: Each example beautifully illustrates certain things, but
: one can not take them too seriously.
True - as the Zen saying has it, " The finger points at the
moon; it is not the moon itself ".
( It is interesting that in Christianity also, they
have had the same work vs grace arguments, with different
sects holding the vadakalai and tenkalai positions.
The Jesuits, when they arrived in South India, were
amazed to see their centuries-old arguments mirrored
in the writings of Vedanta Desikan and his opponents.
The Jesuits hold the Tenkalai positions to be "correct",
so they spent a lot of time bolstering their arguments
against that of Sri Desikan )
un03...@wvnvms.wvnet.edu
>
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>
> [1] It is completely false that the split occurred during
> the time of Sri Ramaanujaa. It is well known among
> sri vaishnavaas that maNavaaLa maamunigaL, the primary
> later day saint for thenkalais, was initiated into
> sanyaasam by the founder of sri ahObila madam which is
> a vadakalai madam today. Further, sri vasihnavaa
> guru parampara texts claim that the split occurred
> only during the time of 4th azhagiya singar. Differences
> of opinion must have begun from the time of vEdhaantha
> dhEsikar. That would be about 300 years after
> sri raamaanujaa.
>
> -- Dileepan
i have a question. definitely during the time of ramanuja there was no split.
the most conspicous difference of "ThirumaN" is little confusing. both sects
have their own views . its ok. what was there during ramanuja's period?
Rammanuja's "thaan ugandha thirumEni" at sriperumbudur is supposed to be
accepted by Ramanuja himself and it has the thirumaN with the paadham? does
this mean that it was being followed by ramaanuja? why was this changed later.
i remember hearing from somebody that it was the same even during sri vEdhaanth
a DEsikar's period. is this true? during sri manavaaLa maamunigaL's period was
this change in effect? Also sri manavaaLa maamunigaL is said to be the
reincarnation of sri raamanujar.
can anybody explain. just curious to know.
vijayaraghavan. t.r
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
: In article <D5qxC...@watserv3.uwaterloo.ca> mvi...@bbcr.uwaterloo.ca (Meenaradchagan Vishnu) writes:
: > They are both brahmin class -- which makes a living using the
: > trademark of God/gods.
: >
: > Meenan Vishnu
: If it weren't for the absence of the sacred thread, they would look
: identical to the members of the "brahmin class".
: There is also many non-brahmin Srivaishnava sannyaasis, including
: Tridandi SrimannaaraayaNa Jeeyar of Tirupati.
The `iyers' and `iyeNGkaars' are brahmins
from south and mostly Tamil regions. In Old
tamil the word `iyer' and in telugu `iyaagaaru'
meant a word of respect for people of any caste
who practiced austerity. Some people later
started calling themselves `iyers' and `iyeNGkaars'
based on birth-based castes.
anban
Kathir
: Mani
un03...@wvnvms.wvnet.edu
>>
> .. stuff deleted:
Go to Thiruvallikeni in Madras, or
> Azhvaar Thirunagari, or any other major Srivaishnava center, and you
> will find many, many people who do not wear the sacred thread, but
> who participate in temple functions, who eat and behave the same
> way as brahmin Srivaishnavas, who wear the thirumaN, and who sometimes
> even sport a kudumi!
>
> Some of these people have the suffix Chettiar or Reddiar in
> their names, but many do not. I do not know to which community they
> belong.
>
>
you are right. in ThiruvallikkENi parthasarathy koil, i have seen a lot of
women folks who are telugu speaking nayudus wearing the "oththai"(srichoorNam
with the thirumaN underneath) and chanting naalayiram. and recently i had been
to srirangam on the Aazhwaar mOksham day and i found so many people like that
especially one such lady was giving a small religious discourse in chaste tamil
abt "thiruvaaymozhi Vs bhagavath geetha". all brahmin madisaar maamis were so
very absorbed by that.
vijayaraghavan T.R.
>
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
: Vadagalai philosophy is also closer to the smartha (Iyer) philosophy than
: the thengalai philosophy.
The Smartha's have a general racist attitude.
These guys have done everything to put Tamil down
in the past. Likes of hiding Tamil works and
promoting skt by putting tamil down. Some of the
Sms are still working in Temples in NA and cheating
people in the name of God.
anban
Kathir
Satyanad Kichenassamy
I am not sure that this type of generalization is valid.
It is thanks to an AshTa-sahasra Iyer by the name of
Swaminathaiyar that we do have Tamil texts to talk about.
I must say that belonging to this community myself,
I do wonder about the intent of the previous posting.
Satyanad Kichenassamy
School of Mathematics
University of Minnesota
kich...@math.umn.edu
Mani Varadarajan
> The philosophical differences are known only to the learned few. In general,
> the vadagalai philosophy is "stricter", (more number of sEvippu for example).
In some senses, the Vadagalai viewpoints is stricter, but not in
general, and certainly not in terms of the number of "sEvippu".
This goes both ways -- I think Thengalais are counselled not to
prostrate more than once, and Vadgalais are counselled to prostrate
at least twice or four times. I am not aware of the philosophical
basis for this distinction.
Note that in this behavior the Thengalais mirror the Smaartas (Iyers).
Mani
Mani Varadarajan
> Aside from the fact, that there may be different rituals for both of them,
> a fundamental difference can be illustrated with an example.
>
> If one observes the way in which monkey's and cat's treat their offsprings
> a difference can be seen.
>
> It is the baby monkey's responsiblity to hold on to its mother tightly
> while the mother cat takes the responsiblity of protecting its offsprings.
More properly, both take the responsibility of protecting their offspring,
but in terms of "carrying" them to moksha, the kittens do nothing and
the cat does all, where the baby monkey does the act of grasping the
mother as she carries it. Of course these are clever oversimplifications.
Mani
Ramesh Jayaraman
|> the vadagalai philosophy is "stricter", (more number of sEvippu for example).
|> The anology of the "monkey" for vadagalai and "cat" for the thengalai is
|> well known. (Even A.L. Basham mentions it in Wonder that was India).
^^^^^^^^^^ I looked for this reference in ALB's book, but
couldn't locate it. Perhaps you mean K.L. NeelakanTa Sastri (History of S. India,
OUP - not positive about the title) where he refers to markata-kisora-nyAyA
(vadakalai) and mArjAra-kisora-nyAyA (thenkalai) ?
Sastri also refers to another AcharyA (whose name escapes me), not maNavALa mAmuni
as the nominal philosophical leader of the thenkalais.
On a side note, I have to agree with Mani Varadarajan's comment about superiority
complexes - when returning from the Tirupathi devasthAnam to our rooms, we were
passing by the dorms/chathrams by the various muTs. I chatted up this gentleman
sitting in front the thenkalai muT (pardon me if have mis-identified it).
While he was not aware (or perhaps was unwilling to share his knowledge after
seeing my fore-head !) of the two nyAyAs, he made sure that I got his point of
view - the thenkalai philosophy has existed for "anAdhi kAlam" !
--
Regards, ram...@erenj.com (Internet)
Ramesh Jayaraman
Mani Varadarajan
> ( It is interesting that in Christianity also, they
> have had the same work vs grace arguments, with different
> sects holding the vadakalai and tenkalai positions.
> The Jesuits, when they arrived in South India, were
> amazed to see their centuries-old arguments mirrored
> in the writings of Vedanta Desikan and his opponents.
> The Jesuits hold the Tenkalai positions to be "correct",
> so they spent a lot of time bolstering their arguments
> against that of Sri Desikan )
It is unlikely that the Jesuits supported the Thengalai position,
since, being Catholics, they adhere more to the "effort is required"
than to the Protestant / Calvinist view, which is much closer to
passivity and predetermination.
The true depths of the Christian faith vs. works conflict was
debated in the early years of the Church. The "salvation by
works" argument was put forth by a group of scholars led by
Pelagius and was eventually discarded as a heresy. Note here
that the Vadagalai view can in no way be regarded as a "salvation
by works" doctrine. It is a faith-based surrender of the burden
of achieving moksha.
Mani
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
Raghu Seshadri <sesh...@cup.hp.com> wrote:
>
>: Although it might sound oxymornonic it is
>: actually an 'active non-action'. It, in effect, means rapt
>: attention with deep love; everything else follows from this.
>
>Active non-action is described very well in the
>Bhagavad-gita also, and Sri Ramanuja has given us
>a cogent and beautiful explanation of this oxymoron
>as well. The Tenkalai position surely has a sound
>footing here.
By 'doing/being-in'' active non-action you'll know whether what
is said where or by whom is correct.
A cogent explanation can not illuminate anything, can it ?
>
>: To do a good (external) action, propelled by
>: great good inside ( n^alluNarvu), is not discouraged in Tenkalai
>: philosophy, I think.
>
>True, it is not discouraged. But isn't this slightly
>different from active encouragement ?
Not in the essence. More below..
>
>In other words, you suspect that the conscious striving will
>lead to ego - the thought that "I" am doing all this, and
>therefore I can demand Mukti as my right. I agree that
>if this happens, it is pernicious. But the Gita gives us
>a good solution to this - it is the principle of
>action without attachment, offering all the fruits of
>karma to Krishna, living in this world as a lotus-leaf
>lives in the water ( as the Tamil poets say ). Krishna
[1] The much talked about 'ego' may appear to be easy enough to see.
If it is really seen, then what J. Krishnamoorthy used to say as
'the observer is the observed' will become a reality. But the point is
'is it a fact' or 'just a theory, a commentary, 'JK had said this',
'Sankaracharya had said it', 'Udaiyavar had declared' bla bla'?
Sure enough all of us can see some of our own egoisitical
thinking, but that is not 'seeing'.
Gita or Veda or for that matter any given book can not give
any 'solution'; and for this reason that some upanishads declare
that Vedas are apara ( lower knowledge).
[2] About the oft quoted words attributed to Lord Krishna: One can do
'action without attachment - offering all the fruits of karma to
Krishna' only after one has done well enough 'active non-action' and
is already a self-realized one. Pretending can not help.
Some may imagine 'extreme humility', but it is not in actuality
much different from a most arrogant one. The
advantage of 'humble' attitude is that the others' egos may
not be 'tickeld'. The 'advantage' is itself a selfish motive.
[ heard of 'I am the humblest' ? :) ]
Also one can see statements such as 'Lord will surely be
pleased by this and by that etc.. ' or 'Lord would not want that'
- but one has to ask did s/he really know Lord's wishes and his thinking ?
>RS
>
>: P.S. The example of monkey, cat, giving-rope, 'tying' are all fine.
>: Each example beautifully illustrates certain things, but
>: one can not take them too seriously.
>
>True - as the Zen saying has it, " The finger points at the
>moon; it is not the moon itself ".
May appear trivial, but this is a most important one.
A ponter to 'Madurai' is not Madurai.
>
>( It is interesting that in Christianity also, they
>have had the same work vs grace arguments, with different
>sects holding the vadakalai and tenkalai positions.
>The Jesuits, when they arrived in South India, were
>amazed to see their centuries-old arguments mirrored
>in the writings of Vedanta Desikan and his opponents.
>The Jesuits hold the Tenkalai positions to be "correct",
>so they spent a lot of time bolstering their arguments
>against that of Sri Desikan )
>
Interesting.
anbudan -selvaa
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
>> Quite right !! ( I'm not a thenkalai aacharyar :) )
>> This view of the thenkalai aacharyars is not some fake extreme view
>> of humility, but a vitally valuable thingy worthy of 'hearing'.
>>
>> From what you say Mani, it appears that Thenkalais have a 'better'
>> understanding and attitude. Vadakalais don't have a clue
>> except one point about 'striving'. About even this 'striving'
>> their view appears to be dangerously ill-founded.
>
>by my summary, and it appears that this was the case. The Vadagalai
>concept of saraNaagati is well based on an understanding of the
>outpourings of the aazhvaars and the Upanishads. I would say that
>they have more than a clue as to what they are talking about.
From what you said, it appeared as I said.
I could very well have misunderstood.
If you would be kind enough to share the "Vadagalai's concept of
saraNaagati", it would be helpful to understand your assertion
that 'Vadagalai have more than a clue as to what they are talking
about.". I'm assuming that what you say is true but from what you
said it didn't appear that way.
>
>Mani
anbudan - selvaa
"paRaiyanaar anban"
Mani Varadarajan
> i have a question. definitely during the time of ramanuja there was no split.
> the most conspicous difference of "ThirumaN" is little confusing. both sects
> have their own views . its ok. what was there during ramanuja's period?
No one knows for certain. Perhaps there were many variants then itself.
A small publication entitled "Two Great Acharyas: Vedanta Desika and
Manavala Mamuni" briefly discusses the dispute over the thirumaN and
concludes that there is no solid historical evidence for the priority
of either. Most probably it was not a great issue of debate until many
years after Manavala Mamuni's death.
For example, Vedanta Desika discusses the significance of the thirumaN
in his "Saccharitra Raksha", a compendium of Sri Vaishnava ritual
belief and practice. Not once does he even hint of the "correct way"
of putting it on one's forehead. Undoubtedly, if it was an issue of
concern in his time, he would have written about it, since one of
his goals was to resolve differing viewpoints within the community.
> Rammanuja's "thaan ugandha thirumEni" at sriperumbudur is supposed to be
> accepted by Ramanuja himself and it has the thirumaN with the paadham? does
> this mean that it was being followed by ramaanuja? why was this changed later.
Again, no one knows what thirumaN was originally on Ramanuja's forehead
in Srirangam, though there are hints that it may be more like the Thengalai
kind. Pay no attention to what is on his forehead now in Srirangam --
the kOvil is controlled by Thengalai priests and of course they will
adorn the image of Ramanuja with a Thengalai thirumaN.
> Also sri manavaaLa maamunigaL is said to be the
> reincarnation of sri raamanujar.
> can anybody explain. just curious to know.
ManavaaLa Maamuni is considered by some Thengalais to be a reincarnation
of Ramanujacharya, but this appears to be a tradition that developed
a century or two after ManavaaLa MaamunigaL's passing, probably to
enhance the Thengalai tradition's stature over the Vadagalai in the
popular eye. It does not figure much in the biographies written
immediately after ManavaaLa MaamunigaL passed away. Most often, he is
simply referred to as "yatindra pravaNa", one who was devoted to the
King of Yatis, i.e., Ramanuja.
Of course, Vadagalais do not believe that Ramanuja reincarnated as
ManvaaLa Maamuni.
For that matter, the whole basis for Ramanuja's being an incarnation
of Adisesha seems to be of late origin.
Mani
Mani Varadarajan
> This view of the thenkalai aacharyars is not some fake extreme view
> of humility, but a vitally valuable thingy worthy of 'hearing'.
>
> From what you say Mani, it appears that Thenkalais have a 'better'
> understanding and attitude. Vadakalais don't have a clue
> except one point about 'striving'. About even this 'striving'
> their view appears to be dangerously ill-founded.
I was afraid that the philsophical difference would be oversimplified
by my summary, and it appears that this was the case. The Vadagalai
concept of saraNaagati is well based on an understanding of the
outpourings of the aazhvaars and the Upanishads. I would say that
they have more than a clue as to what they are talking about.
Mani
Balaji
>More properly, both take the responsibility of protecting their offspring,
>but in terms of "carrying" them to moksha, the kittens do nothing and
>the cat does all, where the baby monkey does the act of grasping the
>mother as she carries it. Of course these are clever oversimplifications.
>
The above cat-monkey analogy is also used to describe the guru-sishya
relationship. ( advisor-student relationship ?! ) There are 4 possible
combinations !
cat advisor and kitten student - good combo, student always survives
monkey advisor and monkey student - good combo, student is smart enuff
to take care of himself.
cat advisor and monkey student - The best ! Each holds on to the other and
it must be smooth sailing all thru - ofcourse
discounting any other differences !
monkey advisor and kitten student - One has to feel sorry for the student !!
I am sure each of us can identify whether our advisor was a cat or a monkey !!
Even if we are not sure about ourselves, we can atleast classify our boss, and
while I am at it let me say that my advisor was a 'monkey' in a cat's clothing !! *grin*
balaji/...
Raghu Seshadri
: >Active non-action is described very well in the
: >Bhagavad-gita also, and Sri Ramanuja has given us
: >a cogent and beautiful explanation of this oxymoron
: >as well. The Tenkalai position surely has a sound
: >footing here.
: By 'doing/being-in'' active non-action you'll know whether what
: is said where or by whom is correct.
: A cogent explanation can not illuminate anything, can it ?
Quite right. No explanation can substitute for the experience.
But we have to start somewhere in our quest, and these
books and commentaries can be one starting point, that's all.
People who only read, and never thirst for the experience,
will never know.
: [1] The much talked about 'ego' may appear to be easy enough to see.
: If it is really seen, then what J. Krishnamoorthy used to say as
: 'the observer is the observed' will become a reality. But the point is
: 'is it a fact' or 'just a theory, a commentary, 'JK had said this',
: 'Sankaracharya had said it', 'Udaiyavar had declared' bla bla'?
: Sure enough all of us can see some of our own egoisitical
: thinking, but that is not 'seeing'.
: Gita or Veda or for that matter any given book can not give
: any 'solution'; and for this reason that some upanishads declare
: that Vedas are apara ( lower knowledge).
That's true.
: [2] About the oft quoted words attributed to Lord Krishna: One can do
: 'action without attachment - offering all the fruits of karma to
: Krishna' only after one has done well enough 'active non-action' and
: is already a self-realized one. Pretending can not help.
What you say is true, but I have this to add. Trying
to cultivate the attitude that I am surrendering
everything to Krishna, even when my ego is very much
alive and licking, will help in spiritual progress;
one cannot, unless one is a born Jnani, leap towards
self-realization without a slow and steady cultivation
of the mind and spirit - this is one of the sadhanas.
You posit "action without attachment" as an end condition
only - but it can also be a means to that end.
Of course sincerity is a pre-req; pretense cannot help,
needless to say.
: Some may imagine 'extreme humility', but it is not in actuality
: much different from a most arrogant one. The
: advantage of 'humble' attitude is that the others' egos may
: not be 'tickeld'. The 'advantage' is itself a selfish motive.
: [ heard of 'I am the humblest' ? :) ]
: Also one can see statements such as 'Lord will surely be
I understand what you are saying; anyone who is familiar
with Uriah Heep will know :-)
: pleased by this and by that etc.. ' or 'Lord would not want that'
: - but one has to ask did s/he really know Lord's wishes and his thinking ?
:
Again, I agree. Of all the ego-ridden statements, that one is
the worst ! I wish all the intermediaries will keep quiet
and let the Lord speak for him/herself :-)
: anbudan -selvaa
RS
Sankaran, Sam
> "aiyangaar" is not a caste word in origin. (Like Singh, Jain etc.)
> Earlier, the family names used by the SriVaishnavas were acharya,
> nambi, piLLai, chOzhiyan, etc..
^^^^^^^^^
That is very interesting. I first came across this
caste/subcaste "chOzhiyan" in mAnAmadurai. Almost all
"aiyangArs" on the east side of the town (where the main
railway junction is) concentrated in an agrahAram named the
"bAgapath agrahAram" were chOzhiyans. But all the aiyangArs
who were not chOzhiya aiyangArs were on the west side of the
town (i.e., on the west bank of vaigai river) were mostly
thenkalais, with a few vadakalais thrown in as "dhrishti
parihAram" :-) However there was absolutely NO interaction
between the chOzhiyans and the other aiyangArs. As a little
boy from the "city" I was quite perplexed by this, and when
I finally asked somebody who was a thenkalai, he explained
that the regular (i.e., vada/thenkalai aiyangArs) did not
recognize the chOzhiyans as aiyangArs at all! Their attitude
to the sowrashtrAs some of whom at least claimed to be
aiyangArs was also the same. In other words the "mainstream"
aiyangArs did not seem to recognize chOzhiyans or sowrashtrAs
as either brahmins or aiyangArs.
As an interesting aside, years later, I met a lift/elevator
operator in the Madras Woodlands Hotel (the one near the Music
Academy) and he claimed that he was a chOzhiyan IYER, not aiyangAr
as he indignantly corrected me! I have never met another chOzhiyan
Iyer, before or since.
Given these complexities, one has to sing with bhArathi:
"sAthikaL illaiyadi pAppa,
kulaththAzhchchi uyarchchi sollal pApam, pApam!"
> Srinivasan K
>
>
Swaminathan SANKARAN
Telephone: (306) 585-4988
FAX: (306) 585-4805
Ramesh Jayaraman
In article <1995Mar27....@erenj.com>, rja...@crsgi1.erenj.com (Ramesh Jayaraman) writes:
|> In article <D5sy...@ireq.hydro.qc.ca>, sr...@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (K.Srinivasan) writes:
|>
|> |> the vadagalai philosophy is "stricter", (more number of sEvippu for example).
|> |> The anology of the "monkey" for vadagalai and "cat" for the thengalai is
|> |> well known. (Even A.L. Basham mentions it in Wonder that was India).
|> ^^^^^^^^^^ I looked for this reference in ALB's book, but
|> couldn't locate it.
^^^^^^^^ I found it, thanks.
|> Sastri also refers to another AcharyA (whose name escapes me), not maNavALa mAmuni
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Sastri mentions Pillai LokAchAryA as the philosophical
leader, although he also mentions maNavAla mAhAmuni in the same paragraph. I would like to know more about these two AchAryAs and their interactions.
|> as the nominal philosophical leader of the thenkalais.
|>
--