You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : January 1997

Re: Disagreement vs. Apachara

From: Parthasarati Dileepan (dileepan_at_utc.edu)
Date: Thu Jan 16 1997 - 14:28:13 PST

At 12:13 PM 1/16/97 -0800, S. Vidyasankar wrote:
>
>>
>> To my knowledge Sri Mani's objections to Sri Murali Rangaswami prompted a
>> few mild and quite respectful disagreements.  Sri Mani's response included:
>>
>>    "Practice your sandhyavandanam, be a vegetarian,
>>     do thiruvaaraadhanai; but don't let these be the
>>     excuse for committing bhagavata-apacharam."
>>
>> >From this it can be argued that Sri M. Srinivasan's complaint applies more
>> to Sri Mani than to Sri Anbil Ramaswami, the unnamed accused.  Further, I
>
>I thought Mani's comment applied more to the Brahmanas of the time of the
>Azhwar, and not to Sri Anbil Ramaswamy per se.

Could be, but the words were addressed to those who perform
Sandhyavandhanam, et al., and use that as an excuse to commit bhagavatha
apacharam.  They are not just the Brahmin's of aazhvaar's time.  However,
the reference to  Sri Anbil Ramaswami was strictly in the context of Sri M
Srinivasan's complaint about bhagavatha apacharam.  My point was that in
this instance, the spectre of bhagavatha apacharam was brought forth first
by Sri Mani, not Sri Anbil Ramaswami.  Again, I hate to be critical of Sri
Mani.  I hope I don't have to clarify my opinion on this matter any further.

You have raised many important questions regarding the practice of
Varnashrama Dharma.  I know very little about these matters and therefore I
am afraid I can't answer any of them.  Personally speaking, I will follow
the lead of my Acharya.  If my acharya says I will have to learn the Vedas
from a Chandala I will have absolutely no problem with that.  If he says I
should not, I won't.

regards, Dileepan