Search:
Bhakti List Archives

Re: Some thoughts... Again. (fwd)

From the Bhakti List Archives

Ramesh Sarangapani • January 7, 1999 


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1999 17:55:40 PST
From: Srinath Chakravarty 
To: sarangap@me.udel.edu
Subject: Re: Some thoughts... Again.

Ramesh, would you mind posting this on the Bhakti list as I feel
this was an enlightening exchange for me?

Truly
-Srinath


>From sarangap@me.udel.edu Tue Jan  5 17:04:03 1999
>Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 20:03:59 -0500 (EST)
>From: Ramesh Sarangapani 
>To: Srinath Chakravarty 
>Subject: Re: Some thoughts about the origin of srivaishnavism
>
>
>On Tue, 5 Jan 1999, Srinath Chakravarty wrote:
>
>> Dear fellow members:
>> 
>>        One must however, distinguish between vaishnavism and 
>> SRIvaishnavism, and also consider the aspect of religion versus 
>> philosophy while discussing this matter.  Vaishnavism as a religion 
has 
>> Vedic origins, and is also enshrined as a tradition in the 
>> Vishnu-puranas.  Many Hindus from all parts of India and from various 
>> sects are Vaishnavite by faith, but the distinction of 
SRIvaishnavaite 
>> applies only to a particular sect of South Indian Brahmins (referred 
to 
>> of course, as iyengar) whose patron saint is Sri. rAmAnujar. 
>
>Dear SrinAtH
>
>Thanks for your note on the origin of Srivaishnavism.
>It was informative and well written.
>
>From what you wrote, you seem to indicate that although 
>vaishnavism existed long before Bhasyakarar, "Sri" vaishnavism
>was started by him. adiyEN is not quite sure if this
>representation is correct.
>
>The appellation SRI derives from the fact that for this
>group of vaisnavas perAtti is the second in line of acharyas.
>For all vaishnavas Perumal is the first acharyan (pEthagavadai peran
>peranma guruvai nindru). However the second in line will
>vary. For SRI vaishnavas it is thayar (Mahalakshmi), for
>gaudiya vaishanavas it is the four faced Brahma etc.
>
>So we _did_ have SRIvaishnavas even before the time of
>Sri Ramanujar. Sri Nathamunigal and Sri Alavandar were
>infact Srivaishnavas (and considered themselves as Sri
>vaishnavas and not a 'general' vaishnava). Among alvars
>Perialvar and Goda were Sri vaishnavas and so was
>thondaradipodi alvar. Bhasyakarar only placed the
>Sri siddhantam on a firm philosophical footing and
>did not create this "Sri Vaishnava" sect. Any one
>who can trace back his Acharya parampara to SRI is
>a SRI vaishnavan. Such people existed long before
>Sri Ramanujar.
>
>This information is based on my limited knowledge. If
>adiyEn am wrong, please feel free to correct me.
>  
>daasan
>Ramesh
>
>
>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com