You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : July 2000

Re: [addr: M. S. Hari]

From: M.S.HARI (Madabhushi Sarangarajan Hari) (
Date: Fri Jul 28 2000 - 23:07:58 PDT

Dear Shree Sheshadri Ranganathan,

I thank you for you mail. I strongly object your words as calling 
my remarks as "belittling remarks" and "Vociferous" There is no
"Bhaagavatha Apachara" involved in my reply. If you want to call
it "immature for a person like me" then do you think that strong
refuting of certain anti-shree-vaishnava words itself as "immature"?
Then can you quote from Prastaana Trayam that mere Veena-Vaadanam with
knowledge in music is itself is Moksha-Upaayam? Please get back to me 
with proper Pramaanam. The issue of "immature" can be sorted out. I
take your words very seriously. Please do not just interpret words
without proper understanding of the context in full.

You have written:
"Every Paurusheya(some years later) or Apaurusheya work has always had
different interpretations. That is how the Sri Bhashyam and other
commentaries on commentaries came into being"
I really do not understand what you mean by this which is "confusing"
for me. To exactly know how Sri Bhashyam came into existence, please
read it under schloars to know. Have you studied Sri Bhashyam under
the guidance of Scholars? 

You have written:
"We might want to seek a clarification from the author of that piece of
article than having to interpret it to our convenience in order to uplift
our own image in the forum."
There is no prejudice here. Please get back to me with proper pramaanam
as I have already told.

You have written:
"And let's not forget that all these magazines(Sri Ranganatha Paduka,
Narasimha Priya et al) are very sentimental to the Shishyas of various
THE MASSES. And one isnt superior to the other..they all mean good!!"
Please get back to with Pramaanam from Prastaana Trayam that
only "Veena-Vaadanam with knowledge in music" is Mokshopaayam.
Please note that I have not talked anything as "superior to the 
other". I do not know why you have mentioned it. A rational person
should not go by prejudices.

You have written
"And the main intention of Sri Ramanuja I thought was to show us the "Bhakthi
marga" than having to fight out with the texts. He used the texts to convince
'outsiders'. For Bhakthas there was always their Acharya's
Thiruvadi and the Guru Parmapara and Prapatthi/Bharanyasa where I meekly
surrender and transfer all the "bhArA" to my Acharya-Lord. And I must lead a
SAATHVIC life full of Bhakthi and devoid of any "ahamkaara" so there will
"Bhaagavatha apachara"
What is that "Bhakti marga" shown by Sri Ramanuja? What do you mean by
your argument that "He used "texts" to convince 'outsiders'? If the
Veda is used only to "convince" outsiders, then from where the 
knowledge about Brahman was attained? Please do reply. I do not have
any "ahamkaara" but only repeat the words of Poorva-Aacharyas.

Thanks & Regards
M.S.HARI Ramanuja Daasan.

Get free email and a permanent address at

Was the salesman clueless? Productopia has the answers.

           - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
To Post a message, send it to:
Visit for more information