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

RE: Divya Prabandhams

From: Mohan Sagar (msagar_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: Tue Nov 18 1997 - 21:37:38 PST

I imagine that there are plethora of validations within our tradition to
equate the tamizh and Sanskrit vEda.  I would also be very interested in
hearing about these, to respond to similar issues. 

I would like to expand on one of the concerns raised by Mr. Srinivasan:

>Now, I was under the distinct impression that our Ubhaya Vedanta 
>Tradition upholds both the prabandhams and the vedas as being equal.  
>Are their certain exclusions to this rule.  Is this the same in both 
>the schools of thought in Sri Vaishnavism  ?

I am under the same impression, and am also under the view that this does
indeed apply to both schools, unconditionally. However, during informal
conversation at a recent NAMA function, two gentlemen maintained the view
that Vadakalais traditionally prefer Sanskrit, while Tenkalais place greater
emphasis on Tamizh in their respective chants. Indeed, these men contended,
the very names of the two schools themselves have been derived from the
geographic origins of their respective preferred language.

I cannot find any validation for this in the books that I have read, except
for a brief discussion in Mumme's "SriVaishnava Theological Dispute."  Mumme
states that at the time of Swami Desikan and Swami Lokacharya, Srirangam,
with its more homogeneous tamizh society, had become the center of learning
for the Azhwars' paasurams, while the teachers in Kanchi leaned more towards
teaching in Sanskrit to validate their views among the scholars of this
religiously diverse city.  From what I understand, though, Mumme can find
little evidence that such a linguistic dichotomy had an influence on either
school's view of Ubhaya vEdanta.

I look forward to clarifications from the more erudite in this forum.

dAsAnu dAsan,

Mohan