You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : October 1995

Questioning.. " We dare!" =)
Date: Tue Oct 03 1995 - 17:49:47 PDT

Jay Bharadwaj says :

"be with the understanding that the Acharya is self realized and that the
questions are directed towards removing existing dvandva in the Mumukshu's
mind which have been caused by previous sins.  Questions that by their

I have to agree with Krish here that this request for heel-clicking acceptance
and an assumption that valid questioning is a result of sin smacks of some of
the Christian fundamentalist dogma which I personally abhor.. " Why is this ? "
" "cuz it sez so in the Baah-bl heah"...

Yes, as another member pointed out, this is a SriVaishnava mailing list, as
is evidenced by the machines that distribute it , however !

This does not mean we are not free or welcome to question our own faith to any
extent possible. Only if we can question our faith and find answers ( ourselves)
can we strengthen it. I am reminded of a few months back, when I posted on here
asking for a discussion on what to do in thecase of questioning or loss of

Surprisingly, many answers were based on tradition. Good, the tradition is
beautiful. However, it cannot be transplanted en masse here. Some parts just 
don't translate. Especially in foreign circumstances as we are, it becomes
VERY important that we support and try to help any member of this list in 
questioning, rather than go into knee-jerk responses when some question hits
a sore spot. Much more tolerance, and less dogma is called for, IMHO.

" Vaishnava aparaadha" is no longer the blanket under which all faults can be
swept under. Sorry, but it don't wash =)

As to Badri's comments about Srimad Azhagiya Singar, I would refer our readers
to purandara dasa's kriti that  lists the qualities of various people and things - 

" hariya neneyatara nara janmaveke / nara haraiya kondaadatha naaLigeyeke"

- what use is a human life that thinks not of hari / what use is a day or 
an hour that does not celebrate narahari ?

It begins thus, and asks several trenchant questions like 

"krodhava bidada sanyaasi taaneke " ? 

What use is a sanyasi who has not renounced rage and anger ? 

Enough said.

Well almost..

" naLIna naabha shree purandhara viTThalana cheluva moorutiya nodada kangaleke"
=) Indeed.

"Brahma though he may be among the greatest of Prapannas.  There is no end
to questions one can ask.  How can Tirumangai Azhwar or Vipra Narayana be
considered worshipable considering their actions?  Realization will come

Good questions. Tirumangai Mannan slaughtered almost his whole band of fellow
thieves at Kollidam ( The Place of Killing - Kwa Bulawayo ) - what we now
call koLLidam, or anglicize to Colleroon =) Vipra Narayana gave up his life
for the love of a prostitute.

If such can come back to the fold, find their faith and grace, there is no
reason to condemn any of us here. Our acharyas that we are so fond of quoting 
and reverencing - they call themselves the greatest of sinners in their
prapatti slokas. And we 'cast the first stone" for honest questioning ?
Something doesn't quite fit here.

"require their followers to worship the single Almighty God, do what He
tells us to do and all protection is promised.  This is an exact parallel
to Sarva Dharman Parityajya.  A fully surrendered Christian or Jew may or
may not go Sri Vaikuntha, but there is no doubt that he enjoys God's

You will be glad to know, Jay that your Judeo-Christian-Islamic theologians do
not return this courtesy of yours. Interesting no ? " for I am the Way, the Truth,
and the Life, and none comes unto the Father but it be through me"..

It is the statistical nature of human groups that in their interaction, some
sacred cows are questioned. When these sacerd cows happen to be people and
principles we revere and respect such as all our Acharyas, it behoves us that
we accept these questions in a spirit of faith - not of defense - examine them
and reply to the best of our knowledge. I do not think dismissing questions as
the result of sin can take us anywhere - at least not together.

	- Sundar