Kunjuppu and Nacchinarkiniyan talked about individuals making decisions(relating to modifications in customs) without spiritual guidance
No. You are wrong. We did have spiritual guidance. I have a Deeksha Guru and a jnana Guru who have given me spiritual guidance. My son also has a Guru who is both a Deekasha Guru and a Jnana Guru.
When Tamil Brahmins in general talk about Guru, they means the Kula Guru like Paramacharya or Bharati Teertha. They are Matathipathis and Kula Gurus. Only for a very few they are personal Gurus.
Today we have each family left alone as an island. The problem with coming to decisions without consulting elders and spiritual gurus is that most normal people make impulsive decisions. I can explain with an example. I used to read Bhagwat Gita without the invocation mantras. Nobody said this was mandatory as it was left to "indvidual common sense". Take the common RK Mutt publication of BHAGWAT GITA . When they publish a thousand verses cant they publish 10 more. No they dont. Similarly with most other publications of Gita. There are a few traditional ones though.Anyway, so I got hold of 70 year old copy of Bhagwat Gita which included the invocation mantras. I decided one fine day, to read it with the invocation mantras, including some special ones, performing the instructions( hand gestures et all) . I found something unusual. I suddenly was filled with the powerful physical presence of something which I could not describe. Then the reading of Gita took a different turn as my mind was tuned on to a more powerful plane and when I referred in the end to sections on fruits of reading gita, I was thrilled. This was because it made more sense that these sanskrit syllables had a spiritual potency. I could connect with the hare krishna concept which I read recently that the words themselves are the bhagwan. But if something as simple as invocation was not paid attention to, what went wrong?Nothing for the past few decades people seen these invocations as ornamentations and jumped straight to the main subject. But if they had made it mandatory to study as per traditional recommendations this would have not arised. Most people of those times may have neglected it or used their common sense .It is possible they found no benefit in its recitation due to their own specific mental states at the time of reading. However if people who even read Gita once in their life,had consulted a traditional spiritual counsel on the right way to read to Gita, he would have told them that invocation mantras are necessary. In this particular case, I could revive a not so common practice because I looked at a traditional book. But extend this logic to all our customs. If you make a change in a custom, how much faith your son will have in it. How much confidence you yourself will have in it,that itself I am not sure. Some customs will never again be revisited even though a particular descendant would have certainly benefitted from it. A lucky descendant might be reinspired by the practice surviving somewhere in the globe. But that is a rare incidence. More rare a particular custom becomes more difficult to revive it. Nacchinarkiniyan talked about one of his son wearing panchagacham but how common is it? Then imagine the situation of his other grandson whose father never wore a panchagacham.
Kunjuppu sir, pointed out that the teaching of a particular tradition guru does not inspire him.The first question which I have in my mind, is how much he felt a need to have a guru? A guru is required because there are things beyond our common sense.In the example of invocation mantras to Gita, even I would have found it not so important before I practiced them. I was lucky to experience power because of some luck or because of my mind state at that time. Not everybody is lucky at first attempt. That is where a guru is needed to show us the way. We sincerely follow his views. Now the problem here is really that we dont feel inspired by certain gurus. Okay then look for a guru who can satisfy our needs.
As I said it is wrong to assume that people do not have spiritual guidance. Many of them do.
About Bhagavad Gita when Ramakrishna Mission publishes a book, the intended audience is people who are Hindus and also people who are interested in Hinduism. The invocation Mantras, Nyasas etc. differ from region to region and samparadhyas. They are not part of the original text. That is why they are not published.
If you take the Devi Mahatmyam book by Ramakrishna Mission only the original text is published. The texts which precede and which succeed the recitation are not published. Devi Mahatmyam is recited in Bengal by most people. The authors knew about this. But since practices change from region to region they are not included.
Again if you see Vishnu sahasranamam by Lifco, Madras, it gives both Sankara Bhashya and Parasara Bhashya. The namavali changes depending on what bhashya you follow. That is whether you are a Smartha or Vaishnavite.
Here both of them are published because the text is intended for serious recitation of Vishnu Sahasranama.
Coming back to change of practices, I feel
1. arrive at some kind of mutual consensus within community. If opinions are divided , let them form concrete opinions after getting all facts on the subject available. Note down the different opinions
2. Arrive at a consensus on who will be the right guru to decide on the view, he may not be a know all, but he may have deep knowledge and experience in this. Selecting a teacher to arrive at a decision is also a discussion process/.There are many who will not have confidence in anyone. Then ask them if they have personally met all the gurus in question or are they basing opinion based on rumours and news reports. If they say they have then the best thing that the rest can do is advice .I am sure that the rest may not come to a conclusion that one Guru alone fits the bill, so lets have different groups each with its own guide.
3. Approach the Guru with faith, seek his opinion on the matter at hand, and then discuss back in the community if a surprising verdict is reached and then iterate within the group till some decision is reached. In other cases pursue the Guru's advice.
This is a better approach as far as I am concerned. If there are valid scriptural answers to the questions we have , then we may first consult if this is exactly what the scripture traditionally means and follow it as per our common sense. we may reach 10 types of decisions for the community based on a proper discussion. But because of the ellaborate process and approval of valid authorities, it will inspire confidence in the next generation. Just letting each individual pursue his own way , applying his own common sense, without going through a rigorous process of examination and consensus will be self defeating. The decison may not only be not right, it may be broken easily, thus paving the way for younger generation to question more on the practices handed to them by their elders.
It would be difficult for us to arrive at a common Guru. The Guru depends on the system of Philosophy that you follow. The Sri Vaishnavas have individual Gurus. Smarthas follow different systems of Philosophy. Any one of the Shad Dharsana. Ramana Maharishi was a follower of Pure Advaita. Then you know about Sadasiva Brahmendra Avadhuta Swamigal. My sampradhaya is of the Avaduta lineage. The public perception of Sadasiva Brahmendra and our sampradhayic perception differ. He was a Siddhar.
Majority of the Tamil Brahmins are Purva Mimansa followers. Their rituals are Purva Mimansa in origin. But even in these rituals there is lot of difference between regions and sects. What is followed by a Vadama in Tanjore district may not be followed by a Brahcharanam in Thirunelveli district.
About Scriptures, I have taken Vanaprastha Ashrama. Now according to the common belief among the Tamil Brahmins, Vanaprastha Ashrama in Nished in Kali Yuga. But sages like Yagnavalkya and Manu do not agree with this view. The Nished is based on some of the later Dharmasasthras.
Then fundamental changes have taken place in our rituals in the last 100 years.
When and Why did we give up Aupasana which is part of our Nitya karma?
The sacred fire has an important place in the Vedic religion. The student-bachelor performs samidadhana twice a day offering samidhs (sticks of the flame of the forest or palasa ) in the fire. This rite is not continued after his marriage. When a person becomes a householder he has a number of rites to perform in the sacred fire. In place of samidadhana he now has the aupasana. The latter word is derived from "upasana" which term is used in the sense of puja, chanting of mantras, meditation, etc. But, according to the Vedas, aupasana is a rite performed in the sacred fire by all Hindus
Aupasana from the Chapter "Grhasthasrama", in Hindu Dharma : kamakoti.org:
How many Brahmins do Surya Namaskaram?
Surya Namaskara - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Everyone has heard of Adhitya Hridhayam. But how many know about Aruna Prasna.
Then in daily rituals how many people do Pranayama as it was originally intended? How many people do Dhyana (Meditation) as it was originally intended?
What I am trying to point out is
1. that there are many problems in arriving at a consensus about common practices.
2. Our rituals have changed/have been changing over the years. It is not a process which started now. It started ages back when the Brahmins left Arya Varta thus going against injunction of Manu Smiriti.
