Unity among Iyer and Iyengars

[Seshadri Subramaniam]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

There are only two species-man & woman.Any man and any woman can marry and live happily,provided the society they live in allows such freedom,and they themselves are free from any peer pressures.This is the original truth.

sb

thalaiva.... your statement itself provides the answer... (highlighted in bold)... it not only depends on us brahmins, but on the innumerable other communities as well...

not everyone is a gnyani or a seeker of moksha... in this harmonised ions provide more magnetism than haphazard ones... hence the idea of marriage within one's culture as the mental frequency would more often match with the other...

but of late, this has not been happenning... this is the result of such outside marriages... this is not a fault of our culture, but the individual and collective failure of ourselves to raise up to our ideals....

 

[s007bala]

re

thalaiva.... your statement itself provides the answer... (highlighted in bold)... it not only depends on us brahmins, but on the innumerable other communities as well...

Brahmin,Kshatriya,Vaisya,Shudra are personality traits inherent in every human being.Though i am researching on animals too on this gunam tattvam.Brahmins are minority only 2% of the population in whole of India.Its gonna be total in breeding within the saptharishis descendants.

not everyone is a gnyani or a seeker of moksha... in this harmonised ions provide more magnetism than haphazard ones... hence the idea of marriage within one's culture as the mental frequency would more often match with the other...

Roger dat!

but of late, this has not been happenning... this is the result of such outside marriages... this is not a fault of our culture, but the individual and collective failure of ourselves to raise up to our ideals....

If the personality traits match like how in http://www.eharmony.com ,i think one shud go for it.Our horoscope matching is astr-sciencetific process.But with so many psuedo astrologers,as the brahmins have let it go,this art of predicting possibilities....the communities are messed up.But still it is only man & woman-period.Rest are mumbo-jumbo as our minds leads us to.If there is a will there is a way always.I meant english will not our tamizh will:loco:

sb:hat:

 

[rrvvvr]

Great responses

Dear all,

the responses and discussion it generated is great and will certainly help in uniting the sects. I have a Iyengar friend in Chennai who got married to an Iyengar gril from Tiruvannamalai. She is so much in awe of the presiding deity there that she applied vibhuti and insisted on visiting a shiva temple on pradosham days. That is when the trouble started. There were arguments and ego clashes before the wise girl gave in to the preferences of her husband's family to find peace. Elders cannot change alright, but the present generation should understnd that unity is the only way to counter the NBs. Request you all to cite incidents without names so that we identify the practical issues and suggest solutions for the overall betterment of both sects.

 

[sridharvasudevan]

Brahmins by nature of birth or pirthru punya have an edge over being intelligent. Intelligence and orthodoxy without spiritual nature in a person is a fertile ground for ego.

So when two brahmins (of the above nature) with different ishta deivas meet they have a great opportunity to kindle their own ego. In the venture to satisfy their ego, they forget that their own origin was from spiritual roots.

A person of spiritual nature understands that sanathana dharma encourages worship of ishta deiva for the development of spirituality in a person. Definitely not for orthodoxy alone.

In the first place, all spiritual greats have agreed that nature's role of creation, preservation and destruction are only depicted by the forces or powers in the form of brahma, vishnu and shiva. All spiritual greats have also agreed that the form of ishta deiva ceases to exist when the person relinquishes ones' own ego or identity and surrenders completely to the omnipotent.

Then, where is the question of fighting over Iyer or Iyengar? Where is the question of who is greater? The moment one fights over this, it only reflects the individual's ignorance or immaturity at that point of time. That too is only the play of God to keep the soul away from the ultimate reality for the time being.

I have always loved this one liner: Harium Sivanum Onru Ariyathavar Vaayil Mannu.

 

[rrvvvr]

Dear Sridharvasudevan, Great understanding of spirituality and even better way of expression. I, for one, know very little about spirituality and almost nothing about the vedas and upanishads. All I know is- brahminism is struggling for survival and such unwarranted differences only prove detrimental to brahminism. Hence this effort of mine in bringing out the differences and bridging the gap in the light of things that I have witnessed till date.

 

[s007bala]

S V

>>I have always loved this one liner: Harium Sivanum Onru Ariyathavar Vaayil Mannu.<<

Neenga Navarathnathhil Onru.I enjoy your posts very much,thank you.

sb

 

[sridharvasudevan]

S V

>>I have always loved this one liner: Harium Sivanum Onru Ariyathavar Vaayil Mannu.<<

Neenga Navarathnathhil Onru.I enjoy your posts very much,thank you.

sb

This one liner is from a movie, I recollect, by Rajini, "Sri Ragavendra". So if it was from the movie, the appreciation would be to Rajini (if it was his own dialogue) or the script writer or might have been originally said by Sri Ragavendra himself.

Dear Sridharvasudevan, Great understanding of spirituality and even better way of expression. I, for one, know very little about spirituality and almost nothing about the vedas and upanishads. All I know is- brahminism is struggling for survival and such unwarranted differences only prove detrimental to brahminism. Hence this effort of mine in bringing out the differences and bridging the gap in the light of things that I have witnessed till date.

Any appreciation for words I have said goes to people who have taught us. Let me thank you on their behalf.

It's true there are some undercurrents even today. In some places the differences are even seen in public. It is best to ignore them. Simply because any attention to it fuels fire. Just like an unwelcome guest exists on their own.

When we are the affected ones, all that we need to do is remember - God has an inexhaustible source of tests and hurdles to keep us busy in our life time. This is one of them. The more we pay heed to these provocations, the easier it is for God to keep us at arms length. By, remembering that one liner, we can smile to ourselves, that God remembers us by testing our faith (and understanding) this way (through them). By remembering that one liner, we can pity the provoker(s) and even pray to God that people in this world are given the knowledge and truth of the one liner.

Peace (of mind only) is never lost unless we lose it ourselves. Unity is never lost unless we decide to see ourselves as separate from the other.

 

[vanavil]

'Harium Sivanum Onru Ariyathavar Vaayil Mannu' - First I came across this saying in Kalki's novel 'Ponniyin Selvan', where the hero mediates between two fighting shiva and vishnu worshippers by saying this. So, the saying is in use from Kalki's time or much before that.

 

[sridharvasudevan]

The older origin of the saying the better. Because it illustrates that people did understand its truth at that time (ponniyin selvan first published in 1950s?). Sadly, the older its origin, it also illustrates that the issue has been there for that long. Of course we know the issue has been there for hundreds if not thousands of years.

Anyway, wouldn't we be only interested in individuals (who comprise society/communities) to realize the truth behind the words rather than origin of this liner?

 

[Seshadri Subramaniam]

I have some iyengar friends and certainly they dont mind visiting shiva or ganapathi temples etc... of course there the others who do not do these - due to samasrayanam... such iyengars (the really abiding ones) do not even eat from another brahmin's house... and always there are the ones, who carry on with their business as if it is just another day...

When we speak of unity it has to have certain common causes - certainly it is not in the best intersts to weigh whether Hari or Haran is the supreme or not... this would only lead to further stirrings... on the same note it is not also possible for the sects to reconcile to the fact "Hariyum Haranum onru"... due to the their alleigance to their philosophical school....

So philosophies aside, we have to be united as brahmins - that is the only way out... let there be iyers and iyengars with all their differing thoughts... we will accept it and continue on... I need not say that Hari or Haran is "The One", but I, definitely can respect the mind which follows either of them?

We say that everything is one because we see conflicts that hinder a peaceful existence... when two minds that have a firm stand and are closed to other thoughts oppose, there cannot be a victory or defeat... further debates would only lead to more acrimony.

There are cases where an iyer or iyengar can reconcile with a non-brahmin, but will not be friendly with a brahmin because he/she is a hardcore adherent of the opposite philosophy.

How have we brahmins degenerated to such an extent? I am disgusted.

We have to lower our ego and respect our brahmin folk who are just like us...

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri SS Ji,

Your way of addressing the differences among various philosophies within 'Brahminism' is well aligned to my own thinking. But I go a step forward. All the 'non-brahmins' are our brethren. We existed only to make sure that they thrived. They are mad at us in certain parts of India, and in most part, rightly so. If we understand that we are all Hindus first, and respect each other as equals, all these schism will disappear.

Just my 2 cents.

Regards,
KRS

I have some iyengar friends and certainly they dont mind visiting shiva or ganapathi temples etc... of course there the others who do not do these - due to samasrayanam... such iyengars (the really abiding ones) do not even eat from another brahmin's house... and always there are the ones, who carry on with their business as if it is just another day...

When we speak of unity it has to have certain common causes - certainly it is not in the best intersts to weigh whether Hari or Haran is the supreme or not... this would only lead to further stirrings... on the same note it is not also possible for the sects to reconcile to the fact "Hariyum Haranum onru"... due to the their alleigance to their philosophical school....

So philosophies aside, we have to be united as brahmins - that is the only way out... let there be iyers and iyengars with all their differing thoughts... we will accept it and continue on... I need not say that Hari or Haran is "The One", but I, definitely can respect the mind which follows either of them?

We say that everything is one because we see conflicts that hinder a peaceful existence... when two minds that have a firm stand and are closed to other thoughts oppose, there cannot be a victory or defeat... further debates would only lead to more acrimony.

There are cases where an iyer or iyengar can reconcile with a non-brahmin, but will not be friendly with a brahmin because he/she is a hardcore adherent of the opposite philosophy.

How have we brahmins degenerated to such an extent? I am disgusted.

We have to lower our ego and respect our brahmin folk who are just like us...

 

[rrvvvr]

reason for differences

I came across 2 versions from my IG friends for not naming iyengar children after siva or ganesa or murugan.first one says that it is wrtitten somewhere in divyaprabandam or somewhere else that lord vishnu is supreme and rest are all subordinate to him. So it is believed that anyone who doesn;t seek vishnu or his avataras, is not guaranteed moksha and indeed considered mineal.The other version for IGs not visiting shiva temples- IGs consider shiva as a resident of burrial ground. So they consider shiva temple as impure. People who know more on this may give their comments. As I confessed earlier, I know very little about vedas and upanishads but I am disgusted at this disunity. As few of you pointed out NBs are acceptable for some, but not the B of other sect. Crazy indeed.

Thanks.

 

[Seshadri Subramaniam]

Rudran was the name accorded... Shiva, perhaps came later... so yes, Rudran is considered the masana vaasi... and his ganas are depicted as asuric hordes... coz he controls them...

The question of purity or impurity is rather sensitive - you see in astrology, grahams are classified as rajasic/sattvic/tamasic... there are other classifications based on varna, parts of the body etc... probably these indicate how they affect the mind and the body... and hence those grahams that affect us adversely are accorded a lower status... eg. rahu, ketu sani... but this status is only relative... are the grahams by themselves sattvic/rajasic/tamasic? No, if they are indeed gods or demi-gods, then they cannot be impure; they are just carrying out their role, and to term the grahams inherently impure by virtue of their relative effects seems illogical. But then, that is how we grade humans, isn't it? A good person is one who does good to others...

This analogy is just to show two different thoughts - it all depends on us and how we accept it. An iyengar calling Rudran impure does not make him so... if moksham is only in a name, then perhaps there should be no iyengar left in this world as everyone (who have their names after Vishnu/Lakshmi) would have attained moksham...

You see, the broader picture is to get enlightenment; the different philosophies aim towards that - we are all tangled up in a mess here with evaluating superiority of gods etc...

Aside: (this is not in line with the topic)

In many of the puranas, vishnu/shivan/murugan etc... were cherished on by womenfolk as lovers... some even managed to marry them. And they are held in high esteem.

On the other hand, there seems to be a distaste for those who love to have lakshmi/saraswathi/parvathi as their wives; those who did so were termed asuras...

If devis are to be considered mothers, then aren't their consorts to be considered fathers? Or if somebody is allowed to think about having krishna/shiva as their husbands, then why is the thinking repulsed when lakshmi/parvathi are thought in the same manner?

Does not sound logical to me...

 

[sridharvasudevan]

Dear Seshadri Subramaniam,

Is there any way to blow a whistle like in theatres? Beautiful anology. Though I was impressed by rational unbiased thoughts on the whole, I was particularly impressed by these lines....

>>if moksham is only in a name, then perhaps there should be no iyengar left in this world as everyone (who have their names after Vishnu/Lakshmi) would have attained moksham...<<

>>If devis are to be considered mothers, then aren't their consorts to be considered fathers? Or if somebody is allowed to think about having krishna/shiva as their husbands, then why is the thinking repulsed when lakshmi/parvathi are thought in the same manner?<<

In fact everyone wants their daughters or girl child born in their family to be lakshmi/devi and want them to be married too, but rest as you put it, "Does not sound logical to me..."

 

[Seshadri Subramaniam]

Shri sridharvasudevan,

if moksham is only in a name, then perhaps there should be no iyengar left in this world as everyone (who have their names after Vishnu/Lakshmi) would have attained moksham...

The counter to this could be that those athmas that are ready to attain moksha in their next janma would be born in an iyengar family...

Just reflecting, not judging.

 

[s007bala]

re

I came across 2 versions from my IG friends for not naming iyengar children after siva or ganesa or murugan.first one says that it is wrtitten somewhere in divyaprabandam or somewhere else that lord vishnu is supreme and rest are all subordinate to him. So it is believed that anyone who doesn;t seek vishnu or his avataras, is not guaranteed moksha and indeed considered mineal.The other version for IGs not visiting shiva temples- IGs consider shiva as a resident of burrial ground. So they consider shiva temple as impure. People who know more on this may give their comments. As I confessed earlier, I know very little about vedas and upanishads but I am disgusted at this disunity. As few of you pointed out NBs are acceptable for some, but not the B of other sect. Crazy indeed.

Thanks.

srk

Neither Shiva,Brahma,Vishnu nor their consorts have come and told individually to people all the time immemorial,what to do and what not do.Its our god given common sense which guides us.This reminds me of the incident here between my neighbor & i.He was the first to greet me and my family becoz he said,thats what his mother said to extend hospitality to us brown skinned hindus,and like a obedient son he is doing dat!!.So,i extended my hospitality and good community relationship activities.During one of our conversation,he told me,that his faith is christanity and belongs to X denomination.But he was upset becoz from the same christian faith of Y denomination has said that he will go to hell becoz he is following jesus christ of X denomination.


I empathised with him,and gave him a book or rather i loaned a book on returnable basis called 'The Hidden Lineage of Jesus Revealed' written by Laurence Gardner(The Chevalier Labhran de St Germain).Several months passed by,he started avoiding me like the plague becoz i supported republican party President George W Bush!! at that time.Finally neighborly relationship has become so strained between the two of us,that we are not even in talking terms.Not that it matters to me nor him.

So,faith and within faith,there are bound to be differences of opinion.Becoz faith itself,is only a human invention,for the LORD to witness his/her LEELA.


sb

 

[sridharvasudevan]

Shri sridharvasudevan,

The counter to this could be that those athmas that are ready to attain moksha in their next janma would be born in an iyengar family...

Just reflecting, not judging.

Nice...it's better to be our own devil's advocate. Improves our thought process.

However, there is also a belief in many families...many communities in general...that our own ancestors return back to continue the lineage...all in the family

 

[rrvvvr]

Dear readers and contributors,

I found the genesis of the controversy(in wiki) originating from Madhwacharya's philosophy of dwaitam, who incidentally is considered to be the fouder of vaishnava sampradaya.He sates in his statement "brahmashabdashcha vishhnaveva" that Brahman can only refer to Vishnu. Madhvacharya states that Vishnu is not just any other deity, but is rather the singular, all-important and supreme one. Vishnu is always the primary object of worship, and all others are regarded as subordinate to Him. The deities and other sentient beings are graded among themselves, with Vayu, the god of life, being the highest, and Vishnu is eternally above them. According to him Vishnu is accorded supreme status. Brahma and Vayu come the next level with both on the same level. Their wives (Saraswati and Bharati) occupy the next level. Garuda, Shesha, Shiva, Indra, Kama, Surya, Chandra, Varuna, Nala, Vignesh and others occupy the succeedingly lower hierarchy. In contrast acharya of Sringeri madam once said-Why should you fight over how the face looks like when you are unable to even see the lord's feet. I think this should be the line that needs to be understood by all brahmins alike keeping in line with contemporary realities.