Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha
Srimathe Sri Varaha Mahadesikaya Namaha
Sri Velukkudi Krishnan Swamy Thiruvadigaley Sharanam
Sri Velukkudi Ranganathan Swamy Thiruvadigaley Sharanam
Sri:
“Jivaatma is originally in knowledge (“jAnanthi”). But covered with anjana, na commits offences” –
According to VishistAdvaitam siddhAntham Truth is measured at that point in time. So factoring time, at the state of not knowing, it is a previous state of knowing
The context of Chiththa as it is in its pure form is never debated.
“Knowing Krishna”? –
Debatable. When Krishna himself doesn’t know his limits, (Swamy Parashara Bhattar) referring a JivAthma as knowing?
Inference:
Krishna can be known that he cannot be known. (Ghataka Shruthi)
“When Perumal and acharayas cite this they are saying so with compassion, not with aanavam” –
That’s the point. It’s not wise to determine who is genuine or speaking with ANavam. Only Perumal knows who speaks with self pride while comparing. Thanks for reflecting same views.
More than thousand times in Dharma Sandeha, questioner’s intent itself was questioned.
Apporul Mei Porul KAnbadhu Arivu
Kelviya pakanumey thavira, kelvi kekkaravara paaka kudaathu enbadhu adiyen udaya thaazhndha abhiprAyam
SriRam answered his entire history to SoorpanakhA
SriRam was Poorva BhAshi without King’s pride
Of course SoorpanakhA was insulted because her subsequent actions were with bad intentions may be intolerable even for SriRam & Sri Lakshmanan
When that being the case:
Sugrivan also insulted SriRam & Lakshmanan but SriRam chose different methodology to treat Sugrivan. Sugrivan was accepted by SriRam.
Ivan venumney kekkarana? Therinjukanumnu kekkarana?
My view:
It’s difficult to interpret but it’s the prerogative of answerer to chose to respond.
“or we are in ‘poraamai’ to perceive a compassionate statement as aanavam.” –
Well said , it is easy to judge from outside but difficult to ascertain the fact. .A third person perspective is always a distant relative. That’s my point.
When a student questions a teacher:
Teacher 1: Who are you to question me? Are you the teacher or me the teacher?
Teacher 2: There is a premise to your question, refer these articles…
AaNavam is completely “Subjective”!
“Comparison is essential; it is the basis of discrimination (in this context this word has the connotation of “vivekam”, not “parapaksham”)”
– See the word discrimination may sound positive in above statement. While our Swamy has told Varna is “Differentiation” not “Discrimination”. A same word has opposite meanings at two different places. We are easy to judge a person as “AaNavam” or “Poraamai” from an outsider perspective.
Also from above statement it is evident that “comparison” is inevitable and unavoidable.
The emotional context of comparison is to be questioned & not comparison itself.
I am 2nd standard
He is 1st standard
Obviously, I know better than him. This is not AaNavam. This is standardization.
A 5 star hotel better than 4 star hotel
Dhanyosmi for all Bhagavath Gita quotations full of rich divine information
🙇🙇🙇🙇🙇🙇🙇🙇
Dasanudasan
