Acharya is Nathamunigal
"Natha" refers to Dravida Veda
As he proclaimed - सर्वार्थदम् श्रीशठकोपवाङ्गमपम्
யாழினிசை வேதத்து இயல் - Yazhinisai vedathathu iyal- Thiruvaimozhi is like a Veena that reverberates the imports of the Vedas as per Parasara Bhattar.
Today is a most blessed day. It is Āṇi Anuṣam, the tirunakṣatram of Śrīman Nāthamunigaḷ.
Nāthamunigaḷ is the pioneer among the Ācāryas of Śrīvaiṣṇava Sampradāyam. Thousands of years after the time of the Āḻvārs, he revived Śrīvaiṣṇava Sampradāyam and made the Supreme Knowledge accessible to all of us out of his boundless compassion. Only by his grace do we have access to the nectarean pāsurams of the Āḻvārs.
Let us enjoy some of his auspicious qualities today:
—————————————————
Śrī Nāthamunigaḷ is the foremost among our Pūrvācāryas. Through his extraordinary efforts and by the kāruṇyam of Nammāḻvār, he not only restored and categorized the 4000 Divya Prabandham but also established the Arayar Sevai which is still observed even today at Tiruvaraṅgam, Āḻvār Tirunagari, Śrīvilliputhūr and other Divyadeśams.
Long before Rāmānujācārya was born with a carama tirumēni in this world, Nāthamunigaḷ constantly worshipped Rāmānujācārya, as Nammāḻvār himself presented the Bhaviṣyadācārya vigraham (the Ācārya of the future - Śrī Ramanuja) along with details of this Bhaviṣyadācāryan's tirunakṣatram to him. He also develops great attachment towards Bhaviṣyadācāryan since Āḻvār himself identifies Bhaviṣyadācāryan (Iḷayāḻvār) as a part of himself (his lotus feet) similar to how Lakṣmaṇa is identified as Śrī Rāman's right hand, and declares that the whole world is going to be uplifted this Bhaviṣyadācāryan's. (as seen in the "poliga poliga" pāsuram)
Nāthamunigaḷ foresees the appearance of his grand son, Āḷavandār and gives this secret knowledge to his śiṣyas who pass it down to Āḷavandār, which helped them identify that Iḷayāḻvār, Rāmānujācārya himself, was the Bhaviṣyadācāryan foretold by Nammāḻvār, based on his greatness, his physical appearance matching the vigraham and his tirunakṣatram based on Āḻvār's own words.
Without Nāthamunigaḷ's effort to retrieve aruḷicheyal, we would not have gotten all the Śrīvaiṣṇava Śrī we have today and also the Ācārya sambhandham towards Emperumānār, as the uttāraka Ācāryan (Ultimate deliverer) for the Śrīvaiṣṇava kulam.
So let us pray to Perumāl like how Āḷavandār does: "Please do not accept me for my great achievements but for my (sambandham with my) grandfather N��thamunigaḷ who has natural love towards your lotus feet and who has fully understood the real knowledge."
Nāthamunigaḷ Tiruvadigaḷē Śaraṇam
The only two times our acharyas point out as instances of bhagavAn flouting the rules are him picking up the wheel against bhISma & hiding the sun with his Chakra.
Even these 2 incidents were due to arjuna's inability to do what was necessary + his rash vow against Jayadratha.
Acharya is Nathamunigal
"Natha" refers to Dravida Veda
As he proclaimed - सर्वार्थदम् श्रीशठकोपवाङ्गमपम्
யாழினிசை வேதத்து இயல் - Yazhinisai vedathathu iyal- Thiruvaimozhi is like a Veena that reverberates the imports of the Vedas as per Parasara Bhattar.
Why not actually read bhIShma parva where Krishna begs Arjuna, "surrendering to me, defeat bhIShma (without using shikhaNDI as a shield)"
Or droNa parva, where the use of the elephant to kill ashvattAma was suggested by arjuna (not krishna)?+
अथर्वशिरஸ்ஸில் ருத்ரன் தன் வைபவத்தைப் பரக்க நின்��ு பேசினான். தனக்கு அடங்காத ஐஸ்வர்யமாய் இருந்தது.இவன் இப்படிப் பேசுகைக்கு அடி என்? என்று சுருதி தானே சங்கித்து "ஸோந்தராதந்தரம் ப்ராவிசத்" என்று பரமாத்ம பிரவேசத்தால் சொன்னான் என்றதிறே அந்த பாவம் வந்தால் அப்படியே சொல்லலாய் இருக்குமே
Meat eating is prohibited to those who aspire for moksha. Because one is supposed to maintain Sattvika. Since we live in a world where we take scriptures for granted whether you eat meat or not doesn't make a difference. Also, Krishna is against eating meat.
If Lord Krishna was against eating meat, eggs, fish etc he would have prevented people in Mahabharata from doing so.
no evidence he stopped people from eating meat at all.
Whatever is your personal choice is fine, please don't confine religion to narrow interpretations.
गुरुम् प्रकाशयेत् धीमान् मन्त्रं यत्नेन गोपयेत्।
अप्रकाशेभ्यो प्रकाशेभ्यः क्षीयते संपतायुषी।।
-One should always revel & speak of the glories of Acharya one should strive to keep mantras as a secret+
Exceptions doesn't mean these are to be ignored. Every ignored statistic is a freaking life. The way you "callously" refer these as "exceptions" signifies a lack of empathy.
The crimes against women that are spoken or unspoken of (coz of a patriarchal society) is so huge that these cases against men are almost an exception.
You remember most cases of violence against men coz they are that few compared to the no. of crimes against women.
If data does not make sense to you, nothing ever will.
@SrivatsavaBU Could be. Both are dumb & probably why they are made for each other. I have special disgust for Chinmayi. This guy is innocuous compared to that Tarantula incarnate.
The dude was asked a simple question. He chose to write a mountain full of balderdash.
You don't see atrocities of 'men' & 'women' yet sees "atrocities" on "women" in the next line. Misogyny or not if a woman chooses to kill a man it's still murder & horrendous+
I don’t claim to know everything bro… so educate me if I am wrong. But I don’t see atrocities of ‘women’ on ‘men’ at all. I see some horrible incidents of sociopathic human beings who happen to be women, committing horrible crimes. On the other hand… I see a self sustaining system that has lasted centuries that suffocates women… that through invisible, everyday micro aggressions, forces them to shrink their identities. That doesn’t offer them an equal world. This is from my perspective. I’ve seen so many women around me suffer silently because of it. And I chose to convey that through this story. I felt responsible for it as a man… because I benefit from the power equation.
I haven’t read the details of this particular case yet… I will do so. And if there’s a story that I find interesting to tell… I will do that too. But it would be about one particular woman committing a crime. Not crimes of women on men. There’s a difference, the way I see it. Mind you, such incidents of crime are ghastly and terrible. But what I was trying to do is completely different. Had nothing to do with such crimes.
Vikram in The Girlfriend isn’t a murderer or a *^%ist. There is no physical abuse. He is in fact faithful. And yet… there’s one section like the original tweet that gets triggered by the film. Ask yourself why that is. But sure… if you or anyone else has a problem… call it out. It’s a healthy habit. I promise to take the feedback and introspect. It’s wonderful for all of us to talk to each other and try to understand each other.
The dude was asked a simple question. He chose to write a mountain full of balderdash.
You don't see atrocities of 'men' & 'women' yet sees "atrocities" on "women" in the next line. Misogyny or not if a woman chooses to kill a man it's still murder & horrendous+
It shows a significant lack of empathy towards a person who lost his life because of a woman. No person irrespective of gender doesn't deserve to die a pitiful death.
Same is true if a man kills a woman. You can't say "oh god waman weren't allowed to do anything back in the day" , just because a guy fails to treat a women in his house properly doesn't mean others should "die". If you start your post "oh those days of misogyny" +