The following is extract from Letters from Sri Ramanasramam, a translation of Suri Nagamma's letters in Telugu.

A devotee who has been a regular visitor here for a long time came a week back with a copy of the Tamil book Thiruvaimozhi and began talking to Bhagavan about Vaishnava traditions. It seems he recently received Samasrayanam (initiation). When he said that, Bhagavan began relating his earlier experiences as follows:

“When I was on the hill, some Vaishnavaites used to come there to see me. There are, as you know, two sections amongst Vaishnavaites, Vadakalai and Thenkalai. I used to speak to these visitors in accordance with their respective traditions, as I lose nothing by doing so.

When, however, they thought that I was on their side and wanted me to have Samasrayanam, I declined. They believe that no one will be permitted into Vaikuntam (heaven) unless he is duly initiated."

My question is what is the basis for the claim of Vaishnavaites, who belong to Vadakalai or Thenkalai section and is duly initiated, that unless one duly initiated one cannot enter into Vaikuntam?

Answer may be provided giving reference to other than the literature of Vaishnavaites, who belong to Vadakalai or Thenkalai section.

  • @idolworshipper: my other question was closed, stating that it is opinion based. Hence, I am asking for the basis for their claim from other sources, as I do not believe their claims. When Vaishnavaites are claiming Lakshmi and Narayana as SUPREME GOD HEADS, as per Rig Veda, what is the basis for that? Can you explain? – Srimannarayana K V Sep 21 at 5:45
  • @idolworshipper: It is a wrong interpretation of Rig Vedic mantra by Vaishnavaites for supporting their claim of nitya suri. I will post an on this, as a question is already existing on this topic – Srimannarayana K V Sep 21 at 5:51
  • @idolworshipper: I have clear idea of what I am talking about. I know the background of Rig Vedic Verse tad viShnoH paramam padam sadA paSyanti sUrayaH. It is from RV I.22.20. And, I had a debate on this issue with another member (Satya) also. You have quoted a verse, but you are interpreting it in a different suiting to your requirements. There are many verses of Rig Veda which talk about Vishnu. However, their meaning is different, but not as Vaishavaites claim to be. – Srimannarayana K V Sep 21 at 5:58
  • 1
    @idol worshipper. Ramanuja never quoted "visnoh paramam padam". But once sriman claimed that Ramanuja misinterpreted that verse and did not reply when questioned. Acharya believed Samhita portions can be understood only after digesting upanishads. You can see this in comments which are moved to chat under nitya suri question. I myself interested to know what are those genuine interpretations sriman is talking of and I asked him he did not reply. – Satya Sep 21 at 7:36
  • It seems that those Vaishnavas who said the Rig Veda verse 1.22.20 tad viṣṇoḥ paramaṃ padaṃ "the supreme abode of Vishnu" indicates that Lord Vishnu is the Supreme God is based on the idea that the Lord whose abode is designated as "the supreme abode" is the Supreme Lord. – brahma jijnasa Sep 22 at 20:37

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .