Talk:Sri Vaishnavism

About the recent edits.
I've removed all unsourced info', as wikipedia's prime policy is "Verifiabilty". Provided authentic neutral party sources(from renowned authors and famous univ' publications - like cambridge university press, etc) for highly sensitive data. Wikipedia's prime policy is Verifiability, not truth, and "verifiable & reliable np sources", are those which matter the most in wiki' articles. Any unsourced data, could be challenged/removed.

Wikipedia only relies on valid sources rather than one's own opinion. Wiki' editors are not supposed to edit with their own knowledge or learnt information. Data and the order of subsects as mentioned by the sources, especially from the cambridge univ' book from British author "Kathleen Gough".(Subsects arranged in the same manner in the order and rank - mentioned by famous ethnographers and museologists. British author kathleen gough has also mentioned the order/rank in her famous book; provided it as a reference which is available for full online viewing). Genetically, the vadakalai and thenkalai seem to be different, for which i've provided sources. I've provided some more data(sensitive info'), about some historic origins, which are well referenced with neutral party sources.

Among the deleted info', some like "centering around srirangam", etc are not accepted as they are unsourced and do not evenly apply to both sects. By the way, some info' that are not sensitive, are referenced with some srivaishnava sources(concerned party/srivaishnava websites). However they are not referenced for sensitive data, but for other. Will take some time to find neutral party sources for that too. If every such source from "concerned parties" are removed, then the article might look way to small(esp' the lead will be reduced to a minuscule). There are time constraints for everything. Will add some info' with sources to the urdhva pundra section, later. Hari7478 (talk) 00:14, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 16 January 2015
Sri Sampradaya → Sri Vaishnavism – WP:COMMONNAME --Relisted. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 11:05, 24 January 2015 (UTC)  Redtigerxyz  Talk 11:11, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Britnnica (Vaishnavism entry) "Srivaishnava sect"
 * Religions of the World: A Comprehensive Encyclopedia of Beliefs and ... (Vaishnavism entry) "Sri Vaishnva tradition"
 * The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism: N-Z "Shrivaishnava" entry
 * Holy People of the World: A Cross-cultural Encyclopedia (Ramanuja entry) "Sri Vaishnavism"
 * p. 474 Encyclopedia of Hinduism (Vaishnavism entry) Shrivaishnavas
 * Encyclopedia of Hinduism p. xxiii (Index) Sri Vaisnavas (IAST) entry -- Redtigerxyz Talk 11:23, 16 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Sunrise, please move the page too.  Redtigerxyz  Talk 18:32, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Copied from Talk:Srivaishnava Isn't this subject the same as Sri Sampradaya? Shouldn't the articles be merged? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:28, 14 December 2014 (UTC) <small.End of copied part


 * Support - same topic indeed.  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   14:36, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Lineage
User:Parthakgs and I have a disagreement on the additoon of the following text: ".Embar cousin brother of Ramanuja, Koorathazwan, foremost disciple of Ramanuja , Mudumbai Nambi ,ArulalaPerumal Empurumanar, an ardent disciple of Ramanuja and who Ramanuja considered equal to him in all aspects, bestowed upon him the daily ritualistic services to his personal idol    ,Kidambi Achan, Ramanujas personal cook and other prominent disciples appointed by Ramanuja."

I think that this text is incomprehensible: what is this about? At least it should be written in an understandable way. Then, it should be made clear what this list of names means, and what the relevance is. And then, still, it may be WP:UNDUE, that is, too much info to be added. Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!   15:10, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi Jonathan,


 * I mentioned the descendants of Ramanujas direct disciples and his kins, thus tracing the lineage of certain families of Thenkalai sect. Just want to emphasize the lineage of some section of thenkalai people. Large section of the Thenkalai community trace their lineage to close associates of Ramanuja. I have used the websites for citations these websites are either maintained by the descendants of those direct disciples or disciples of the descendants.the websites are of concerned parties. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parthakgs (talk • contribs) 08:51, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


 * so, is this like a family tree? Or are it different lineages, descending from one arch-father? As it is now, I don't understand it. Could you clarify it further?  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   10:37, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes Jonathan I have mentioned few of different lineages, that is descendants of few of Ramanujas disciples and associates. Like Mudumbai nambi is Ramanujas uncle and his descendants are part of Thenkalai community, likewise Koorathazwan and I supported it by citing the web pages hosted by the concerned parties. However the list is not exhaustive as Ramanuja appointed 74 apostles list which I have cited lastParthakgs (talk) 15:37, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Please read wikipedia content policies such as the reliable sources and scholarship. Blogs and websites you mention are unacceptable as sources for this or other wikipedia articles. As @JJ mentions above, assuming you can find reliable source(s), you need to explain why the lineage information is WP:DUE to this article. Please do not edit war with @Joshua Jonathan on this. Gain his consensus. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 03:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

@Sarah, I do not have intention of Edit war, I am novice and I understand Jonathan is a professional editor, so just want to present the fact here so that you or Jonathan can edit the article. the sources I have given above is of the concerned parties or the authentic pages hosted by Srivaishnavite community and is not a minority view. However, I understand some are the blogs so I have given the multiple citations, including the authentic cites(here I mean sites hosted by the concerned parties of this community). Hope this holds good and you can know if you browse through it.Parthakgs (talk) 08:24, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Origins and genetic differences
Hello Jonathan and all concerned

This section is ambiguous, derogatory to Thenkalai sect and based on some research papers whose sampling is unknown, may be genetics part of Vadakalai should be moved to under Vadakalai. further the sample is from Andhra Pradesh which cannot be generalized to whole sect considering Iyengar clan is heterogeneous. Some of my points. I would request this section be removed in light of above points, this is derogating the ancestry of Thenkalai cult and hurting their sentiments, also this creates a solid foundation for the schism which is really a superficial and not ethnic based. Considering Wikipedia is the first page that comes up on search engines and has more responsibility to present facts in neutral way untouched by prejudice of some fringe elements. Parthakgs (talk) 16:24, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Firstly, Ramanuja was social reformer but he didn't disturb the social fabric, he did open the annals of religion to all irrespective of caste and birth, but he never converted any lower caste people to Brahmins, inferring Thenkalai Brahmins are converts from lower castes is baseless and height of felony.
 * Secondly, Thenkalai were liberal to open religion to all following the foot steps of Ramanuja ,but by proliferation of philosophy not by conversion to Brahmins or through inter marriages. This article is speaking of Brahmins following Thenkalai sect and not of people from all the castes who follow this cult. Ofcourse nonbrahmins followers outnumber the Brahmins following Thenkalai cult, so mentioning this fact in this article under this section is not appropriate.
 * Thirdly, whole Iyengar clan is an heterogeneous community at large with blood pouring from different sects of Brahmins coming under Ramanujas order, Ramanuja himself being smartha Brahmin. This generalization of genetic test on certain sampling is absurd. S k Gupta book doesn't give the scientific details on blood samples, authenticity of its samples is unknown and cannot be taken as a proof.
 * Fourthly, families belonging to descendants of an apostle follows both the cult. Such as there are both Vadakalai and Thenkalai families who is tracing their lineage to kidambi achan,Nallan Chakravarthy,Mudumbai nambi, Alavadar,Ilayavalli to state only a few. This shows the schism is only a recent one and based on certain ideologies and does not have genetic background.
 * Finally, the rivalry between these two cult is not new and is well known to all. I see a particular person User:Hari7478 has added this section, who seems to be from Vadakalai cult and have some ulterior motive to twist facts by citing and generalizing a marginalized genetic research.

Being European, I'd rather think that the section is degeneratory for/of Vadakalai, portraying them as some sort of intruders. But alas, I took a quick look at the sources, and I really wonder what the first seven or so sources have got to do with genetics. Let's have a look:
 * "According to genetic studies, the Thenkalai gene frequencies are distinctly different from that of the Vadakalais."
 * Pg.71 - JJ: this is about sex differences, not about genetics.
 * - JJ: about the acceptance of Sudras by the Thenkalais.
 * - JJ: also about Sudras.
 * Pg.443 – '&#39; - JJ: unverifiable via Google Books.
 * Pg.61- '&#39 - JJ: about Sudras
 * Pg.58 - JJ: also aboput Sudras


 * "The Vadakalai Iyengars are believed to be an Indo-Aryan people who once migrated from North India."
 * "Pg.283 refers to Vadagalai, as sanskritic and patriarchal people who had migrated from North India, while Pg.160 speaks about the brahmins who are aryans, following the sanskritic and patriarchal systems. A visible snippet view of the source is available as citation no. in the same article." - JJ: unverifiable via Google Books, but sounds plausible.
 * "Pg.72, The page classifies Vadagalai & Madhwas as aryans of south india, under the "Vaisnava" section" - JJ: source says northerners; but in what context? Unusable
 * - JJ: non-WP:RS.


 * "In a genetic study, individuals examined among Vadakalai Iyengars in Andhra Pradesh showed a high similarity of gene frequency with the people of Faislabad in the Punjab province."
 * "Last page 10th line to the left has vadagalai specific reference while the whole article speaks about the gene frequencies of the people of Faislabad-Punjab-Pakistan " - JJ: the study says that the Vadagalai are similar to Pakistani.


 * "The Vadakalai community believes in the caste system,"
 * unsourced; tagged


 * "and championed the cause of purity of the vedic tenets."
 * - JJ: accurate, and flattering for the Thenkalai!

Well, I've done some corrections. I think that the Thenkalai are well-pictured now. Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!   06:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jonathan,

thank you, Now this seems to be somewhat accurate description of the community. Further I belong to this Srivaishnavite community and I know how heterogeneous this community is as taking myself, my patrilineal descent can be traced to Advaitic Sanyasin(Smartha Recluse), who became direct disciple of Ramanuja and I have relatives from both the sects. This community is continually evolving and there are many parallel communities like Hebbar, sathadha Srivaishnava, and main stream Vaishnavites who are direct descendants of Ramanuja's Disciples. these communities avoid intermarriages as well. But, the mainstream community who has families following both the cults, divided in some point of time after Ramanuja , particularly after Manavala Mamunigal, who is considered to be reincarnation of Ramanuja himself and path finder of Thenkalai. Desika being the pathfinder of Vadakalai sect, but he is also part of the Thenkalai Guruparampara. Just, want to emphasize that there is no Genetic differences. Further Vadakalai, is offshoot of Thenkalai and was stringent in Vedic practices and they made Desika as their head, this point may e controversial and challenged. Vadakalai's are more organized than Thenkalai into Mutts and Ahobila matam being the largest one. Thenkalai mostly were swayam acharyas being direct descendants of Ramanuja's disciple and not much organized as this may be the reason of skewed researches and conclusions.Interstingly, Ramanujas main desciples such as Koorathazwan, Anandhazwan, Mudaliandan,Mudumbai NAmbi, yagnamurthi to cite a few are still Thenkalai and the descendants are household Sanyasins having followers just as a mutt with pontiff as head. There is also an Interesting off shoot - Metkalai http://www.srimatham.com/about.html, just to quote. Parthakgs (talk) 09:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Genetic research papers are WP:Primary, interpreting genomes for 'religious sociology' is something wikipedia editors shouldn't do. Avoid it. A short summary from a review and WP:Secondary paper if available may be okay, but we must limit ourselves to summarizing the conclusions-with-context by the scholar(s). We must avoid WP:OR, avoid blog-y websites. Too much emphasis on 'lineages' in this overview article on Sri Vaishnavism is WP:UNDUE. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

History, Philosophy and Texts sections
All three of these sections need some work, as they don't summarize the WP:RS. The sub-traditions may become more clear as the History, Philosophy and Texts sections get better summarized. I will add a bit, as I get hold of the sources and time. Please review/ add/ revise. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Removed Centres of Pilgrimage - Divya Desams
I had removed this section as it may not be valid under this article and no sources are cited from April 2016. If we have reliable sources which says that Divyadesas are of primary importance than any other Vishnu Temples for Srivaishnavism then we can add it back and without list. We can still add link to Divya desams under see also section. agasthyathepirate(talk) 05:20, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Non-RS content
Welcome to wikipedia. Please review the content guidelines such as WP:V, WP:RS and WP:WWIN before repeated insertion of unsourced or poorly sourced content into this article. THe Shreevats Muth Ka Itihas by Shri Aniruddhacharya seems like self-published WP:QUESTIONABLE source. What evidence do you have that it is peer reviewed reliable source. Further, the list you keep repeatedly adding reads like an ad / plug, which is inappropriate per WWIN. Please explain and discuss your addition on this talk page. Your cooperation is requested, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 11:55, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

How does Sri fit into Vishishtadvaita
Can someone explain how "Sri" as in SriVaishnavism fit into the philosophy of Visishtadvaita? Sri is defined as the medium for salvation. If she is distinct from Vishnu, then is she another soul? Elsewhere it is written Sri is an avatar of Lakshmi. According to SriVaishnavism article, Sri is inseparable from Vishnu. Does this mean Sri is a soul distinct from Vishnu but is inseparable because she has already attained moksha or liberation? Does this also mean that the laws of Karma do not apply to Sri as she has already attained moksha (as Lakshmi is generally said to be waiting on Vishnu in Vaikuntha), or do they apply?

Care to explain, anyone?

Nittawinoda (talk) 20:13, 10 June 2019 (UTC)