- 1 From Vaikunda Raja
- 2 Hello Raj,
- 3 Comparison with Parashurama
- 4 About Vaikundar
- 5 Article on Vaikundar
- 6 Ayyavazhi
- 7 Ayya Vaikundar
- 8 Sampoovan
- 9 Sakthi
- 10 Vaikundar
- 11 Demonstrating Powers
- 12 Reply
- 13 Ayyavazhi
- 14 Trimurti
- 15 From Subramanian
- 16 Ayyavazhi
- 17 Siva
- 18 Ayyavazhi and Hinduism
- 19 Nabi
- 20 New Article
- 21 From Raja
- 22 Smartism
- 23 Translation of Akilam
- 24 Ambedkar
- 25 Ayya Vaikundar
- 26 New work
- 27 Vivekananda
- 28 Reference
- 29 Vivakananda's influence
- 30 Views on Vedas
- 31 Ayyavazhi ideas =
From Vaikunda Raja
Hai Raj,Thanks for your message.And in responding to your question related to Kroni one thing is notable that there are basically many variations between Hinduism and Ayyavazhi on Philosophy.
For example according to hinduism the Asuras lived on earth but according to Akilattirattu Ammanai it is the evil spirit which controled the beings on earth .Iam in a trial to give more details on the contents of Akilattirattu Ammanai and you may understood the difference by going through it.Since they are in Tamil, in poetic form it may took several days for me to translate and I requests you to be patient. For further comments, you are welcommed.Vaikunda Raja
Iam again Raja You have slightly sensed the disunity between other Hindu belifs and Ayyavazhi.
You have also compared it to Smartism, which is closely affiliated with the Advaita tradition. Also, Akilattirattu Ammanai says about the ultimate Oneness. But it differs from smartism in the belief of Ishta Devata, it says Ayya Vaikundar as the avatar of Trimurtis the Descendents of Ekam.It also says about Rebirth.As per your opinion I will soon create an article on Differences and similarities between Hinduism and Ayyavazhi. I request you,If you found any mistakes on my work, please inform me since Iam a new user to Wikipedia.Likewise I also request you to share your opinions in relation to this topics with me.Thank you.-Vaikunda Raja
Iam Raja. I feel really sorry for the mistake from my side, in relation to the article on Yukams.It, the particular part was an extract from a reserch book on Ayyavazhi, from University of Madras. And only after your question about that I refered the Main source Akilattirattu Ammanai, and I found that Vibhushanan and Sampoovan along with three brothers of Rama created as Pandavas, and I've made changes to the Article.Thanks for bringing to light my mistake. And I will soon contact you with my suggestions in relation to Ayyavazhi influencing Saint Vivekananda and Relating Vaikundar to Parashurama.Vaikunda Raja
Raj,Palliyarai in tamil means Sanctum sanctorum. And Elunetru in tamil means seat, and it was in that seat, a garland made of rudraksha was placed. And comming to the point, in saivam, Linga is seen as form of god, but here it was considered that God is formless and just the seat was arranged in the Sanctum sanctorum for the God.
Your questions in relation to sampoovan will be answered quickly as possible.As Iam not so experienced deep in the source of Ayyavazhi I found difficult immedietly to answer you.Iam in discussion with elders of Ayyavazhi. And don't feel that your Questions are tiresome for me. In turn it is encouraging me to create more articles and to go deep in to the source. Again you are welcommed with Pleasure.
In answering to your question regarding Vibishana, according to Ayyavazhi, Vibishana sensed the truth about Rama he advised Ravana to which he was irritated and so he adjoined Rama. And Rama accepts him as his brother, and he was informed that ,as he realised god even though he was an Asura, he will be rewarded more , and in connection to that he was given chance to help God in destroying the Evil,in the following aeons and therefore created as one among Pandavas, and in the Kali Yukam as one among the Citars.
And in telling about Vivekananda's influence to Ayyavazhi there is a major thing to discuss and find out .The fact that Vivekananda only after visiting swamithoppe, wear head gear is a major claim among some of Ayyavazhi, particularly among old people.The old people says that their father had seen Vivekananda in Swamithoppe.In that time, during the late 19th century wearing head gear is a matter of pride and low castes were not alowed to wear that.But in Ayyavazhi Only with that one will be allowed in side the worship centers.It was ment by Vaikundar to propose that all people were kings to rule. I think that this fact is closely related to Vivekananda's way, Advaita. On the other hand on my point of view, in this matter of Vivekananda's head gear the reason preasented by Vedantha society is too hard to digest.In one of their book I read that he first worn it,by a suggestion from the king of Khetri, during a desert journey, and from that he found it more comfort and thereby continued.You might have heared about Vivekananda.Though he was a saint undoubtfully he was a man of extra-ordinary thought. And all my suggestion is such a skilled man dosn't do any thing without reason. As you are well-versed in Hinduism the chances for you for knowing about Vivekananda is more than that of me. So please help me, particularly in knowing from which year Vivekananda started wearing head gear and at which year he visited Kanyakumari?
And in telling about Nadars, we can say that no other castes in India suffered as much as Nadars. The same Vivekananda called this part, the then part of Travancore as "tent of mads", due to the caste tyranny.If you go through the history of Travacore you will understood.Vaikunda Raja
Raj, The white mark on the fore head of Vishnu in the image, Vishnu is the symbol, Thiru Namam ,the religious sign of Ayyavazhi. Every followers of Ayyavazhi wore it on their forehead.This is entirely different from the Namam worn by Hindus( in 'U' shape). - Vaikunda Raja
Now I came to Know that, according to Akilattirattu, Vibhushana was created from the Sweat of Lord Narayana.- Vaikunda Raja
Comparison with Parashurama
Few days back you questioned that like Parashurama was Ayya Vaikundar an avesha avatar.According to the source we can't compare Vaikundar even to Parashurama. Firstly, Parashurama was not even mentioned in Akilattirattu. Next, Parashurama was an incarnation of Vishnu. But here Vaikundar is the incarnation of a comparitive Superpower of Sivan, Brahma and Vishnu and accordingly these three are considered secondary to Vaikundar.The source gives a detailed discription about that.Finally, in the case of Prashurama Vishnu entered his soul but in the case of Vaikundar not the soul of any one entered him, but instead a whole Transformation is that which took place in two phases.First from an ordinary human being to Sampooranathevan and next from Sampooranathevan to Vaikundar and this is because of the tyranny of the boons asked by Kaliyan.I think Ayya was a unique avatar and cannot be compared to any one else.And if you think that Vaikundar is comparable to any, please suggest. - Vaikunda Raja
Siva Brahma and Vishnu are not same and each have their own individuality and in all the previous yugas Vishnu incarnated, but in the kali Yuga Ayya incarnated as a united being of this three and as a Universal super power.He is not Comparative. Also there are several quotes in Akilam saying about a Moolamoorthy superior to this mummorthis and it is that moolalurthy incarnated as Vaikundar and so Vaikundar is superior to to sivan Brahma and also Vishnu.
And about Kroni you are right. He is similar to devil or satan-Vaikunda Raja
In vinchai after the transformation there is a qoute in Akilattirattu in which Narayana say to Vaikundar "you are Sivan,You are Nathan and you are Thirumal and fear not anybody" in which all the three were seen as Vaikundar and that's why they suggested like that.(See Vinchai to Vaikundar) -Vaikunda Raja
Again we can't compare Vaikundar to Dattatreya because he was the Avatar of the Moolamurthi superior to trimurthis. He incarnated in such a way because kaliyan asked the birth of Gods, Bramins,etc as boon. So trimurthis or any godheads cannot take birth seperately in this world to destroy him.
Also you asked did he demonstrate powers like Krishna as vision of the Universal form? Yes He did.Very soon I will be again with a set -Vaikunda Raja
On saying in brief about the boons that kaliyan claims, all the scientific developements of mankind opposing the nature are all bought by him as boons. For example Air plane was invented around 1900 A.D.But before in Akilattirattu it was mentioned as Parakkum Kuligai which means the technique of Flying, was given to him as a boon by Thirumal. Birds fly in nature and man cannot but he made it possible by his brain, or skill of Thinking. In other words we can say that he skill of thinking which is the foremost power of mind was the boon he claims. Mind you, mind is an illusion according to hindu and Ayyavazhi Philosophy. And it was a bit longer part and it took more time for me to translate and so in few days I will give more details of the boon in the article.You are welcommed for further suggetions,Thank You.-Vaikunda Raja
Also Akilattirattu Ammanai says about Pushpa Vimana.It was in that Ayya attained Vaikundam. But as you says it was not Verifiable. In this case with Kaliyan there are two chances (ie)either this facility of flying should be first with gods and by seeing it kaliyan should have claimed that (or) it must be a newly asked unique power of flying and in such case the word vimana mentioned earlier should mean any other objects either vicible or invicible. It may also be a personification of something. Anyway, one thing is clear that it the skill of flight in Kali Yukam is unique to Kaliyan or Human Beings.
Kroni and Kaliyan are not same. Kaliyan himself was the sixth Fragment of Kroni.Also, Kroni though said to be a personification he was commanded elobrately in Akilam with millions of hands legs and eyes. His eyes were facing his back, etc. But in thwe case of Kali he was simply said as Mayai(illusion) which tends the mind of the people to earn material things and all.On the other hand he was personified in the shape of a human being.So kaliyan should not be compared with Kroni.-Vaikunda Raja
Article on Vaikundar
I have created a new article on Ayya Vaikundar, Vaikunda Avatharam.And the page, Differences between Ayyavazhi and Hinduism is under construction and after the completion I will inform you.-Vaikunda Raja
According to Ayyavazhi Narayana represents only Vishnu. But in kali yukam all the powers of Sivan and Brahma were handled over(surrendered) to Narayana to destroy the Kali, because Sivan and Brahma created Kaliyan with out in discussion with Narayana with the compeltion of Devas. So in Kaliyukam Sivan's and Brahma's were puppet regime.
The people of Ayyavazhi does not cremate their body but burry it,unlike others they bury the body in the sitting position(in the position of padmasana)facing the north direction,in the belief of the person performing austerity for the unfolding of Dharma Yukam. - Vaikunda Raja
Raj I can't understood the term "I think you should put such details about the other members of the trimurti giving power to Vishnu" from your message. - Vaikunda Raja
I think all about Vaikundar in your mind is confusing you. Dosn't matter. Let me try to clear it. First of all keep in mind the three facts, the Spirit, the Soul and the Body. Vaikunda Avatar is a combination of the spirit of Narayana, Soul of the Ultimate God, and body of an ordinary human being. You says that a website on Ayyavazhi says that he was an Avatar of Narayana. It was told so because the spirit of Vaikundar's is Narayana's. Then you asked, is Vaikundar an avatar of Trimurthi.
In Akilam, Thiruvasakam - 2 says about the formation of Universe. It says that "In the biggining when Ekam changed as param, a voice 'immm' formed, from which a Satthu formed. Then formed the Sivam followed by Sakthi and from that Sakthi a Natham formed and then Vishnu then Brahma and then Sivan and so on.."
On saying about that Ayyavazhi says about an Ultimate formless God, (Ultimate Oneness).And then this ultimate being divide in to two, a Mass and an Energy. On the other hand also mean that a positive creative force and a negative creative force, called Sivam and Sakthi.Then both combine to form the murthi stage, as Siva, Brahma and Vishnu. So according to Akilam beyond the trimurthi there is an ultimate being.
Now comming to the point the Soul of this Ultimate being is that which incarnates as Vaikundar with the Spirit of Vishnu, one Among Murthis.Also, Trimurthi remains seperate after the Incarnation Of Vaikundar. There are also quotes in Akilam stating that Power of Vaikundar is Beyond that of Trimurthis. On the other hand Sivan and Brahma rests by surrendering their power to Vishnu. Vishnu as spirit was in side Vaikundar but the soul of Vaikundar is of the Ultimate Being. The spirit of Narayana was installed to Vaikundar because Narayana had the resposibility to destroy all the fragments of Kroni.
See also the article Ayya Vaikundar which was cleaned up by User:Steven McCrary and I also make some corrections.If you found further any difficulties ask me and Iam glad to answer. The article, Boons of Kaliyan is too hard to me to translate since it was in hard poetic Tamil. But I was trying to do it and within few days it will be done. - Vaikunda Raja
Few days back you asked that who was Sampoovan. He was a character in Ramayana, and I don't know more about him. I will try to find more about him and inform. - Vaikunda Raja
Yes, it seems similar. But Ayyavazhi does not give different forms to her. On other words it does not views her as a diety, but simply says her as formless. - Vaikunda Raja
Yes you are absolutely in the right way. The moorthy stage is all the forms of Saguna Brahman and Nirguna Brahman remains undistingushable and formless and only in this belief, in Ayyavazhi worship centers they provide seat for God. You also compared Elunetru with Linga and Saligram. Here by Iam telling that while Saligram and Linga which indirectly represents the form of God, Elunetru remains by telling the formless aspect of God or Nirguna Brahman. Likewise while Hinduism (Advaita)says that all were to rule the earth Ayyavazhi practicalized that by symbolising it through the wearing of Headgear. This is a major difference between the rest of the Hinduism and Ayyavazhi. As per Vivekananda's policy that "Advaita should be brought practically in the life" Ayyavazhi workout it practically while the rest of Hinduism preserved Theoritically.Do you agree? - Vaikunda Raja
Few days back you suggests a website in which Lord Krishna demonstrates the power and asked that likewise Does Vaikundar demonstrate powers. Yes, but like wise the article boons of Kaliyan it was also hard for me to translate and would take some more time. - Vaikunda Raja
From the things that you have learned about Ayyavazhi, do you think that it was related to Pantheism or Panentheism?- Vaikunda Raja
Again I was here to state the same thing. As you stated earlier we can put this term to the stages of Brahmam.Like Smartism Ayyavazhi also says that three god heads were the different forms of a same God. Here God represents the Nirguna Brahmam and Trimurti as different forms as Saghuna Brahmam. Isn’t Nirguna Brahmam with different forms was called Shaguna Brahmam? If it is, the different forms had their own works. According to Ayyavazhi Mythology Kaliyan was created unlike the previous without in Discussion with Thiumal so in only the Kaliyukam the whole power is towards. Thirumal. But regarding their origin and all they were from the same ultimate being and different forms of the Nirguna Brahman. - Vaikunda Raja
Vanakkam Raj! I have been away for some time. How have you been doing?
I have heared this discussion about God in relation to this category (God is all or God in all)by many people of Ayyavazhi for a long time. And perhaps not concluded so far because of the different quotes of the scriptyre. There are a good number of verses to suggest Ayyavazhi as panthestic, but in turn nearly an equal number enough to oppose and state it as Panenthestic. For example, in Thiruvasakam - 2, where Akilam says the creation it was said that it was from the Eakam (Ultimate Oneness) all others including the God heads formed, and the Eakam formed itself.But Vaikundar when jailed in Singaratthoppe, during the trial with the tiger, he addressed the Santror that, "Fear not to any body,Iam the one who created the Eakam, and so the Tiger will Identify it's creator".Likewise there is a lot to present.However it accepts the Ultimate Oneness. And I think that it could be concluded only a series of Discussion. - Vaikunda Raja
Again Thanks for your help. Also these three stages of Siva were told in Akilam. But in Akilam Sivam (formless) was said to be formed from the Eakam(Nirguna Brahman) and not Eakam itself. Akilam also says the Satha sivam and the third stage Siva Peruman (Maheswaran).Also does Smartism accepts the three stages of Siva. - Vaikunda Raja
Ayyavazhi and Hinduism
Raj, the article Ayyavazhi and Hinduism was completed, and there may be grammatical errors please do what you can in copy editing it etc.Again I thank you, remembering that, you suggest the model for this article. Another question, Does any branches of Hinduism says this concept of hell? - Vaikunda Raja
It refers to Prophet Muhammad. And as far as I had gone through Akilam there were no seperate Quotes inreference to Buddhism, Jainism, etc. Perhaps not sure. Also basic phylosophy of all these were Dharmic. As per Vivekananda all these were called as a whole as religion of Vedantha. He said that Buddhism is the conclusion of the religion of Vedantha. He said that what were told in Buddhism is from Vedantha. And I think, also for Akilam it is. And If I found anything, I will inform.Thank You. - Vaikunda Raja.
Raj, basically Akilam denies the theory of Dualism, though its myth superficially seems dualistic. It accepts the Ultimate Oneness. But not only Islam but all the Abrahamic religions mostly stick to the concept of dualism. I think this is the reason for the condemnation. As Ayyavazhi a monistic religion I think it can't hate anybody, but only for spreading of a wrong theory in the vision of it. But not able to conclude. Do you think anything about this? - வைகுண்ட ராஜா
Raj, As I go through the article smartism I found that it interpretin both Sri rudhram and Vishnu sahasranamam. In Ayyavazi the main mantra "Ayya Siva Siva Siva Siva Ara Hara Ara Hara". I think the same is stated here 'Ayya' represents Paramatma, 'Siva' represents Sivam and 'Ara Hara' similar to 'HariHara' as Siva and Vishnu. Another thing, In the article Swami Vivekananda, can't we add the views about Vivekananda influenced by Ayyavazhi. If anyone oppose with reason we can remove. - வைகுண்ட ராஜா
Translation of Akilam
Efforts are taken in many levels by many organisations of Ayyavazhi so far. But some how failed. Mainly for the reason that, different view of the scholars about Akilam. For example, a group scholars in ayyavazhi says that, Vaikundar after the incarnation did not take the physical body but only shows an appearence for the people. For reference they use a series of quotes. Being Tamil a different language (you might not Know) the whole view will be changed in a mere change of a letter. It not only changes the meaning, but the whole philosophy.
They says that the six fragments of Kroni were the chakras of the physical human body.Taking this philosophy as base a book was published. Mostly every important lines were discussed word-by-word. Except a little objection for some opinion,(the image given in the article Ayyavazhi Publications) I can't object that work. Because the lines of Akilam paves way for such vision.
Another work suggest Vaikundar as a avatar of Narayana. There is also a work which suggest Akilam as a dualistic faith.
Another work which suggest sampooranathevan as representative of human beings. And it tells that Akilam is a book which says the way by which jeevatman (souls) became paramatman (Oversouls) in advaithic way.
There are other works which tells it in a form of story.
There are also several essays which suggest Akilam in relation to scientific theories. For example Akilam tells about Nine planets except sun and moon (Heliocentric theory), while hinduism tells about geo-centric theory which was rejected by scientists. It is notable that the planets Neptune and pluto were discovered after the date in which Akilam (1841.A.D.) was written.(i.e) Akilam tells about them before they were discovered.
Then the Thiruvasakam - 2 was compared with Big Bang Theory,in a work, saying 'Imm' in Akilam as the concept of 'Black hole' in that theory.They with several quotes were strong in it.
Then there is another view relating Akilam to the Darwin theory, saying the first bacteria of the pricamberian period as Kroni. The fossils are mostly found in Indian Ocean especialy in Java, and Australia which were in the direction south-east to India, the direction from which Vaikundar arose from the sea. In Akilam it says that it was there the Thuvaraiyam Pathi located similar to the term Lemuria or Kumarikkandam where life originated.
Darwin says that all species came from a common one. Ayyavazhi scholars says that the different fragments were the variation and development of species came from the common ancestor Kroni, undergoes step-by-step developements in different ages(in science periods) and finally the last fragment as the developement of species in to human beings. Also the physical appearence of Kaliyan said in Akilam is exactly as the human body. It says that kaliyan born inverted (head down wards and legs upwards). Regarding humans, birth of the head first and Body next, inverted.
It is also notable that Akilam was also derived in Dvaithic as well as Visishta dvaitic way from biggening to the end. The same line derived in Advaitic way by some one is taken derived in other two ways by some others. On my view all these angles are not the things to be rejected.All of them were right on their own way. These are the difficulties on translating Akilam.
Apart from this, Ayyavazhi was not a developed religion and most of the followers of Ayyavazhi were economically backward. Even the economical problem is over, what would be the solution for this different views? The only way is, to translate it as a story - வைகுண்ட ராஜா
It seems that Ambedkar rejects Hinduism because of caste system. He was a dalit and he would have suffered a lot from his stage of child, due to this caste system and that is the reason he rejects not only Caste but also Hinduism.
Vivekananda in one of his speeches says that the caste were introduced for the welfare of the society in olden days. The condition of the society changes with time and place. That caste system might have benifited that ancient period, but it was not fit for the present world. Shruthi was the thing to be accepted for all time but smrithi tells about the thing which changes with time and place.In any place Shruthi and smrithi differs, we should only accept shruthi.
In Akilam it says that before the birth of Kroni there were different castes who lived without differences(as brothers).It is for that age. But for Kali yukam it says,"Destroy the demons and the eighteen castes in to the mountains, water and fire" (i.e) it was not to be followed any more.That system was not fit for the present metropolitan world. Here the view of Vivekananda is similar to that of Akilam.
I heared somewhere that Krishna in Gita said that I was the one who created the castes and this should be followed. I think it was for this reason Ambedkar in adition to the caste system rejects also the avatars. May be, If Ambedkar learned about Ayyavazhi he might not oppose Avatars. - வைகுண்ட ராஜா
Hi Raj, I’ve expanded the article Ayya Vaikundar. Though they says the same thing in the page Ayyavazhi mythology, I think that it is important that it should be here, because these things links to the life of Vaikundar. I was not against shrinking it but, I think each facts, especially topics, should be there. Am I right? - வைகுண்ட ராஜா
Raj,I've created a new article Kosas.Please take a look. Thank You.
Raj, here is something seems reference to the connection of Vivekananda to Ayyavazhi. Dr.C.Poulose in his research book 'Advaita Philosophy of Brahmasri Chattampi Swamikal', had notted that Atmananda Swamikal was a diciple of Ayya Vaikundar, and he learned the Marmavidya in Sidha vidya and ghecherividya (Chinmudra) from Ayya Vaikundar. And Atmanada Swamikal taught all these vidyas to his disciple Sri Chattambi Swamikal. When Swami Vivekananda was arriver in Ernakulam, Sri Chattambi Swamikal taught this chinmudra to him. He also noted that Sri Narayana Guru, Sri Nilakanta Tirthapada and Tirthapada Paramahamasa were all the disciples of Atmananda Swamikal. Can we use this as reference in the article Vivekananada to show his influence?
But none of them were mentioned in Akilattirattu. -வைகுண்ட ராஜா
That book 'Advaita Philosophy of Brahmasri Chattampi Swamikal' is with me. -வைகுண்ட ராஜா
Raj, the influence of vivekananda to Ayyavazhi is discussed with Sam and Steve. Say your opinion. Do you think the reference with us is all enough to place in the article? -வைகுண்ட ராஜா
No Problem Raj, The complete address of the Publishers,
- Ayyavaikunta Nather Sidhasrama,
- Pottayadi - p.o,
- Kanyakumari District,
- Tamil Nadu.
- Aswathy Books,
- Uchakkada - p.o,
- Thiruvananthapuram - 695506,
- Phone. 0471-211469.
But, regarding ISBN, I am sorry. I go through the book twice or more but I don,t found any such num
Views on Vedas
Yes, Nantheesurar in the Kaliyan article, is that the same as Nandi.
Then in the matter on the views on Vedas. Akilam states the Vedas 'The Book of Perfection' because the theology based on it (Vedas) is not bounded with palce or time. On viewing Historically, The names and number of author(s) and of Vedas are unknown. So even on a historical perspective it was not bounded wth place or time. You might have known that the things which changes with respect to time and place or that which is bounded by time and place are Maya. So Vedas seems beyond maya. The things which are beyond maya are viewed as Ekam (oneness or Nirguna Brahman)in Ayyavazhi. But in the case of Ramayana and Mahabaratha, they tell about Rama or Krishna who were the incarnations (whom some time related to history) of a sort of Saguna Brahman. On the point of View of Ayyavazhi, a religion or its procedure should be given to mankind by Supreme God (in ayyavazhi Ekam) who is beyond time and place. On that view Ayyavazhi finds Ekam which had the responsiblity to give a religion and not Saguna Brahman. But due to the destruction of Vedas by Kaliyan, as a final solution, The Ekam for the first time incarnated in the world to give the world the scripture. Mind you on the view of Ayyavazhi only once The Ekam incarnated in the world and that is Vaikundar. But now the question will rise, Isn't Vaikundar and Akilattirattu Ammanai is bounded with time and place? The answer is " An incarnation will definitly need a 'body' which is bounded by these. But in that context mind you in The Trinity (Vaikundar) which contains Ekam, Narayana and Human The Ekam as a soul (atman) in Vaikundar remains itself beyond time and place and as a incarnation it only uses Narayana (a sort of to Saguna Brahman) as spirit and 'human as Body' as the part of Incarnation in the maya world. So in this view Akilam is regarded as the 'Book of Perfection'
Also in the words of Vivekananda, "If any one finds a place where Shruthi and Smrithi defers he should definitely follow Shruthi since it is beyond time and place." Also smriti is ment only to teach the common people with ease, the high philosophy in shruthi in a story form. So even in this case only shruthi forms the embryo of religion or philosophy. And on the view of Akilam only that embryo is send by God and only that should be accepted as 'Book of Perfection'. - Vaikunda (<.^.>) Raja
Ayyavazhi ideas =
But in Ayyavazhi the concept of Ekam and the lesser god-heads were not treated equally. The impersonal absolute is considered to be the supreme. Then in the case of Avatar all avatars including Purna were treated more or less equally in Ayyavazhi. But it is nottable that the purnas such as Krishna, narasimha and Rama were only mentioned in Akilam and other such as Parashurama is not mentioned. I've a little doubt about his presence in Akilam. But definitely he was not considered as a avatar in Ayyavazhi.
Then we can't compare Ayyavazhi with Bahá'í Faith because it was only a idea created by Bahá'u'lláh, who was considered by them (the followers) as a prophet. Am I right? Or they consider him as God? Does they have any mythology to focus him so? But in Ayyavazhi we had a rich mythology which states Ayya to be the foremost God or Supreme Power. The religious book clearly sugget it. That is one of the main reasons why Ayyavazhi was considered as a seperate religion outside Hinduism. But the first half mythology of Ayyavazhi had some (many) relations with hinduism. But the second part; that is the key factor which consider Ayya Vaikundar as the incarnation of Narayana as the supreme Power which was not accepted by Hinduism. This relationship with Hinduism seems similar to that of Christianity to Judaism. - Vaikunda (<.^.>) Raja
Raj, I don't understand why you compare Ayyavazhi with Mormonism. Mind you both Mormonism and Christianity focuses towards a incarnation, Christ. But here in this case Ayya, Vaikundar was told only in Ayyavazhi and not in Hinduism. But now I heared some news that some Siddhars had told before about the arrival of Vaikundar. Both Mormonism and Christianity treates Christ almost equally. But in the case of Vaikundar, that is not. But if you see this similar to the relationship between Judaism and Christianity there seems some connection. Because Christianity completely focus Christ. But Judaism completely wash out him to be the incarnation of God. Also in Ayya while Ayyavazhi focuses him to be the supreme, Hinduism remains unaware of that. Then Christianity accept some from judaism in the form of Old Testament in the first half of Bible. Like wise Ayyavazhi took some (first half) from Hinduism. The second half (New testament)is unique to Christianity and like wise in Ayyavazhi. Then there are some terms in judaism in relation to Christ (though not accepted by judaism). Like wise if it is true that the advent of Vaikundar was told earlier by Siddhars then that will go in similar to that of Christ in Judaism. The only main reason that Ayyavazhi to be dissimilar from Christianity is, Christianity goes some 2000 years back but only 200 in the case of Ayyavazhi. And only here Ayyavazhi resambles Mormonism. - Vaikunda (<.^.>) Raja
According to Akilam there are three Neethams (equity or acts), Manu Neetham, Raja Neetham and Deiva Neetham. And Dharma Neetham is the alternative name for the Raja Neetham. This area tell that how an individual should place himself in front of society(Manu Neetham), before the king(Raja Neetham) and before the God(Deiva Neetham).
Then in the matter of the relation ship between Ayyavazhi and Hinduism I've some opinions.
- First Understand that Ayyavazhi does not recognise any scriptures other that Akilam. But only the Vedas only before Kali Yuga, like the acceptance of old testament by christianity. It won't accept it as it do the new testament. Then Akilam is sheduled just as the christian Bible. The fisrt half about the events before the arrival of Vaikundar and the next half revolving around the life and teachings of Vaikundar. It was not like mormons accepting both bible and in addition some others.
- Then in the matter of Incarnation Ayya Vaikundar will be recognised as an incarnation of Vishnu by Hinduism. But can be accept him as Kalki or the tenth Avatar of Vishnu. But today most of the followers of Ayyavazhi advocate Vaikundar as Kalki. Also there are some indirect quote in Akilam strenthening this belief. Then i found also some proof for that in Hinduism too. According to Visnu Purana Kalki will incarnate in the date between (febraury 23 and march 23). I dont know the sanskrit or tamil calender exact to this date. Vaikunda Avatar was on march 3rd. Then a tamil siddha on telling about the dynasty of the kings of Kali Yuga, starting from parikshit and ends in Narayana (Nathan)who was expected to live for 12 yrs. Vaikundar lived a bodily life on the world only for 12 yrs. Then Akilam also says about Vaikundar comming in white horse which is similar to Kalki. So, as the expected messiah in judaism is focused as Christ by the Christians, the expected Kalki in Hinduism is focused by Ayyavazhi as Vaikundar.
- Then Mormonism and Christianity both accepts Jesus (an earthly incarnation). But if Vaikundar is focesed as Kalki then I think Hinduism can't accept him. But Ayyavazhi accepts some concepts fro Hinduism. Then the case will be closely related to that of Christianity and Judaism. Because Christianity accept some concepts on God (not incarnation) from Judaism but Judaism refuse to accept Jesus as Messiah.
So I found Ayyavazhi's mostly similar to Christianity in the case of relationship to the ancestor.
Yes you are right and as the time progress we are getting more informations which stengthen the belief of Vivekananda's influence to Ayyavazhi. Now it will be more usefull if we find did he made any references about Ayyavazhi in his letters or any books. May be, there may not any direct reference about Ayyavazhi because Ayyavazhi was not then a developed religion. And also Akilam was not published then. So there is only a less posibility to tend Vivekananda to view Ayyavazhi as a regenerated religion from hinduism and in that case it fell in his mind as an advanced theological and philosophical hindu offshoot. So we should found that, had he noted about any advanced or different religious, philosohical, theological or social system or any religious spacialities prevalent in Kerala [because this part is in south Travancore (kerala)then ] especially Kanyakumari. Thank You.- Vaikunda (<.^.>) Raja