Valuation from Acharya Venkatanatha, the unitary state of Shreepillai Lokacharya

Abstract

As a result of the prominent industries of Sreeramanyujacharya, Vaishnavism had a lot of publicity in the south of the country but within two hundred years of their livelihood, two independent votes were established in the Vaishnavite sect, one of which was represented by ShriPillai Lokacharya (1206-1311E) And did not say that the opinion polled by him was called 'Tinkala'. The second opinion was represented by his contemporary Acharya Shriveenkatanath (Vedantic or Kavitarkak Singh) (1269-1369 AD) and the dissenting opinion by him was not called Barkal. Pillai Lokacharya was elder in the age of pedagogical. Tankelai is the branch of Dakshinpath and is a branch of Barkalay Uttarkat. The Tankelhi branch was a partypart of TamilWind and he did not believe in Sanskrit Vedas, whereas the Barkalacharya branch accepted both of the evidence, but he was proud of Sanskrit, the main distinction from his contemporary Acharyavankatnatha of Shri Pillilokacharya was about the subject of the meaning of the affair. . Therefore, two separate opinions were made in the specialty of the Vedic religion and the different interpretations of the form of Bachtalal established and other small distinctions became two clear paths on the question of rickshaw such as Tilak etc. In the thirteenth century, the differences between the Templai and the Balkal sect grew very much. Behind the backdrop of the gentle Jamatri sect, Manav Mahamuni was the head of the Tenglian. Though there was mutual sympathy between the leaders of these two sects (Sripapallai Lokacharya, Vedantic and Soumya Jamatri Muni), followers of these sects used to quarrel among small things and even today the conspiracies of these sects are presently present.