PDA

View Full Version : A few basic questions



wcrow
07 January 2010, 06:38 AM
I thought that this would be the best forum to post in considering that my questions are quite basic. I am not hindu, so by all means move the thread if it is an unsuitable place.

My questions are:

1) I understand that the conception of God is different for each sect of hinduism, but I do not understand how this can be. Does your scriptures not specify which god is supreme God?

2) the place of the philosophies. Are they applicable to every denomination or are some more suitable to Shaivas than Vaishnavas for instance? I am just a little confused as to thier place in the religion.

3) what is your view of other peoples gods? Are they just false gods or can they be seen as valid faces of the Brahmman or Devas in thier own right?

Thankyou in advance of answering, I hope I can learn much from this :).

Eastern Mind
07 January 2010, 10:19 AM
I thought that this would be the best forum to post in considering that my questions are quite basic. I am not hindu, so by all means move the thread if it is an unsuitable place.

Vannakkam wcrow. You will get several answers here as we are a mixed lot. These are my personal views and in no way represent all Hindus. I am coming from the western convert monistic Saiva Siddhanta perspective, a small subsect, but also from a more general view.

My questions are:


1) I understand that the conception of God is different for each sect of hinduism, but I do not understand how this can be. Does your scriptures not specify which god is supreme God?

God is all and in all. I call this God Siva. Siva is all pervasive, both immanent and transcendent. He (only for convenience, God has no gender, sounds better than 'it') is the cause of all things. At the same time He permeates the entire universe. He is also the Primal Soul, or first Soul. He is both formless and with form. Nothing exists outside of Him. He is known by many names, Sakti, Durga, Krishna, vishnu etc. But it is all the same God.

I believe all Hindus would have some, all of, or perhaps even more, ofthis in their conceptions of God.


2) the place of the philosophies. Are they applicable to every denomination or are some more suitable to Shaivas than Vaishnavas for instance? I am just a little confused as to thier place in the religion.

I believe in the Vedas as scriptural authority. I also believe in the Saiva Agamas. The works of early Saiva Tamil saints such as Tirumoolar's Tirumantiram, Manickavasagar's Tiruvacagam, and Tiruvalluvar's ethical Tirukkural and hymns of the Nayanars are also dear to me. The modern works of my own Guru, and his predecessors are also my scripture.

For all Hindus, the Vedas are always there. After that, it gets more complicated. There are Vaisnaiva Agamas, I believe, as well as hymns of the Alvars. There are also Puranas, the Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana, and countless works or translations by countless scholars, Gurus, saints and sages, or just notes by devotees of oral teachings of Gurus. It is very vast. The Complete Works of Sri Aurobindo for example, has several volumes. Each Hindu has s elected only a small portion of all this to help guide their own lives. No individual could ever study it all. There are even ancient scriptures that have been lost as many were written on leaves, and the leaves have decayed. Today with the use of good cameras, some are being preserved. India has many languages, each with translations or original works.


3) what is your view of other peoples gods? Are they just false gods or can they be seen as valid faces of the Brahmman or Devas in thier own right?

For me, it is the same God, only not so vast in the concepts. For me to claim that God is in a rock is heresy to a Christian, for example. But the concept of a God who is all-loving, a personal Big Brother so to speak, perhaps the primal soul, or creator, that might be closer. (I'm not at all familiar with the concept of God in Abrahamic religions.)


Thankyou in advance of answering, I hope I can learn much from this :).


Enjoy!

Aum Namasivaya

ScottMalaysia
07 January 2010, 02:40 PM
1) I understand that the conception of God is different for each sect of hinduism, but I do not understand how this can be. Does your scriptures not specify which god is supreme God?

There is only one God who appears in many different forms. The way my mother-in-law explains it is to use the analogy of a diamond. The diamond has many different facets, but it's all ultimately one diamond. God also has many different facets and forms, but God is One.


2) the place of the philosophies. Are they applicable to every denomination or are some more suitable to Shaivas than Vaishnavas for instance? I am just a little confused as to thier place in the religion.There are two main Hindu philosophies - Advaita and Dvaita. The Dvaita philosophy states that there is a total and irreconcilable difference between the human soul and God. In other words, our soul is different from God.

Advaita states that the human soul is actually non-different from God - in effect, our soul is actually Brahman, the impersonal aspect of God. It is due to maya (illusion) that we perceive ourselves to be separate from God.

Generally, Saivites (those who worship Shiva as the Supreme) and Shaktas (those who worship Goddess Shakti as the Supreme) generally follow the Advaita philosophy. Vaishnavas (those who worship Vishnu/Rama/Krishna as the Supreme) are generally Dvatins. Some ISKCON devotees ("Hare Krishnas") in particular are very negative of the Advaita philosophy.


3) what is your view of other peoples gods? Are they just false gods or can they be seen as valid faces of the Brahmman or Devas in thier own right?As I said above, there is one God who appears in different forms. Many Hindus accept Jesus Christ as an incarnation of God, and some even place His picture on their altars. There is a well-known bhajan (hymn) called Raghupati Raghava Raja Ram, and there are two lines that state:

Iishvar Allaah tero naam,
sab ko sanmati de Bhagavaan

God or Allah is Your name,
Lord, bless everyone with this wisdom.

This basically means that the Supreme can be called my many different names.

sanjaya
07 January 2010, 04:02 PM
Hi Wcrow. I'm pretty ignorant myself, but I'll answer your questions to the extent that I can.


1) I understand that the conception of God is different for each sect of hinduism, but I do not understand how this can be. Does your scriptures not specify which god is supreme God?

I don't know that there's any concept in Hinduism of a supreme God (assuming we're talking about the Vedic pantheon of Devas here). In early literature, Lord Indra is portrayed as a sort of king of heaven. In later literature, Lord Vishnu takes this role, while the very worship of Indra fades. But I've never seen any Scripture suggesting that Vishnu should be worshiped to the exclusion of other gods. For example, when my family does Satyanarayana Puja to Lord Narayana (Vishnu), we start with a prayer to Lord Ganesha, who is said to remove all obstacles. We also recite the Vishnu Sahasranama (1008 names of God), which goes to show that Lord Vishnu is known by many other names. The aspects of the various Devas do not contradict each other. On the contrary they are complementary. It stands to reason that if God is infinite and omnipotent, then no single picture or understanding of God will portray him accurately. This, I think, is why God is portrayed as many different Devas.


2) the place of the philosophies. Are they applicable to every denomination or are some more suitable to Shaivas than Vaishnavas for instance? I am just a little confused as to thier place in the religion.

So am I! Until recently I didn't even know that there were different Hindu sects. A lot of Hindus have no sect and subscribe to no specific philosophy. Maybe that's just because some of us haven't yet explored these philosophies to any significant depth.


3) what is your view of other peoples gods? Are they just false gods or can they be seen as valid faces of the Brahmman or Devas in thier own right?

I don't believe in "false gods," per se. In the Gita, Lord Krishna explains how God's supremacy can be reconciled with the fact that people worship what seems to be other gods:

Whosoever desires to worship whatever deity — using any name, form, and method — with faith, I make their faith steady in that very deity. Endowed with steady faith they worship that deity, and obtain their wishes through that deity. Those wishes are, indeed, granted only by Me. (7.21-22)
So there are not multiple gods, but only God. While I believe there is some truth to be found in all religions, I believe that Hinduism gives us the best portrait of God, and that other religious teachings that disagree with Hinduism are not correct. But this doesn't mean that God won't hear the prayers or the worship that other people offer to him in ignorance.

Mohini Shakti Devi
07 January 2010, 11:47 PM
Originally Posted by wcrow
1) I understand that the conception of God is different for each sect of hinduism, but I do not understand how this can be. Does your scriptures not specify which god is supreme God?


The stories in the old Vedas are historical records, they are not allegories nor morality tales or direct lessons they are records of the activities of the progenitors of Mankind, akin to a Soap Opera, where the persons involved were Devas whose acts were noble, commendable, admirable and examples of ‘Doing the Right Thing’. All the Vedic literatures were put into writing at the dawn of the present era (‘Kali’, the last of four Ages) by one person, the literary Incarnation of God, VedaVyasa.

Some scholars will assert that these are the only devas that exists.
Yet, the whole story is that there was Lord Brahma, the first born person within this ‘Brahmanda’(the Egg-bubble shaped enclosure that is this Universe, which emits from Maha-Vishnu’s Breathing. See the graphic: http://www.tri-murti.com/ancientindia/mahavishnu.jpg )

The “Vedic Literatures” explain that the Devas are elevated Living Souls living in the same Universe as all of us. The Devas were all born of the same Great Great Grand father, Lord Brahma. The Existence of the Devas in the higher planetary systems is an extended family of Celestial pedigree living aristocratically par-excellence. Gita says, “What ever a great man Does, common men will follow”, even so mankind aspires to live like Gods.

Krishna, the supreme personality of Godhead, revealed himself throughout the Epic history of the Last Empire to Rule the entire Globe, the MahaBharata.



Originally Posted by wcrow
2) the place of the philosophies. Are they applicable to every denomination or are some more suitable to Shaivas than Vaishnavas for instance? I am just a little confused as to thier place in the religion.



The word philosophy is Not the right word.
Any differences in sects et al is boiled down to two differing “Conclusions”:
God is a Person
(and/) or
God is a intellectual principle or incarnate form of that principle.

The similarities are the yoga disciplines and regulations which are derived from basic [philosophical?] principles. For example, vegetarianism is a common denominator followed by all, along with degrees of austerities, silent meditation etc.

There are classical ‘Schools of Philosophies’, but on close inspection differ essentially in their differing ‘Conclusions’. The Conclusion is the ultimate stated Goal. The Goal varies but basic yoga practices all appear the same. Familiarity with the saints adored down through time will garner admirers who have encountered those Saint’s fame. Esoterically speaking, the “feelings of separation” from the chief mentor or ‘Personal Goal’ of the yogi is what makes the devotion personal.



Originally Posted by wcrow
3) what is your view of other peoples gods? Are they just false gods or can they be seen as valid faces of the Brahmman or Devas in thier own right?




They are Lord Brahma’s children, grandkids, great-grandkids, great-great-grandkids living lives afforded them by a ‘Trust-Account’ awarded them by their supreme Good-Karma.

devotee
08 January 2010, 12:20 AM
Namastee Wilfred,



1) I understand that the conception of God is different for each sect of hinduism, but I do not understand how this can be. Does your scriptures not specify which god is supreme God?

Concept of God is one alone. However, the devotees chose the forms & names of same God in different manners as suits them.

Hindus believe :

"God is one but people describe Him in different ways".



the place of the philosophies. Are they applicable to every denomination or are some more suitable to Shaivas than Vaishnavas for instance? I am just a little confused as to thier place in the religion.

There are many different philosophies within Hinduism. Every sect has its own philosophy. However, all philosophies must conform to the Vedas to be accepted as valid within Hinduism.


what is your view of other peoples gods? Are they just false gods or can they be seen as valid faces of the Brahmman or Devas in thier own right?

Refer to answer to the first question above.

OM

wcrow
08 January 2010, 02:02 AM
Thankyou all very much for answering, this is very interesting.
So are devas also just facets of the one god, whichever one you might believe that to be?
The thing I am having trouble is the different names for God(s).
You have Ishvara, Deva, Svayam Bhagavan and Brahman - and then some people go and use english translations on top of this, which makes me even more confused :o

I am also wondering how a worsipper knows which god is the supreme godhead (shiva/vishnu/shakti), is it just a matter of which seem more logical to you? It just sees to alien to me to not have your scripture tell you who your god is, and instead have many different versions.

Thanks,

Wilfred.

NetiNeti
08 January 2010, 10:38 AM
I am also wondering how a worsipper knows which god is the supreme godhead (shiva/vishnu/shakti), is it just a matter of which seem more logical to you? It just sees to alien to me to not have your scripture tell you who your god is, and instead have many different versions.

Thanks,

Wilfred.

To me the supreme Godhead is without description and without name. When I worship Vishnu or Brahman I am worshiping a facet or representation of the one true god. The deity that attracts you is the face of God that you devote yourself to, but in the end you are worshiping the nameless, all pervading God. Ramakrishna said that in order to be fully non-dualistic, one must first dabble in dualism. The worship of a deity is dualism because it separates man and God. Ramakrishna worshiped mother Kali, but attained samadhi when he was able to let that image go and focus on the supreme essence of God in all things. This is not what all Hindus believe but is what I believe to be true and is the teachings of my particular master.

Welcome to the forums and I hope you find much truth.

Eastern Mind
08 January 2010, 01:31 PM
I am also wondering how a worsipper knows which god is the supreme godhead (shiva/vishnu/shakti), is it just a matter of which seem more logical to you? It just sees to alien to me to not have your scripture tell you who your god is, and instead have many different versions.



Vannakkam again. From my point of view which leans more towards mysticism than logic, it is not at all logical. Logically it would be all the same. It wouldn't matter. Logically it shouldn't matter one iota if the '03 Toyota is black, yellow, red, or blue, if its the identical car on the inside. But ironically it does matter. More blue Toyotas got sold.

Here is a simplified version of how we know.

It is more a matter of gut, or instinct. This religion is first and foremost experiential. Walk past or pilgrimage to a Kali temple, a Siva temple, and a Krishna temple. Go inside each one and sit for an hour or so. Watch the rituals. Watch the people. Eat the prasadam. Speak with the priest. Choose a devotee and do what he does. Place the sacred marks upon your forehead. If there is a library or a temple book there on philosophy, take it home and read it.

Then go home and reflect on it. Ask yourself "Where did I feel comfortable? Which place felt like I had returned home?"

If it was the Kali temple, then you're probably a Shaktite.
If it was the Siva temple, then you're most likely a Saivite.
If it was the Krishna temple, then you're a Vaishavite.
If you really couldn't decide, you're a Smarta.
If none of them made any sense at all, you're not a Hindu.

This is how we decide. Some version of this. In India, most likely you just are what your parents are, but not always. Growing up in a Hindu land is far far different from growing up in a western land.

BTW, over the years I have owned a 72 Red Corona, 2 81 blue Tercels, 1 Yellow 81 Tercel, 1 Black 81 Tercel, 1 Blue 83 Camry, 1 Blue 87 Corolla, 1 03 Red Echo, and an 07 Silver Yaris. Buying a Toyota is logical, not like deciding which God is supreme for you.

Aum Namasivaya

devotee
08 January 2010, 08:07 PM
I am also wondering how a worsipper knows which god is the supreme godhead (shiva/vishnu/shakti), is it just a matter of which seem more logical to you? It just sees to alien to me to not have your scripture tell you who your god is, and instead have many different versions.


Back to square one ! Drop your Christian mind-set first & then read the answers again. It is already stated above.

May be you are too young to understand all this. Sit down & relax ... there is no such hurry.

OM

yajvan
08 January 2010, 10:17 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté wcrow (et.al)

I see many have given you an answer... devotee suggests taking your time and this is a good notion - we will be here. So, ask questions; doubt (saṃśaya¹) via questions and proper answers hones viveka¹ (discrimination) i.e. the ability to discern a correct view of the world.

Please note too that veda is from vid, true knowledge. It is not historical record in the purest sense - if we wish history ( his-story) then we look to the itihāsa-s. This word is made up of iti + ha + āsa which means so (thus) it was or thus spoken i.e. history.

What is an example of itihāsa-s ? the Rāmayāṇa or/and the Mahābhārata. We can go deeper and wider into the ved (veda's) but that is not your question.

You ask of the Supreme also considered anuttara. This word anuttara means chief, principle - the wise say this word means that which cannot be surpassed, we may call it ultimate, of that which has no equal. And in our view of this anuttara in sanātana dharma (hinduism) there is this Supreme, yet it is known by many names.

Let me offer a hymn from ṛg (rig) veda I.164.46, and ṛṣi dīrghatamas. He informs us:

indraṃ mitraṃ varuṇamaghnimāhuratho divyaḥ sa suparṇo gharutmān |
ekaṃ sad viprā bahudhā vadantyaghniṃ yamaṃ mātariśvānamāhuḥ ||

I do not expect you to read this or know this - so if I may let me assist and pick out the most salient point. The key words here are ekaṃ sad viprā bahudhā. It says, Truth (sad - existence , essence, Brahman) is One ( ekaṃ ), the sages (vipra - ṛṣi-s) call it variously (bahudhā).

You see wcrow, this Supreme is so great ( brahman means, great, expansive) is so incompassing there is no thing that It is not; Hence It is śiva, kṛṣṇa, pārvatī, śakti, maha-viṣṇu, bharava, bharavi, etc. - all of the most high, most adored devatā , Divine and īśvara ( Great Lord) that resides within our community.
This Supreme is not exhausted, never constrained, no limits what so ever - perfectly Supreme and independent. For this you will see mutiple views and opinions of one's most adored Lord on HDF and other places that offer hindu/sanātana dharma values.
Truth is one, the sages ( and even us) call it variously... that is the point to appreciate.

It is like the example given by the wise...
4 blindfolded men are asked to stand next to this thing ( an elephant) and define what he 'sees' via touch or feel. One says, 'this thing is like a big tree' ( touching a leg); another says 'oh no, this is more like a gentle snake' (as the elephant carresses his head); another says 'that cannot be' as he is fanned by the elephant's large ears and suggests it to be a fan of some sort; the other says 'you all must be wrong' , as he touches the elephant's belly and suggests a huge bellowing rough-and-hairy baloon of some sort.

You see when we try to inform you of our elephant ( the Supreme, anuttara) we touch the Supreme in all differnt ways, yet it is still the elephant.
Like that we are different, like that we are all touching the same Supreme.

praṇām

words

saṃśaya is uncertainty , irresolution , hesitation , doubt
viveka true knowledge , discretion , right judgement , the faculty of distinguishing and classifying things according to their real properties

ScottMalaysia
08 January 2010, 10:46 PM
If it was the Kali temple, then you're probably a Shaktite.
If it was the Siva temple, then you're most likely a Saivite.
If it was the Krishna temple, then you're a Vaishavite.
If you really couldn't decide, you're a Smarta.
If none of them made any sense at all, you're not a Hindu.

What if it was one like ours with Ganesh, Seeta-Rama-Lakshman, Radha-Krishna, Shiva-Parvati and Hanuman?

Many Hindus in India (and Malaysia) are not sectarian. An Indian might pray to Goddess Durga but not consider himself a Shakta. A Malaysian might be a devotee of Krishna but he might have never heard the term "Vaishnava".

Generally, a Hindu chooses one God as his "Ishta Devata" (chosen divinity). This is the main God/Goddess that he prays to. My Ishta Devata is Amman (Goddess Durga).

wcrow
09 January 2010, 02:01 AM
Back to square one ! Drop your Christian mind-set first & then read the answers again. It is already stated above.

May be you are too young to understand all this. Sit down & relax ... there is no such hurry.

OM

I don't think I have a christian mindset. You see, In my religion the practical is the most important thing, and all of the gods are important - we can't change practice just because we think one god is more imporant than the others. It is very different in hinduism, it seems.



If it was the Kali temple, then you're probably a Shaktite.
If it was the Siva temple, then you're most likely a Saivite.
If it was the Krishna temple, then you're a Vaishavite.
If you really couldn't decide, you're a Smarta.
If none of them made any sense at all, you're not a Hindu.


This makes a lot more sense in a religion where all gods are just faces of the one, it would just be semantics then, wouldn't it?


Sorry I couldn't get quotes for this last one:

"It is like the example given by the wise...
4 blindfolded men are asked to stand next to this thing ( an elephant) and define what he 'sees' via touch or feel. One says, 'this thing is like a big tree' ( touching a leg); another says 'oh no, this is more like a gentle snake' (as the elephant carresses his head); another says 'that cannot be' as he is fanned by the elephant's large ears and suggests it to be a fan of some sort; the other says 'you all must be wrong' , as he touches the elephant's belly and suggests a huge bellowing rough-and-hairy baloon of some sort.

You see when we try to inform you of our elephant ( the Supreme, anuttara) we touch the Supreme in all differnt ways, yet it is still the elephant.
Like that we are different, like that we are all touching the same Supreme."

This has cleared it up for me. Thankyou all.

My last question is about worship. How + why do you people worship? Is there a set amount of worship is required/reccomended to do?

Eastern Mind
09 January 2010, 07:33 AM
Vanakkam Scott: Even in Smarta temples like the one you describe, an individual would probably lean more to a certain shrine. If not, well then, they're pretty Smarta.

I've also heard the terms 'leaning toward' a lot. Such as officially Smarta, but leaning towards Saiva. Or Saiva leaning towards Shaktite. Clearly everyone is different and therefore has a different take. My explanation was just very simple. An extremely introductory lesson if you will. You and I and anyone else who's been around for a while knows that it is far more complicated. Take the Balinese Hindu for example, or the Surinam one, or the Mauritian.

This complexity is hard to explain to a beginner like wcrow. Its even hard to explain to a Hindu from India who hasn't traveled much.

As far as Ganesha goes, most Hindus, other than the Ganapatyan sect don't see him as a choice for the Supreme. But your current temple is very typical of many North Indian style temples. In the Southern style, I've never heard the 'Jay Jagadisha Hare' aarti song .. ever.

Regardless, if wcrow is actually leaning towards Hinduism, he'll find out. If he still has a ton of Christianity stuff to dump, he'll never figure all this out. It is very difficult to come out of simplicity black/white philosophy and start seeing everything in shades of grey.

I think the concept of 'Ishta-Devata' in itself, I believe is a Smarta concept, initiated by Shankara in his attempt to unify all of the Hindu religions. Surely someone else here can elaborate more. I am no expert.

It is common in the west to build Siva-Vishnu temples, mostly out of monetary issues. A notable exception is in Atlanta where on the same piece of land, they built two separate temples that stand alone.

Aum Namasivaya

ScottMalaysia
09 January 2010, 06:31 PM
Vanakkam Scott: Even in Smarta temples like the one you describe, an individual would probably lean more to a certain shrine. If not, well then, they're pretty Smarta.

I don't think that it's a Smarta temple. From what I know, Smartas worship five forms of God: Ganesha, Shiva, Vishnu, Durga and Surya (the Sun God). Smartas are also very strict and orthodox, and don't allow conversion.


As far as Ganesha goes, most Hindus, other than the Ganapatyan sect don't see him as a choice for the Supreme.

Most Hindus would say that He is one of the many forms of the Supreme.


But your current temple is very typical of many North Indian style temples. In the Southern style, I've never heard the 'Jay Jagadisha Hare' aarti song .. ever.

You can listen to the song and watch a video of the arati here (http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naOdha_EQik).

I've never seen it used in Southern temples, either. Generally, bhajans aren't sung in South Indian style temples. The worship seems to be quite individualistic. Yes, at the puja times, many devotees will often come and line up to worship, but it's just between them and God. Once they've prayed and received the blessing and sacred compounds, they'll leave. The North Indian style temples, however, often have congregational worship, with slokas, bhajans and a discourse on the Bhagavad-Gita kind of like a sermon.

I personally have to say that I prefer the North Indian style temples myself, but possibly this is because the very first temple I saw was an ISKCON one, which had marble Deities. However, I do like the South Indian Goddess Mariamman (although I pray to Her in the form of Durga at my local temple).


It is common in the west to build Siva-Vishnu temples, mostly out of monetary issues. A notable exception is in Atlanta where on the same piece of land, they built two separate temples that stand alone.

Yes, well Shiva and Vishnu are among the two most popular Gods in Hinduism. If you have a Hindu community of both Vaishnavas and Saivites, but there aren't enough of them to support two temples, then one temple with both Gods would seem to be the perfect solution.

A question for Eastern Mind: Have you seen South Indian Vaishnava temples? If you have, what are they like? Are the puja rituals much different from the South Indian Saiva temples?
(I've seen a Krishna temple in Singapore, but the people were sitting on the floor for some ceremony when I was there, so I didn't really get a chance to look around. When I visited the Sundaraja Perumal (Vishnu) temple in Klang, it was shut).

Eastern Mind
09 January 2010, 07:35 PM
A question for Eastern Mind: Have you seen South Indian Vaishnava temples? If you have, what are they like? Are the puja rituals much different from the South Indian Saiva temples?
(I've seen a Krishna temple in Singapore, but the people were sitting on the floor for some ceremony when I was there, so I didn't really get a chance to look around. When I visited the Sundaraja Perumal (Vishnu) temple in Klang, it was shut).

I have never been in a straight up Vishnu one, but I assume they are a lot like other South Indian temples. I have been in ones that had Venkateswara shrines. Granite, abhishekams, Brahmins only etc. Saidevo will be able to inform us.

Aum Namasivaya

saidevo
09 January 2010, 11:22 PM
namaste Everyone.

The concepts of the rituals in the Shiva-VaiShNava temples are more or less the same, although the scriptural readings differ widely. More than the Shaivites, the VaiShNavas are passionate about the 4000 Divya Prabandham hymns composed by their AzhvArs in Tamil, and these hymns they regularly recite in their daily pujas. In most temples in TN these days, aartil is waved with an oil or ghee lamp instead of burning camphor as camphor smoke is found harmful to the deity images.

A speciality of the VaiShNava temples is that when a group of devotees come by seeking darshan of the PerumAL--ViShNu image or ThAyAr--LakShmI image, the priest shows the arti to each feature of the deity, explaining its significance. He also gives some hints about the sthala purANam--local legends and the history of the temple. Along with the aarti flame, some tuLasi leaves are also given to the devotees, followed by holy water, and then the priest touches the devotees' heads with a silver crown on which are inscribed the lotus feet of PeriyAzhvAr. In the ThAyAr sannidhi, kumkumam is given as prasAdam.

Here is an article about the MAdhava PerumAL temple, Mylapore, which was one of my favourite VaiShNava temples: http://www.indianetzone.com/27/sri_madhava_perumal_temple_mylapore_chennai_south_india.htm