Thanks for the effort. Let me try to explain in a different way.
I fully comprehend your point. When I was a teenager, I was somewhat frustrated (are you are) by the seemingly "recurrent" or "templated" compositions. I had mentally categorized (half in jest and half in frustration) Dikshitar as "Mr. Bhajeham", Shastri as "Mr. Nannubrova", and Swati as "Mr. Pahimam". The compositions of Tyagaraja seemed to directly speak to me without the seemingly roundabout approach of compound words and personality-based dissemination of ideas.
Later on it became clearer to me that this had little to do with who was more or less creative, but rather had to do with the objective. MD, ST, and SS used the "templated" approach because it greatly suits their objective of disseminating spiritual ideas through puranic legends. Tyagaraja used the "direct" approach because he went out into the street to do "bhajan", wherein a direct dialogue with his audience would generate "easier results" in the manner of draksha rather than narikela.
Note that MD and Tyagaraja were friends, they are supposed to have listened regularly to each other's compositions. I am pretty sure neither had a feeling that one was at a "lower rung" than the other. At the same time, MD did not deviate (for the most part) from his approach, and Tyagaraja from his. Note that Tyagaraja had no lack of Sanskrit ability. Most likely, both he and MD could converse fluently in Sanskrit. However, when he composed in Sanskrit he also adopted the same "templated" approach. That should tell you something about the reasons for adopting the "epithet"-based (or "templated" as you call it) approach.
In this process I frequently ended up being challenged in trying to express what I wanted to express. Perhaps a reflection of my limited/rusty sanskrt vocabulary . I found that the same thought process flowed much more freely in Tamil. Again I typically stop with writing poetry as I am rather musically challenged in a lot of ways.
Clearly, I am not in a position to advise you why you are challenged by this. As I mentioned, this is not particularly difficult to do. The bhagavad gita is written in this style (with the adavntage that it can afford to ramble on for 18 chapters unlike the CM composer who has 5 minutes to express his idea). The upanishads are written in a contemplative style, sometimes switching to dialogue between characters.
Let me make it clear that I am all for different approaches to compositions. If you decide to compose in the "direct" style satisfying the technical guidelines, you have my full support. This thread is regarding overarching secular themes, not to promote the specific composition style of one composer or other.
What is strongly disagree with is your notion of "templated approaches" being on a "lower rung" of creativity. As I have explained above, this has nothing to do with creativity. Simply two different methods that appeal to different people and have different objectives.
Now, my specific responses to your concluding points:
1.Whether you write secular or religious or musical theme why are'nt we as a generation emulating the trinity
in their 'out of the box' thinking and stop with emulating in their templates and contents?
Emulation is not the root cause of what you see today. As with all change, it is gradual. Some elements of the "older" approaches are retained, some others are changed. As I said, I am not against your approach to composition. Please go ahead. As I also mentioned, I will be happy to compose in this manner as well. Hopefully it will convince you that both approaches have merit.
2.If you want to compose please do not stop at the lowest rung of creativity.
I think we all understand this. However, your notion of "epithet"-based composition style (regardless of theme) being on a "lower rung" is not well considered. Possibly, your own frustration with your perceived linguistic capabilities drives you to this assertion. I am pretty "catholic" in my reception to new ideas, and I have never claimed that secular themes are "superior" to religious ones. I only claimed that they need to be emphasized more and are equally valid in CM experience. I urge you to take a similar approach to the technical issues such as composition style (which are not really the primary subject of this thread).
3.A hundred theoritical arguments apart, this is a suggestion to the active members of this site:
Why don't we take up some theme of the month in the innovations forum and let the various folks here take a jab at composing, the more the languages the better (The more languages the better and see where it goes, it certainly would be a good exercise)
Sure, please go ahead. I personally do not compose for a specific occasion or as an exercise. I prefer to "craft" my compositions over a long period of time. One point that has not been mentioned (but I am sure you understand) is that it is ultimately about music as an art. Simply composing a nice poem is no use if it does not seamlessly integrate with the pure music.