On Sanskrit vs. Tamil - part 3.

[Guest guest]

Dear members,

 

I will try to keep this part as short as possible.

 

As mentioned by Sri Muralidhar Rangaswamy and Sri Sadagopan, the times of

Sri Ramanuja and Sir Alavandar required them to compose more on Sanskrit than

Tamil. However they paid their respects to the AlvArs in their taniyans (the

history

of Taniyans is very interesting). For example, Sri Alavandar pays homage to

NammAlvAr at the beginning of Stotraratna. There are inscriptions on the

recitation

of TiruvAymozhi during tirupaLLiyezhucci in SriRangam that is dated about 1085.

So it is evident that the knowledge of the 4000 was very much intact with the

early acharyas and it was up to the later acharyas, particularly starting with

PiLLan,

to write commentaries on the subject.

 

Sri Bhattar, who wrote one commentary on one of the stanzas of 4000, also

composed two taniyans in tamil for NammAlvAr's Tiruvaymozhi. So did

Sri AnantAlvAn who composed one taniyan in praise of NammAlvAr.

Sri Bhattar also mentions the equivalence of Sanskrit and Tamil Vedas in

his Srirangarajastava.

 

----- From Srivaishnava ManiprvALa by Sri K.K.A Venkatachari-------

 

An intereseting reference to Tiruvaymozhi is given by Sri

VadakkuthiruvIthippiLLai:

 

Though the meaning is vEdArtha (this thiruvaymozhi) it is not self-manifest.

Veda (Sanskrit) is like paratva, IthihAsa abd PurAnas are like avatAra

and the TiruvAymozhi is like archAvatAra.

 

The Veda, as we know, is Sruti which is considered to be without beginning

(anAdi) or eternally revealed. If Vedas are Sruti which is anAdi, then the

hymns of AlvArs are considered in the Srivaishnava tradition to be that of

Sruti which has Adi (ie the temporal beginning of the AlvArs through whom

the Supreme Lord Narayana revealed Himself). VadakkuthiruvIthippiLLai

is the first archarys to make this distinction in his Idu:

 

Though the tiruvAymozhi has the meaning of Veda, it is not self-manifest

like the Veda. He uses the following simile to expand his suggestion. The

Supreme form of the Lord (paratva) is like the Veda, the PurAnas are

like the Lord's avatAra manifestations on earth, while the TiruvAymozhi

is like the image form (archA), because it is easily available to anyone

irrespective of time and place.

 

Also, Azhakiya manavALap perumAL nAyanAr in his AchAryahrdayam

remarks that the tamil language of Agastya is as eternal as Saskrit.

 

----------------

 

AchAryarkaL thiruvadikalE SaraNam

Venkatesh