phala-srutis

[Guest guest]

Dear and revered Sri.Anbil,

 

Thank you for a lovely write-up on the meanings of various "phala-srutis".

 

I have a small and rather naive question on the subject. I'll be grateful

if you

could throw some light on it.

 

We call the main body of a hymn as "stotra" or "stuthi" but reserve the

Vedic

term "sruti" to the epilogue! "phala-srutis" partake of the character of

"sruti"

even more than "stOrA-s" perhaps? What is the significance?

 

Thank you Sir for your kind words about "bandhus and jantus".

 

adiyEn,

sudarshan

[Guest guest]

Dear Sudarsan,

Thank you for an elaborate explanation. You have indeed regaled me with your

amazing style. I feel that I am not in any better position than the gentleman

you have referred to. Thank you again for educating me.

 

In this connection, I would like to allude to the publication of Sribashyam

by Purisai Swami. He chose to publish first the 4th Adhyayam. He explained

that as it is verily the "Phala Adhyaya", he had chosen to project it first.

This, he said, would create a taste for and induce reading the other Adhyayas.

You are right when you state that reading the Phala will truly ensure the

Phalas mentioned.

 

I would appreciate if we can continue the discusssions through private mail.

 

Dasoham

Anbil Ramaswamy

 

 

Dasoham

Anbil Ramaswamy

[Guest guest]

Dear and revered Sri.Anbil,

Many thanks for your succinct and clear note explaining why "phala-sruti"

is "sruti". I am not sure I need to go the trouble of referring the matter

to any scholars here in India. I've now been sufficiently informed, nay

"regaled" even, by your own "stylish" note !

 

Jokes and banter apart, there was a serious reason why the question struck

me in the first place.

 

It was an old "mImAmsa" verse I'd read somewhere but I can't remember

where.

Here is the verse I noted down in my old scrap-book which I unhesitatingly

"embark upon" to share with you (you who are definitely not "everyone or

anyone" to me) even at the risk of being mistaken for "showing off my

ignorance"! ):

 

"upakrama-upasamhArow abhyAsa-apUrvatA phalam (note the word

"phalam"!)

arthavAdo-upapatti cha lingam tAtparya-nirnayE

 

According to my notes scribbled here, since Vedic texts are sometimes very

difficult to unravel or interpret the 'mImAmsa-sAstras" lay down in the

above verse 7 ways in which Vedic pronouncements or "mahAvAkyA-s" are to be

understood. There are 7 methods of understanding a piece of Vedic discourse

or passage:

 

(1) "upakrama" and

(2) "upasamhAra"

 

mean respectively "the initial" and "concluding" part of a work. If the

"initial" and "concluding" part of a Vedic treatise or commentary speak of

the same subject-matter or idea then, it may be safely assumed (according

to the vedic pundits) that the same idea is the central matter about which

the whole of the Vedic passage deals.

 

(3) "abhyAsa" is repeating an idea or theme. In a certain Vedic passage, if

a single idea is repeated again and again then that is taken to be the

central theme of the passage.

 

(4) "apUrvatA" I learn denotes an idea that does not get mentioned at all

in the narrative or ideological flow of a passage but appears quite

suddenly, as it were in mid-stream, out of the blue! The idea or theme

which thus gets expressed afresh is then taken to be the central purpose or

import of the Vedic passage concerned.

 

(5) "phala" (which is very interesting to me personally and which is what,

believe me, sparked my question to you) means "fruit", "benefit", "reward"

or "result". If in the course of a Vedic work or speech, it is said,"If you

act in this manner you will gain such and such fruit or benefit", it means

that the central purpose of the work or speech is to persuade you to act in

the manner suggested so that you may reap the fruit or "phala" held out.

 

(6) Sometimes (the scholars say) in a Vedic passage a number of ideas or

points are dealt with. Even a story based on such various ideas may be

woven and narrated. In the course of such narration a particular matter

will receive special attention. This particular point then must be

considered, I learn, as the central purpose of the passage. This method I

understand is called "arthavAda".

 

(7) Finally they say that Vedic passages where a certain viewpoint is

sought to be established with sound reasoning then that viewpoint is to be

treated as its central thesis. This the scholars say is called the

"upapatti" method of interpreting the Vedas.

 

Now many years ago I once had a gentleman-friend (a true "paramEkAntin" in

my opinion) who confided in me that he actually fought shy of reciting the

"phala-sruti" portions of the Vishnu-sahasranAmam because reciting the

divine 1000 "nAmA-s" of the Lord was "phala" or reward in itself! Where was

the need then to recite the tail-end string of "shlOkA-s" purporting to be

"phala-sruti-s" and which often take the good part of 3 or 4 extra minutes

to mutter ?

 

His was a very valid point, indeed!

 

Then it occured to me suddenly to ask him if he accepted the view of our

revered "AchAryA-s" that the "mahAbharatha" was indeed a fifth-Veda i.e

"pancha-Veda"?

 

He looked at me in a puzzled way but shook his head and said,"Of course I

do!".

 

"Then do you accept," I said,"that the "mahAbhAratA" too may contain, like

the 4 other Vedas, certain great "veda-mahAvAkyA-s"?

 

"Perhaps, yes", the man said.

 

"Why do you say "perhaps"! Don't you think that passages like the

"vidura-neethi", the "bhagavath-gitA", the vishnu-sahasranAmam" or the

"yaksha-prasna" are all truly the equivalent of "veda-mahAvAkyA-s?", I

persisted in quizzing the gentleman.

 

He thought deeply and nodded his head in agreement.

 

"Then if Vishnu-SahasranAmam" is a Veda-maha-vAkya," I continued,"how many

of us can lay claim to a full and deep understanding of its true message,

idea or central theme?", I queried.

 

"Not many," the gentleman admitted,"but you might get some idea if you

diligently followed the "bhAshyA-s" of our great "AchAryA-s"."

 

"Have your studied the "bhAshyA" of Sankara or Bhattar?", I quizzed on.

 

"Yes, a bit".

 

"So what have they taught you about the "mahA-vAkya" which the Vishnu

SahasranAmam you say verily is?"

 

The gentleman remained silent in thought. For a while he scratched his head

and then sheepishly admitted, "Not much, but I learnt something about the

Lord's "kalyana-guna-s" here and there."

 

I laughed and then put my arm around him and said,"Swami, don't be so

ashamed. I too am in the same boat. I have done SahasranAma-pArAyanam for

the good part of the last two decades and am yet to truly grasp and

understand even a fraction of its exalted message notwithstanding poring

over "bhAshyA-s", texts, commentaries and inter-Net summaries of it all!".

 

"But," I exclaimed to the gentleman."adiyEn actually and very firmly

believes that the sum and substance of the entire Vishnu-SahasranAmam lies

in its alluring "phala-sruti". Hence even if I fail to recite the 1000

nAmA-s on a certain day I usually make up by reciting in full the

"phala-sruti" portions instead!".

 

The gentleman was shocked at my statement!

 

"What! You hold the "phala-sruti" to be the equivalent of the main

"sahasranAma"? What nonsense! How can anyone accept it? What is the

"pramAnam" you have?", he thundered at me.

 

It was then that I quoted to him the "mImAmsa-sAstrA" above which says :

 

"upakrama-upasamhArow abhyAsa-apUrvatA phalam

arthavAdo-upapatti cha lingam tAtparya-nirnayE

 

and which also explains that one of the valid ways in which a "vedic"

"mahA-vAkya" can be interpreted is through the "phalam" method or, as in

the case of the "SahasranAmam", through its wholesome and magnificent

"phala-sruti" !!

 

The man shook his head, nodded disbelievingly and walked away with a

bemused look on his face!!

 

Hope you like my "style", Sri.Anbil!

 

adiyEn,

Sudarshan