Guest guest Posted December 13, 1998 Report Share Posted December 13, 1998 SrI: SrImatE SrI Lakshminrusimha ParabrahmanE namaha Dear devotees, namO nArAyaNA. adiyEn is forwarding a posting by a bhAgavathA in another list , with his permission. adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan ananthapadmanAbha dAsan krishNArpaNam ------------------- Sri Ramanuja’s life history is filled with extraordinary events. Paraphrasing Einstein on Mahatma Gandhi, it is almost unbelievable that such a one walked this earth in flesh and blood about 1,000 years ago. Among these events the most emotional one is the incidence that gave him the name “Emperumaanaar”. The skeletal details of the event are well known. However, there are some important misunderstandings. The most important of these is whether or not Sri Ramanuja went up the temple Gopuram and preached the Rahasyas and Rahasyarthas to everyone. Research on such matters is of no importance to a Bhagavtha who is completely immersed in the Kalyana Gunas of our Lord. However, since adiyEn is not at that level of maturity my curiosity got the better of me. AdiyEn looked into four publications. They are: [1] Acharya Vaibhavam by Sri. U. vE. Purisai Nadathur Krishnamachariyar Swami, published by Sri Visishtadvaita Research Centre, 66 Dr. Rangachari Road, Madras 18. (1992) [2] Sri Ramanujar by Pi. Sri, published by Sudesamithran, (1964) (Out of print) [3] Ramanuja Vaibhavam by Vadivazhagiya nambidasar with Commentary by Sri R. Kannan Swamy, published by Sri Villiputhoor R. Kannan Swamy, 91 Thulasingam Mudali Street, Madras 11 (Original 300 to 400 years ago, commentary 1988) [4] Araayirappadi Guruparampara vaibhavam by Pinbazhagiya PerumaaL Jeeyar (a sishya of NampiLLai), published by Puththoor Swamy, (The oldest account of Guruparampara, 1968 print) Before we examine the written evidences, let us examine the scene of the event. First, going up the temple Gopuram and looking down from the top is an intense emotional experience. The watchman who took us up narrated the story with so much emotion that it was impossible to keep the tears in check. There are two moorthy’s for Emparumaanar, in seated position, at the top of the Gopuram looking down into the street. The watchman also narrated how pilgrims from Andhra would hug these moorthees and weep. Such untinted devotion towards our Ramanuja is indeed inspiring. Then we notice a few things. First, ThirukkOshitiyur Nambi’s thirumaaLigai is just a few steps from the bottom of the Gopuram. Would Sri Ramanuja have violated the promise he made to his Acharyan in such a brazen way right in front of his own house? May be , may be not, this is perhaps arguable. But, the second thing we notice is that the day when this event is supposed to have happened was the day of TheRkaazhvaan (Lord Nrisimha) utsavam. On that day the place in front of the temple Gopuram must have been crawling with people, young and old, men and women, children running around, vendors hawking their wares, etc, etc. There must have been a carnival atmosphere. Would our Paramacharyan have chosen such a time and place to openly impart the most esoteric of manthras to even the uninterested and incompetent? How many people would have really understood the significance of this? Lastly, from a real practical point of view, there is simply no way that Sri Ramanuja would have been heard down below in the streets even if he was shouting at the top of his voice from high above on top of the Gopuram. Now, let us turn to the textual evidence. First, the most recent of these is Sri Purisai Swami’s book [1] published by Sri Ahobila Mutham. Here the Swami says, even though Sri Ramanuja went to Thirukkoshtiyur along with Koorathazhvaan, Mudaliandan, and Nadadurazhvan, he approached Nambikal by himself and received the upadesam. Then, the next day, the day of TheRkazhvan utsavam, Sri Ramanuja conveyed the upadesams to Koortahaazvaan and others. NambikaL was irked by this and ordered that Ramanuja be brought in front of him. The rest of the story follows along the well known lines. The significance of this is the ease with which Sri Ramanuja passed on the upadesam. Even at the risk of the esoteric meanings getting lost for ever, NambikaL put Sri Ramanuja through severe tests before imparting them to him. Further, Nambikal passed it on only to one disciple. However, Sri Ramanuja, out of his limitless compassion, did not subject his pupils to any grueling tests. This opened the way for everyone to learn the manthras with ease. This is the real significance of the event. Now let us move to the second text by Pi. Sri. Here, Pi. Sri. says that Sri Ramanauja approached Nambikal along with Koorathaazhvaan (K) and Mudaliandan (M). When Nambikal objected to the presence of K and M, Sri Ramanuja answered that M is his Thridandam and K is his Pavithram. NambikaL was pleased and taught the manthras and the meaning to all three. Then, the next day, on the day of Therkaazhvaan utsavam, Pi. Sri. says, Udayavar conveyed the esoteric manthraas as well as the hidden meaning to everyone present, including women and children. Pi. Sri. then adds that “some say he went up the gopuram”. Here is the original: “gOpuraththil ERi ninRu ivar thirumanthiraththaiyum, athan poruLaiyum muzhanginaar enRu *** kooRuvOrum uNdu ***.” The phrase “kooRuvOrum uNdu”, i.e. there are people who claim this, clearly shows that Pi. Sri. Was hedging about the gopuram incidence. Now, to the remaining two references [3] and [4]. Of these, Sri Ramanuja Vaibhavam [3] is dated approximately 300 to 400 years ago. Sri R. Kannan Swamy, the commentator, argues that the author, Vadivazhagiya Nambi is a disciple of Azhakappa Nambi. This means the author must have belonged to ThenAcharya sampradayam. According to this text, Udayavar does introduce M and K as his Thandu and Pavithram. But, the upadesam itself is supposed to have been given in the ear of Udayavar. Here is the relevant portion of the verse #341: .... nambi oppilaar seviyil andha uNmaiyai upadEsiththaan.” (Nambi gave the upadesam about the truth in the ear of the peerless Ramanuja.) >From this we can infer that the Upadesam was given only to Ramanuja, but not to others. The text then continues that Sri Ramanuja stayed in Thirukkoshityur for a few days. Then, on the day of Therkaazhvaan utsavam, Sri Ramanauja openly gave out the upadesam. Here is that part of verse #356: “.... anaivarum aRiyum vaNNam seppinaar iLaiyaazhvaar ...” (Ramanuja explained the meaning so that everyone could hear.) There is no mention of Gopuram here or Ramanuja giving upadesam specially to M or K. But, since [3] follows [4] quite closely, we can infer that by “anaivarum” (all) what is actually meant is the group of Sri Vaishnavas present with Sri Ramanuja. Finally, let us look at the oldest of all these texts, ARAyirappadi [4]. The Thandu-Pavithram part of the story is mentioned here, which is repeated in much the same way in [3] above. But, in this text Nambikal gives permission for Udayavar to instruct K and M on the esoteric manthras. Here is the original: “... ivvartthatthai ivargaLukku oziya maRRoruvarukkum sollaathE k0LLum ...” (Do not explain these meanings to anyone other than these (two).) >From this it is clear that Nambikal gave upadesam only to Ramanuja, but not to K and M. Then, the text goes on, the next day was Therkaazvaar utsavam. On this day Sri Ramanuja gave upadesam to many Sri Vaishnavas. Here is the original: “... therkaazvaar thiruvOlakkaththil anEgam srivaishNavarkaLLukku ap prama rahasya arththatthai aruLinaar.” Note the term, “anEgam Sri VaishnavavargaLukku”. Nambikal allowed Ramanuja to pass on the upadesam only to K and M. But Udaiyavar gave it away to many Sri Vaishnavas. That is all. There is no mention of upadesams to everyone including women and children as Pi. Sri states. And, there is no mention of any Gopuram. The Gopuram episode is just interesting addition to popular folklore full of emotional anubhavam, but not much in the way of fact. Summary ------- Did Sri Ramanuja climb to the top of the Gopuram? [1], [3] and [4] do not mention this at all. Even Pi Sri in [2] hedges by saying some people claim this. So we can authoritatively conclude that Sri Ramanuja did not climb on top of any Gopuram. Did Sri Ramanuja give out rahasya manthras/mantharthas to everyone? Only Pi. Sri. states this happened. ARAyirappadi clearly states that this was given only to "anEgaSri Vaishnavas." Thus there is no justification to claim that Sri Ramanuja freely gave it to anyone walking in, let alone anyone standing in a street corner. It seems some people claim that "Sri Vaishnavas" means anyone coming in and "anEga" means a mass of people. Such broad interpretations of these terms are speculations and cannot be presented or accepted as facts. Those who continue to claim such broad interpretations are well advised to look at the way in which Kooraththaazhvan and Mudaliandan got Charamasloartham. All said and done, none of these diminish the significance of what actually took place almost 1,000 years ago. But for Sri Ramanuja’s perseverance to get the upadesam from NambikaL and then the ease with which he passed it along to many of his sishyas, we may not have the prapatti margam today. It is for this reason that Udayavar is indeed Emperumaanar. ============= Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 14, 1998 Report Share Posted December 14, 1998 This is obviously one of the most significant episodes in Sri Ramanuja's life, and no matter how interprets it, one cannot but be impressed with the concern Ramanuja had for his fellow beings. But what exactly did Ramanuja do? These questions are lost in history, perhaps, but the early biographies, acharyas' works, and oral tradition can lead us near the truth. Sri Anand wrote, quoting another bhakta (Dileepan?): > Then we notice a few things. First, ThirukkOshitiyur > Nambi's thirumaaLigai is just a few steps from the bottom > of the Gopuram. Would Sri Ramanuja have violated the > promise he made to his Acharyan in such a brazen way > right in front of his own house? This is a good question. Ramanuja was a revolutionary character, unquestionably unique in his open-mindedness and willingness to see through religious texts and teachings and make sense of them. What is more, he was a person who stuck to certain principles even when they challenged the norms of his time. Here are a few examples of how he related to several of his acharyas. a) When Yadavaprakasa, his first teacher of Vedanta, interpreted some passages of the Upanishads in an intellectually unacceptable way, compromising the glory of God, Ramanuja respectfully but openly disagreed, putting his very life in danger. This was when he was a mere boy. b) While being instructed in the inner meaning of Tiruvaymozhi by Tirumaalai Andaan, Ramanuja openly objected to several interpretations taught by the acharya, and offered his own instead. At least once, Andaan refused to teach Ramanuja in consternation. c) Periya Nambi performed the "brahma medha" funeral rite, traditionally reserved only for brahmins, for an untouchable saint, Maaraneri Nambi. When Ramanuja saw this, he challenged PN, his primary acharya, to explain how he could violate tradition in such a gross manner. Periya Nambi gave a convincing and moving reply about the greatness of bhAgavatas irrespective of caste which satisfied Ramanuja. You see, openly but respectfully challenging his acharyas on principle came easily to Ramanuja, even when the consequences were severe. In this instance, he knew that Tirukkottiyur Nambi would come to hear of his revealing the secret teaching, irrespective of how and where he did it. Ramanuja did not want to hide his actions from Tirukkottiyur Nambi; that would be cowardly. He knew he was disobeying his acharya, knew that the latter would find out, and for the sake of uplifting his fellow beings, was willing to pay the consequences. So, in answer to the question, > Would Sri Ramanuja have violated the > promise he made to his Acharyan in such a brazen way > right in front of his own house? my answer is: I think so. Ramanuja was not trying to hide his actions. But this may not be the "gopuram" in question. More on this below. > But, the second thing we > notice is that the day when this event is supposed to > have happened was the day of TheRkaazhvaan (Lord Nrisimha) > utsavam. On that day the place in front of the temple > Gopuram must have been crawling with people, young and > old, men and women, children running around, vendors > hawking their wares, etc, etc. There must have been a > carnival atmosphere. Would our Paramacharyan have chosen > such a time and place to openly impart the most esoteric > of manthras to even the uninterested and incompetent? This, to me, shows Ramanuja's very uniqueness, and I believe this why he did it. He went to the most public place possible, the temple, (this is undisputed) and revealed the mantrArthas there. Sri Pinpazhagiya Perumal Jiyar, in another description of this event in his biography, writes that Ramanuja taught this to "everyone" (sarvarkkum aruLicceyya). If one would ask how this would have occurred, I can easily surmise the following situation. Ramanuja sits down with his inseparable associates Mudaliandan and Kurattazhvan. A crowd gathers around, attracted by the tejas evident in Ramanuja's face. And Ramanuja proceeds to teach. This kind of thing (public discourses with random visitors) happen even today in any major temple. [ I do not think that Ramanuja climbed the gopuram, nor do the oldest accounts say that he shouted out the sacred mantra. As Sri Bharat has written, it seems that gopura also referred to a particular area or room of the temple. But all of the old accounts are agreed that he taught the mantrArthams in this place to many people, not just a select handful of disciples. ] Re: Sri Purisai Swami's version of the events I am not sure what texts Sri Purisai Swami used for his version, but they do not agree in many respects with Sri P.P. Jiyar's aaraayirappadi. Re: Vadivazhagiya Nambi Dasar's "Ramanuja Vaibhavam" (300 - 400 years old) Dileepan writes: > ... anaivarum aRiyum vaNNam seppinaar > iLaiyaazhvaar ... > > (Ramanuja explained the meaning so that everyone > could hear.) > > There is no mention of [...] Ramanuja giving > upadesam specially to M or K. But, since [3] follows > [4] quite closely, we can infer that by anaivarum (all) > what is actually meant is the group of Sri Vaishnavas > present with Sri Ramanuja. This conclusion I don't find obvious at all. Why doesn't "everyone" (anaivarum) simply mean everyone (or many people) at Tirukkottiyur? Why would Ramanuja go to the temple to teach, instead of his thirumaaLigai, if it were not to teach people unknown to him? This is much more straightforward. In general, these biographers are very specific. If they mean only a few or select people, they usually say so. When they mean otherwise, they say it. Re: P.P. Jiyar's aaraayirappadi Dileepan writes: > Then, the text goes on, the next day was Therkaazvaar > utsavam. On this day Sri Ramanuja gave upadesam to many > Sri Vaishnavas. Here is the original: > > ... therkaazvaar thiruvOlakkaththil > anEgam srivaishNavarkaLLukku ap > parama rahasya arththatthai aruLinaar. > > Note the term, anEgam Sri VaishnavavargaLukku. Nambikal > allowed Ramanuja to pass on the upadesam only to K and M. > But Udaiyavar gave it away to many Sri Vaishnavas. That > is all. There is no mention of upadesams to everyone > including women and children as Pi. Sri states. Women and children are also Sri Vaishnavas and can be included in the group. But, it is true, children may not have had an interest and may not have sat and listened. Summary ------- I agree with Dileepan's summary that the facts do not admit of Ramanuja having climbed the temple tower (gopuram). But as far as the second question is concerned: > Did Sri Ramanuja give out rahasya manthras/mantharthas > to everyone? I agree that Ramanuja did not give out the rahasya mantras in this episode. No ancient biography mentions that he did. However, Dileepan writes: > ARAyirappadi clearly > states that this was given only to "anEgaSri Vaishnavas." > [...] There is no mention of upadesams to everyone > including women and children as Pi. Sri states. The aaraayirappadi also says, [p. 286, Puttur Swamy's edition]: ivarum adhaith theRkaazhvaar thiruvOlakkaththilE dhooLidhaan^amaaka sarvarkkum aruLicceyya ^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^ Ramanuja went to sannidhi of Terkaazhvaar (Narasimhar) and graciously imparted [the meaning] to everyone, as if he were giving away dust At the very least, the meaning of "everyone" (sarvarkkum, anaivarum) must be broader than a select few of his disciples. I also see no need to categorically exclude women and children, for whom Ramanuja has shown great affection and respect (more than the norm) many other times in his life. Dileepan continues: > And, there is no mention of any Gopuram. I would like to repeat here what Sri Bharat wrote about the "gopuram". The next day, he entered into the big and elevated hall *(this is called the Gopuram or pinnacle as sung by ANNAvappangAr in his Ramanuja AtimAnusha stava- <kim gOpurOpari vitEritha bhUridAnam>) of Terk-kAzhvAn or the Lord Nrisimha,Resident of Tiru-k-kOTiyUr ... So gopuram does not mean the pagoda here, but a large meeting area. I think we agree in many respects. Ramanuja did not climb the temple tower. That would not serve his purpose. He also did not shout out the sacred mantra. That wasn't his point. But he did teach many people, perhaps everyone he could gather, the sacred teaching embodied in the mantra as revealed by Tirukkottiyur Nambi, putting himself in danger of severe punishment here and hereafter, for the upliftment of his fellow beings. emberumaanaar thiruvadigaLE SaraNam adiyEn thirukkacci nambi dhaasan P.S. Just as one should not speculate so much as to make Ramanuja a revolutionary firebrand, changing everything in sight, one should also not speculate the other way and reinterpret all his bold moves to always fit the straightjacket of traditional norms and conservatism. The spirit of the ancient biographies do not read this way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 14, 1998 Report Share Posted December 14, 1998 SrI: SrImatE SrI Lakshminrusimha ParabrahmanE namaha namO nArAyaNA. forwarded is the reply from Sri Dileepan. adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan ananthapadmanAbha dAsan krishNArpaNam ----------------- Mani Wrote: >P.S. Just as one should not speculate so much as to make Ramanuja a >revolutionary firebrand, changing everything in sight, one should also >not speculate the other way and reinterpret all his bold moves to >always fit the straightjacket of traditional norms and conservatism. adiyEn tried to stay as close to the text as possible. None of the "bold moves" that are in the text have been denied or made light of. There is no need to invent new "bold moves" to improvise on the already great legacy of Sri Ramanuja. It is unfair to say that staying faithful to the text is "always fit the straightjacket of traditional norms and conservatism". Mani states further: >The spirit of the ancient biographies do not read this way. It is best to leave the spirit of these biographies to the real scholars. It is better for us to stick to the texts and the interpretations given by the scholars such as Sri Purisai Swamy, etc. [Accounts of Ramanuja's fidelity to truth deleted. No debate there.] > >> carnival atmosphere. Would our Paramacharyan have chosen >> such a time and place to openly impart the most esoteric >> of manthras to even the uninterested and incompetent? > >This, to me, shows Ramanuja's very uniqueness, and I believe >this why he did it. He went to the most public place possible, >the temple, (this is undisputed) and revealed the mantrArthas >there. This is just speculation. We need to be faithful to the text as much as possible. To say that Sri R did upadesam of the most esoteric of manthras in most public of places is just pure speculation unsupported by texts. >Sri Pinpazhagiya Perumal Jiyar, in another description >of this event in his biography, writes that Ramanuja taught >this to "everyone" (sarvarkkum aruLicceyya). adiyEn has written about this in detail. This "everyone" is restricted in scope to Sri vaishnavas defined earlier in the text. Interpreting any other way will make the earlier reference false. > >If one would ask how this would have occurred, I can >easily surmise the following situation. Ramanuja sits down >with his inseparable associates Mudaliandan and Kurattazhvan. >A crowd gathers around, attracted by the tejas evident in >Ramanuja's face. And Ramanuja proceeds to teach. These are more speculations. This is the way myths start forming. There is no justification to suggest that Sri R taught the inner meanings of the most esoteric of manthras to a crowd that gathered, a crowd that could very well be like one that would gather around a politician or a street magician. > referred to a particular area or room of the temple. But all > of the old accounts are agreed that he taught the mantrArthams > in this place to many people, not just a select handful of > disciples. ] "anEgam Sri Vaishnavas" is the key phrase. "Sarvar" is this group of "anEgam Sri Vaishnavas". How many is "many" and how many is "handful"? We can quibble about this. But, it is clear that "anEgam Sri Vaishnavas" cannot be the general public gathered which is likely to contain curious onlookers than people with keen interest. General preaching in such a gathering is more plausible than giving out the inner meanings of most esoteric of manthras. Further, "anEgam Sri Vaishnavas" cannot mean Sri R broadcast the manthraarthas in public. > >Re: Sri Purisai Swami's version of the events > >I am not sure what texts Sri Purisai Swami used for his >version, but they do not agree in many respects with >Sri P.P. Jiyar's aaraayirappadi. If so, please show it. If anything, it is Purisai Swamy's account that agrees with ARAyirappadi most closely. Pi. Sri.'s account is the one that is most off base. It got the Gopuram wrong, and the upadesam to K and M wrong. He also got the issue that is being debated wrong. Vadivazhagiya Nambi Dasar has the Gopuram issue correct, K and M's upadesam correct, but got the days mixed up. It follows ARAyirappadi in the rest of the account. Purisai Swamy's account comes closest to ARAyirappadi in this issue. He got everything right relating to Thirumanthrartham. > >This conclusion I don't find obvious at all. Why doesn't "everyone" >(anaivarum) simply mean everyone (or many people) at Tirukkottiyur? >Why would Ramanuja go to the temple to teach, instead of his >thirumaaLigai, if it were not to teach people unknown to him? >This is much more straightforward. "everyone" is already explained as limited in scope to Sri Vaishnavas. He went to TheRkAzhvaan sannithi because that is where he was doing upanyasam to his sishyas as per this particular text, not to look for crowd of strangers. Please note that Sri R did not have a Thirumaaligai in ThirukkOshtiyur. > >In general, these biographers are very specific. If they mean >only a few or select people, they usually say so. When they mean >otherwise, they say it. Exactly. If those authors wanted to say that Sri R gave the mantrarthas to Sri Vaishnavas and non-Sri Vaishnavas alike, they would have said so boldly. Yet they limit the audience. Let us stick to the text. Let us not exaggerate what actually happened. >Women and children are also Sri Vaishnavas and can be >included in the group. But, it is true, children may not >have had an interest and may not have sat and listened. Yes, the Sri Vaishnava goshti may have had some women. That does not change anything. However, the text does not specify whether there were any women in the group or not. It is better we do not speculate one way or the other. -- adiyEn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 1998 Report Share Posted December 15, 1998 SrImatE SrI Lakshminrusimha ParabrahmanE namaha namO nArAyaNA. Forwarded is the concluding post by Sri Dileepan on this gopuram episode of emperumAnAr. adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan ananthapadmanAbha dAsan krishNArpaNam ------------ Dear Mani: To bring closure to this discussion adiyEn would like to highlight the points of agreements: ================ Mani Varadarajan wrote: I agree with Dileepan's summary that the facts do not admit of Ramanuja having climbed the temple tower (gopuram). > Did Sri Ramanuja give out rahasya manthras/mantharthas > to everyone? I agree that Ramanuja did not give out the rahasya mantras in this episode. No ancient biography mentions that he did. ================ The only point of disagreement is to how many people did Ramanuja teach the manthrArthas. This is not a major point as there is no major restriction, except for demonstrated interest, on this as far as what adiyEn understands. Thank you Mani for a good discussion. -- adiyEn ======================================================== Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.