"mArgazhi" diary

[Guest guest]

Dear bhakti-list friends,

 

Adiyen thanks Sri.T.A.Varadan and Sri.Sridhar for

their comments and gratuitous advice.

 

Adiyen recognizes a "gag-order" when he sees one and

fully understands what is being meant.

 

Adiyen did not know that it is not allowed for an

ordinary Vaishnava-layman to converse about or muse on

Goda's poetry of "tiruppAvai" without immediately

inviting comparison with some great giant of a

commentator of the past or present.

 

(This is a bit like expecting some poor local

cricket-club player to walk out and bat exactly like

Sir Donald Bradman all the time! Also, it is like

saying, "when we can watch the great Bradman play

classic strokes on my video-player at home, why do I

need to come out to the local playground to watch this

lousy club-standard batsman at the crease?". Why

indeed?).

 

Since the standards of the two learned gentlemen in

this matter are very, very 'high' indeed and adiyen is

absolutely certain he will never be able make their

grade, adiyen sees wisdom in keeping his little

reflections on the poetry of the "tiruppAvai" to his

own humble self.

 

Adiyen is sorry to have "offended" you both Sir on the

eve of the "new millennium". He shall offend you no

further, most reverend Sirs,

 

Thank you,

Regards,

dAsan,

Sampathkumaran

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Talk to your friends online with Messenger.

http://messenger.

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Sampathkumar:

 

I sense a certain resentment in your posting vis a vis my comments

about YOUR interpretations/reflections on tiruppavai. My

'gratuitous' (and obviously unwelcome) comments seem to have

engendered significant felicity of expression on your kind part. Let

me attempt to clarify a few things:

> Sri Sampathkumar wrote:

>

> Adiyen thanks Sri.T.A.Varadan and Sri.Sridhar for

> their comments and gratuitous advice.

>

> Adiyen recognizes a "gag-order" when he sees one and

> fully understands what is being meant.

 

I (and for that matter anybody else here, I suppose) have no desire

or qualification to impose a gag order on you or anybody else. Your

viewpoints are as valid as anybody else'. The aspect that I took

exception to stemmed from your efforts to somehow lend sampradayic

enjoinment to your reflections, as you clearly do here:

> Sri Sampathkumar wrote:

>

> But the chief purpose of life, according to Vedanta,

> is to understand and trancend the "purushArthA-s".

> Once we do attain an intuitive understanding of the

> principles of "aram", "porul", "inbam" and "mOksa" we

> are said to be on the certain road to Godhead.

>

> Andal's "tiruppAvai", scholars and "achAryA-s" remind

> us, actually teems with several scintillating

> references to this great Vedantic matrix of

> "purushArthA-s" described above.

 

A good friend of mine was trying to

convince me the other day that thiruppavai was a derivative work of

the shaivite work thiruvambAvai. Well, he has a right to hold that

view point. However, he is not correct in telling me that our

AcharyAls (who are celebrated as "Eka kanThasthAL" - there is not a

situation where, down the lineage, would you find guru-shishya

grantha virOdham - Lakshminathan down to our current day acharyas)

provide 'scintillating' references to support his rather untenable

position. Likewise, it behooves you to provide references from

Scholars and Acharyas (as Sri Mani had reminded you earlier) if you

are going to claim that your interpretations are supported by the

sampradAyam.

 

Also, when it comes to something as exalted as tiruppavai, there are

no higher or lower standards of interpretation. There is just one

standard set forth by Emberumaanaar down to swami dEsikan and

maNavALa maamunigaL. And it is a standard of uncompromising attitude

towards the divine that we can all only enjoy by learning and

sharing.

>

> Adiyen is sorry to have "offended" you both Sir on the

> eve of the "new millennium". He shall offend you no

> further, most reverend Sirs,

>

 

I am not qualified enough to take 'offense' at your words. I would

just like to suggest that you should, may be, 'reflect' publicly once

you have had an opportunity to learn (preferably through an Acharya)

from the numerous vyAkhyAnams available on tiruppavai. That way,

you will never be in a position to mis-interpret anything.

 

Please forgive me if my words have hurt your sensiblities. The

intent was to clarify and not to hurt.

 

aDiyEn,

 

sridhar

[Guest guest]

dear srI sampathkumAr & other bhAgavathAs,

> (This is a bit like expecting some poor local

> cricket-club player to walk out and bat exactly like

> Sir Donald Bradman all the time! Also, it is like

> saying, "when we can watch the great Bradman play

> classic strokes on my video-player at home, why do I

> need to come out to the local playground to watch this

> lousy club-standard batsman at the crease?". Why

> indeed?).

 

The analogy should be more like "We expect an eskimo

who has no conception of what cricket is to play like Don Bradman

all the time". And adiyEn includes himself in the eskimo club here.

Most of us are in that boat. All we can expect the eskimo to do

is (if he has access to a VCR and a tape of Don Bradman playing

cricket ) for him to show us how Bradman played by playing a tape

on the VCR.

 

 

---begin quote---

Since the standards of the two learned gentlemen in

> this matter are very, very 'high' indeed and adiyen is

> absolutely certain he will never be able make their

> grade, adiyen sees wisdom in keeping his little

> reflections on the poetry of the "tiruppAvai" to his

> own humble self.

 

----end quote

 

When it comes to our sampradAyam, especially while interpreting

pAsurams & other granthams, there is no such thing as a

"high" standard or a "lower" standard. There is only one standard -

and that is - Are we representing what our pUrvAchAryAs

say accurately and clearly? - Anything else is not acceptable.

>

> Adiyen is sorry to have "offended" you both Sir on the

> eve of the "new millennium". He shall offend you no

> further, most reverend Sirs,

 

please - you did not offend adiyEn - Who is adiyEn to get offended?

What you wrote is contrary to what our pUrvAchAryAs say -

not offensive to individuals - very ignorant and indisciplined - like

adiyEn.

Misrepresenting what our pUrvAchAryAs say and/or writing

something that even has a possibility of being understood in a manner

that is different from what our pUrvAchAryAs say is what should be

stopped. If you stop because you think that "Varadhan and a few others

do not like what I have to say", then you are stopping for the wrong

reason.

adiyEn hopes that you stop writing your own interpretations because

you realise that it is unnecessary and is misrepresenting the message

of ANdAL and our pUrvAchAryAs.

 

 

adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan,

Thirumalai anandAnpiLLai Varadhan