Authenticity of Divya sthalams (was Archa thirunakshatram)

[Guest guest]

SrimAn Chakravarty wrote:

> I've always wondered why (or how come, rather)

> there is such a proliferation of divya sthalams

> in the southern part of the Indian subcontinent -

> especially when almost all the vibhava avataras

> existed in the north. Certainly appears to have

> more to do with history than with divinity,

> i.e. the revival/evolution of certain religious

> traditions during the last two millennia,

> coupled with the constant threat of Moslem

> invasions after the first millennium A.D.

 

Assuming that "divya sthalam" is synonymous with

"divya desam," I do not agree with that conclusion.

Just because the sthaLa purANas may be of a later

origin and just because the vibhavAvatArams "took

place" in North India, there is no valid reason for us

to assume that the divya sthaLams of South India are

any less "divine," and that they are more "historical"

sthaLams than "divya" sthaLams. Several reasons.

 

For one, once prathiTai is done on a vigraha, God

starts to inhabit the vigraha just as any svayamvyakta

idol or sALagrAma. The vigraha is no less divine.

 

Secondly, according to the pAncarAtra, the arca form

of the Lord might precede the vibhavAvatAra of the

Lord. Alternatively, his manifestation might be

revealed to a devotee much before the actual

vibhavAvatAram. I do not have the actual pAsuram of

the AzhwAr, but I believe thirumangai AzhwAr has sung

on the yet-to-be kalki avatara. Besides, in the

ahobila-mutt-managed dasAvatAra sannidhi in Srirangam

which is a divya-desam, God has manifested his kalki

avatAram.

 

Thirdly, also according to the pAncarAtra, the Lord

might choose to inhabit a certain place and form much

before the sthaLam exists or the temple comes into

being. Again examples of this abound, but I have to

get back to you on the specifics. An AzhwAr might

have sung on a "primordial" divya desam, which

probably might very well have no relation to local

legends or much later historical events and structures

such as the temple itself. AN ASIDE: As a direct

corollary of this (and obviously not related to this

topic but nevertheless interesting) is that the dates

of the AzhwArs *cannot* directly be deduced from such

historical and inscriptional testimony.

 

On the other hand, as Mani has pointed out, not all

sthaLa purANas can be accepted as authentic if there

are logical and scriptural inconsistencies.

>

> In any event, I was reminded just recently that

> Srivaishnavism recognizes only SEVEN svayamvyakta

> archa forms, including the SAlagrAmam. All the

> other divyasthalams have been consecrated

> through pratiSThai/samprokshaNai.

 

I am led to believe (although I am not certain) that

there are *atleast* four svayamvyakta kshetrams (not

necessarily divya desams) viz. Srirangam, Tirupati,

Kanchipuram, and Melkote. Probably this is the

reason, Ramanuja composed the slokam for

nithya-dhyAnam "SrirangamangaLa maNeem karuNa nivAsam

.... shreesham namAmi shirasA yadushaila deepam ||"

Again, because of the reasons I have mentioned

earlier, it might be a very difficult proposition to

determine whether or not a certain arca form is

svayamvyakta. For that we might have to go to the

authentic AzhwAr pAsurams rather than local legends

and inscriptional evidence.

 

-- murali kadambi

 

 

 

 

Send instant messages & get email alerts with Messenger.

http://im./