Alwars

[Guest guest]

Dear SriVaishnavas,

 

In Aarayirapadi Guruparampara Prabhavam each alwar is

mentioned as an Amsam of Nithyasoori, eg. Thimazisai

Alwars is told to be Amsam of Sudarsana Chakram.

 

But Alwars in many of their Pasurams describe

themselves as Nithya Samsaari eg. Thirumangai Alwar in

Thirumozhi says "Nottren Palpiravi Ninnai Kannba dhOr

Asaiyinal"

 

I seek your help to clarify me whether Alwars are

NithyaSooris or Nithya Samsaris.

 

 

Thanks & Regards

Adiyen

Lakshmi

 

 

 

Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Lakshmi,

 

There are many articles in the archives which debate this

issue. There are two opinions, both of which were expressed

by the early acharyas themselves. In fact, the early acharyas

didn't seem to be bothered with making a strict, academic

distinction between the two concepts.

 

The opinion that the Alvars were samsAris who arose through

the gift of the Lord's grace is expressed explicitly in

Nampillai's and Periya-vaaccaan Pillai's commentaries (13th cent)

on Nammalvar's Tiruviruttam. Periya Parakaala Swami's commentary

(17th cent) presents the other view and argues against this

position. What has resulted from this is that as we have it

today, the Vadagalai school's position is that the Alvars were

nitya-suris, and the Thengalai school's position is that they

were samsAris. However, I have heard people from both schools

express the opposite position, and I doubt that several centuries

back differences on this issue fell along kalai boundaries.

 

The best discussion of this debate that I have read is found

in Sri Uttamur Swami's introduction to his Tiruvaymoli urai

'prabandha-rakshai'. Both positions are outlined in a fair

manner. Sri Uttamur Swami sides with the position that they

are nitya-suris, though I remain unconvinced for the same

reasons that you mention in your question.

 

Now a note regarding the 'ArAyirappadi guru-paramparA-prabhAvam'.

There is a section in all the published editions of the text

that discusses the divinity of the Alvars. This section is

known as the 'Divya-Prabandha PraamaaNya Samarthanam'. I received a

note a while back from Sri M. Srinivasan, a student of the

GPP 6000, about the authenticity of this section:

 

This note is to let you know that the authorship of the Divyaprabandha

PraamaaNya Samarthanam (DPS) is not to be attributed to Sri. Pinbazhagiya

PerumaaL Jeeyar, according to well-respected Sri Vaishnava scholars.

 

It is true that the DPS is included in the 6000-padi Guruparamapara Prabhavam

(GP6000) and that the authorship of the GP6000 is definitely attributed to

Sri. Pinbazhagiya PerumaaL Jeeyar. However, the DPS's authorship is

attributed

to later Acharyas than Sri. Pinbazhagiya PerumaaL Jeeyar.

 

My copy of the GP6000 was published in 1906. It had three eminent scholars

for

its editors, the best known among them being Sri. Vai. Mu.

Gopalakrishnamachariar. This edition has a footnote where the DPS begins.

This

footnote points out that the DPS was added by later acharyas according to

'sampradaayam vallaar (experts on the tradition)'. It also notes, by way of

confirming the expert opinion, that the DPS cites the name of Azhakiya

MaNavaaLa Naayanaar, who came later in date after Sri. Pinbazhagiya PerumaaL

Jeeyar thus making it chronologically inconsistent to attribute authorship to

the jeeyar.

 

I refer you to these other articles which present both sides.

 

http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/mar99/0110.html

http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/nov97/0064.html

http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/nov97/0081.html

http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/nov97/0086.html

 

Hope this helps,

Mani