Guest guest Posted June 29, 2002 Report Share Posted June 29, 2002 Sri: Thirukkurhur sadagOpan vazhiye!! anbUlla thiru.ulaganAdan avarkale, adiyenin pranAmam. (Dear Members, first we should heartly welcome Thiru.UlaganAdan to this forum. Thiru.UlaganAdan's reputation has precceded him to this forum. He is consider a scholar of great calibre on the vast tamizh literary works) I have had the pleasure of exchanging scholarly posts with him in a forum elswhere on the WWW. I take pleasure in doing so again. It also gives me great encouragement to interact with a person of his calibre. I would be happy to provide the facts as seen by many other scholars researching/studying the field of bhakti before rAmAnusar. Dr.UlaganAdan wrote: > While granting all these I am not sure whether Bakti as total self > surrender to BEING is something these Vedanta texts mention or >elaborate. Bakti as saraNaakati, as self surrender belongs >essentially Tamil developments in spirituality and this is >something developed during 6th cent. A.D. against the desiccation >of genuine spirituality introduced by the positivistic Buddhists >who developed LOGIC at the expense of deep understanding of genuine >metaphysics. > Bakti arose along with Hymnology where the divine melodies >combined LOVE with spirituality and through that MELTED the heart >and through that spiritualized self. This was ABSENT during the >Upanisadic period and very clearly Ramanuja, in enthusiasm perhaps, >is READING into the Vedanta Texts what he has learned from the >Tamil Bakti poetry. This is an error in Vedanta exegetic -- reading >into them what is not there in fact. The Ghasundi inscription which is dated to 200 BCE (i request members to refrain using BC and AD. Please use BCE and CE instead). The Ghasundi inscription mentions the shrine of Shankarshana and Vaasudeva worshipped in a theistic form. This essentially means that a theistic form of devotion exsisted much before the advent of Adi Shankar or for that matter, the Alwars, Nayanmars and Ramanuja. Whether the Buddhists introduced 'positivistic' thinking is a topic beyond the scope of this forum. I will concentrate on what the environment in the periods before the advent of Gautama Buddha had to say about bhakti and sharanAgathi. Bhakti and sharanAgathi is deeply rooted in the vedAs. The rig vedam is replet with the concept of sharnAgathi. I quote from Dr.Sadagopan's mail: "The selected pramANams that have Vedic Roots on Bhaara NyAsam/Prapatthi/Aathma SamarpaNam/sharanAgathi/Bhakti et al thus commence from the ancient Rg Vedam and goes forward: Rg Vedam : X.4.4, I.189.1 , III.20.4, III.14.2, VI.29.3, VIII.92.32, X.133.6,X.4.1, X.63.10, VIII.45.20. SvEtasvatara Upanishad: 6.17, ChAndhOgyam : 2.23.3-4 ,2.23.1 MuNDakam: 2.2.4 , Bhagavath GithA : 7.14, 7.15, 18.62 NS 18.66, AzhwAr Paasurams as Tamizh Vedams et al." The concept of bhakti and sharanAgathi in the Tamizh Murai of the Alwars and Nayanmars do not differ from those seen in the Vedam and the Upanishads. This begs the question, if the concepts were rooted in the vedams, did they then serve as a source of inspiration for the Tamizh literary opi? One has to understand that no one is following a 'patent' my works fundamental here. The experiences of the inspired rishi and the great alwars and nayanmars are what we humans with our limited intellect fail to understand. Then again, we have marxist historians, christian missionary historians (that is a paradox within itself, one can't be a christian missionary while trying to be a scholarly historian) and so called secular historians who date the advent of the alwars and nayanmArs beyond their traditional dates. For example, the King James version of the bible was inspried by a Jewish commentary on the Torah, although christian missionaries vehemently reject this fact. This is a forum where the traditionally accepted history as evident in the vast ocean of tamizh and samskrutam works supersedes that of any other 'western' commentaries/explanations. The vedAnta is essentially eisegetic is nature, although elements of exegesis exsist from time to time. veDanta does not say one has to avoid societal values all together. The upanishads inspire the mumukshu (one who seeks to be librerate) and the bubukshu(one who seeks to lead a just life on earth) equally. This is why the emphasis is placed on dharma, artha, moksha and kama which are the four highly important purushArthas (goals for humans). This is clear that there was no polemic between the vast tamizh treasure of the alwars, ilAngo vadigal, nAyanmArs and the samskrutam treasures. Of course, both of benefitted from mutual cross fertilization. The works of the alwars and the nAyanmars enable the common man to understand the essence of the upanishads. The upanishad scholar deeply cherises the bhakti laden works of the alwars and nayanmArs. To sum it all up, the concept of bhakti and sharnAgathi are also found in the upanishads. The bhakti movement as we popularly know it arose as a criticism of the buddhist and jain ascetic way of life. The concepts of renouncing society out right without engaging it is found more in buddhist and jain works. Obviously the buddhistic and jain ideals was repugnant to the vast section of humanity who were overwhelmed by the bhakti movement. As thiruvalluvar would say, knowledge is always slippery. Knowledge is like sand in our closed fist, all of it escapes from our grip easily, we shold make constant efforts to learn all the time. Adiyen ramanuja dasan, Malolan Cadambi Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 9, 2002 Report Share Posted July 9, 2002 Sri rAmAnujaasya caranau Saranam prapadyE. /vaNakkam to Sri Malolan Cadambi, Sri Lakshmi Srinivas, Smt. Jayasree Saranathan and other /bhaktAs. It seems to be reasonable to conclude that the /tamiz word used for /bhakti is /patti without the letter "k" (kakaram) but the kakaram undergoes a mutation as /takaram. The word /bhakti becomes /patti in /tamiZ. Shri /malolan cadambi has given extensive citations from the /upanishads to show that /bhakti and /SaraNagati traditions are rooted in the /vEdAs and the /gItA. Shri Lakshmi Srinivas quoted a pAcuram from /kulacEkarap perumAZ(/perumAL tirumoZi: /divya pirapantam 687) and showed further that the words /patti and /pattar have been used by /AzvArs and /nAyanmArs. Smt. Jayasree quoted from /tiruc/canta viruttam (/pAcuram 79) and provided more evidence to show that /patti is the proper word in /tamiZ for /bhakti. That is the point which I wanted to make, but about which I was not clear in my postings. Please excuse me. Dr. Lokanathan and others are working hard to show that /tamiZ is a language that was in use prior to the use of /samskrut and that all ideas and traditions of import are adaptations of /tamiZ traditions. Dr. LokanAthan was a Poet Laureate of London /caiva CittAnta Society. He might still be. The incentives for his writings seem to come from London. He lives in Malaysia. While I wish Dr. Lokanathan success in his endeavors, I want to be cautious. Please recall that these postings were the result of a posting, drawing the attention of the /bhakti list to the fact that Dr. Lokanathan was pursuing a line of thought that Shri rAmAnujA (and others by implication) was simply too enthusiastic, having become cognizant of the bhakti tradition of the great /tamiZ aTiyArs, which included the /mUvar /sampantar, /nAvukkaracu, /sundarar) and /mANikka/vAcakar. He holds that Sri rAmAnujA read into the vEdas the /bhakti tradition which was in his (Sri rAmAnujA's) mind, due to his (the /AcAryA's) familiarity with the /tamiZ traditions, but, which in reality was absent from the /vEdAs. His evidence for this holding is simply that there is no reference to /bhakti or SaraNagati in the vEdAs. In other words, the burden of proof does not rest with him, who makes the claim but on others who would deny the claim. This argumentis in itself is very strange. But when it comes from London one cannot expect more. It is by decree, call it academic decree if you would. London is an expert in /kadait tEG/kAyai eTuttu vaZip piLLaiyAruku uTaippatil. Take the coconut [for free] from the shop and break it before the wayside /vinAyakA [and claim credit [puNyam!] for it.] London is an expert in this kind of giving and /puNyam tETutal. One way to argue is to look for the origin of the word /bhakti. That was my line of argument. We have two words /bhakti and /patti, no doubt both meaning the same. We have now agreed that /bhakti is a /samskrut word and /patti is a tamiZ word. All the four postings only showed that. Let us establish which one of these words could have come first. Now if one is reasonable, one would say that he or she can see how the word/patti is derived from the word/bhakti. The system of derivation is familar to most of us. But to be fair one must also ask, if the word /bhakti is derivable from the word /patti, and if so what is the system that would establish that. Now I do not have the burden to pove that. So what I did was to throw the burden onto Dr. Lokanathan's casefile. His works have not shown anything of the kind I seek. Since Dr. Lokanathan cannot directly establish a system, he has been encouraged to invent a third system that would supercede both /tamiZ and /samskrutam. Let us call this system the netherworlds system for a moment or underworld system, if you would, using a translation of /netherworlds. The argument would be to rise from the underworld to the surface of /tamiZ and then onto the outer world of /samskruth. /tamiZ is the intermediate link from the underworld to the outer world of /samskruth. All traditions based on /samskrut are borrowed from /tamiz and in fact from the netherworlds. /tamiZ also is not independent, but totally dependent upon the netherworlds. Dr. Lokanathan has been encouraged to invent these underworlds. He calls it Sumerian. There are only four and one half experts on this newly invented system. Dr. Lokanathan is considered the greatest expert; sometimes he is the only one. We did not know all these, because it was lying hidden under the waters in the netherworlds. It is this kind of exercises that led to the original statement of Dr. Lokanathan on the bhakti traditions. The citation that was posted did not give any argument; it only made an affirmation which would be called in court language an allegation. Dr. Lokanathan placed the burden of proof of his allegation on us. I think the four postings including mine show that to some extent we have refuted his claim and the burden now rests on him to meet the standard of proof. I request him to show how the word /bhakti is derivable from the word /patti and also to show that the system that makes the derivation posible is a reasonable deduction. He may use induction, but it cannot be all induction. In such a derivation, we also need to include the set of all words related to /bhakti such as: /bhagavAn, /shObhA, /vibhA, /AbhA, /bhAgya, /bhAnu, /bhAskara, /bhArat, /bharat, /bhajan, etc. That is, an isolated pair of words such as (bhakti, patti) defines itself is not an argument. One cannot say that /patti is derived from /bhakti and so /bhkati is the other word of the pair. In /samskrut we have the root word /bhA. It is not difficult to expand the list. In /tamiZ I run into trouble to match each one of the words in the list using /pa. I hope Dr. Lokanathan does not run into the same trouble as I do. Smt. Jayasree Saranathan has pointed out that /bhakti is a profound original concept. So is its /tamiZ equivalent /patti. Profound ideas do not hang loosely. There must be treatises on it. Dr. LokanAthan cites the /tamiz works as basis to support his argument. Shri Malolan Cadambi has given many references on /SaraNAgati from the vEdAs. The /gIta is also a work cited by Shri Cadambi. Chapter 12 of the /gIta is captioned /bhakti/yOgA. The first line of the first poem starts: /evam satata-yuktA yE bhaktAs-tvAm pary/upAcatE | /yE cApy/azaram/avyaktam tEshAm kE yOga/vittamAH || This /slOka is a question posed by the student /arjuNa to his /guru kRushNa: On the one hand we have the /bhaktAs who worship you (as /saguNa) unconditionally with thoughts fixed on you in the manner we have seen in the previous [five] chapters and on the other hand, we have the /nirgunA worshippers who worship you as the Imperishable and the Inscrutable. Of these two worshippers, who is the One who possesses /yOgA as wealth? Who is the richer of the two in possesing the wealth of God? The word /Evam means "thus' So /bhakti has been already defined in the previous chapters. It is accepted by reasonable people that Chapters 7 through 12 and the last verses (65-69) of Chapter 18 deal with /bhakti in the /gItA. At any rate, the last verse of the previous Chapter 11 also deals with /bhakta. /gItA: 11: 55: /pANdavA, one who is engaged in My service, considers Me as the Most Exalted, who is devoted (/bhakti) to Me, who has shunned ownership to his actions, who is free from enmity towards all beings, such a person reaches Me indeed. Because /bhakti is worship of /saguNa/brahmam, /treatment of /bhakti starts with /saguNa/brahmam in Chapter 7. Thus, krushNa starts with scratch and defines a basis of /bhakti as worship of God as /saguNa. This is Chapter 7. These ideas are increasingly expanded and specialized as we move from Ch. 7 to Ch. 11. The corner stone of /caiva/cittAntA /bhakti tradition is that it is enough to worship the /aTiyArs of God. It is even better. God is beyond everything that can be possibly be conceived, yet He is everywhere. So worship Him in each and everything rather than looking beyond. But singleness of mind is the secret of /bhakti. These are established as the highest secret of the /bhakti tradition: /rAja/vidyA rAja/guhya yOgA (Ch.9) In chapter 12 the question of /arjuNA is: Which manner of worship is better? Worshipping an abstract God (/nir/guNA) or worshipping a form with attributes (saguNA)? /krushNa has just finished describing what /bhakti (saguNA worship) is in five chapters! And he has dealt with /karmayOga in Chapters 2 to 6. The question of /arjuNa prepares us for /JnAna/yOgA. A song of /tiru/nAvukkaracu sets the stage. The /gIta deals with the same ideas in Chs. 7-11, but much more extensively. Chapter 12 relates these as a summary and removes some nagging doubts by introducing the principles of /nir/guNa. /JAna/yOgA continues from Chapter 12 through the end of Ch/ 18. In the last few verses, /jnAnA is reduced to /bhakti! How does this redction take place? /jnAna is summarized as /SaraNa/gati in 18:62, 65, 66! 18:61 gives an operating principle of /jnAnA as /mAya. And perceiving the role of /mAya one establishes the theoretical basis for /karma/yOgA not established until Ch. 18. /karma/yOgA is given as a /mantrA in Chapters 2 through 6. Now the verses 18: 61 ties /karma/yOga and /jnAna/yOga as one bundle and verses 18:62, 65, and 66 tie them all in one bundle and calls it /SaraNam. /SaraNa/gati is therefore not just /bhakti in action, but also includes the knowledege that we are only executors of actions and not the owners or doers of the process that produces the results. It icludes assuming a readiness to act in obedience to God and punch in the input, but also disassociating oneself with the process of output. /saraNa/gati is self-surrender in a very broad sense. The /acAryAs use /SaraNagati often because it is a larger system and includes all of the /gItA from Chapters 2 through 18. I do not know a treatise like the /gIta on /bhakti in /tamiZ. Only one /aTiyAr I know comes close. That is /thAyumAnavar. /tAyumAnavar belongs to 17th century. I do not know enough of /namm/AzvAr. I do not know at all of others. But the folowing song of /tirunAvakkaracu does give a good insight into the /bakti tradition of the /tamiZ in the same spirit as the /gItA. Its rhymes and rhythms touch oue hearts //ariyAnai antaNar/tam cintaiyAnai The Worthy One, The One Who resides in the minds of cool /brahmins /aru/maRaikaL akattAnai aNuvai yArkkum the One Who is the Soul of the vEdAs, The Microcosm, [see next line] //teriyAta tattuvanait tEnaip pAlait [continued from the previous line:] That Which is not known to anyone, The One Who is Honey-Sweet, The One, Who is nourishing like Milk /ikaZ/oLiyait tEvarkaL tam kOnai maRRai The One Who spreads [propagates] like light, The One Who presides over the Court of the dEvAs, and again //kariyAnai/nAnmukanaik kanalaik kARRaik The One Who is the Black vishNu, The four-faced brahmA, the Fire, the Wind /kanaikaTalaik kula/varaiyaik kalantu ninRa The One Who is the Oceans with their non-stop sounds of the waves, The One Who is the Mountain Ranges, The One Who ressides in all these as an integral part // periyAnaip pErumpaRRap puliy/UrAnaip The Great One, Who resides in the temple at /perumpaRRap puliyUr /pEcAta nAL/ellam piRavA nALE. Any day when one does not speak [sing] about this God is as good as a day yet unborn. The /bhakti principle that God is in everything is brought out vividly in many examples both subtle and gross, micro and macro, etc. God is beyond all these is also stated explictly. Yet One must praise Him as a particular God. Here it is God of /perupaRRa puliyUr. And the principle of /mAyA is brought forth in the expression: /kalantu ninRa. All these are part of one system gigantic in its conception yet the micro is as important as the macro. And then the principle of /bhakti in action: by how wasted a day is when One does not sing God's Glory. Please, try this rhyme: You will love it: /kariyAnaik kalantu ninRa /periyAnaip /pEcAta nAL/ellam piravA nALE! Even if one considers himself or herself as a Shri vaishNava, the rhymed version does not say who the God is. It may as well be Shri vishNu who resided as /krushNA. By removing part of two lines, it is applicable to any God. /civA is /perumpaRa puliyUrAn and also /devar/kOn just as Shri /vishNu is /amarar adhi/pati. /vantanam. /naH svI/kurvaka asmAt krupAm: Wherefore, cause us to have Your Grace. Visu [ According to Bhagavad Ramanuja, Arjuna's questions in the 12th chapter do not seek to distinguish between meditation upon a saguNa (attributed) God and a nirguNa (qualityless) God. Such a distinction is wholly without foundation, as Bhagavad Ramanuja has established time and time again. The discussion, as we saw in a thread a month or so ago, concerns who will achieve success sooner, the worshipper of God (who is always endowed with attributes), and the worshipper of the Imperishable, namely, one who meditates upon the pure nature of the individual self. I have to say that your reading of the Gita markedly departs from not only the view of Bhagavad Ramanuja but also Sri Sankara. I strongly urge a study of these acharyas' commentaries, which are unbelievably profound in their depth of analysis, before coming to conclusions about the meanings of particular verses. On another note, Nammalvar's Tiruvaymoli is considered one of the finest treatises on bhakti, in Tamil or otherwise. -- Moderator ] 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.