kamba rAmAyanam

[Guest guest]

DEAR BHAKTHI GROUP MEMBERS

 

I do not entirely agree with Sri Mani Varadarajan s view that Kamba rAmAyanam is

not quoted as there is no in depth knowledge. It is not quoted as it is not

completely coherent to our philosophy. As Sri Pillai LokAcharyar quoted in Sree

Vachana Bhooshanam that in "idhihAsa srEshtamAna rAmAyanam sirai irundhavaL

yERRam sollugiradhu",though Ramayana deals with so many aspects, the essence is

the sirai irundhavaL yERRAm.

Then are the other several thousand slokams to be ignored? Sri Periya Vachan

Pillai has selected select few slokams as "thani slokam" and rendered commentary

on that. These slokams are supposed to be the gems among ramayana slokams.

 

Though Ramayana is quoted in commentary in several places, these are generally

referred to corroborate certain points.

Further, ramayana is not strictly a vaishnavite subject. It has got the quality

of having severala non vaishnavite subjects -unlike thriuvoizhmozhi/bhagawadh

vishayam-which render this to be relegated to the rear. In spite of this,

ramayana has been quoted by acharyas frequently as these slokams are indeed

great and eyeopener for comprehending the salient features therein.

 

Acharya hridhayam - 63 "rAmAyaNam nArAyaNa kadhai enRu thodangi , ganga kAngEya

sambavAdhi asath kErthanam paNNina echil vAi suddhi paNNAmal, thirumAl avan kavi

enRa vAi Olaip padiyE, mARRangal Aindhu kondu vuriya sol vAitha idhu,

vEdhAdhigaliL pourusha mAnava Geetha vaishnavangaL pOlE arulicheyalil sAram"

 

Here, thiruvoizhmozhi s greatness is being explained in contrast to rAmAyanA and

bhAratham.

The negative points of rAmAyanam is briefed here. rAmAyanam started as telling

the story of sreeman nArAyanA. but went on to explain the birth story of ganga,

murugan and so on. Similarly, in bhAratham veeduman s birth and other s birth

are being explained in detail and as the name goes bharatham is pOsal pattOlai-

a detailed script on micro activities of war- whcih in depth details the

intricicies and nuances of wars and battles whcih are in fact tangential to

sreevaishanvism. Hence, in strict viewpoint these parts of both the epics are

not relevant for us.

Therefore, we need not worry why nobody is quoting these.

Incidentally, I have heard personally velukkudi varadhachari swami referring to

several kamba rAmAyana pAsurams in the lectures and also read books of Kanchi

swami where these have been quoted.

The point is we need not give much weightage to these apart from of course

literary point of view.

vAnamAmalai padmanabhan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Sri Padmanabhan,

 

I cannot agree with your implication that the Valmiki Ramayana

itself is a second tier scripture for Sri Vaishnavas. The

comparison to Tiruvaymoli, if one must compare, should be taken

only as 'na hi ninda' -- not to put down one but merely to

praise the other. Sri Ramanuja studied Srimad Ramayana from

Srisaila Purna (Periya Tirumalai Nambi) 18 times and for this

reason the latter is regarded as the greatest of Ramanuja's

five teachers (SrI-bhAshyakAra-uttama-deSika according to

the taniyan). It is also established practice for the devout to

recite Srimad Ramayana regularly, even in the Sri Vaishnava

community. This hardly lends credence to the view that only

'selected slokas' are worthy of consideration in Valmiki's

great epic.

 

None of this of course explains why Kamban is neglected, which

was the original question. If anything, Kamban, being a formal

Sri Vaishnava, should be even more acceptable, since he

writes his Ramayanam as a devout Rama-bhakta with the unquestionable

desire to depict Rama as the Supreme God.

 

regards,

ramanuja dasan,

Mani

[Guest guest]

Respected Members,

 

I agree with Sri Mani that Srimath Ramayanam is

considered most authentic fo our Poorvacharyas and

only out of 'Nahi Ninda Nyaya' Srimath Ramayana was

compared against Trivaimozhi in Acharya Hrudayam by

Sri Azagiya Perumal Nayanar.

 

Further, Sri Pillai Lokacharya consisred "Srimad

Ramayana" and Mahabharatha" as more authentic than

Puranas and between the 2, Srimad Ramayana was

considered even more authentic.

 

You mentioned about Simad Ramayana and Sri Ramanuja.

In Ramanuja Noortrandhadi, It is mentioned that Sri

Ramanuja took to his heart the inner meanings of

Srimath Ramayana.(Padi konda keerthi, Ramayanam

ennum...)

 

Your Anothor question was about why Kambar was not

'Extolled' as other alwars or other acharyas.

 

the reason I uderstand that in the every tenth poem

of Kamba Ramayana, there is a mention of 'Sadayappa

Vallal' who was the sponsor of Kambar.

 

However, Alwars were always against euology on

mortals.("Naa kondu Manidam Paden", ie ,"would never

sing the praise of a human being") This should be the

reason why Kambar was not kept in the Alwar/acharyas

gohosti.

 

Even later poets like Pillai perumal Iyyengar were

quoted widely by Vasihnavites purely becuase he was

very strict about whom to extoll/praise.

 

We should also remember that when the Philosophical

arguments were in heights during olden periods, a

sectarian work like Kamba Ramayanam would not cut ice

with people from other sects, but Vedas, Upanishads ,

Puranas and Ithihasas could surely cut ice if you

refer/quote.

Regards

KM Narayanan

[Guest guest]

Thanks Sri Mani for that. I was actually taken aback. I have been studying

Kamba Ramayana for the past about 25 years and is writing a daily column on both

Kamban and Valmiki for more than 1 1/2 years now. That came as a shock to me

that Kamba Ramayana - nay, Ramayana as such (for the story of Subramanya etc.,

are not narrated in Kamban's version) - is regarded as something second grade,

by Vaishnavas.

 

Thanks again for this mail.

 

Sincerely,

Hari Krishnan

 

-

"Mani Varadarajan" <mani

<bhakti-list>

Thursday, October 24, 2002 8:07 AM

Re: kamba rAmAyanam

 

 

|

| Sri Padmanabhan,

|

| None of this of course explains why Kamban is neglected, which

| was the original question. If anything, Kamban, being a formal

| Sri Vaishnava, should be even more acceptable, since he

| writes his Ramayanam as a devout Rama-bhakta with the unquestionable

| desire to depict Rama as the Supreme God.

|

| regards,

| ramanuja dasan,

| Mani

[Guest guest]

I am sure all those quotes from AchArya Hrudhayam are in the 'na hi ninda'

context. In an attempt to praise one, it is compared with the other in a

literary context without any malign intention. Moreover, the original

question was to compare vAlmiki and kamba Ramayanams and not Ramayanam with

other works.

 

To answer the original question, Kamban is not totally neglected. I have

heard vELukkudi swami, annangarachar swami and Kannan swami quoting kamban.

The 'original' stamp for valmiki and 'pUrvacharya' stamp for PVP sometimes

supercedes the 'thamizh' stamp for kamban. But this in no way undermines

Kamban's great work. Also, like Mani pointed out, the average upanyasaka

would master the dhivya prabhandhams, valmiki Ramayanam and other epics

first before coming to Kamban and therefore in such cases Kamban takes the

backseat.

 

Could somebody post the references to kamban in the Idu or 24000? It

should be interesting...

adiyEn,

-Vijay Triplicane