(No subject)

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimate Ramanujaya Namaha

 

Dear Sri Visu and Sri Narasimhan,

 

I am reproducing the moderator's comments here. Since

it has been appended to the tail-end of the postings,

others may have missed it.

> Note from Moderator: SrI Viswanathan's statement "I

> am not sure that in the light of statements made by no less

> an /AzvAr than nammAZvAr, it is possible to make definite

> statements about the so-called

> other deities", and the current follow-up posting by

> SrI Lakshmi Narasimhan,

> are obviously their personal opinions. tiruvAimozhi

> consists of 1102

> pASuram-s, and knowledgeable interpreters interpret

> the message of nammAzhvAr

> in the context of the all the pASuram-s taken

> toegether. In the ten pASurams,

> nammAzhvAr describes the different vibhUti-s of

> perumAL, just as Lord kRshNa

> describes His different vibhUti-s in SrImad bhagad

> gItA chapter 10. The proper

> interpetation for these is that each one of these

> forms that has something great about it,

> owes its greatness purely to Him. It is an incorrect

> interrpetation to infer that all the

> things (such as milk in pASuram 3.4.6 - pAl enko)

> that are referred to in these

> pASuram-s are same as parmAtman. The issue of

> anya-devatA-s has been discussed

> extensively in this list. Maybe the proper way to

> learn the message of the AzhvAr-s

> is to approach an AcAryan.

 

 

 

Sri Visu had presented pAsuram 3.4.8 as 'evidence' that NammAzhwAr

has not made any conclusive statements about the "so-called other

deities".

 

Now, let us look at some more pasurams from the same TiruvAymozhi.

 

-- Of most significance of here, in my humble opinion, is the decade

of 4.10.

 

Please read *ALL* these ten pAsurams very closely. Just some of the

relevant statements of AzhwAr are:

 

"dheyvam maRRillai pEsuminE"

"pEsa ninRa sivanukkum biraman dhanakkum piRarkkum naayagan

avaNnE!"

"OdiyOdi pala piRappum piRanthu maRROrdheyvam

paadiyaadip paNinthu palpadikaal vazhi yERik kandeer!"

"mikka aadhippiraan niRka maRRaith theyvam viLambudhirE!"

 

 

[ To shorten this email, I point readers to Sri Madhavakannan's

nice translation:

 

http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/apr98/0049.html

]

 

 

And all this is only the simple, straight-forward translation. There

are many similar pAsurams, elsewhere in the TVM.

 

Since I'm least qualified to write anything about the Swapadesam of

Nammazhwar, I will not attempt to draw my own conclusions about the

pAsuram that Sri Visu referred to.

>>>>>>>>>>

 

However, accepting Sri Visu's interpretation of TVM3.4.8 as accurate

could only mean that AzhwAr is contradicting himself here in

TiruvAymozhi, the Tamil Vedanta!

 

In fact Sri Visu's interpretation diverges completely from the basic

Srivaishnava tenets.

 

-- Further, if all the philosophy in the Tiruvaymozhi could be

mastered through self-study - using just (perhaps) a Tamil

dictionary and a copy of the TVM text, then why do we have so many

pUrvAcharya vyakhyAnams of just the TVM?

 

1. ArAyirapadi by Sri PillAn (6000 granthAs)

2. OnpadinAriyapadi by NanjIyar (9000 granthAs)

3. IrupattunAlAyirapadi by sri periyavAcaan pillai (24000 granthAs)

4. Idu MuppattiyArAyarapadi by vadakku thiruvIdi pillai

(36000 granthAs)

5. PannirAyirappadi vAdikesari azhagiya manavAla jIyar

(12000 granthAs)

6. PadinettAyirappadi by periya parakala swami (18000 granthAs)

7. IrupattunAlAyirappadi padi by vEdanta ramanuja mahadEsikan

(SAkshAt SwAmi) (24000 granthAs)

 

And also Swami Desikan's Nigama Parimala, DrAmidopanishat-sarA,

DramidOpanishat-tAtparya-ratnAvalI.

 

What is need at all for Bhagavath Vishyam kAlakshEpam at the feet of

a qualified sadAcharya?

 

 

-- While everyone is entitled his own interpretation (or rather

opinion) of any pasuram as he/she may see fit, it is just plain wrong

to pick pAsurams out of context and promote new meanings that defy

pUrvAchAryas (and AzhwArs) interpretations of the SrivaishnavA

tradition.

 

The AzhwArs had personal anubhavam of the Supreme Deity and His

forms, some of which are not accessible to ordinary people like us.

It was the AchAryas lead by the munitrayam of Sri NAthamuni, Sri

AlavandAr, and Sri RAmAnujar who brought this into AnushtAnam for the

common layman like us. Let us us stick to interpretations that are

faithful to their Darsanam.

 

On this list, there has been enough discussion on anya-devata worship

to literally write a book. This is certainly not some dogma that was

cooked up by members of this List, but one of the many guidelines the

shastras sanction for mumukshus and prapannas.

 

Swami Desikan has discussed this topic in detail, quoting extensively

from the divya prabandham and many other pramanas, in the rahasya-

traya-sAram among other granthAs. Similarly many other Acharyas have

discussed this topic in their granthAs.

 

But after a certain point, endlessly quoting references in favour of

one position or the another merely becomes an exercise in numbers.

 

The reality is that unless one studies the Srivaishnava granthas

under a qualified Srivaishnava acharya, it can be very difficult to

understand, accept and put into practice many of the principles of

our sampradayam.

 

Here's nnother excellent article by Sri Mani:

http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/aug2000/0257.html

>>>

 

 

Finally, let us reflect on the very relevant pAsuram of Sri Manavala

Mamuni's Upadesa Rattinamalai, that Sri Narasimhan had brought up:

 

munnOr mozhin^tha muRai thappAmaR_kEttu *

pinnOrn^thu thAmathanaip pEsAthE * - tham_nenjil

thORRinathE solli ithu_suththa upathEsa_vara

vARRathenbar * moorkkarAvAr.

 

 

 

sarvamsrIkrishArpanmasthu.

adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,

-Shreyas