SrI YamunAchArya Thirunakshathram- Today- Adi utthirAdam

[Guest guest]

SrI:

SrImathE Gopaladesika Mahadesikaya namah:

 

Dearest Srivaishnavas,

 

Yaamunaacharya- SrI Alavandhaar- Tradition records his period from

year 917 AD to 1042 AD. (about 125 years). Today is his

Thirunakshathram (Adi UtthirAdam). He was the Grandson of the

thaaLam vazhangith thamizh maRai innisai thandha vaLLal Sri

Nathamuni.

 

YAmunAcharya is the grand -Acharya (PrAchAryA) of Ramanujacharya.

He established the principles of VisishtAdhvaita as an expansion of

the doctrines housed in his grandfather's treatises and elaborated

on those doctrines with authoritative scriptures such as Sruthis,

Bhagavadh Gita, AzhwAr's paasurams and Selected SaatvikaPurAnAs.

 

He is the one who composed the earliest Stotras of Srivaishnava

Sampradayam:

He wrote the following works great in content and yet lucid.

(1) chatusloki

(2) Stotra Ratnam

(3) Siddhitrayam consisting of (i) AtmaSiddhi. (ii) Samvitsiddhi and

(iii) Iswara Siddhi

(4) Agama Pramanya

(5 ) Maha Purusha Nirnayam

(6) Gitartha Sangraha

(7) Nityam

(8) Maayaa Vaadha Khandanam

 

Swamy Desikan says in YathirAja Sapthathi:

 

Vighaahe Yaamunam Theertham Saadhu Brindaavane Stitham |

NirasthaJih Magha Sparse Yatra Krishnah Kritaa Dharah ||

 

(meaning) Alavandar who learned Vedanta Arthas at the feet of

Manakkaal Nambi was not only the one residing on the banks of Yamuna

(Yamunai Thuraivan) by name but was also like the clear flowing

waters of the river Yamuna. Lord Krishna got rid of the cruel

Kaalinga from the river and made its water pure and clear for all to

drink. He was most delighted when he played with the Gopis of

Brindavanam in the Yamuna waters. Likewise, Alavandar vanquished

those who misinterpreted the Vedas and established Vedanta

Siddhanta. Just as one can derive supreme pleasure by bathing in the

holy waters of Yamuna, one can enjoy supreme Bhagavad Gunanubhava by

immersing in the lucid granthas of Yaamuna.

 

Once an arrogant vidwAn by name Akkiyalvan was challenging and

humiliating learned men. Yamuna (as a 16 year old boy) accepted the

challenge and went to the court to argue with him. The queen was so

impressed with the boy that she told the king and persuaded him to

give away half the kingdom if he won in the debate and offered

herself to be thrown to wild dogs, if the boy failed.Akkiyalvan

asked the boy to state three propositions positive or negative which

he offered to counter. And, if he could not, the boy would be

declared the winner.

 

Yamuna asked (or stated) three statements. He asked Akkialwan to

counter.

 

( i ) Your mother is not a barren woman- Naturally he could not

counter saying that his mother is a barren woman (he is very much

standing in front of Yamunacharya).

 

( ii ) The king is a righteous and powerful ruler - Obviusoly he can

not afford to conuter this.

and ( iii ) The queen is a model of chastity. - oh no! Never can he

counter this.

 

Akkialvan accepted defeat and the King now asked Yamuna to disprove

his own statements.

 

Yamuna clarified by observing the following:-

 

( i ) The sacred laws say that an only son is no son at all. So,

Akkiyalvan's mother was as good as barren in the eyes of the law.

( ii ) The king cannot be called righteous when he entertained such

an arrogant person to be his chaplain and his not dismissing the

chaplain showed that the king was indeed powerless.

( iii ) According to the Sruti texts, every woman is wedded first to

Soma, then Gandharva and then Agni before marrying her earthly

partner. The queen was no exception and therefore cannot be deemed a

model of chastity.

 

(This is only to drive home a point that logic can not be the

solution fully. One needs to fall back on Saasthras and

Sruthi/Smrthis for praMANams.)

The King sent Akkiyalvan out of his kingdom and gave Yamuna half his

kingdom. The queen hailed the boy as "Alavandhaar"- One who came to

save me..

 

Thus, Alavandar has become the king and could not attend to

spiritual pursuits further.

 

Meanwhile, Rama Misra (maNakkaal nambhi) was trying to catch

Yamunacharya's attention to fulfil his promise to his Guru to

install Alavandar as the spiritual successor to Nathamuni.. But, he

could not meet Alavandar, being a king now to discuss the matter. He

came out with an idea. He came to know that the king relishes

thoodhu vaLai keerai (kind of spinach). He supplied that spinach to

the royal kitchen daily. After few months, he stopped. The king

asked the cook as to why the spinach is not being served. They

replied saying "one brahmin used to supply. He does not come

nowadys." Alavandhar told them that he would like to meet him, if he

comes next. Next day, they met each other.

 

Rama misrar told Alavandhar that his grandfather Sri Nathamuni had

passed on the family wealth (kula dhanam) that needs to be handed

over to Sri Alavandhar. Alavandhar said, "in that case, give me

that."

"No. It is not here. Come with me.". He took him all the way to

Srirangam Koil. (ArAdha aruLamudham podhintha kOil). He showed

Alavandhar, the Divya mangaLa vigraham of Sri Ranganathan. Looking

at the Lord, in such divine splendour, the divine beauty- and

looking (with tears rolling down his cheeks) at those "kariyavaagi,

pudai parandhu, miLirndha, sevvariyOdiya, neeNda, ap periya vaaya

kaNgaL.." (those dark, well spread, shining, ruddy lined, long,

large eyes)-

 

He bursts out:

I have nothing to give you. None at all. I have no quailifications.

I am not religious. What a Great person my Grand Father was! What am

I! I have no one but You(the embodiment of mercy! Compassion!- dayA)

as my refuge. He performed Saranagathy at the Lotus Feet of Lord

Ranganathan.

 

na dharma nishtOsmi na chaatma vEdi

na bhaktimaan tvaccharaNAravindE

akinchanOananyagatih saraNya!

tvat paadamoolam saranam prapadye. (Sthothra Rathnam- 22nd sloka)

 

Oh you worthy of being sought as refuge! I am not one established in

Dharma, nor am i a knower of the self. I have no fervent devotion to

your lotus-feet. Utterly destitute as I am, and having none else for

resort, I take refuge under your feet. (Translation by Swamy

Adidevananda)

 

Rama Misra explained the purpose of his mission and requested

Alavandar to take over the reins of spiritual leadership bequeathed

to him by his illustrious grandfather, Nathamuni. Alavandar took to

Sannyas and was then known as YAMUNA MUNI.

 

Sri Alavandhar's naichyAnusanthAnam (feeling lowly nature of oneself-

the jIvAthma as compared to the Lord's Greatness, KalyANa guNAs) is

very beautifully reflected in SthOthra Rathnam. They are more

appropriate and applicable to us (and not Sri Alavandhar). He has

composed for us only.

 

Sloka 48:

Aparaaadha-sahasra-bhaajanam

patitam bhiima-bhavaarnav'odare;

agatim saran'aagatam hare!

krpayaa kevalam aatmasaat kuru.

 

Oh Hari! pray, make me your own out of sheer grace - me, who has

fallen into the depths of the terrible ocean of worldly existence,

and who, being resortless, have sought refuge at your feet.

 

amaryAdha: Kshudra: chalamadhi: asUyAprasavabhU:

kruthagnO dhurmAni smara paravasO vanchanapara:

nrusamsa: pApishta: kathamahamithO dukkajaladhE :

apArAth uttheerNa: tava paricharEyam charanayO :

 

What a soul stirring sloka! One can not but cry reciting this,

(imagining himself as the hero:-( of the sloka)

 

AlavandhAr describes himself as:

 

amaryAdha: - one who has crossed the bounds of established rules

Kshudra: - engaging in trivial /worldly /material/sensual pursuits

chalamadhi:- never steady; (chanchalam), fickle mind

asUyA prasava bhU : Place where jealousy is born

kruthagana: Ungrateful one

dhurmAnee:- ill feelings towards fellow human beings;

smara paravasa : Fallen into the gamut of desires and sensual

impluses

vanchanapara: skillfully deceiving others (at cheating others )

nrusamsa: - engaging in violent acts

paapishta: ( Incorrigible sinner - mahA paapi

 

Swamy Desikan says- ahamasmi aparAdha chakravartthi. (also meant for

us).

Swamy desikan also writes in Subashithanivi:

 

I bow with mind, speech and body to that great Lord, who is the best

among all persons, who approaches others of His own accord without

waiting for them to take the initiative because of His innate

goodness and agreeable nature, as also to myself who is chief among

the wicked and who harms others without reason, there being one

thing in common to us both, viz., that the good or evil done to us

once has the effect of wiping off all the good and or evil done

before. If what God, in His wisdom, thinks is good, though not

really good, has been done to Him even once by a person, all the

wrongs committed by him earlier is forgiven by Him. Therefore, I bow

to Him. In my case, if once what I consider wrong, which may not

really be so, is done to me by someone, all the good done by him to

me till then is completely forgotten by me. Fie upon me! Ingratitude-

being the basest of vices, it has been mentioned at the very

beginning.

 

What a naicchiyAnusanthAnam!

 

Swamy's works are the ones which give us jnAnam about our

unparalleled unambiguous VisishtAdvaita Srivaishnava philosophy, the

presence of which can never take us to the wrong roads.

 

After taking so many countless births, We, (dAsars (servants) of Sri

Alavandhar), who have been blessed to be born (due to the limitless,

unconditional grace of the Lord Sriya: Pathi Sriman Narayanan) as

Srivaishnava in this birth, and have realized and taken up the

prapatti maargam (due to again the nirhEthuka krupA of the Lord),

who are bequeathed with such Great Acharyan – YamunAchAryan, the

learning of whose SrI sukthis enable us to know the tatvatrayam

crystal clear and upAyam and upEyam (means and goal) perfectly, and

keep us reminded of the same always, will never ever read

(hereafter) works of those who belong to other religions. – Says

Swamy Desikan.

 

neeLa vandhu inRu vidhivagaiyaal ninaivonRiya naam/

meeLavandhu innum vinai udambu onRil vizhundhu uzhalaa(dhu)

ALavandhaar ena venRu aruL thandhu viLangiya seer/

Alavandhaar adiyOm padiyOm ini alvazhakkE.

 

Let us place our heads at the feet of this great Acharya

Saarvabhouman - the One who was the source of inspiration for Sri

Ramanujaachaarya. May he bless us with his vailakshaNya kataaksham

to keep us on track at all times!

 

SrI yaamunAchArya ThiruvadigaLE SaraNam

Regards

Namo narayana

dAsan

[Guest guest]

, "srivaishnavan"

<srivaishnavan> wrote:

> Yamuna clarified by observing the following:-

>

> ( i ) The sacred laws say that an only son is no son at all. So,

> Akkiyalvan's mother was as good as barren in the eyes of the law.

> (This is only to drive home a point that logic can not be the

> solution fully. One needs to fall back on Saasthras and

> Sruthi/Smrthis for praMANams.)

*************

 

Dear SvAmin,

 

Nice reading your write-up on Alavandar's life. Just one question to

you, however, on the above passage, if you don't mind.

 

Can you pls. enlighten which 'sacred law' is that which says "an only

son is no son at all'?

 

Sir, ever since I read your mail I've been deeply troubled. FYI, I

happen to be the 'only son' (the only offspring, in fact) to my dear

parents! After all these years, I shudder to think I amount to simply

nothing in the world. Not even a good son to my parents?

 

Sir, I beg you to please clarify at the earliest and set my worst

fears to rest.

 

Deeply concerned,

dAsan,

Sudarshan

[Guest guest]

Dear Swamin,

 

My humble self do not know the Saastras inquired by your learned self but I have

had the oppurtunity to have listened to Sri.Krishna Premi Swamigal who during a

upanyasam said that Sri.Alavandar clarified to Aakiyalvan that "As a single

cocunut tree cannot be called a 'Thoppu' , we cannot call a single mother

totally unbarren.

 

But there is no basis of calling a single son as 'no son at all'.

 

Dasan

 

K.Lakshmi Narasimhan

 

Sudarshan K Madabushi <mksudarshan2002 wrote:

, "srivaishnavan"

<srivaishnavan> wrote:

> Yamuna clarified by observing the following:-

>

> ( i ) The sacred laws say that an only son is no son at all. So,

> Akkiyalvan's mother was as good as barren in the eyes of the law.

> (This is only to drive home a point that logic can not be the

> solution fully. One needs to fall back on Saasthras and

> Sruthi/Smrthis for praMANams.)

*************

 

Dear SvAmin,

 

Nice reading your write-up on Alavandar's life. Just one question to

you, however, on the above passage, if you don't mind.

 

Can you pls. enlighten which 'sacred law' is that which says "an only

son is no son at all'?

 

Sir, ever since I read your mail I've been deeply troubled. FYI, I

happen to be the 'only son' (the only offspring, in fact) to my dear

parents! After all these years, I shudder to think I amount to simply

nothing in the world. Not even a good son to my parents?

 

Sir, I beg you to please clarify at the earliest and set my worst

fears to rest.

 

Deeply concerned,

dAsan,

Sudarshan

 

 

 

/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Sirs,

 

This is in response to mother of one son being called "as good as" barren by

AlavandAr, based on his knowledge of the

shAstras. Because the debating scholar (who had more to loose) did not disagree

to ALavandAr's logic, we can say,

that ALavandAr's position was substantiated in the shAstrAs.

I don't know the exact shastric statement that calls mother of one son as

barren, but I am willing to bet it is there.

 

Life expectancy is generally low for one reason or the other.

One or the other sort of calamity abounds. With one son, there is a higher

probability that mother may end up child less. She is still not barren, but as

good as barren. Wedding AshirvAda mantrams are full of references to having many

sons (dashAsyam putrAna dEhi...). A Calamity can end ten sons as readily as one.

But if you have 10, there is a higher probability that at least few may survive.

 

 

Someone who has very little money or no

money are both called poor. There are approx 400

million people in India who are classified

as living below the poverty line. I bet, they are all not

equally poor. There are Premjis and Narayana Murthy's among them as well.

 

There is no reason for only son, or mother of one son etc. to take these things

seriously. I think we are redaing too much into it. It is a matter of

technicality. As far as the son is concerned, he is 100% son and mother of

course is 100% mother. As someone quoted Sri Krishna premi saying, a garden with

one mango tree is not called thoppu. That is true isn't it?

Even the so called barren lands have some vegetation here and there. Manhattan

which is called concrete jungle has quite a few trees and a grand central park.

Grand canyon has many parts which are not so grand after all (like the spot I

was standing)! Arizona has more trees than many places thar are not called so.

Picking on AlavandAr's logic today is like someone 1000 yeras from now picking

on the USA for calling a place Death Valley

or Arizona!

If we try to understand the spirit of AlvandAr's argument,

then we have no problem.

 

Our shAstrAs say "apurtasya gatirnAsti (no son, no mokSHam)".

Then, what about a more profound statement in the mahAnArAyaNOpanishad: "na

karmaNA na prajayA dhnEna, tyAgEnaikE amRetatva mAnaSHuh (It is not wealth, work

or children, but it is renunciation that leads to liberation..)".

 

After all, I am ALavandAr's great (27 times) grandson, and if I don't defend my

great (x27) grand father, what good is any son at all!

 

dAsan,

 

K. Sreekrishna Tatachar