Fwd: discussions on [t'venkatam] sri vishnu sahasra naamam 7: "Nirgunan"

[Guest guest]

--- sudarshan madabushi <mksudarshan2002

wrote:

 

> tiruvenkatam

> sudarshan madabushi

> <mksudarshan2002

> Sun, 13 Nov 2005 13:14:05 +0000 (GMT)

> Re: [t'venkatam] sri vishnu sahasra naamam

> 7

>

 

 

Dear SwamIn,

 

You are right in reiterating that BhagavAn is full of

auspicious ("kalyANa") qualities ("gUnA"). (The very

word "BhagavAn" denotes possession of 6 divine

qualities ("shadguna") in consummate measure). Given

such, it would indeed look like a glaring

contradiction to call the ALmighty "nir-gUNan" -- One

who is without any attribute or qualities.

 

So how to explain or reconcile the seeming

contradiction?

 

In this context, I recall once privately asking, many

years ago, the 'mahAn' 'vaikuntavAsi' Sri Mukkur

Lakshminarasimhachari Swami to shed some light on the

subject. He explained it most wonderfully --- in his

brilliant and inimitable way (in a mixture of Sanskrit

and Tamil) by way by underscoring the fine

philosophical nuances of the word.

 

Although I am sure it is beyond my capacity to

reproduce in English language the full and exact force

and beauty of his explanation, let me attempt below to

convey at least the broad sense and drift of what he

said -- even if it succeeds in only barely illumining

the interesting question now on hand.

 

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

 

The word "nir-gUnan" is really not so much to be

interpreted as a "nullity" ("absence of auspicious

qualities") as much as it is to be regarded as an

"anti-thesis" (the opposite of "inauspicious

qualities").

 

Mukkur Swamy used to illustrate the above with a

touchingly simple but effective parable.

 

An ardent devotee was offering "pushpa-archana seva"

(offering flowers) in worship to Lord Ranganatha. As

he placed the flowers one by one at the feet of the

Lord, the devotee kept chanting the divine "nAmAs" of

the Lord as given in the "sahasranAmavaLi". As the

devotee kept doing this, in time, he soon lost himself

in deep fervour, contemplating as he was deeply on

both the "archA" form of the Lord and the beauty of

each of the "nAmAs" as well.

 

As devotion began to swell like a monsoon flood within

his heart, the devotee soon began to spontaneously

utter "nAmAs" of his own coining which he felt were

appropriate and fit enough to praise the Almighty ---

as appropriate as the "nAmAs" of the "sahasranamam"

even! Carried away by a paroxysm of "bhakti" and his

own creative Muse, the devotee's "nAmArchana" began to

assume original but unsual addresses to the Lord!

 

It is said that Lord Ranganatha, on hearing the rather

unusal "nAmArchAna", was both pleased and bemused!

 

However, at one point in the course of such an unusual

"nAmAvaLi archana", the devotee addressed the Lord

as "Om dAridrAyai namah:!". It is said that when the

Lord Ranga heard this "nAma", he was shocked out of

his divine slumber! The "archAmurthy" rose from his

supine posture to angrily accost the devotee:

 

"O brahmin! What did you just call me? YOu call me

"daridran"?! Do you know the meaning of the "nAma"

that you just gave me? How dare you call me

"daridran"? I who lack nothing at all in this and all

the celestial worlds, am I a "daridran"?"

 

In Sanskrit the word "daridran" means one who is

"without a trace of wealth or good fortune" -- a

pauper, one who is bankrupt of any material worth,

means or virtue. The Lord at SriRangam who was the

abode of all goodness, auspiciousness and good

fortune, could not ever be described as a "pauper".

But this devotee had called Him just that

--"daridrAyai namah:"! It was unpardonable blasphemy

the devotee had committed -- he had uttered a

profanity in the presence of the Almighty and he had

grievously sinned! Lord Ranga was understandably

extremely upset....

 

Mukkur Swami's story went on to recount that the

devotee was however totally unfazed by the wrath of

the Almighty at SriRangam. Calmly he seems to have

retorted:

 

"Oh Ranga, Lord Almighty! Do not try to intimidate me!

I called you a "daridran" and I will stand by it! It

is a fitting a "nAma" for you, it accurately describes

you. I can even prove it! But will You accept the

"nAma" of "daridran" for Yourself, if proven that it

behoves and aptly fits You?"

 

On being nonchalantly challenged thus by the devotee,

it is said the Lord of SriRangam, who was now seated

upright on His serpent-bed inside the sanctum, grew

even more livid with anger. He hissed menacingly,

"Alright, prove it to me, you who call yourself my

devotee, prove to Me that I am "daridran", a pauper,

and I will accept it henceforth as yet another "nAma"

to adorn and embellish my Supreme Nature,

Power and Glory!".

 

The devotee began to calmly explain to the ALmighty:

 

"O Lord, you are indeed a "daridran" in two specific

respects. One, you have no one in all the worlds,

earthly or celestial, who can be said to be your

equal. Second, there is none in all the worlds,

earthly or celestial, who may be said to be your

superior.

 

"Thus, O Ranga, unlike ordinary mortals like us, who

have many peers and superiors amongst ourselves,

you have none to either equal you or surpass you. In

those two particular respects, you will have to agree,

that You, who may otherwise be the Supreme Being, you

are indeed virtually a "pauper" -- a "daridran", who

suffers from a peculiar sort of poverty --- an utter,

absolute poverty of beings anywhere who are either

your equals or superiors!"

 

It is said that after hearing this ingenious but

unassailable argument of the devotee who had called

him "daridran", Lord Ranga was duly silenced. He

meekly went back to bed on his serpent-bed. It is said

that ever since that great moment, when a mere devotee

got the better of the ALmighty by calling him a

"pauper" with full impunity, Lord Ranga continues to

rest supine at SriRangam --- "floored" completely, as

it were, and yet to recover from the defeat in that

encounter, after all these ages!

 

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

 

The moral of the story, as Mukkur Swamy finally

explained to me was this:

 

Like the word "daridran" in the story above, the word

"nir-guNan" too, as used in praise of the Almighty,

does not carry any unsavoury connotations at all.

 

The Almighty is deserving of praise for both

possessing "kalyAna-guNa" ("saguNan") as well as for

being utterly devoid of "nir-gunas" ("nir-guNan") ---

that is why He is said to be "amalan" (another "nAma"

for the Lord, one which is found in the famous

"amalan-Adi-pirAn" of TiruppAnAzhwAr. It means the

ALmighty remains ever un-sullied, un-besmirched,

un-tainted by even a hint or hint of inauspicious

qualities).

 

Therefore, in view of all the above, we need not

hesitate to use the word "nirguNan" to address and

praise the Lord. In so far as He is absolutely devoid

of inauspicious qualities He is "nirgUnan". And in so

far as He represents the absolute plenitude of

"kalyAna-gUnA", He is to be regarded and worshipped as

the absolute "anti-thesis" of "nirgunAn".

 

Thanks and regards,

 

dAsan,

Sudarshan

 

 

 

 

--------------------------

> 32. Om nir guNaaya nama: -- naamaa no. 844 occurring

in slokam 90

> > My point is Lord is full of auspicious

attributes/characteristics/gunas and

> Sri Shankara, based on his Nirguna/Nirishwara vada -

says that He is without> any attributes. But I

wonder whether Sri Bhattar also opines this

way (or is this One beyond trigunas?).

> regards

> sukumar

 

 

 

 

 

 

________

Enjoy this Diwali with Y! India Click here

http://in.promos./fabmall/index.html