ArchAvataram - 1

[Guest guest]

srImathE rAmAnujAya namaha

 

Dear SrI Cadambi:

 

At the out set, let me state that I have very little knowledge on any of the

Agamas. But, I think some of your arguments may be running orthogonal to the

original intent of the thread on Acharya Hrudayam. Further, it may be useful

to understand the distinctions between shruthi (vedas, divya prabandham) and

smruthi (BG, ithihAsa, purANas, Agamas) and their respective purports. I will

not go into a detailed discussion on what these represent (beyond the scope of

the discussion here), but suffice it to say that we cannot use a manual to build

temples in any way, shape or form as a basis to contradict the purusha sooktham

:-).

 

There are three different sources of vedic knowledge (prasthana-trayi). The

Upanisads are known as sruti-prasthana. Vedangas (six branches of vedic

knowledge), Mahabharata, Bhagavad-gita, and Puranas are the smrti- prasthana and

Vedanta-sutras (brahma sutras of vEda vyAsa or bAdarAyaNa) is the

nyaya-prasthana. Please note that smrti and nyaya, as works of either

conceptual description or practices for life, yield in precedence to Shruthi and

derive validity only when they are consistent with the shruthi (vedas / divya

prabandham). Vedic revelations are known as sruti. From the original Veda

Samhitas up to the Upanisads are classified as sruti. The additional

supplementary presentations (notes, commentary, expositions) of these principles

as given by the great sages are known as smrti.

 

You wrote:

 

> For simplicity, archavataram is the sudhha sattvam of lord plus

>prakriti. The idol itself is subject to laws of prakriti. Giving a

>simple analogy, one salutes the flag in symbolic salute to the nation

>and not the nation itself as the flag. There is a difference here.

>This analogy is given in Srimad Rahasyatrayasaarabodhini.

............... portions deleted

> I am not well versed in AH

> and SVB. But, understanding contradictory ideas potrayed by the two

> sri sookthis and the agama is not in good light.

> In my next email I will write in detail quoting only from the

> Pancharatra Agama on the definition of an ArchAvataram. I reiterate

> my point that all the gunas of perumAl are not present in the

> archAvataram. I can provide pramAnam for this from the pancharatra

> agamam.

 

You seem to have mixed up the conceptual / philosophical basis for different

manifestations of srImannArAyaNa with the Agamic laws of how we consecrate and

build temples, perform ArAdhana (Please note that Agamas come from purANAs that

have much lesser shAstric validity as opposed to shruthi, which is verily the

ultimate truth).

 

As a matter of known fact, the pUrthi in archAvathAram that our AzhwArs and

acharyas eloquently celebrate, stems from a fairly well known shruthi vAkyam

that describes poorthi, completeness in terms of kalyANa guNas for bhagavAn's

manifestations:

 

(this appears in multiple locations as an invocation in the upanishads, and this

has been commented upon by a number of our Acharyas)

 

poorNamadah poorNamidam poorNAth poorNamudachyathE

poorNasya poorNamAdAya poorNamEva avashishyathE

 

However, our AzhwArs and Acharyas celebrate archAvathAram as the ultimate

evidence perumAL's kalyANa guNas - not lacking elsewhere -, because of its

accessibility (soulabhyam) and sousheelyam (neermai). I am quite sure, that

even in the desika sampradAyam, it would be unacceptable to attribute an absence

of completeness with respect to perumAL's kalyANa guNas in archAvathAram - an

absence of guNa poorthi as you put it - (you may want to check with your

Acharyan on this) .

 

Of the Vaishnava Agamas (Vaikhanasa, Pancharatra, Pratishthasara and

Vijnanalalita), The Brahma, Saiva, Kaumara, Vasishtha, Kapila, Gautamiya and the

Naradiya groups stem from the Pancharatra Agama. The Naradiya section of the

Santi-Parva of the Mahabharata is the earliest source of information about the

Pancharatras.

 

Of course, the pAncha rAthra was revealed by srImannArAyaNa himself, so if there

is a contradiction between pAncharAtra and the vEdas, clearly the confusion

stems from our limited capabilities to comprehend (agnyAnam, anyathA gnyAnam,

vipareetha gnyAnam).

 

Now, your contention that the pAncharathra details an absence of guNa poorthi in

archAvatharam is contradicted by the following description of the perumAL in Sri

vaikunTa perumAL kovil in kanchipuram. In fact, here is a delineation of the

archA as the ultimate consummation of the different nilais of perumAL.

 

Known as "Parameshwara-Vinnagaram" (the abode of Vishnu) as sung by Tirumangai

mannan, Its architecture is unique, with three sanctums on the three floors one

over the other and a concealed staircase leading to the upper floors. The temple

reveals a visual theology, the doctrine of the `four formations' (chatur-vyuha)

and the vimana as three-dimensional Mandala and its divisions into exoteric and

esoteric dimensions. The central figure in the sanctum is perumAL as Vasudeva

facing west, Sankarshana facing north, Pradyumna facing east, and Aniruddha

facing south. The sculptural scheme, directly reflecting pAncharAthra,

represents the six `glorious excellences in guNa and the 12 divine names

(dwadasa-namas). The guNa poorthi is reflected as: the omniscient knowledge

(jnana), power (bala), sovereignty (aishwarya), action (virya), brilliance

(tejas) and potency (sakthi). The sanctum of the third floor represents the

realm of space-time, depicting Vasudeva as he appeared in the human form of

Krishna. This divine temple, in essence, manifestly synthesizes perumAL in all

his manifestations.

 

My point here is not to get into a discussion of Agamas or the pAncharAthra

samhithas. This group, as you are well aware, is not the place for it. It is

that, in an exposition on something as exalted as Acharya hrudayam (the very

essence of thiruvAymOzhi), it behooves us to not introduce orthogonal arguments,

especially when we are totally ignorant of the subject (or its exalted nature).

It is also important to incorporate the same humility towards other Acharyas of

our hoary tradition as we do with our personal Acharyas. Further, arguing

whether guNa poorthi is granted to archAvathAram in the Agamas is irrelevant

when there is copious reference to such resplendence by our Azhwars and

Acharyas.

 

As Swamy ParAsara bhaTTar says of Sri ranga nAtha in Sri ranga rAja stavam, the

only purpose for our efforts should be to gain the reward from the association

with the Acharya (sambandhAth swAthma lAbhaha):

 

anyathrAthadguNOkthihi bhagavathi na thath

uthkarsha chouryai parEshAm

sthuthyathvAd yAvad arthAth phaNithirapi nisseemakathvAth

AmnayAnAmaseemnam api hari vibhave varshabindoho iva abdhau

sambandhAth swAthma lAbhaha na thu kabalanathaha

sthothrEvam na kim mE?

 

AzhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyar thiruvaDigaLE sharaNam

 

 

sridhar

 

 

Message: 10

Thu, 19 Sep 2002 22:07:45 +0100 (BST)

Malolan R Cadambi <mcadambi

ArchAvataram - 1

 

Sri

SrimathE ramanujaya namaha

Namah SarvEbhya

 

Dear Smt.Napinnai,

 

Addition to my last mail.

 

> ........ portions deleted

 

Regards,

 

Adiyen nigamAntha mahadesika daasan,

 

Malolan Cadambi

nigama vachasAm moulimandAra mAlAm!!!!

 

 

 

Everything you'll ever need on one web page

from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts

http://uk.my.

 

 

 

______________________

______________________

 

 

 

Your use of is subject to