PiLLai LOkAcArya on Arca AvatAra

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya nama:

 

Dear Devotees,

Salutations to all. PiLLai LOkAcArya on "arca avatAra" from

arTha pancakam is given below. Writing tamizh in english is painful

but still it is transliterated to my capacity.

 

arcAvathAram Avadhu - "thamar ugandhadhu evvuruvam avvuruvam thAnE

thamar ugandhadhu eppEr matRRappEr" engiRa padiyE thanakkenna Or

vuruvam, Or peyarum inRikkE, Ashrithar ugandha vadivE vadivAgavum,

avargaL itta peyarE peyarAgavum,sarvaj~nanAy irukkach cheithE

aj~nanai pOlEyum,sarva shakthanAy irukkach cheithE ashakthanai

pOlEyum, avAptha samastha kAmanAy irukkach cheithE sApEkshanai

pOlEyum,rakshakanAy irukkach cheithE rakshyam pOlEyum,

svaswAmibhAvaththai mARAdik koNdu kaNNukku vishayamAm padi sarva

sulabhanAyk koNdu kOilgaLilum, grhangaLilum,dhEsha kAlAvathi inRikkE

ezhundharuLi irukkum nilai

 

Meaning: The "arca" form consists of images of God that accomodates

itself to the various tastes of His creatures for their

worship,having no fixed form HE assumes that which the worshipper may

choose and desire to have Him;having no name,assumes that which the

worshipper may choose and desire to call Him; All-knowing but HE

seems as if not-knowing;All-powerful but seems as if powerless; All-

sufficient but seems as if He is needy;thus seems to exchange places

(Worshipped with the worshipper)and chooses to clearly manifest(naked

eye)Himself to him in temples,at homes and in short,at all times and

places as he desires.

 

AzhvAr EmperumAnAr Jeeyar TiruvadigaLE saraNam

nappinnai

[Guest guest]

Dear BhAgavatas,

 

Adiyen got a doubt when reading the translation from

Smt Nappinnai. In translating "thanakkenna Or uruvam,

Or peyarum inRikkE", she has used "having no fixed

form" and "having no name".

 

I think our sampradhayam holds that He has a definite

form (dhivya mangala rUpam) and that He has many

definite names.

 

What Sri Pillai Lokacharya means perhaps, is that while

He has form and names, He gladly accepts any form and

name that His devotees like for Him (Asrithar ugantha).

May be that is why he used the thanakenna - He has the

form and name not for Himself but for the sake of His

devotees and gladly accepts many more.

 

Smt Nappinnai and others, please clarify.

 

adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan

TCA Venkatesan

 

--- vaidhehi_nc <nappinnai_nc wrote:

> Sri:

> Srimathe Ramanujaya nama:

>

> Dear Devotees,

> Salutations to all. PiLLai LOkAcArya on "arca

> avatAra" from

> arTha pancakam is given below. Writing tamizh in english

> is painful

> but still it is transliterated to my capacity.

>

> arcAvathAram Avadhu - "thamar ugandhadhu evvuruvam

> avvuruvam thAnE

> thamar ugandhadhu eppEr matRRappEr" engiRa padiyE

> thanakkenna Or

> vuruvam, Or peyarum inRikkE, Ashrithar ugandha vadivE

> vadivAgavum, ...

 

 

 

New DSL Internet Access from SBC &

http://sbc.

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya nama:

 

Dear Sri Venkatesan,

You're absolutely right about our sampradAyam. Also

look at the beautiful writing style of Sri PiLLai LOkAcArya. The

BAdarAyanA,the author of BrahmasUtra,was a monist. A monist is not

counted amongst the paramahamsas(most perfect of the renounced order

of life). Veda vyAsa,in none of his commentaries,explained the

transcendental activities and auspicious qualities of the Lord. He

feels incomplete and expresses his despondency in his own words in

Srimad BhAgavatam(Canto 1,Chapter 4,verses 30-34). It's due to this

my dear Ramanuja didn't find sanction in the srutis to explain

certain things,so he keeps quiet. Sri PiLLai lOkAcArya's words do not

contradict the sAstra at the same time whatever you said holds true!

HE,out of His own will and volition and for the benefit of

worshippers,assumes forms and He is the "ocean" of auspicious

qualities. Sri Ramanuja's GaDyatraya(also enitire NDP)is the proof

for it. SRi Ramanuja had more freedom in Gita BhASya than he had in

BrahmaSUtra. Again wrt carama slokam,Sri Ramanuja is in strict line

with the sAstra(bhakti and prapatti as two paths). Only in GaDya

traya,you see prapatti as the sole means of salvation and also the

true spirit of Sri Ramanuja.

 

Veda vyAsa is considered as divine incarnation yet it's the

Lord who infuses the inspiration in him to write such a commentary

(impersonal brahman). Finally everything boils down to "nirhEtuka

krpa".

 

One incidence from Srimad BhAgavatam: some ladies who were all

bathing naked,immediately started to hide their bodies when they saw

Veda vyAsa whereas they didn't feel shy nor were they aware of their

nakedness when they saw SukAcArya,the son of VedavyAsa. Also remember

SRi MaNavALa mAmunigaL's commentary on carama slokam where he

says:Superiority of a prapanna over others(sAstra followers)is that a

person following sAstrAs refrains himself from prohibited objects

while a prapanna refrains himself from even "permitted" objects.

 

Veda VyAsa didn't specify the devotional service in his

writings,and although our sampradAyam is ubhaya vEdAnta,NAlAyira

Divya Prabandham is superior because it contains all the sAstra but

sAstra doesn't contain NDP(devotional service to the Lord). I am

learning our sampradAyam and in the process I'm sure to

make mistakes but would love to be corrected by learned people.

 

AzhvAr EmeprumAnAr Jeeyar TiruvadigaLE saraNam

nappinnai