Guest guest Posted September 22, 2005 Report Share Posted September 22, 2005 Dear Madam, It is tempting for me to accept this explanation in toto. Let me first give my thoughts. 1. Yes, the words viNNuLAr , imayavar are some general terms and the meanings vary according to context. Here is where the vyAkyanam-s come into play we have to depend on them. In EDu,viNNuLAr is taken as those who are serving Him there -The term nithya-sUri is categorically mentioned. Those who serve here is also mentioned. The point here is -yes, nithya-sUri-s are mentioned in the vyAkyAnam as being subjected to the vicissitudes of the five sensory organs.Going a step further, the episode of Thiruvadi is cited. Therefore, we cannot gloss over what is given in vyAkyAnam-s and say that nithya-sUri-s are not subject to this, as the vyAkyAnam-s depict this clearly. 2. Now a question may arise, when Bhagawadh GiTA mentions that it is pure sAtvic nature in the parama-padham, which is also mentioned in Sri PiLLai lOkAchAryA's Thathvathrayam, how come, here it is mentioned by AzhwAr that nithya-sUri-s are subject to this? 3.Apparently there is a seeming contradiction. 4. On discussion with fellow srEvaishNavites, various opinions emerged : The fact that Thriuvadi visited indhra lOkam back and forth made him susceptible to such egoistic thoughts. A counter questions comes up . When the parama-padham is a watertight compartment -thunnittu pugal ariya vaikuntha nEL vAsal- how can sages and thiruvadi go back and forth/ Perhaps, this incident did not occur in vaikuntham at all is one opinion. There is a place called 'lElA vaikuntham 'which is in this destoryable word -let us say, is another school of thought' EmperumAn is spread everywhere. However, His omni-presence in senrtient and insentient beings does not affect Him.Others like Thiruvadi when they do migrate from VAikuntham get tainted by mixture of other two guNAs - is another opinion. Therefore, he got involved in this incident is one answer. Conclusion : Yes, the word viNNuLar is interchangeable and general. We should refer to vyAkyAnam-s when this generality occurs. Here in this pAsuram, specifically nithya-sUri-s are referred in the vyAkyAnam. This cannot be refuted as EDu and other vyAkyAnam-s definitely quote this. That the vaikuntham is devoid of rajas and thams is clear from BG and Thathvathrayam. The several opinions which I cannot determine with conclusive proof is also given above. Therefore, in my humble opinion either this should not have taken place in vaikuntham at all or this should be taken as an exception to the rule or there should be a better reconciliation which I am not able to make. I shall make consultatons in in this regard. Thank YOu rAmAnuja dAsan vanamamalai padmanabhan - saranathan ramanuja ; Padmanabhan ; panardasan ; vedaranga Wednesday, September 21, 2005 11:28 PM [ramanuja] ViNNUlAr SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA. We often come across in prabhandham, words such as ViNNavar, Vanavar and Amarar used interchangeably. Imayavar and ViNNulAr are other terms used less often. But we can see a qualifying reference or context-orientedness at places where these terms are used, enabling us to deduce what the aazhwar intends to convey. It is like how the same name brahma is used to denote both the all pervading Brahman and the four-faced brahma, with some prefix or contextual reference as in the sloka ‘gurur brahma, gurur Vishnu:…saakshaath para-brahma..’ We can also see the same trend in Prabhandam verses. The aazhwar makes some qualifying remarks regarding whether he refers to devas or nithya sooris, in that particular context. The only verse(s) which I am able to recollect where all these terms are used to denote them to be in Vaikuntham is in “Soozh visumbhu” 10. The vanavar, iamayavar, vinnavar and munivar wait at the threshold of Vaikuntahm to receive the aazhwar. In other places, contextual reference makes them different from nithya sooris. First of all a clear distinction is made about who are qualified to be amarar or nithya sooris. As per Thiruvoimozhi 10-5-8,9&10, amarar are those who are not tainted by ‘vinaigaL’. The aazhwar refers to nithya sooris, when he says ‘amara-th-thozhuvaarkku amaraa vinaigalE’ In contrast, the Vinnavar are those who are in ViNNulagam and at many places in Prabhandam, Vinnavar are referred to in the context of or in contrast to MaNnavar, the earthly beings. This ViNNulagam is part of the 3 world, Mooulagam. This mooulagam is part of created universe which has a beginning and an end within the total life span of 100 years of the four-faced Brahma deva. Therefore the ViNnavar can not be amarar of amaraa vinaigaL who accompany the Lord at Vaikuntham. In 10-2-6, a direct contrast is being made between amarar (nithya sooris) and Vanavar (devas of lokas like Indra loka). By telling ‘amararai-th-thirigindrar’ we find the amarar as Liberated souls like sage Bhrugu whose condition as expressed in 3rd chapter of Taittriyan Upanishad is similar to ‘thiriyum amarar’ or ‘wandering Liberated soul’ In the next line aazhwar talks about the ‘viNNOr’ (paNi seivar ViNNOr), thereby differentiating them from amarar. ViNNOr have some specific duties to perform whereas nithya sooris have no such designated duties, making them liberal literally. This duty-binding nature is what makes them subject to ups and downs and be endowed with faculties to carry out the duties. That is how they come to be aggrieved when asuras trouble them. In Thiruvoimozhi 7-8-6, it is said ‘vaanavar tham thuyar theera..’ bhagavan came down to earth to humble Bali. Similar instances can be quoted from Prabhandam to show that Vinnavar or vanavar or ViNNulAr do undergo troubles, to wipe out which Bhagavan takes some steps. Thus the ViNNulAr refers to vaanavar coming within the framework of created worlds. Another source that can be cited is the Acharya Hrudhayam-description of Thiruvoimozhi (4th prakaraN). The 7th patthu in which this verse appears is generally about aazhwar’s ‘aakhrOsham’ as to why Bhagavan has given these indriyas that give trouble to him (jivas) Even ViNNulAr have not escaped the spell of the indriyas is what is made out in the first 10 of 7th patthu. Connecting this to BG, the individual soul upon attaining Brahman , gets the ‘annadhithvaath, nirgunathvaath’ nature (13-31) (or vice versa or this state happening simulatneous) making it to have no need to do work (na karOthi) . The sequence of jiva’s journey in attaining Brahmanhood from verses 13-21 to 32 in BG is of souls who enjoy Bhagavan. They are not those who suffer anything on any account, nor are they endowed with gunas and senses of prakruthi –born. They have transcended the gunas – they are nir-gunaath. This means that if some entity is described to be suffering from or endowed with prakruthi-born attribute, then that entity can not be said to have attained brahmanhood, which in other words mean not having got a place in Vaikuntham. Therefore it can be conclusively said that ViNNulAr are not nithya sooris. They are VaanOr or viNNAvar of created universe. I stand to be corrected. Pranams. Jayasree saranathan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2005 Report Share Posted September 23, 2005 Dear Sri Padmanabhan Swami, Thanks for the explanation. I do accept that the acharyas have mentioned that ViNNulAr are Nitya Suris. But, the apparent contradiction with other pramanas too has to be dealt with. We also have the case of Jaya and Vijaya, who are also Nitya Suris, but were cursed etc. But, Vedanta Desikar is said to have addressed this issue in one of his chillarai rahasyangal, pointing out that they were not in Vaikuntha,but in karya Vaikuntha or Lila vaikuntha. The vedanta sutras also say anArtti sabdAt anAvrtti sabdat- he doesn't come back, he doesn't come back. Now a question: Jaya and Vijaya were not Nitya Suris but baddha Jivas who performed certain activities in LIla Vaikuntham, similar to the Vaikuntham. How about Sri GarudA? How does he come down and perform activities? Ramanuja dasi Vedavalli Ranganathan --- Padmanabhan <aazhwar wrote: > Dear Madam, > > It is tempting for me to accept this explanation in > total. > Let me first give my thoughts. > > 1. Yes, the words viNNuLAr , imayavar are some > general terms and the meanings vary according to > context. Here is where the vyAkyanam-s come into > play we have to depend on them. > > In EDu,viNNuLAr is taken as those who are serving > Him there -The term nithya-sUri is categorically > mentioned. Those who serve here is also mentioned. > The point here is -yes, nithya-sUri-s are mentioned > in the vyAkyAnam as being subjected to the > vicissitudes of the five sensory organs.Going a step > further, the episode of Thiruvadi is cited. > > Therefore, we cannot gloss over what is given in > vyAkyAnam-s and say that nithya-sUri-s are not > subject to this, as the vyAkyAnam-s depict this > clearly. > > 2. Now a question may arise, when Bhagawadh GiTA > mentions that it is pure sAtvic nature in the > parama-padham, which is also mentioned in Sri PiLLai > lOkAchAryA's Thathvathrayam, how come, here it is > mentioned by AzhwAr that nithya-sUri-s are subject > to this? > > 3.Apparently there is a seeming contradiction. > > 4. On discussion with fellow srEvaishNavites, > various opinions emerged : > > The fact that Thriuvadi visited indhra lOkam back > and forth made him susceptible to such egoistic > thoughts. > A counter questions comes up . When the > parama-padham is a watertight compartment -thunnittu > pugal ariya vaikuntha nEL vAsal- how can sages and > thiruvadi go back and forth/ > Perhaps, this incident did not occur in vaikuntham > at all is one opinion. > There is a place called 'lElA vaikuntham 'which is > in this destoryable word -let us say, is another > school of thought' > > EmperumAn is spread everywhere. However, His > omni-presence in senrtient and insentient beings > does not affect Him.Others like Thiruvadi when they > do migrate from VAikuntham get tainted by mixture of > other two guNAs - is another opinion. Therefore, he > got involved in this incident is one answer. > > > Conclusion : Yes, the word viNNuLar is > interchangeable and general. We should refer to > vyAkyAnam-s when this generality occurs. > Here in this pAsuram, specifically nithya-sUri-s are > referred in the vyAkyAnam. This cannot be refuted as > EDu and other vyAkyAnam-s definitely quote this. > That the vaikuntham is devoid of rajas and thams is > clear from BG and Thathvathrayam. > The several opinions which I cannot determine with > conclusive proof is also given above. > > Therefore, in my humble opinion either this should > not have taken place in vaikuntham at all or this > should be taken as an exception to the rule or there > should be a better reconciliation which I am not > able to make. > > I shall make consultatons in in this regard. > > Thank YOu > > rAmAnuja dAsan > vanamamalai padmanabhan > > > > - > saranathan > ramanuja ; Padmanabhan ; > panardasan ; vedaranga > Wednesday, September 21, 2005 11:28 PM > [ramanuja] ViNNUlAr > > > SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA. > > > > We often come across in prabhandham, words such as > ViNNavar, Vanavar and Amarar used interchangeably. > Imayavar and ViNNulAr are other terms used less > often. But we can see a qualifying reference or > context-orientedness at places where these terms are > used, enabling us to deduce what the aazhwar intends > to convey. It is like how the same name brahma is > used to denote both the all pervading Brahman and > the four-faced brahma, with some prefix or > contextual reference as in the sloka 'gurur brahma, > gurur Vishnu:.saakshaath para-brahma..' > > > > We can also see the same trend in Prabhandam > verses. The aazhwar makes some qualifying remarks > regarding whether he refers to devas or nithya > sooris, in that particular context. The only > verse(s) which I am able to recollect where all > these terms are used to denote them to be in > Vaikuntham is in "Soozh visumbhu" 10. The vanavar, > iamayavar, vinnavar and munivar wait at the > threshold of Vaikuntahm to receive the aazhwar. In > other places, contextual reference makes them > different from nithya sooris. > > > > First of all a clear distinction is made about who > are qualified to be amarar or nithya sooris. As per > Thiruvoimozhi 10-5-8,9&10, amarar are those who are > not tainted by 'vinaigaL'. The aazhwar refers to > nithya sooris, when he says 'amara-th-thozhuvaarkku > amaraa vinaigalE' In contrast, the Vinnavar are > those who are in ViNNulagam and at many places in > Prabhandam, Vinnavar are referred to in the context > of or in contrast to MaNnavar, the earthly beings. > This ViNNulagam is part of the 3 world, Mooulagam. > This mooulagam is part of created universe which has > a beginning and an end within the total life span of > 100 years of the four-faced Brahma deva. Therefore > the ViNnavar can not be amarar of amaraa vinaigaL > who accompany the Lord at Vaikuntham. > > > > In 10-2-6, a direct contrast is being made between > amarar (nithya sooris) and Vanavar (devas of lokas > like Indra loka). By telling > 'amararai-th-thirigindrar' we find the amarar as > Liberated souls like sage Bhrugu whose condition as > expressed in 3rd chapter of Taittriyan Upanishad is > similar to 'thiriyum amarar' or 'wandering Liberated > soul' > > In the next line aazhwar talks about the 'viNNOr' > (paNi seivar ViNNOr), thereby differentiating them > from amarar. ViNNOr have some specific duties to > perform whereas nithya sooris have no such > designated duties, making them liberal literally. > > > > This duty-binding nature is what makes them > subject to ups and downs and be endowed with > faculties to carry out the duties. That is how they > come to be aggrieved when asuras trouble them. In > Thiruvoimozhi 7-8-6, it is said 'vaanavar tham > thuyar theera..' bhagavan came down to earth to > humble Bali. Similar instances can be quoted from > Prabhandam to show that Vinnavar or vanavar or > ViNNulAr do undergo troubles, to wipe out which > Bhagavan takes some steps. Thus the ViNNulAr refers > to vaanavar coming within the framework of created > worlds. > > > > Another source that can be cited is the Acharya > Hrudhayam-description of Thiruvoimozhi (4th > prakaraN). The 7th patthu in which this verse > appears is generally about aazhwar's 'aakhrOsham' > as to why Bhagavan has given these indriyas that > give trouble to him (jivas) Even ViNNulAr have not > escaped the spell of the indriyas is what is made > out in the first 10 of 7th patthu. > > > > Connecting this to BG, the individual soul upon > attaining Brahman , gets the 'annadhithvaath, > nirgunathvaath' nature (13-31) (or vice versa or > this state happening simulatneous) making it to > have no need to do work (na karOthi) . The sequence > of jiva's journey in attaining Brahmanhood from > verses 13-21 to 32 in BG is of souls who enjoy > Bhagavan. They are not those who suffer anything on > any account, nor are they endowed with gunas and > senses of prakruthi -born. They have transcended the > gunas - they are nir-gunaath. This means that if > some entity is described to be suffering from or > endowed with prakruthi-born attribute, then that > entity can not be said to have attained brahmanhood, > which in other words mean not having got a place in > Vaikuntham. Therefore it can be conclusively said > that ViNNulAr are not nithya sooris. They are VaanOr > or === message truncated === Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.