viNNuLAr again

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhagavathas

 

I think that it is better to refer to the vyakhyanams to find the importance of

the words used in Azhwar Pasurams.

 

The references like Vinnular, Imaiyavar, Amarar is used to refer to the Nityasuris.

 

The term vanavar is used to refer to the Muktha Jivans or other celestials.

 

The vinnular in the tirumalai pasuram refers to Nithyasuris. They are seeing the

Lord always and enjoying Lord's presence and doing all the service to Him.

Inspite of seing the Lord always, they are unable to understand how the Lord

chose to respond to an animal like Gajendran.

 

Nithyasuris are referred in vedas. In Vishnu suktam ,the description is given

for Nithyasuris as " tat vishnoh paramam padam, sadha pasyanti Surayaha''

 

If you refer to the vyakhyanam 'Eedu", vinnular perumarkku adimai seyvar are the

great devotees of the Lord like Sugriva or other great soulsin this earth..Even

they are tormented by five senses Then what to say of the Jivas like us.

 

Adiyen Ramanujadasan

 

Soundararajan

 

Azhwar Emberumanar Jeeyar Thiruvadigale saranam. TCA Venkatesan

<vtca > wrote:

Sri:Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama:Dear devotees,The following is entirely adiyEn's

interpretationand is not based on any acharyas vyakhyanams orposition. So

kindly forgive my transgression ifyou choose to read forward.The question arose

out of the pasuram Thiruvaymozhi7.1.6 and then moved on to other areas (of who

nithyasUris are and their differences with other devas etc).adiyEn will fall

back to the original question.The pasuram in question is:viNNuLAr

perumARkadimai seyvAraiyum seRum aimpulan ivaimaNNuL ennaip peRRAl en

seyyAmaRRu nIyum vittAl?paNNuLAy! kavi thannuLAy! paththiyinuLLAy!

paramIsanEvandhen kaNNuLAy! nenjchuLAy! solluLAy! onRu sollAyEHere the original

question was on, who is meant by the term 'viNNULAr' and if they are vaikunta

vAsi's how is that they are they

affected by the five senses?I think instead of looking at the one line alone,one

needs to look at the thrust of the whole pasuram.First, can the viNNuLArs be

anyone other than vaikunta vAsis? Without going into the vyakhyanam,I think we

can say that they are indeed that, basedon the next qualification given -

'perumARkku adimaiseyvAr'. It is highly doubtful that Azhvar wouldqualify

beings from any other lOka with thatadjective. Because, if one allows that for

otherlOkas then we too could stake claim to that - truekainkarya paras. And we

all know how absurd that would be. Let's look at another pasuram: "viNNuLAr

viyappavanthu Anaikku anRu aruLai Intha kaNNaRAy!". Heretoo, the viNNuLArs are

said to be those in paramapadam.A different term used: "vAnuLAr aRiyalAgA

vAnavA".Here too the vAnuLArs are said to be those inSri Vaikuntam.Why?

Because, the push behind all this is the fact

that everyone of Azhvars words - in fact, the thrust of our entire sampradhayam

- is the glorification of Lord Sriman Narayana. To say that some devas inother

lOkas do not realize the Lord is to say nothing. It is stating the obvious. It

is when we say that even those in paramapadam do not understand Him or cannot

fathom His acts, that we tend to somewhat realize the grandeur and greatness of

the Lord.So, with that viewpoint, let's look at the pasuramin question.If Azhvar

mentioned that pull of the senses on somedevas in some lOkas, which is an

expected feature,then the pasuram loses its full point. This isneither

satisfactory from a philosophical sensenor is it satisactory from a poetic

sense.However, if we were to say that even paramapadavAsis are potential

targets to these five senses,then what chance do we, who are in this world,

stand against them - if He does not come to ouraid

('nIyum vittAl')? Now, our total incapacity to save ourselves and our total

dependency on theLord is made clear.The question, then, is, are the beings

there trulytargets to the 'aimpulan' and if so, how does itwork with what the

Vedas say.One way we can reconcile this is that it is poeticexaggeration. One

made to bring the immensity ofour dependency on Him.However, if we look at

Mumukshuppadi, perhaps wecan get a clue. Pillai Lokachariar does pointout

'kankaryaththil kaLai'. He says that a 'virOdhi' to even mukthAthmas exists.

And when a virOdhiexists, it means that they are swayed by something.Perhaps,

they are not the same five senses to which we are subject. Nevertheless, there

is something that can possibly move them out of their true nature of service to

Him for His pleasure only.Why would such a virOdhi exist? Perhaps it does

todistinguish us from Him. He has no virOdhis and hasno

desires. However, we do have one desire ("kaNNanukkE Amathu kAmam") and we do

have a virOdhi to our service. I may be wrong - but I don't think that there is

any pramANam for this in the Vedas either.Finally, one thought. In our

sampradhayam, one doesnot look for pramANams for Azhvars words. It isAzhvars

words themselves that are pramANam; just like the Vedas. They are indeed the

Thamiz Vedham. Due to His infinite and unconditional grace, they have been

blessed with unique vision and knowledge ('mayarvu aRa mathi nalam aruLap

peRRavarkaL'). There are many stories and characters in Azhvars works which do

not find a place in any known purANa or itihAsa. Nevertheless we accept them as

divine visions seen by Azhvars; no less than what Valmiki Bhagavan saw. It is in

this vein that we have to treat Azhvars words.Once again, adiyEn seeks the

forgiveness of thedevotees for any and all transgressions made

inthe above statements.adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan

Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice

2005

Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.