Thennacharyas and Desikar - 1 -- Was: Is this true

[Guest guest]

Sri:

 

Sri Vimal had raised some questions on some supposed

events in Desikar's life which show Thennacharyas

in a rather poor light. adiyEn will try to answer

them with a couple of personal notes as well as an

article by Sri PB Annangaracharyar Swami.

 

It is my belief that a misplaced notion has been the

cause of such stories - stories that attempt to

glorify one's acharya by putting down another. This

approach takes us far away from the spirit of our

sampradhayam and will not be condoned by the very

acharyas who we seek to glorify. Such stories also

maintain the rift between the sampradhayams as they

continue to hurt the sentiments of many. Only when

we lose such stories and spend our time in looking

at the great achievements of our acharyas and the

nobility of their souls can we truly move forward.

 

Azhvar Emberumanar Jeeyar Thiruvadigale Sharanam

 

adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan

 

----

 

Pillai Lokacharyar and Desikar - seeronru thaniyan:

 

There is a thaniyan dedicated to Sri Vedanta Desikar

that goes

 

seeronRu thUppul thiruvEngadamudaiyAn

pAronRaich sonna pazhamozhiyuL - OronRu

thAnE amaiyAdhO thAraNiyil vAzhvARku

vAnErap pOmaLavum vAzhvu

 

A beautiful and very appropriate thaniyan for Desikar.

 

However, there are question marks surrounding the

authorship of this thaniyan.

 

3000padi (Vadakalai Guru Parampara Prabhavam) states

that this thaniyan was authored in praise of Vedanta

Desikar by Pillai Lokacharyar.

 

Thenkalaiyars roundly disagree with this statement.

 

So, let us examine this case and see if we can

validate this claim.

 

To do that, first we have to understand what a

thaniyan is all about.

 

A thaniyan is a verse of praise. On that basis, one

could not have an objection to a verse of praise to

Desikar by any one. Desikar was a remarkable scholar

and acharya and verses in his praise are common.

 

However, a thaniyan is not any general verse of praise.

It is specifically dedicated to an acharya by a specific

person - most of the time, by a direct disciple or one

who takes himself/herself as a disciple to that acharya.

The thaniyan is sometimes given during the lifetime of

the acharya himself and some times at a later time. In

some rare cases, a thaniyan is dedicated to a disciple

by that disciple's acharya himself.

 

So, if this is a thaniyan authored by Pillai Lokacharyar,

then we have to examine the relationship between Desikar

and Pillai Lokacharyar.

 

This is a part of history that is not clear or acceptable

to all. However, let us go by the popular version - that

the two indeed lived together in Srirangam at the same

time - prior to the islamic invasion.

 

So, the question is: did Pillai Lokacharyar and Desikar

have a acharya-sishya relationship (either way)? That is,

was Desikar a sishya to Pillai Lokacharyar or was he an

acharya of Pillai Lokacharyar?

 

The answer would be a resounding no from both sides for

both cases. There is no evidence to make such a claim.

 

In fact, if anything, there is evidence that the two had

some disagreements with each other, at least early on, in

matters of philosophy and interpretations. Desikar has

written that there may be philosophical disagreements

between the Lord's devotees but that it does not diminish

the respect they have for each other. It is said that this

was specifically targeted toward the disagreements he had

with Pillai Lokacharyar in the beginning.

 

So, we can clearly state that the two did not share this

kind of relationship.

 

Is the acharya-sishya relationship critical for a

thainyan? That it is, is clear from the fact that

vadakalaiyars do not accept the "srishailEsha dayApAtram"

thaniyan to have been authored by Azhagiya Manavalan

Himself - precisely because of the fact that it leads to

the conclusion that Lord Ranganatha took Mamunigal as His

acharya.

 

Nevertheless, let us examine whether Pillai Lokacharyar

could have written the thaniyan not as a salute to his

disciple or acharya, but as a general praise.

 

To answer that question, let us examine an important

point - the age difference between Desikar and Pillai

Lokacharyar.

 

It is generally accepted that Desikar lived from 1268 to

1369 CE. 6000padi Thennacharya Guru Parampara Prabhavam

states that Pillai Lokacharyar was born in the year 1205

CE and lived for 105 years in this world (though some

accounts state that he lived for 120 years).

 

Going by this, there is an age difference of 63 years

between Desikar and Pillai Lokacharyar. There are some

accounts that claim that Pillai Lokacharyar was closer in

age to Desikar. But I think, in general, we can accept

that there was a considerable age difference between the

two. We can discard certain modern accounts that place

them at almost the same age, as there appears to be no

factual reasons behind them.

 

Considering this and accounts that state that Pillai

Lokacharyar was the established senior acharya at

Srirangam by the time that Desikar arrived there, we can

safely state that Pillai Lokaacharyar had written many if

not all the works of his ashtadasa rahasyams before

Desikar started working on his rahasya granthas.

 

In addition, there is no evidence to show in any of Pillai

Lokacharyar's works that he ever accepted the positions of

Desikar in the points of disagreement between the two.

 

On the other hand, latter works of Desikar seem to

indicate that he was somewhat reconciled to Pillai

Lokacharyaar's position. There are many articles by

Thennacharya scholars that delineate this very well.

 

Being this the case, it is very hard to see why the

3000padi would state that 'Lokacharyar wrote this

thaniyan after listening to rahasyArthas from Desikar'!

 

Finally, it is not clear why Pillai Lokacharyar would

write a single verse of praise on Desikar and thereafter

say nothing more about Desikar - in his works or in other

verses.

 

In addition, Sri Kanchi PBA Swami has indicated that the

name "thUppul" itself was a derivation of the

name "thumbai vanam" and that thumbai vanam was an

agrahAram established by Appaiya Deekshithar who came

after the times of Pillai Lokacharyar and Desikar. If this

were true, it is not acceptable that Pillai Lokacharyar

would have used the word thUppul, even if we claim that he

wrote this thaniyan.

 

In conclusion,

1. Pillai Lokacharyar and Vedanta Desikar did not share a

acharya-sishya relationship.

2. Pillai Lokacharyar was senior to Vedanta Desikar by

nearly 63 years.

3. Pillai Lokacharyar did not accept Vedanta Desikar's

philosophy (his earlier philosophy when he was likely

living in Srirangam with Pillai Lokacharyar).

4. There is no reason to believe that Pillai Lokacharyar

listened to Desikar on rahasyarthas.

5. The name "Thuppul" itself was likely created at a

latter time.

 

Based on this analysis, it can be seen that it is highly

unlikely that this thaniyan was authored by Pillai

Lokacharyar. We can only reach the conclusion that a

misplaced notion and zeal was the cause to introduce the

claim that it was authored by Pillai Lokacharyar.

 

The sad part is that the thaniyan itself is a beautiful

verse and is an apt praise of a great acharya, which can

be recited by all without entering into this needless

claim and the controversy following it.

 

adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan

 

 

--- vimalkumar ranganathan <panardasan wrote:

> Sri:

>

> Sri VEdAntAchAryar is one of the most beloved achAryAs

> for both Ramanuja Sampradaya, as well as dEsika

> sampradaya followers. For me personally, he is one of the

> greatest geniuses ever to have set foot on this planet.

> He is the avAtAram of the gaNTA (bell) of Lord Srinivasa

> Himself, he tolled the bell of Knowledge, Bhakthi,

> Humility, and many more qualities and the strong sound of

> that bell is still ringing in our glorious sampradAyA!!

> His satha dhUshani tore the concept of advaithA apart -

> akin to what periyAzhwAr said ("pEsuvAn pugil nambara

> manrE"), endless would be the duration if one starts

> talking about the glories of Swami VedAntAchAryar.

>

> Having said that, it pains me when one starts to

> trivialize Swami vEdAntAchaAryar with incorrect

> information and childish stories. I eagerly read the

> biography of Swami vEdAntAchaAryar by ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005