SrI sArasAram -- I (28)

[Guest guest]

NOTE: Readers having difficulty in reading the text may need to change their

encoding to UTF-8.

-----------

srI:

SrI sAra sAram – I (28)

--

I – ThirumantrAdhikAram

--

The Significance of ‘namah’ (continued)

---

SwAmi Desikan further discusses the significance of the word, ‘namaha’. We

have already seen that this word is the middle word in the Tirumantram, coming

after the first word, the praNava. The word, ‘namaha’ is also a sentence by

itself, meaning ‘I am not mine nor other things connected with me.’ It takes

the sentence form when it is split into two words, ‘na’ and ‘maha’.

Here, the word, ‘maha’ is formed from the root, ‘m’ which signifies the

Atma, as we saw in the praNavam. This root ‘m’ turns into ‘maha’ as the

singular sixth case according to grammar. ‘m’ means ‘I’ and in its sixth

case it means ‘mine’, in Tamil ‘enakku’. This is a general usage. It

also has a special relationship which is explained by SwAmi Desikan now:

“ ‘aham mE’ enRu anAdiyAka bhramit-thavan ippOthu, ‘AtmA api cAyam na

mama’ enkiRAn. itthai ‘atha mahyam na’ enRArkaL.

Sambandha-sAmAnya-shashThee ingu tAdarthyatthai vivakshikkiRathu enRu

tAtparyam. thannaip paTRath thanakku nishEdhyamAna tAdarthyam AkAra-bhEdat-thAlE

varukaiyAl AtmASraya-dOsham-illai. thAn thanakkup paNNikkoLLum atiSayamum

parArthamenRu anu-santhikkaik-kAka ingu ‘thAn thanakkuc SEshanallan’

enkiRathu.â€

We shall now study this passage sentence by sentence:

“‘aham mE’ enRu anAdiyAka bhramit-thavan ippOthu, ‘AtmA api cAyam na

mama’ enkiRAn.†–

The jIva, that is, the sentient-being, has been thinking from time immemorial

that ‘I am for me alone’. This is a wrong assumption that has no known

origin. It has been there in all his past lives that are countless. However,

since he has understood the significance of this word, ‘namaha’, he gets the

realization that he is not the servant to himself. As he has now realized that

he is not the physical body, but the Atma, which is housed within this body, he

has started saying, ‘AtmA api cAyam na mama’ – ‘This Atma too is not

mine.’ This quote is from the MahAbhArata. Let us see the SlOka in full:

“AtmApi cAyam na mama sarvApi pruthivee mama /

yathA mama tathA aNyEshAmiti paSyan na muhyati //†(MahAbhArata, SAnti Parva,

25-19)

(My Atma too is not my servant. If a thing that is not SEsha to me is claimed as

my SEsha, even the whole world can also be thought as a SEsha to me. My Atma is

not only not SEsha to me, but to others too. One who knows this will not be

confused.)

This wisdom is the result of his knowledge about the significance of the

praNavam.

SwAmi Desikan gives a pramANa from SrI ParAsara Bhattar’s ashTHaSlOkee:

“itthai ‘atha mahyam na’ enRArkaL.†– AcArya-s have described this

realization as ‘atha mahyam na’ (ashThaSlOkee-3) -- ‘I am not a SEsha to

me’. We have already studied this SlOka earlier.

SwAmi Desikan explains:

“sambandha-sAmAnya-shashThee ingu tAdarthyatthai viviakshikkiRathu enRu

tAtparyam.†-- The word ‘mah’ is in the sixth case which normally shows

only the connection. The term used to indicate this connection is

‘sambandha-sAmAnya-shashThee’. Here in this context, it conveys in

particular the sense of being SEsha.

“Thannaip paTRath thanakku nishEdhyamAna tAdarthyam AkAra-bhEdat-thAlE

varukaiyAl, AtmASraya-dOsham-illai.â€

Here, an objection may rise: It has been shown that the word, ‘namah’

refutes the wrong notion that has been there earlier that one was the SEsha to

himself. How does this thought occur to him? In that case, it would turn out to

one being both SEshi and SEshi at the same time. Is it possible? In the world,

have we ever seen anyone being the master and the servant to himself? If it

happens, then, will it not be a fallacy, called ‘AtmASraya dOsham’? The

‘AtmASraya-dOsham’ is the fallacy of self-dependence. As the Atma already

has the SEshatva quality, if it is attributed to have the opposite quality of

SEshi also, will not be self-refutation? If such a question is raised, Swami

Desikan replies:

“Thannaip paTRath thanakku nishEdhyamAna tAdarthyam AkAra-bhEdat-thAlE

varukaiyAl, AtmASraya-dOsham-illai.†--

A SEsha (servant) has to render some distinguished service to his master. The

person who receives the distinguished service is the SEshi (master). A person

may even render some special service to himself. He can also attain the glory as

a result. Hence, doing a special service to oneself and receiving its benefits

are different from one another, and hence the fault of ‘AtmASrayam’ will not

arise. It, therefore, finally emerges that there is nothing wrong in saying

that the ‘na’ in the word, ‘namah’ refutes the notion of one being the

SEsha to oneself.

It may be asked, what is the use of feeling, ‘I am not Sesha to

myself’ following the understanding of the word, ‘namah’? Swami Deikan

gives the reply:

“thAn thanakkup paNNikkoLLum atiSayamum parArthamenRu anu-santhikkaik-kAka

ingu ‘thAn thanakkuc SEshanallan’ enkiRathu.†–

It is a rule that a SEsha should do splendid service to the SEshi. As per this

rule, if the jIva does something for his own benefit, he must consider that it

ultimately goes to the Lord and not to him self. Hence, we should realize that

the feeling that one is not SEsha to one self actually results in the thought

that everything is for the Lord alone.

 

(To continue)

dAsan

Anbil S.SrInivAsan

------------

 

 

 

 

Messenger blocked? Want to chat? Go to

http://in.messenger./webmessengerpromo.php