ThiurnedunthANtakam-Thirumangai AzVar-s verse

[Guest guest]

Dear SvAmi,

 

Till the explanations - Divyartha Dhepikai-s are along with the vyAkyanam-s

it is okay. Once it does not go along with the vyAkyAnam it is very

difficult to digest.

 

There is no doubt that Sri EmperumAnar wanted more VyAkyanam-s and emerged

the five great commentaries for 'TiruvAimozhi'.

 

The anubhavam-s should not stop definitley it should go on and that is what

we are having while interacting in the groups.

 

However, the limit is crossed when we transgress the original texts.

 

If we, for the sake of anubhavam interpret to our likings then it will lead

to chaos, as i would interpret to my liking and you to yours.

 

Therefore, it is always better to stick to the original version and keep

these explanations as guide.

As you would appreciate, guides cannot be substitues and dhivyartha

dhepikais cannot supersede the original vyAkyAnam.s

 

Neither you nor me can reduce the greatness of Svami Desikan.

 

Mentioning in Rahaysa thrayam as parrot is one thing, mentioning that AzvAr

pays obesience to Svami Desikan is another. Is it not? Is UthamUr svAmi

actually menitoning that AzvAr is paying obesience to svAmi Desikan? pls.

clarify.

It is better always to refer to orignal vyAkyanam-s also while following

these dhepikai-s. It will avaoid all such confusion.

 

Further, skipping on selective basis just bacause it is given by UthamUr

svami will not be in good taste. Please understand that i am not against

UthamUr svamy, if that is what you mean by skipping .However at the same

time, let us understand that once these things come in groups, this comes

into public glare and therfore will attract queires.

 

If still you want me to skip reading these, please me from the

group.

 

dasan

vanamamalai padmanabhan

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

" balaji_gop " <balaji_gop

" Padmanabhan " <aazhwar

Thursday, July 03, 2008 12:31 AM

 

 

Dear Padmanaban swamin,

 

It is well known that one of the reasons for Udaiyavar not giving a

vyakyanam for Azhwar srisookthis is that people usually dont comment

on a moolam which Udaiyavar already had commented. Thus Udaiyavar did

not want to stop the divyanubhavams of his sishyas from pouring out as

vyakyanams. If PVP swamin's commentary has to be the only commentary

and all anubhavams should be revolving about it then it would mean

that Swami Desikan had committed apacharam by writing Nigama Parimalam.

 

Coming to the parrot episode. Swami Desikan in Sampradaya prakriya

bhaagam of Srimad Rahasya Traya Saram mentions that he is a mere

parrot who was taught to speak by Appullar. Appullar and Swami Desikan

are Acharya purushaas belong to our Emperumaanaar Darsanam. So it is

apt to mention the anubhavam of Uthamoor swami alluding to Desikan and

Appullar. When Madhavakannan swami clearly mentions that he is giving

us the divyanubhavams of Uthamoor swami, there is no reason for

confusion. Those who feel that Uthamoor swami's vyakyanams are

saampradayic would relish others would skip it.

 

Dasan,

Aravindalochanadasanudasan