RE: aruLic ceyal anubhavam 17

[Guest guest]



SrI:

 

Dear Swami,

 

Great explanation from Kanchi swami. This question has lingering in our mind ...

 

Some contemporary quotes are here (purely on grammatical interest. So pardon for handling these examples):

 

 

1) மிசà¯à®š நேரம௠வீண௠போகாமே

2) வேலைகà¯à®•à¯à®ªà¯ போகாமே வீடà¯à®Ÿà®¿à®²à¯‡à®¯à¯‡ கெடநà¯à®¤à®¾

3) from thiruvachakam : வமà¯à®ªà¯ பழà¯à®¤à¯à®¤à¯à®Ÿà®²à®®à¯ மாணà¯à®Ÿà®¿à®™à¯à®™à®©à¯ போகாமே

4) from thevaram : ஆவியைப௠போகாமே தவிரà¯à®¤à¯à®¤à¯†à®©à¯à®©à¯ˆ

5) periya puranam : செஙà¯à®•à¯‹à®²à¯ வளவன௠தபà¯à®ªà®¾à®®à¯‡ நாளà¯à®®à¯ நடதà¯à®¤à®¿à®µà®°

 

dAsan

 

 

 

 

Vanamamalai [Vanamamalai ] On Behalf Of Padmanabhan11 March 2009 12:09parichaya; divya desam; oppiliappan; Sri Ramanuja; vanamamalai aruLic ceyal anubhavam 17

 

 



ALL THE 30 WRONG

 

Sri Kaliyam mentions in last pAsuram of one of his Tirumozhi-s as poimozhi onRiLLAdha pulamaiyALan-’பொய௠மொழி ஒனà¯à®±à®¿à®²à¯à®²à®¾à®¤â€™

 

Sri Nam AzvAr mentions in one of the TiruvAimohzi-s that TiruvAimozhi is 'poyyil pADAl;-பொயà¯à®¯à®¿à®²à¯ பாடல௠ஆயிரமà¯'

 

Both of them vouch for the truth and cerify the correctness beyond doubt.

 

Sri ANDAL however, in TiruppAvai -which we all celebrate as the very root of VEDham- mentions in the last

'all the 30 as wrong'. What is this paradox?\

 

The last pAsuram reads as follows

 

'muppathum thappAmEA!'

 

Sri Kanchi swamy in his Thiruppavai upanyasam says, "muppadhum thappAmE". Some people take it as "Muppathum thappAmE! ---- are all the 30 wrong?"

 

Actually this is muppathum thappAmal -Without missing any pAsuram we should chant.

 

The tamil grammar permits certain permissible change in the letters, more so in the last letter. Either the letter is missing or changed. One of the example is pandhar for pandhal -refer 18th pAsuram of TiruppAvai.

 

Similarly, in case of This the last syllable gets twisted and changed we can say ETRup pOli+kaDaik kuRai

 

The final syllable changing from thappAmal to thappAmEa and the final 'al' completely missing.

 

We should understand this as

'à®®à¯à®ªà¯à®ªà®¤à¯à®®à¯ தபà¯à®ªà®¾à®®à®²à¯â€™ when we chant ’மà¯à®ªà¯à®ªà®¤à¯à®®à¯ தபà¯à®ªà¯à®ªà®¾à®®à¯‡â€™

 

(AS reported by Smt Sumithra and Sri Varadarajan)

 

Sri Mukund from Singapore gives the following inputs and value additions.

 

 

 

Grammatically both mEA and mal are 'nErasai' seers and hence pAvilakkaNam stand good for both.

 

Osai is good with mEA rather than 'mal' and hence this might have been the way of chanting from nathamuni's time.

 

Apart from these, thappamEA is a vinai yeccham which has to go with ingu ipparisu uraippAr and need not be be stopped with thappamEA.

 

Kanchi swami's genius in explaining this any small misunderstanding that arises here is exemplary

 

-dasan

 

 

 

dasan

vanamamalai padmanabhan