JitantE Stotram na tE rUpam ...

[Guest guest]

SrI:

SrI Lakshminrusimha ParabrahmaNE namaH

SrI nArAyaNa yateendra mahAdESikAya namaH

 

namO nArAyaNa! JitantE PuNDarIkAksha !

 

Dear devotees,

 

Quite recently, SrI Malolan Cadambi raised a question on

Jitante Stotram and SrI KrishNa Kalale was particularly

interested in the translation of the verse " na tE rUpam ... "

{both in public and private mail} since it has some issues of

philosophical importance and also there is a scope for further

analysis with Bhagavad RAmAnuja's VEdArtha Sa~ngraha in establishing

the Divya-Ma~ngaLa Vigraha to be eternal for BhagavAn. aDiyEn in

the earlier reply gave some details on the commentaries on Jitante

Stotram and commited to translate this verse.Soon,SrI VijayarAghavan

too expressed his wish to post excerpts on Jitante Stotram. Probably

he is held up due to his busy schedule. aDiyEn had already sent a

write-up to SrI KrishNa Kalale that time. It is re-produced now for

the members, with changes and additions for better readability

and understanding.

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

 

JitantE Stotram (Verse 1.5)

*****************************

 

na tE rUpam na cha aakAraH na aayudhAni na cha aaspadam |

tathApi purushAkAraH bhaktAnAm tvam prakASasE ||

 

Summary of SrI PeriaVAcchAn PiLLai's commentary {leaving out

quotations etc brevity; Appropriate Notes and some bracketed

explanations by aDiyEn for clarification}:

 

----|

rUpam tE na | DivyAtma-SvarUpam {rUpam},

aakAraH cha tE na |-> Divine Form {aakAraH},

aayudhAni tE na |-> Weapons and bhOga-sthAnas like Parama-Pada

aaspadam cha tE na | are not for Your (Lord's) purpose.

----|

 

BhaktAnAm-tvam : You, such a bhakta-paratantra

 

tathApi : Even if You have made DivyAtma-SvarUpam etc for the

pleasure of AaSritas <bhaktas>,

 

purushAkAraH : without deminishment of Lordship etc qualities

conveying paratvam as enshrined in Purusha-SUkta,

 

prakASasE : You shine as a puzzle {sth beyond one's understanding}

with such vismayaneeya kalyANa guNas ie.With amazement

that How come the Lord of all Lords, the Supreme

Controller of everyone is simultaneously a paratantra

to His bhaktas !; How come a complete Svatantra is also

Paratantra - Contradicting characteristics !!.

 

< Excellent bhAva, which our AzhwArs and AchAryas are ever fond

off >.

 

The words rUpam and aakAraH are present => Both the terms,

though capable of, can't mean His Divine-Form. aakAraH can't mean

DivyAtma-SvarUpam; Hence rUpam means DivyAtma-SvarUpam and

aakAraH means Divine-Form.

 

Note 1 : Presence of the terms rUpam and aakAraH by itself

differentiates Bramhan's SvarUpa from its divine dody.

 

Note 2 : " tE na " commented as " Not for BhagavAn's Purpose " ,should

be understood that svarUpam etc are " primarily " not for

Lord's purpose. ParamAtma also has anubhava of His ownself

ie.DivyAtma-SvarUpa, His Divya-ma~ngaLa vigraH etc, as

indicated by SAyujya {anubhava of common entities by both

ParamAtma and mukta}. But, BhagavAn's primary aim is to

make Himself and His aiSvaryas be the object of anubhava

for His devotees.

 

Bhaktas, due to their nature as a sEsha of BhagavAn, make

themselves and their belongings be the object of anubhava{primarily}

for BhagavAn, the SEshi. But, BhagavAn due to His vAtsalya,Souseelya

etc kalyANa guNas makes Himself and His belongings to be the object

of anubhava {primarily} for His devotees. In the previous verse, it

is stated that devotees cross this material world making BhagavAn

Himself as their upAya <means>. This verse states that, BhagavAn

makes Himself and His belongings be anukUla(favourable) to such

devotees {for aaSrita rakshaNam : Making thier mind be fixed upon

Him}.

 

Note 3 : Ref Bh.GIta < " ..jn~Ani tu aatma eva mE matam " > BhagavAn

considers jn~Ani as His very " aatmA " - which He claims to

be His matham (Philosophy) !!, While the reality is in the

reverse {with ParamAtma being the aatmA of everyone in

supporting,controlling etc - others being His SarIra}. He

is verily a bhakta paratantra.

 

< The commentary by " VyAkyANa Chakravarthi " to this verse is really

a great delight. Beautiful anubhava indeed ! >

 

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

 

Summary of SrI Putta~nkOttakam SwAmi's Interpretation similarly

as above :

 

In the previous verse, surrendering to the lotus feet of PerumAL

is mentioned. The question arises as to whether there is a form

for PerumAL in the first place, since VEdas declare Him to be

" apANipAdO javanaH " ie.One devoid of hands,legs etc. VEdas declare

so because, in our common experience we see that a body undergoes

changes and is bound to get destructed etc. Even taking for granted

that PerumAL has a form, it seems to be against the Upanishad texts

like " yattaddrESyam .... " which declare that ParamAtma does not

have white,black etc colour and that He can't be seen. This verse

answers such doubts :

 

tE : For You - the DivyAtma-SvarUpa,

 

rUpam na : colour is not there {note: rUpam refers to

colour also ; rUpam is an accepted adravya refering

to colour in our siddhAnta, as well by others including

NayyAyikas};

 

aakAraH cha na : head,hand etc aakAra is not there;

<ie.the all-pervading paramAtma which is jn~Ana

is not differentiated at its various places

through various aakAras, as we see a body to

be differentiated into various things like ear,

nose,hand,leg etc; ParamAtma ie.DivyAtma-SvarUpa

is uniform throughout>;

 

It can also mean that aakAras like man,women and

napumsakali~nga are not there ;

 

aayudhAni na : weapons are not there;

 

aaspadam cha na : no aadhAra is there, since You are the

aadhAra of all.

 

tathApi : Even then,

 

BhaktAnAm-tvam : You, (*)for the sake of bhakta's dhyAna-aarAdhana

 

purushAkAraH prakASasE : shines with an eternal divine form in

purusha-aakAra, which has colour and

weapons.

 

(*): Here also, it has to be understood that Lord shines with

that divine-form, " primarily " for the sake of bhaktas.

 

This verse answers the questions raised above, since :

 

a. Existence of a form is stated.

 

b. The form is stated to be eternal. Since SAstras declare such

a divine form, we can't operate mundane logic to dismiss its

existence through inference. <It will be eternal by the sa~nkalpa

of the Lord>.

 

c. Also, for the statements in VEdas which convey that Lord does

not have hands,legs etc, it means that " Lord does not have

prAkruta <materialistic> hands,legs etc " .

 

d. DivyAtma-SvarUpa does not have any colour and hence it is said

that it can't be seen {through naked eyes}.

 

He {contemporary of SrI In~jimEttu Azhagiyasi~ngar and a great

scholar of SrI Ahobila Muth} finally says that since such an

interpretation as above is possible, lets not leave it out of our

anubhava {in addition to SrI PVP's interpretation}.

--

 

aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,

anantapadmanAbhan.