Digest Number 335-Thitthikkum Amudu

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Sudarshan,

 

A good question indeed-why should Azhwar say

" Thitthikkum amudhU " instead of mere " amudu " , which would make the meaning

clear? Is it a case of overemphasis or does it have some special meaning? It

must, for every word and syllable of Azhwar sreesooktis is pregnant with

meaning and tautology or " punarukti " are blemishes unattributable to Divya

Prabandas, as these are the outpourings of bhaktAs blessed with " mayarvara

madinalam " . Nor does Azhwar resort to phrases merely as " pAda pooraNam " ,

just to complete the sentence or ensure conformity with metrical

requirements.

 

1. If we take the entire sentence, " eNNam pugundu

thitthikkum amudu " , the meaning is somewhat clear. While the ordinary nectar

can only sweeten the palate, the Lord, who is an " amudu " beyond compare,

makes the mind, body and every nerve therein tingle with ecstasy. This is

the meaning we get if we place emphasis on the word " eNNam " .

 

2. If the word " pugundu " is taken as the key word, then

it might mean this- whereas nectar has to be imbibed orally by the user, and

doesn't go into the user's system on its own volition, the Lord enters us on

His own, uninvited, and makes us delirious with delight. This is borne out

by similar references elesewhere too in Tiruvaimozhi- " ThirumAl vandu en

nenju niraya pugundAn " , " en mAya Akkai idanuL pukku " etc.

 

Incidentally, there are other differences too between

the ordinary ambrosia and the Lord as an " amudu " -

 

3. There is no lasting use for nectar , as the first dose

itself confers immortality. If taken thereafter, even this sweet

amudu might pall. Emperuman, on the other hand, is an " ArAvamudu " , who gives

us new and newer experiences in delight, every time we see, hear or talk

about Him. Nectar might make us say " Enough " (ParyAptam), but the Lord is an

aparyApta amrita, and His anubhavam never palls on us.

 

4. Though it might confer immortality, Nectar is not

immortal by itself. Once it enters the system of a person, it undergoes the

normal metabolic changes and ceases to exist. Not so the Lord, who confers

on us eternal and everlasting bliss, without He Himself losing any of His

original qualities.

 

5. The immortality conferred by Ambrosia might be

a mixed blessing and allows us only to remain forever bound to the Samsara

Chakra. In fact, some might call it a curse, instead of a boon, to remain

alive forever. ArAvamudu, on the other hand, blesses us with the sort of

immortality that results in eternal bliss, removed forever from the mundane

morass.

 

6. Nectar was obtained after herculean effort by churning

the ocean, with the entire population of DEvAs and asurAs ranged on either

side, using Mantara Parvata as the churning rod, the poisonous snake VAsuki

as the rope and the Lord Himself as the stabilising force propping up the

mountain. In contrast, ArAvamudu is attainable with practically no effort at

all, by adopting the extremely easy upAya of SaranAgati.

 

7. While Nectar had its origins in the Milky Ocean and could

not have conferred amaratvam on anyone existing prior to its emergence, the

Lord is " anAdi " (without an origin) and has always been around to gladden

generation after innumerable generation of mortals, taking them all to

Paramapadam at the appropriate time ( " Veedum thanrum nindru nindrE " ).

dasan, sadagopan.

 

------

 

______________________

______________________

 

______________________

______________________

 

>Dear friends,

 

A young of mine has sent me a question for which adiyane is unable to

give a ready response. It is a question related to use of Tamil idiom

and poetic 'rasanai' (flavour) and perhaps knowledgeable ones amongst

you might be able to clarify.

 

In the TiruvoimOzhi decad on Tiruvengadam, NammAzhwar sings as

follows:

 

vaNNa maruLkoL aNimEga vaNNaa!* maaya ammaanE,*

eNNam pugundhu thiththikkum amuthE!* imaiyOr athipathiyE,*

theNNal aruvi maNipon muththalaikkum* thiruvENGkadaththaanE,*

aNNalE! un adisEra* adiyERku aavaa vennaayE! 6.10.3

 

The phrase " thiththikkum amuthE! " , my correspondent says, sounds

rather unusual. " thiththikkum " means " sweet " and " amuthE " means

ambrosia, the divine nectar, the elixir of immortality in God's

world.

 

Nectar or " amutham " is said to be naturally " sweet " ( " thiththippu " ).

No such thing as a bitter ( " kassappu " ) or sour ( " puLippu " ) ambrosia

exists. In such a case isn't NammAzhwAr's use of the adjective

" thiththikkum " to qualify " amutham " rather redundant or tautological

-- from a strictly literary/grammatical standpoint? It sounds a bit

like saying " O sweetening sugar! " .

 

The AzhwAr might have easily said " eNNam pugundha amuthE! " or

something similar, and still have conveyed the same degree of delight

savoured in the thought of 'tiruvengadatthAn'! Did NammAzhwAr add

" thiththikkum " merely for the purpose of ensuring poetic metre/rhyme

or is there some other subtle message he sought to convey through the

seeming redundancy of phrase?

 

Comments/views welcome.

 

Thanking you,

Regards,

 

dAsan,

Sudarshan