You are here: SriPedia - Oppiliappan - Archives - Jul 2003

Oppiliappan List Archive: Message 00118 Jul 2003

 
Jul 2003 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]



Dear friends,

Have you ever asked yourselves why when you want to address someone
respectfully, very often, you prefix the honorific "swAmin" or
"svAminah:" to the person's name? Even in e-mails to this Group, if
you have noticed, members often address one another as, say, for
example, "Anbil svAmin", "Sadagopan svAmi", "Rajagopala svAmin" etc.

This habit of addressing someone as "swAmi So-&-So" is an age-old
one. SriVaishnavites always refer to their beloved 'achArya', Vedanta
Desikan of the 13th century, as "Swami Desikan". The followers of the
Ramakrishna Mutt always refer to their illustrious guru, Vivekananda,
as 'Swami' Vivekananda. In fact, every ordained monk of this Mutt is
always addressed as "Swami So-&-So" -- Swami Vimalananda, Swami
Gautamananda, Swami Paramatmananda and so on and so forth... Swami
Chinmayananda was another famous "svAmi" of contemporary times who
established his own Vedantic order. There are today in India
innumerable holy Orders whose members similarly, as we can see, are
all invariably revered with the common address of "svAmi".

"swAmi" does not however attach itself naturally to the name of all
holy men and "achAryAs". For e.g. some holy men's names are prefixed
with the word "sAdhu". Near Madras, I learnt recently, there was a
holy man called Sadhu Yogiram Suratkumar who had quite a spiritual
following. Among the Sindhis of Bombay, some years ago, a holy man
known as 'Sadhu' Vaswani was well known. This word "sAdhu" is the
prefix holy men of North India are known to generally prefer. Some
holy women in the North are also addressed as "sAdhvi". 

"sAdhu" is derived from "sattva". He who is full of 'sattva' or
'sAttvic' qualities like serenity, compassion and piety is a 'sAdhu'
or 'sAdhvi'. Today, in and around the temple town of Ayodhya, we
might see holy men sporting fierce manes and carrying even fiercer
looking 'trishul' (tridents) and 'tridanda' (staffs) and we begin to
wonder if "sAdhu" is an apt form of address for them ... but then
that is not the subject of this piece and so let's leave it there.

Nobody also refers, if you have noticed, to the great sage VyAsa as
"Swami Vyasa". He is popularly known only as "vyAsa bhagavAn". His
son Shuka was no less venerable than the father but he is known to us
today not as 'Swami' Shuka but as "shuka-brahmam". Since Shuka was
known to be constantly and entirely immersed in Brahmic
consciousness, he came to be addressed as "shuka-brahmam". It is from
the ancient example of Shuka that today the honorific "brahmasri" is
sometimes attached to the names of some exalted men. For e.g. in
Madras recently we heard of the sad demise of the renowned
'sangeeta-kalapshEpakar', "brahmasri" Balakrishna Sastrigal. While
delivering his musical religious discourses to which thousands used
to flock, Sastrigal was sometimes known to forget himself totally in
God-consciousness. There was also another well-known Vedic scholar in
Madras -- "brahmasri" Manjakudi Rajagopala Sastrigal; and then, who
can ever forget too the inimitable "brahmasri" Sengalipuram
Anantharama Dikshitar -- the exponent 'par excellence' of such
scriptural classics like "nArAyaNaneeyam"? 

Just as Sage VyAsa was addressed as "bhagavAn" and not "swAmi", so
too do we SriVaishnavites, who regard Sri RamanujAchArya as our
foremost 'guru', we do not ever refer to him as "Swami Ramanuja".
More often we refer to him as "bhagavath ramanuja"; or else, we refer
to him with some other hallowed honorific such as "uDayavar" or
"bhAshyakArar", never at all "swAmi". Neither do the Advaitins ever
refer to their great 'achArya', Adi Sankara as "Swami Shankara". He
is always known only as Shankara "bhagavath-pAdAL". 

The words "brahmasri" and "bhagavan" or "bhagavath" are more far more
laudatory and elevating than the term "sAdhu". The reason for this is
that great souls like VyAsa, Shuka, Shankara and Ramanuja were not
only "sAdhus" in their own right but, far more importantly, they all
commanded the kind of universal awe and veneration which only
Bhagavan, God Almighty Himself can, and indeed does, from His flock.

Thus, when we examine all these holy honorifics such as "swAmi",
"bhagavAn", "brahmam", "sAdhu" etc. we are naturally led to ask
ourselves what does "swAmi" really connote? Is "bhagavAn" somehow
superior to "swAmi"? Does "swami" connote a higher degree of
veneration than "sAdhu"? Or, do they all mean the same thing and may
hence be freely used interchangeably? We are also led to ask
ourselves: "Who is a "swAmi"?" When should it really be used to
address a person? When we happen to address each other as "swAmin"
are we being appropriate? Or else, are we using the term in a rather
blithe, casual, indiscriminate and even meaningless way? When we call
someone "swAminah: so-&-so", do we do so merely out of the need to
seem polite or obsequious? Is it really befitting one to be called
"swAmin" and if so, why?

"swAmin" truly differs from the other honorifics we mentioned above.
It is rather special. It has great depth of meaning. It denotes a
certain degree of exaltation that lies somewhere between "sAdhu" and
"bhagavAn"; and yet "swAmin" is actually one of the loftiest
compliments in Sanskrit one can pay to any mortal. 

In exact Vedantic parlance, when a person is recognized to be a
'svAmin', he (or she) is said to be "self-possessed" i.e.
specifically, he is seen (1) to be in constant enjoyment of an
extraordinary degree of freedom of spirit. This freedom is called
"swArAjya" -- and it is a kind not given to ordinary men of the
world. Furthermore he is also seen to (2) to possess and wield an
extraordinary degree of authority amongst fellowmen. It is these two
specific characteristics that define "swAmi".

"The truly free man or woman is 'svAmin', literally "in full
possession of self". He or she exercises spontaneous authority over
others; not the authority that debases others but that which
ennobles, not the authority that distances but that draws to
intimacy, not the authority of birth or social advantage but of the
ability to forget oneself in the welfare of others...". (Michael
N.Nagler writing in Eknath Eswaran's "The Upanishads" (Page 292)-
Penguin publication 2002).

Let us study the word "svAmi" a little more to understand better its
definition above. 

The word "swAmi" has its roots in the ancient Upanishads. It echoes
straight out of 2 passages from the Taittiriya Upanishad in one
instance, and then, in another, from a beautiful passage in the
Chandogya Upanishad.

"swAmin" is derived from the root "sva-" in Sanskrit which means
'one's Inner Self'. Those of us with even scant knowledge of Sanskrit
might have come across the word "svayam". Some idols in our temples
such as Srirangam or Tiruvengadam are said to be "self-created" --
"svayambhu". You might also have heard of "sitA svayamvara" -- the
event of Sita's marriage in the Ramayana where she chose for herself
("svayam") her mate ("varah") from amongst a parade of suitors. All
these "sva-" words are thus derived from the root "sva-" and it means
'by oneself'. Whenever "sva-" is affixed to a word in Sanskrit it
denotes the "self" or "oneself". A person, for example, who by dint
of his own hard effort ("sva-prayatna") masters the Vedas
("adhyAya"), he is said to be engaged in "svAdhyAya". 

Now, in the Taittiriya Upanishad, there is an oft-quoted line that
exhorts a Man of education and wisdom to embrace the study of Vedic
scripture as cardinal duty if he must advance in the journey of life.
"svAdhyA'yAn mA pramadah:"... says the Upanishad, "Do not ever fail
in the personal duty to undertake Vedic study". Now, the "sva-" in
"swAmin" is really an echo of "svAdhyAya" as it appears in the
Upanishadic sense. Hence, a person fit to be addressed as "swAmin"
should be, first and foremost, engaged constantly in "svAdhyaya" --
the rigour of Vedic study.

Next, in another passage ("anuvAka") in the Taittiriyam, the
Upanishad deals with a lofty spiritual concept called "svA-rAjyam" --
"ApnOti svAraajyam"... says the SikshAvalli. This 'svArAjyam' is
precisely that Freedom of Spirit referred to above that a "swAmi" is
seen to be enjoying constantly. A true "swAmi" is an utterly free
soul, who goes about wherever he wants and does whatever he pleases
in the full knowledge of God, the 'paramAtma'. 

The best example of a true "swAmi's" "svArAjya" is seen in an event
in the life of Swami Venkatanathan (14th CE). He was once invited to
serve as poet-laureate at the royal court at Vijayanagaram under
enticement of a princely salary. He spurned it without a moment's
hesitation in the true manner of an utterly free soul ("svArAyja"),
saying that a servant of God does not stoop to singing peaens to
earthly sovereign. It was really the 'Swamin' within Venkatanathan
which also declared, "The wealth that is rightly mine to covet
resides here on the Hill of Hastigiri (meaning the Deity of the
Kanchi temple) and it surpasseth all the royal riches of
Vijayanagaram". Venkatanathan chose "svArAjyam" over 'rAjyam' and
came thus to be celebrated as 'Swami'.

The true 'swAmi' also wields a natural but powerful authority over
his fellowmen. It is almost magical how such SwAmis command the awe
and affection of those who come under their spell. As already quoted
above, it is the exercise of "spontaneous authority over others; not
the authority that debases others but that which ennobles, not the
authority that distances but that draws to intimacy, not the
authority of birth or social advantage but of the ability to forget
oneself in the welfare of others...". 

Vivekananda was the perfect example of a 'Swami' who wielded the sort
of authority over fellowmen that the ideal of Upanishadic 'svArAjya'
holds up to us. He strode like a spiritual collossus amongst the
Congress of Religions in Chicago in which he participated in 1888.
Everyone across USA who came into contact with Vivekananda went into
a spell. None that had met him, for as much as a few moments even,
could come away without feeling, "Here indeed is a fearless and free
soul. Here indeed is a true Swami". 

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

In the the Chandogya Upanishad in the last and 8th Chapter we come
across a passage of rare insight into the character of a 'svAmin':

"Ordinary mortals do what they are told, and get attached to
anything: their country, or piece of land. Everything they work for,
secular or religious, comes to nothing. Only those who find out Who
they are, and what they want, find freedom, here and in all the
worlds." (chandOgya VIII.1.5-6)

Here again, the Upanishads holds up to us the ideal of Freedom as the
chief characteristic of the true 'Swami' -- the man who has "found
out who he is and what he wants" and hence enjoys the freedom of this
world and the hereafter and enjoys authority too over both...

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

By the lofty standard of "svArajya" -- personal freedom and authority
-- that the Upanishads set for a true "swAmi", now we must ask
ourselves, how many of us would qualify to be addressed as "swAmi"?

Everytime I hear these days someone address me as "svAmin" or
"sudarshan swAmi", I really squirm, for I know it is a honorific that
shall never ever rest comfortably upon my puny shoulders.

Regards,
dAsan,
Sudarshan 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
oppiliappan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list