Srimathe Ramanujaya nama: Dear Nappinnai: Sorry about the delayed response. Both Acharyan and thAyAr (as Sri Venkateshan eloquently described in an earlier message) have a very important role in our sampradAyam, i.e., purushakAratvam. Swamy madhura kavi and godha piRATTi underscore the role of purushakArathvam in accessing perumAL's thiruvaDi. Azhwars sang thiruppaLLiyazhicchi to perumAL, vishwamitra did so for chakravarthitthirumagan, only AnDAL has the thani sirappu (lone glory) that she sang thiruppaLLiyazhicchi to Bhagavathas (thiruppAvai 6-15) before she begins to access vAnOrgaL and then talks to KrishNa. In doing so, she highlights the role, importance of bhAgavathas, Acharyan in purusing perumAL's feet (there is so much material on this issue by our Acharyas, swamy PVP et al, that we will need a life time just to enjoy the wonderment that our Acharyas feel about thAyAr, AnDAL's siRappu). In any case, the point I was making was not about examining all these issues. That there is an inherent need to accept the word of swamy mAmunigaL, because, after all, he (and no one else) is perumAL's acharyan. When swamy maNavALa mAmunigaL counts azhwars as ten, there is really very little need for discussion (or justification) beyond that. aDiyEn yatheendra pravaNa dAsan, sridhar --- In ramanuja@xxxx, "vaidhehi_nc" <nappinnai_nc@xxxx> wrote: > Sri: > Srimathe Ramanujaya nama: > > Dear Sridhar, > I need clarification regarding the no. of AzhwArs. Is it > not 11 with the exception of Madhurakavi who sang on NammAzhwAr > unlike the rest who sang on PerumAL. I can understand Madhurakavi's > being bhAgavatha sESatvam but not ANdAL's. ANdAL's is bhagavath > sESatvam too. I'm not convinced by your statement of ANdAL's > bhAgavath sESatvam. > > Relation of Madhurakavi-NammAzhwAr-PerumAL is parallel to the > relation of Satrugna-Bharata-SriRama > > AzhwAr EmperumAnAr Jeeyar TiruvadigaLE saraNam > nappinnai
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |