You are here: SriPedia - Ramanuja - Archives - Jul 2002

Ramanuja List Archive: Message 00063 Jul 2002

 
Jul 2002 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]



SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA;
APPAN THIRUVADIGALE SARANAM.

Last part of mail on Purushakara.








Numerous references could be pointed out; not only from Thiruvaimozhi but also 
from NDP and other scriptures to show the relationship between Emperuman and 
Pirattti 
She forced Sri Rama to take her along with him to forest. Though she could have 
used her divine powers to 
get away from Srilanka. When Hanuman offered to carry her from Lanka she not 
only refused; but also informed him that she will not behave in anyway that 
will reduce the prestige of Sri Rama. All these acts go to show that Piratti 
was absolutely dependendant on Emperuman and was very careful to uphold his 
Lordship. When Ravana approached her in Asokavana with the intentionof making 
her queen, she advised him to shed away such thoughts. She also advised him to 
make friendship with Rama, if not surrendering to him. All these go to show her 
intent of absolute dependence of Emperuman and her subordinate position. 
There is another instance worth pointing out. Ravana and ?kakausura? have done 
similar crimes towards Piratti. Kakasura was spared from death because of 
Piratti?s intervention ( or her mercy or Purushakara ). When Kakasura fell down 
on ground to spare his life she adjusted his head in such a way it was touching 
the feet of Rama.

What else is required to show her position? Is it necessary to say that she is 
protecting her children by recommendation? 


In Thiruvaimozhi the first song ? UYARVAR UYAR NALAM UDAYAVAN EVANAVAN?.
??????
;;;;;;; AVAN
THUYARARU SUDARADITHOZHTHU EZHU MANANE ?
( There is no specific instruction as to whom we should worship.)

In 1st ten, 2nd Thiruvaimozhi, 10th Pasuram.
?Van pugazh Naranan thin kazhal chere?
Here the clue is given.
In the 3rd of the same ten, ? PATHUDAYAVARKELIYAVAN PIRARKALUKKARIYA
VITHAKAN MALAR MAGAL VIRUMBUM NAMARUMPERAL ADIKAL 
Now, the position is complete. We can link all these and come to a conclusion 
as to what should be done.

 





Though Sri. Ramanuja intensified the movement of SV by winning over opponents, 
streamlining of the same was necessary. He made ThirukurgaiPiran Pillan to 
write commentary on Bhagavt Vishya. He appointed Sri Parasara Bhattar,son of 
Kurathaazhvar as his successor. He himself could have written the commentary. 
But, there after nobody will dare to change a word in it.

Thirukurugai Piran Pillan?s commentary (6000 Padi) is very concise. Notonly 
that; usage of Sanskrit is more than Tamil.
Next commentary is by Nanjeeyar, sishya of Parasara Bhattar. It is a 
littleimproved version of Aarayirappadi, now 9000 padi. 
Next comes period of Nampillai.. Sishya of Nanjeeyar.
A versatile scholar, gave discourses ( Kalashebam); but did not commit himself 
in writing. The prominent sishyas under him are PERIYAVACHAN PILLAI ANDVADAKKU 
THIRU VEEDHI PILLAI. He commissioned Periyavachan Pillai to write commentary on 
Bhagavat Vishyam and that is 24000 Padi.
Vadkku thiru veedhi Pillai of his own accord put down on record of Nampillai?s 
discourses (at night he used to record daily discourses). Later on when 
Nampillai came to know of it he seized that copy and kept it under his 
possession. Later on it was released to Eeyunni Madhavar. This document is 
known as EEDU 36,000. Another commentary, rather meaning of word by word with a 
short commentary. (known as 12,000 padi) by Azhagia Manavala Jeeyar, sishya of 
Periya vaachan pillai came into existance.All these 3 commentarieswere of the 
same period. 36,000 Padi is exhaustive than 24,000 Padi. But,both are of the 
same material i.e Kalashebam of Nampillai. Both are excellent ones in 
manipravalam, compraising of more tamil words. A beautiful treat for those who 
know ?Manipravalam? Here only, the usage of the word 
?Purushakara ? is mentioned. The act of Piratti was recognised in earlier 
period ;but was not identified as ?Purushakara? Now, that deficiency was made 
good.. The ? Purushakaram? is well explained in ?Srivachanabhooshanam? by 
Pillai Lokachariar, son of Vadakku thiruveedhi Pillai. Let us take a glimpse of 
it. 

Sutra. 1.Vedartham aruthi yiduvathu smruthi,ithihas puranathigalale
2. Smruthiyale Poorvabhagathilartham aruthiyidakakadavathu; Marrayirandalaum 
Utharabhagathilartham aruthiyidakadavathu.
3. IVAI YIRANDILUM VATHUKKONDU ITHIHASAM PRABALAM
5. Ithihasa sreshtamana sri ramayanathal chirai irundhaval yerramchollukirathu. 
Mahabharathathal Dhoothu ponavan erram chollukirathu.

( Brahmakandam of vedas are to be explained with the help of Ithihasam. Sri 
Ramayana speakes about the greatness of (SITA )who was imprisioned; 
Mahabharatham speaks about the greatness of (Sri KRISHNA ) who went as 
messenger (for Pandavas)

6. IVAI IRANDALUM PURSHAKARAVAIBHAVAMUM UBHAYA VAIBHAVAMUM CHOLLIRRAYIRRU. ( By 
this two, greatness of Purushakaram (Ramayanam) and Upayam (mahabharatham) are 
explained.

Hereafter these two are explained detail.


Nampillai has developed the commentaries started in a small scale in an 
admirable level. Initially, Periavachaan Pillai?s vyakyanam was in force, 
asEEDU 36, 000 was later made public by Sri Manavala MaMunikal in his 
Kalashebham before Namperumal for one Year and he got due honours.
Azhvar?s Arulicheyals which were dormant prior to Sriman Nathaminigal have been 
elavated to highest position during Nampillai?s perioid. Even wards of great 
men Naduvil thiruveedhi Bhattar (Kurathazhvar vamsam) and Kanthadai Thozappar ( 
Mudaliandan Vamsam) became jealous of Nampillai. Later they reconciled and 
became his disciples of Nampillai. Needless to say who held Vedas in high 
esteem would have become envious. The work of Pillai Lokacharyar 
"?Srivachanabhooshanam"?was not welcomed. ?Acharya Hrudhayam?(Mind of 
Nammazhvar ) was also brought into existence by the brother ofPillai 
lokacharyar, Azhakia Manavala perumal Nayanar.

All these event s appear to have paved way for disgruntlement. During 
thisperiod Islamic Invasion of Srirangam took place and Namperumal was taken 
for safety in exile for a longer period. Sri. Vedantha desikar, contemporaryof 
Pillai Lokachariyar did not go with Namperumal. He left for Satyamangalam. 
Namperumal returned in 1371 to Srirangam. Sri Manavala mamunigal gave a 
discourse on EEDU 36,000 for one whole year in (1431)

It is understood from Parakala Matham ?s web site that matam was established in 
1360 by Brhamatantra swtantra Jeeyar. Now you can understand the situation for 
the division of one branch from SV.

Adiyen feel that some justice has been done now, in replying your questions.

Adiyen Ramanuja dasan, T.Parthasarathy

_________________________________________________________
There is always a better job for you at Monsterindia.com.
Go now http://monsterindia.rediff.com/jobs





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