Dear Shri SrEvaishNavites,
I request all the sRevaishNavites to kindly go
through these three parts of the writte up by Sri TCA Venkatesan sWamy and
please devote some time for this purpose exclusively.
The result automatically follows.
Thanks to TCA swAmy.
dASan
vanamamalai padmanabhan
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 11:54
PM
Subject: [ramanuja] Thennacharyas and
Desikar - 3 - PBA Swami's Article
Sri:
Attached is a translation of an article by Sri
P.B. Annangaracharyar Swami explaining how closely Desikar followed
Periyavachchan Pillai's Srisuktis.
By the way, it has come to my
attention that some people are interpreting what I have said so far
as an attempt to put down Desikar. Nothing could be further from the
truth. I am only pointing out the logical flaws on certain claimed events.
What needs to be realized is that Desikar's greatness stands on its own.
It does not need any of these stories. In fact, such stories are the ones
that tend to bring down his stature. As an example, consider this: Is it
greater to realize that Desikar wrote the Padhuka Sahasram as a
celebration of the Lord, His divine padhukas and Swami Nammazhvar or to
claim that he wrote it for a contest?
Finally, please note the
final paragraph in the attached article. These words should be marked in
gold.
adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan
--
Desikar and
Periyavachchan Pillai's Sri Suktis:
In the Srivaishnava sampradhayam,
there are many works created by our ancestors of both kalais. Let us not
worry about the works of acharyas such as Manavala Mamunikal whose
time came after that of Swami Desikan. There are not many who know the
closeness of the acharyas such as Periyavacchan Pillai and Pillai
Lokacharyar who were present at the same time or just prior to
Desikar's time.
That Periyavacchan Pillai is ahead of Desikar's time
is shown very clearly by Desikar himself in one of his sri
suktis.
Periyavacchan Pillai's vyakhyanams had become well known by
Desikar's time. In his Rahasya Traya Saram, in PrabhavavyavastAtikara,
Desikar says the following: "kulam tharum engiRa pAttukku vyAkhyAnam
paNNina abhiyuktharum 'janmaththAl vruththaththAl kuRainthAn
oruththanukku bhagavath sambandham uNdAnAl avanai ivai udaiyAn
oruththan thAza ninaikkak kUsa vENdumpadiyAyiRRu bhagavath prabhAvam
irukkumpadi. AnAl ivargaLOdu peN koduththuk koLLugiRathillaiyE ennil
athu jAthi nibandhanam, slAkhai guNa nibandhanam' enRu
nirkarshiththArkaL." In this, Desikar has quoted the words from
Periyavachchan Pillai's vyakhyanam. It is the determination of
all vyAkhyAtas up till Srimad Injimettu Azhagiya Singar, that Desikar is
talking about Periyavachchan Pillai in this statement with the use of the
word 'abhiyukthar'. It is therefore clear that Periyavachchan Pillai's
time is ahead of that of Desikar.
Stotra Bashyam:
If one
reads Desikar's Stotra Bashyam along with Periyavachchan Pillai's
vyakhyanam, it will be easily understood how much Desikar has followed
the path of Periyavachchan Pillai's words.
This can be in the first
shloka "namochintyAdbhuda:" itself. Desikar uses nearly 80% of
Periyavachchan Pillai's Sanskrit pramANas. This is not a false claim.
Both works are easily available and anyone can examine them both and see
for themselves. Not only the pramANas, but Desikar also takes the
delightful inner meanings shown in Periyavachchan Pillai's
vyakhyanams.
A hundred examples can be shown for these and a few
are taken up here.
In the first shloka, in the phrase "njAna
vairAgya rAshayE", the common meaning that most would think of is that
Nathamunigal is a collection of such qualities as njAna and vairAgya. This
is not incorrect. Desikar too determined this meaning
first. Periyavachchan Pillai considered the bahuvrIhi samAsa here and
taking the meaning of rAsi as a samUha, applied it to both njAna and
vairAgya and said that he posseses collections of njAna and vairAgya.
Considering that njAna and vairAgya are single, he then questioned himself
whether they can be refered to as collections. He answered that by
saying that because the divine nature/qualities of the Lord are many,
the knowledge about them is also many. And because there are many things
that have to be given up, vairAgyam is also many. Desikar
has translated this exact meaning into his bashyam.
Further in this
shloka, comes the phrase "agAdha bhagavad bhakti sindhavE". Here,
Periyavachchan Pillai, instead of taking the meaning that Nathamunigal
is an ocean for the quality of bhakti, takes the meaning that bhakti is an
ocean (as per the divya sUktis "kAdhal kadal puraiya
viLaiviththa", "kAdhal kadalin migap perithAl", etc) and states that he
possesses the ocean that is bhakti. Desikar took this meaning and wrote
"bhaktim vA sindhudvEna rUpayitvA bahuvrIhi:".
In the phrase "na
ninditam karma tadasti lOkE", Desikar first gave the ordinary meaning
'worldly' for the word lokE. However, seeing that Periyavachchan Pillai
had used the meaning 'Sastra' for it in his vyakhyanam, Desikar too stated
the same in his bashyam.
For the phrase "vasI vadAnyO guNavAn", Desikar
explains the twelve divine qualities following the vyakhyanam
of Periyavachchan Pillai.
For the shloka "achintyadivyAtbudEdhya
...", Desikar has translated Periyavacchan Pillai's avatharikai
and added to it.
For the phrase "bhaktajanaika jIvitam",
Periyavachchan Pillai provides two meanings: 1. that He provides
all sustenance for His devotees and 2. He has His devotees as His
sustenance. Desikar too says the same in his bashyam.
Next, let's
look at the word "samartham". Here too Desikar follows Periyavachchan
Pillai's vyakhyanam. Here, it is said that the Lord is capable
and qualified. However, lowly as we are, we too are celebrated as being
capable. Therefore, the capacity of the Lord cannot be something simple.
So, Periyavachchan Pillai looked to see what special meaning can be
understood here. And knowing Alavandar's divine heart, he said
"aLavudaiyarAna nithya sUrigaL anubavikkum thannai, nithya samsArigaL
anubavikkum idaththil 'ARRa nalla vagai kAttum ammAnai"
enkiRapadiyE Sathmikka SAthimikka anubavippikkum
SAmarththyaththai udaiya". Truly, this is the great capacity of the
Lord. Desikar practically translated this as "AsritAnAm sAtmya bOghap
pradAnE". The term sAtmya is a rarely used one. This is specially used in
the divya granthas of our acharyas. This is used by Periyavachchan
Pillai in his avatharikai for Thiruvaymozhi 1.9 ("ivaiyum avaiyum
uvaiyum") as the Lord giving His anubhavam to Azhvar ("SAthmikka SAthmikka
koduththaruLinAr"). Desikar takes that and states the same in
his Dramidopanishad Tatparya Ratnavali as "vipumanubhujE sAtmya
yOgapradAnAt". It is in the same meaning that he has used this word in
Stotra Bashyam as well.
Sachcharitra Rakshai:
In Saccharitra
Rakshai, in the second adhikara which discusses Urdhva Pundram, Desikar
explains the meaning of the Thiruvaymozhi pasuram 4-5-6 "kariya mEni
misai veLiya nIRu siRithEyidum, periyakOla thandangkaNNan" by saying
"chakshushi tattAraNam tatra vihitamiti anjana paratvamAhur AchAryA:".
Here, it is unshakeably clear that Desikar is refering only to
Periyavachchan Pillai by the word "AcharyA:". Why? Thirukkurugai Piran
Pillan's vyakhyanam for this pasuram is as follows:
"nIlamEga nipadhivya rUpOchitha dhivyAngkaragaththAlE
anulipthanAy, adhivisAlamAy adhiramaNIyamAy iruppathoru
thAmaraith thadAgam pOlE iruntha thirukkaNgaLai udaiyanAy". From this,
the meaning for 'veLiya nIRu' can be taken as dhivyAngkarAgam and the
whole first line 'kariya mEni misai veLiya nIRu siRithEyidum' can be taken
as refering to the Lord. Periyavacchan Pillai's vyakhyanam here is much
different from that of Pillan. The meaning of 'veLiya nIRu' is taken to be
anjana chUrNam (veLiyam is anjanam). The first line is therefore not taken
as refering to the Lord, but as refering to the Lord's eyes
('thadangkaN'). The meaning then of the pasuram is that the Lord who has
the divine dark eyes which has anjana chUrNam. This meaning is seen only
in Periyavacchan Pillai's vyakhyanam and is different from Pillan's
vyakhyanam. In Pillan's vyakhyanam, for the word 'nIRu', neither anjana
paratvam is shown nor chakshushi tAraNam is shown. Therefore, the word
"AchArya Ahu:" that Desikar uses cannot be said to refer to Pillan and
has to be taken to be refering to Nampillai's vyakhyana parampara and
therefore Periyavachchan Pillai.
Tatparya
Ratnavali:
That Desikar gathered knowledge of Ubhaya Vedantas
from his acharyas is clear. When no vyakhyanams had been written for
Thiruvaymozhi, pUrvAcharyas learned its meanings with the help of the
original text and by listening to its meanings from their acharyas.
After Pillan's Arayirappadi, they would have used it to learn the
meanings. Nanjiyar's Onbathinayirappadi is also short. Once Periyavachchan
Pillai wrote his detailed and delightful Irupaththunalayirappadi,
they started using it for understanding its meanings. Even though,
Nampillai's Idu Muppaththariyrappadi was written down then, since it was
hidden for a while before being brought out, in that middle period,
everyone including Desikar would have used Periyavachchan Pillai's
work as the kAlakshepa grantham for Thiruvaymozhi. This has been proven
with many examples.
Arayirappadi avatharikai vyakhyanam for pasurams
such as Thiruvaymozhi 1-8 "Odum puLLERi", 1-10 "porumA nILpadai", 2-8
"aNaivatharavaNai mEl", etc are quite different from the
Irupaththunalayirappadi avatharikai vyakhyanam for the same. Desikar has
followed Irupaththunalayirappadi vyakhyanam in his Dramidopanishad Tatparya
Ratnavali and Dramidopanishad Saram.
Thiruvaymozhi 10-1 is "thALa
thAmarai" pasuram in which Azhvar's anubahavam of Thirumogur Lord takes
place. In his avatharikai for this pasuram, Pillan states this much
only: "Thirukkannapuraththil emperumAnai anubaviththu ippOthu thirumOgUril
emperumAnai anubavikkiRAr". In the following pasurams too, he presents
only the simple meanings. Other acharyas show a special meaning here:
Azhvar has determined his passage to parampadam previously in the
pasuram "saraNamAgum" in Thiruvaymozhi "mAlai naNNi". Having determined
his archirAdi mArga gathi, Azhvar is now said to be seeking Thirumogur
Kalamegap Perumal to help him in that path ("vazhith thuNai"). Manavala
Mamunigal in his Thiruvaymozhi Nurranthathi states "thAL adainthOr
thangkatkuth thAnE vazhith thuNaiyAm, kALamEgaththai gathiyAkki". Acharya
Hrudayam too states "mArkkabandhu chaithyam mOhanaththE
maduvidum". Periyavachchan Pillai presents this meaning in
his vyakhyanam "kALamEgap perumALai vazhith thuNaiyAga paRRugiRAr".
Pillan's vyakhyanam does not say anything like this, other than saying that
Azhvar worships Thirumogur Appan. Now let us look at
Desikar's Dramidopanishad Tatparya Ratnavali and Saram. In Ratnavalai,
in shloka 104 "taithyAnAm ithyAdi", he says "srAntihAritvamukhyai rAgArais
satgatis syAt". All those who wrote vyakhyanam for "satgatis syAt" state
here that "kALamEgap perumALE vazhith thuNai". In Dramidopanishad Saram
also, Desikar says "satpadavyAm sahAyam srIsam prAha" as the meaning of
this pasuram.
This does not mean that we are saying that Desikar did
not like Arayirappadi. Because it is a smaller work, Desikar used it a
little and because Periyavachchan Pillai's work was more detailed
and had more interesting interpretations, he used it as his kAlakshepa
grantham.
Bhagavad Gita:
There are a couple of rare and very
important matter in Bhagavad Gita. One time a pundit came to
Nampillai and asked "Why is there no reference to archAvataram in
Gita?". Nampillai replied "In the fourth adhyaya, where it says 'ye yatAmAm
prapadyante tAn tadaiva bhajAmyaham', it includes archAvataram". This is
recorded in Varththamalai. It is shown in Idu
and Irupaththunalayirappadi that Nampillai determined that Thiruvaymozhi
pasuram 8-1-4 "umaruganthugantha uruvam nin uruvamAgi" as refering to
archAvatAram and that he used this Gita shloka as the pramANam for it.
This determination is done by Nampillai only and it is not present in
Ramanuja's Gita Bashyam. This is also shown by Desikar in his Tatparya
Chandrikai in the 'ye yatA mAm' shloka as "atra krushNAvatAra vrutthAntena
saha archAvatAra vrutthAntOpi sangruhIta:".
There is an even more
important point. One time Nampillai was doing an upanyasam and was refering
to the Nachchiyar Thirumozhi pasuram "thammai ugappAraith thAm ugappar".
He then took the "ca"kAram in the Gita shloka "priyo hi njAninotyarttham
aham sa ca mama priya:" and stated "njAni en pakkalil seyyum
prIthiyai upAthiyAkki avan pakkalil nAn prIthi paNNuvathu perithO?".
Seeing this, Desikar stated at the end of his Tatparya Chandrikai "sa ca
mam priya: itpatra nirathisayaprIthim kurvatopi mahotArasya
IshvarasyApi tatprIthyupAdhikaprIthikaraNAt athruptis
suchiteti kesitAchAryA:". The veneration shown using the
word 'kesitAchAryA:' instead of 'kesitAhu:' should be understood
here.
The focus of what has been said thus far is not to try to
bring down the greatness of Desikar. It was done only to show the respect
that Desikar had toward the srIsUktis of Periyavachchan
Pillai.
There are many who state that Desikar and other
acharyas have great differences of opinion in the sampradhaya meanings.
If they give up their personal stands and opinions and study the srIsUktis
of all acharyas, the oneness of their thoughts will become very
clear.
If they wish so, they don't even have to accept that Desikar
followed the srI sUktis of Periyavachchan Pillai and Pillai Lokacharyar.
Let it be that these acharyas followed Desikar in their works. It is only
important for us to accept that they all spoke with one voice ("pEsiRRE
pEsum Eka kaNdarkaL") and one
thought.
--
TT>
azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
|