Dear Mrs.
Saranathan,
By terming that certain words
contain only in vyAkyAnam and not in the text, we are trying to undermine
both.Both in the sense that, The texts are better understood from
vyAkyAnam-s
refer upadhEsa rathinamAlai -
ariya aruLich cheyal poruLai
AriyargatkippOdhu-aruLich cheyalAith thARindhu.It is unfortunate that
this argument springs from the premise that there is no nexus between the text
and the vyAkyAnam. NOthing can be far from truth.
The terms -Thirumandhiram, dhvyam
and Charama SlOkam are not mentioned in the texts. Nor they would appear in
tamin nigandu. The vykyanam-s are replete with such srEvaishNavic terms. The
texts do not contain such terms. The vyAkyAnam for 'OrAyiramAi' -Thirumandhiram;
agalakillEan -dhvyam; vArthai aRibavar -chrama slOkam will become null and void
ab-initio, if we accept the argument that the text and nigandu do not contain
this term.
First we tried to overlook
vyAkyAnam Now we are trying to say that vyAkyanam-s do not reflect the spirit of
text. I do not think this is the spirit of argument nor it shows reverence for
our pUrvAchAryAs.
Any researfch should be to
open the eyes in tandem with vyAkyAnam but not at the cost of
vyAkyAnam-s
As I said earlier, The vyAkyAnam
for this particular pAsuram categorically mention nithya-Suri=-s and also gives
a precedence. If one does not like it, that is different matter altogether.
Undermining vyAkyAnam-s for the sake of education will NOT SERVE THE
PURPOSE.
Yes, dhEvAs take rebirth. brahmA's
has got a life longevity after that his post is gone. -nAnmugan nAL
migai.ref. Periya ThiruMozhi. There is no argument regarding
this.
In this particular pAsuram, it is
categorically mentioned nithya-sUri-s. Therefore, there is no point is referring
to Suzh-visumbu vyAkyAnam which is in an entirely a different context.
Yes, vEdu is Moksham. Yes it is
also vidu min muRRavum -nETTal vihAram - refer nannUl sUthram.It has go thus grammatical
connection as well as content connection. How does it matter in this
context? I cannot go against EDu. I cannot undermine EDu.
Your disclaimer does not insulate
against apachAram on EDu.
.
Conclusion: This will throw an impresssion that our
sampradhayam is a water tigtht one does not encourage any research. Absolutely
not.
If it had been so, so many
vyAkyAnam-s for a single prabhandham could never have
emerged.
The Versatile Genius -MahAvidhvAn-
PrathivAthi Bayankaram -Kanchi swamy has done extensive research. EAch of his
articles are eye openers for us and help us in understanding the vyAkyAms and
texts clearly.
He has pointed out several
instances where aruLich cheyal/vyAkyAnam-s contain contradiction-s/gaps with
idhihAsa purANangaL. Far from citing the lack of text in vyAkyAnam or nigandu he
always concludes that The AzhwAr-s are blessed ones and any such contrary
thiking should be accepted as it is, as they come out of 'mayaRvara mathi nalam
aruLap peRRvargaL'
Thank God YOu accept AchArya
Hrdhaym which in no uncertain terms after comparing The divine Gospel Bhagawath
GEThA declares supremacy of ThiruvAiMOzhi. Therefore, any contradiction between
the two, the ThiruvAimozhi should supersede and hold good.
I do not want to continue such type
of discussion undermining either AchAryAS or AzhwAr-s in the name of research.
The research if it can be called so, should go in tandem and not tangential to
AzhwAr and Acharyas. I am not wiser than them and therefore I cannot argue
further.
rAmAnuja
dAsan
vanamamalai
padmanabhan
Thank You.
rAmAnuja
dAsan'
vanamamalai
padmanabhan
azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
|
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |