rules of interpretation
From the Bhakti List Archives
• December 30, 1999
Dear friends, These days although adiyen avoids reflecting upon the "tiruppAvai" on the bhakti-list, adiyen can't help continuing to do so silently within the safe confines of his heart and the outer limit of his living-room. Out of one such silent musing-session, adiyen comes up with a small question. Hopefully, scholars on the list, and those steeped in the "vyAkhyAna-grantha-s", might perhaps be able to clarify and educate adiyen about it. adiyen notices that in the 'tiruppAvai' some of the things which 'pirAtti' says in an earlier 'pAsuram' she says it differently in a later 'pAsuram'. Sometimes what is said in a later 'pasuram' appears almost as a retraction of what was hinted in an earlier 'pasuram'. Pundits and "achAryA-s", however, interpret the message and content of latter 'pasurams' as overriding those of earlier ones. adiyen wonders if the rule of interpretation being followed here is the same as what in the "meemAmsa-sAstra" is known as the rule of "apacchEda-nyAya" according to which, if and when there is a variance between two different portions of a scriptural text, that which is the latter would prevail over the former. In very technical terms, they say that which is "para" (latter) is always more powerful than that which is "purva" (the former). Applying the above rule of interpretation, may we perhaps say that messages of truth we glean out of the final 2 or 3 'pasurams', will simply override or nullify related ones of all previous 'pAsuram-s'? Please comment. Thanks, dAsan, Sampathkumaran __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com
- Next message: L&T-ECCG-Buildings & Factories: "THIRUP PALLAANDU- 1"
- Previous message: sampath kumar: "Re: Information about Narasimha"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]