Search:
Bhakti List Archives

"Odious Comparison"

From the Bhakti List Archives

sadagopaniyengar • January 17, 2003 


                       
Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatindra Mahadesikaya Nama:

                                Odious Comparison
 
         What do we do, when we want to describe to our child something, which he has not come across so far?

Let's say he has not seen elephants and we want to provide him a verbal picture of the pachyderm. We give him a vivid description of how the elephant looks like a moving hillock, how its four legs resemble solid pillars, how bead-like its eyes are, how soft and rubber-like its long trunk is and so on. This gives the child a fairly good idea of what an elephant looks like.

In other words, we employ a simile or a series of similes to describe what we know to a person who doesn't know. Thus similes or "upamA" serve to picturise the unknown, with reference to the known. 

Apart from the prosaic purpose of enabling comprehension of a concept, similes also serve as adornments or embellishments in poetry. Poets make liberal use of similes to enhance the impressiveness of the subject. Mahakavi KAlidAsA was a facile handler of similes, so much so that the very term simile brings him to our mind ("UpamA KAlidAsasya"). However, whoever coined this tribute might not have been a student of Srimad Ramayana or Swami Desikan's works, as both these great poets were adept at employing upamAs. We come across hundreds of similes employed by Sri Valmiki to telling effect throughout the epic. Here is a beautiful specimen:

Sri Hanuman stands on the Mahendra parvatam, bracing his huge feet against the hill and pushing down to give him the requisite momentum for the spring into the air, for crossing the ocean to Lanka. And when he does launch into his long flight, the pressure/vacuum created in his wake is so intense that several trees are uprooted from the hillside and, propelled by the momentum, follow the VAnara veera for some distance, before falling into the ocean. This, Sri Valmiki says, was like hosts accompanying visiting relatives for some distance, while seeing them off.

Similes may be employed for describing worldly things, but what upamAnam could possibly be used for describing the Paramapurusha? It is indeed paradoxical that similes are available for enabling comprehension of easily understandable earthly things, but not for telling us how the Divine Being looks, who is beyond the grasp of human faculties. Thus where we need them the most, similes fail us. According to the "alankAra shAstra", the entity cited as an example (upamAnam) should be superior to that which is being compared (upamEyam). Thus, when we say that an elephant resembles a hillock, the hillock is definitely superior in size to the elephant. Applying this standard, we find absolutely nothing that can be cited as a simile, as far as the Lord is concerned.

Notwithstanding this difficulty, Azhwars, Acharyas and the VEda Purusha use upamAnams freely to describe the Lord. We find them addressing Emperuman as "Kadal VaNnan" (one whose colour is that of the sea), "kovvai chevvAi" (one whose lips are red as the kOvai fruit), "KAyA malar vaNNan" (one whose colour resembles that of the kAyAm poo), "MEghashyAmam"(one whose complexion is that of the rain-bearing cloud),"ThingaLum Adityanum ezhundArpOl amkaN irandum" (one whose eyes resemble the Sun and the Moon), "Pacchai mA malai pOl mEni"( a huge torso resembling a green hill) "PavaLa vAi"( lips red as the coral), "Kamala chengaN"(lotus-like eyes)<"tasya yatA kapyAsam pundarIkamEva akshiNI" (His eyes resemble a lotus in full bloom), "nayanAbdi sEthu:" (the nose resembles a check-dam for the  eyes overflowing with mercy), "Kamala padam" (feet resembling the lotus), etc.

Azhwars are fully aware that there is nothing in this world that can be held out as an adequate simile, while describing the Lord. He is the matchless Paramapurusha, the likes of whom the world has never seen or is likely to see too. While everything in this world is made of mundane matter, characterized by a mixture of Sattva, Rajas and Thamas, the Lord is the personification of Suddha Satthva, the embodiment of Divine Purity, beauty, delicacy, virility and countless other auspicious attributes. There is thus absolutely nothing we can compare Him with. There is nothing in this world, by understanding which we can comprehend Him.

If this were so, we might ask, "Why then go to the trouble of offering a simile at all, if nothing could be found which reflects His stature adequately?"

Azhwars, blessed with wonderful wisdom ("mayarvara madi nalam") to comprehend and fully appreciate the Divine nature and attributes, are in the position of a mature adult, who is conceptually clear about a particular thing, with the compulsion of clarifying the same to the ignorant infant. They are hard-put to describe the Paramapurusha and His magnificence, finding words terribly inadequate to convey what they see and feel. The sublimity of spiritual experience has to be felt and no amount of description can give the listener a true view of what is involved. Sugar has to be tasted for finding out what sweetness is, and no verbal or written account can reflect the particular taste, to a person who is unaware of it.

However, Azhwars' experience is so enthralling that they cannot remain without sharing it with their blighted brethren. Their bliss is so uncontainable that they have to tell somebody. And their mercy for those caught in the vicious cycle of samsara is so overwhelming that they cannot remain without attempting to redeem errant humanity with an account of what they are missing. Having experienced both ephemeral delights and eternal bliss, Azhwars are keen that the blundering human beings renounce the former in favour of the latter type of Anandam. 

It is this fervent wish to share their bliss with us that makes Azhwars resort to similes, however inadequate, to describe to us the tirumEni and Atma guNAs of the Lord. However, once they employ these upamAnams, the realisation strikes them that comparison with such mundane things does gross injustice to the Lord, and they are struck by remorse at this perceived apachAram.

For instance, Sri Nammazhwar likens the Lord's feet to a lotus at innumerable places in Tiruvaimozhi. Further, the brilliance of the Lord's tirumEni is also compared to the luminescence of pure gold by not only Sri Nammazhwar, but by others too-("ANi sempon mEni endAi", "Pon mEni kaNdEn", "HiraNmaya:Purusha:","RukmAbham svapna dhee gamyam" etc.).

However, having made the comparison, Sri Nammazhwar realises that a mere mundane bloom can never equal the beauty, softness, delicacy, reddishness and exquisiteness of the Lord's tiruvadi. The flower can never presume to serve as an example of even one single aspect of the tiruvadi, and such a comparison can only serve to undermine its glory. Nor can the yellow metal ever equal the splendour and radiance of the Lord's tirumEni, which exceeds by far the combined brilliance of a thousand Suns shining simultaneously. The shine of gold would pale into insignificance before the Lord's incandescence, as a mere oil lamp before sunlight. The ineffectual nature of such comparisons is brought out by the following Tiruvaimozhi pasuram-

"Katturaikkil TAmarai nin kaN pAdam kai ovvA
  Sutturaittha nan pon un tirumEni oLi ovvAdu
 Otturaitthu ivvulagu unnai pugazhvellAm perumpAlum
 PatturaiyAi purkkendrE kAttumAl ParanjOtI!".

The limited beauty and brilliance of lotus and gold respectively are no match for the limitless natural splendour and magnificence of the Lord, and any resort to such similes would only end up showing the Lord in poor light, says Sri Nammazhwar. 

 There is another aspect to the usage of similes by Azhwars. Whenever they find some exquisite aspect of Creation, like a lotus in full bloom, the Sun blazing in all his splendour, the green meadow with early-morning dew topping the blades of grass, reefs of coral under the sea blazing red, beautiful ornaments of gold and silver blinding the eye with their brilliance, etc., Azhwars are reminded immediately of some aspect of the Lord's divya mangaLa vigraham or divine attribute. These may not reflect the Lord's glory in its entirety, but serve as reminders, however insignificant, of His matchless magnificence. When a child asks us, "How big are the Himalayas?", we are indeed at a loss for something with which the loftiness, length and breadth of the magnificent peaks can be compared, and end up telling the child lamely," Look at the four -storeyed house opposite. The Himalayas are a thousand times as tall.". 

Though this description may not do justice to the Himalayas, it would serve to give the child some impression of the real thing. Most of the similes used for describing the Lord are similar, and serve to give us only an inkling of His real nature and stature. 

When the versatile VEda Purusha himself is reported to be at a loss for words to describe even a single glorious attribute of Emperuman and returns vanquished in his endeavour ("YatO vAchO nivartantE, aprApya manasA saha"), what can such poor similes do to project any aspect of the Lord's perfect physique or magnificent nature?

 It is perhaps with this in view that the adage "Comparison is odious" was coined.

Srimate Sri LakshmINrsimha divya paduka sevaka SrivanSatakopa Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

Dasan, sadagopan

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



--------------------------------------------------------------
           - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
To Post a message, send it to:   bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Group Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bhakti-list
Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/
 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/