Search:
Bhakti List Archives

Re: Desika, nyaasa tilakam

From the Bhakti List Archives

Madhavakkannan • July 2, 1998 


SrI:

Dearest Sri Ubhaya Vedantha Vachaspathi (Sri Mani), 

Hat off to you for your meanings in both Sanskrit and in Tamil. Your
interest, your depth of references, knowledge, enjoyment, is simply
excellent. A true ubhaya Vedanthi. A good example in Tamil and in Sanskrit.


You are a model for youngsters; a model for those who are born/brought up
outside India (why outside? even in India) and are not exposed to our
traditions at all, while you have been blessed by Divya Dampati to have
such great depths of involvement.  

I take this opportunity to bring another point of attention to my Dearest
Sisters and Brothers that it is mainly parents who influence to a very
large extent for inculcating such interests in our children,- not possible
just overnight -.

Also, it is not right on our part to expect our boys (and girls) to do
sandhyaavandhanam and recite slokas regularly, when we can walk off to our
office with no such regular, daily prayers/Sandhyavandhanams. Set an
example to kids; (e.g :Hang the shirt in front of the children; they will
automatically follow us). No point in waking up, when they reach teens and
are beyond control.  

Just a loud thinking. Not that I know. Nothing is of course in our hands;
It is He who does all. Let us pray to Him for His grace on us.

Ram Ram

Regards

Narayana dAsan madhavakkannan
 ----------
> From: Mani Varadarajan 
> To: bhakti@lists.best.com
> Subject: Re: Desika, nyaasa tilakam
> Date: Thursday, July 02, 1998 2:43 AM
> 
> On Sun, Jun 21, 1998 at 11:27:15PM -0400, Sadagopan wrote:
> > Dear Sri Mani Varadarajan :
> > 
> > 1 . To the best of my judgement , "OM " here does 
> > not represent PraNavam per se , but what it
> > stands for in the deeper ananlysis. 
> > 
> > It is here " the supreme expression of 
> > acceptance " , the  symbolic notation for 
> > the Divya Dampathi's acceptance
> > of the BharanyAsam request of Swami Desikan .
> > 
> 
> Dear Sadagopan Maama,
> 
> Here is a belated reply.  I agree, it is clear here
> that "Om" has a double meaning.  But it also appears 
> clear that Desika is cleverly revealing that the word 
> "Om" is an integral part of the mUla mantra by using 
> the praNava as a pun in this sloka. In other words, 
> the acharya's indirect meaning is perhaps actually
> more his intended meaning!
> 
> Desika's son Varadacharya comments that this sloka clearly
> brings out the direct meaning of the ashTAkshara mantra
> (mUlamantra) in the same order as the words of the
> mantra.  If I read the commentary right, the explanation
> is as follows: 
> 
> "Om" in both the sloka and mantra refers to 
> one's being a sesha to the Lord, a part of the Infinite
> that serves to enhance his glory.  "namaH", according
> to the sloka, refers to one's complete dependence on 
> Him and no one else.  The word "nArAyaNAya" in the 
> fourth or dative case refers to the highest goal 
> of existence being service to Him.
> 
>    [ ataH paraM mUlamantrasthapadakrameNa Seshatvasahitam
>      pAratantryaM prakASya nArAyaNa-padastha-caturthyabhipretaM
>      kainkaryarUpaM purushArtham api viSadayati Om iti | ]
> 
> Sri Madurantakam T.E. Veeraraghavachariar Swami, in
> his Tamil comments, refers to "Om" meaning directly
> the praNava:
> 
>    mUlamantrattiluLLa mUnRu padangaLaalE muRaiyE
>    sEshatvamum, svaatantrya nivruttiyum, bhagavatkainkaryamum
>    prakaasikkinRana.  avaRRai idil visadamaaka aruLicceykiRaar.
> 
>    lakshmIkaantanaakiya SrIranganaathanE, praNavattil unakkE
> -> seshamivvaatmaa enRadai adE sollaalE "Om" enRu isainduLLEn.
>                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>    "yaanE-enRanadE" enRuvarum ahankaara-mamakaarangaLE ajnaanangaL
>    anaittukkum mudal vittu.  avaRRait tuRandEn, nilaininRa
>    eNNiRanda ellaiyilaada vibhUtigaLaiyum guNangaLaiyumudaiyIrgaL
>    nIyum tirumagaLum.  ungaLukku ekkaalattilum antaranga 
>    kainkaryangaL ceyyakkadavEn.  ivaRRai adiyEn aayaasaminRiyE
>    peRumpadiyaaka aruLavEndum.
> 
> 	[ entire comment on this sloka (v.30, nyAsa tilakam) ]
> 
> I think this sloka, along with the commentaries, demonstrates
> that the praNavam as OmkAra has been cited in a publicly
> recitable stotra by a pUrvAcArya.
> 
> Mani
> 
>