Explanation on ' Pitambara'
From the Bhakti List Archives
• May 23, 1996
Dear Bhagavatas. While posting about Periyalwar, I had mentioned that " as the processsion emerged out there appeared on the sapphire skies, Lord Vishnu in his proverbial pink attire ( Pitambara) " Mr Mani asked and rightly- " Is not Pitambara a yellow-colored garment? This is how Krishna is normally pictured in the devotional paintings I have seen. " I give below my PROVISIONAL explanation which I had sent in a private mail to Mr. Mani. I am posting this in the net because Mr. Mani had raised it in the net. I shall be back with a final reply as soon as I get a clarification from my Acharyas who have mentioned on the lines stated by me DASOHAM Anbil Ramaswamy Subj: Missing digests#2.71 and 2.75 Date: 96-05-18 23:17:27 EDT From: VVijay1068 To: mani@srirangam.esd.sgi.com Dear Mani, I have not received Bhakti Digests # 2.71 and 2.75. I will be much obliged if you can arrange to transmit them to me to make my collection complete. Thanks. Regarding Pitambaram, the word ' Pita ' does mean yellow but I have heard scholors saying in Kalakshepams that it is not the kind of yellow we come across with reference to ' Manjal Veshti' used during marriages or by those visiting Tirupathi. These are deep yellow in color. Yellow has several hues, one that is whiteish ( like artificial Pattu ) or natural original that is slightly pinkish which goes by the name of ' Patala pita '. A similar difference can be noticed as between cultured pearl which is bright white in color and the real original pearl of a slightly different ' shade '. Also, it can be seen that the Lord is described as wearing pure white - vide "SUKLA AMBARA DHAARAM Vishnum Sasi Varnam Chatur Bhujam". In this context, the word Sukla meas ' White'. In fact any color would suit the Lord as can be seen from the colorful attire he is donned in temples - like even Green as in Sri Parthasarathy temple. Anyway, this is only a provisional reply. I did not wish to rush with an explanation without consulting our Acharyas in Srirangam . As H.H. the Jeeyar is presently in Sancharam, I cannot reach him rightaway. The process naturally takes time, but I can assure you that I will certainly get back to you on the subject as soon as I get a clarification. I would once again request you NOT to raise these points in the Public Net since I would not be able to reply at once because of the verification process and LACK OF MY IMMEDIATE RESPONSE PENDING CLARIFICATION MIGHT BE MISTAKEN BY THE GENERAL READERSHIP. I would appreciate if you address your doubts and concerns by PRIVATEMAIL. I assure that they will receive as prompt a consideration as any public mail would. I am sure you will appreciate my position. I would appreciate your feedback on my postings on Andal. If there are any corrections to be made, I will obliged if anyone were to point out. And, any words of appreciation would certainly enthuse me into improving my contributions. With best wishes, Dasoham Anbil Ramaswamy
- Next message: VVijay1068_at_aol.com: "e. mail dated May 22, 1996 from Jaganath Bharadwaj"
- Previous message: N. R. Srinivasa Raghavan: "Re: bhakti-digest V2 #82"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]