part 2 - Re: 3-Alwars by Sri Bhuvarahacharya
From the Bhakti List Archives
Sampath Rengarajan • Thu Nov 13 1997 - 07:15:58 PST
On Nov 11, 10:40am, Mani Varadarajan wrote:
> Subject: Re: 3-Alwars by Sri Bhuvarahacharya
>
> Sri Anbil Ramaswamy writes:
> >
> > I do not know how he says that the Alwars were just suffering humans like
any
> > of us but but maybe were endowed with superior vision.
> >
> > Swami Desika clearly says that the Alwars were HIS own incarnations
(Abhinava
> > Dasaavataaram Panni - Vide Rahasya Traya Saram)
> >
>
> One needs to dig deeper and more broadly into our pUrvAcArya's
> works to see how they viewed the Alvars.
>
> Regarding Desikan himself: his statement from Guruparampara Saaram
> that the Alvars were a new daSa avatAra (10 incarnations) of the
> Lord needs to be properly understood in context. Desikan is saying
> nothing different from Sri Bhuvarahachariar Swamy. The Alvars
> were graced by the entrace of the Lord into their hearts, cutting
> asunder their ignorance and showing Him to them as He truly is.
Coming to the reference from swami desikan it was
suggested indirectly that swami desikan had meant the lord entering the
bodies of azwars once they are born as baddha jivas and not as
thiru avathAram of lord HIMself. From the the tamil i learnt for
several years i can only get a meaning from the lines of swami
desikan "parAngusa parakAlAthi roobaththAlE abinavamAga oru
dasAvathAraththaip paNNI", that the lord did take incarnation of
dasAvathAram. the word paNNi means "DID" or "having done". Swami
desikan didnot say "dasAvathAramAga pugunthu" ie he didnot say
that he "entered" or pugunthu in the form of a dasA vathAram in 10
azwar's bodies.
I would request everyone to refer to Sri vangipuram swamigaL vyAkyA
nam for Srimad rahasya tray sAram of Swami desikan where these appears.
It is important to note that Sri vangipuram swamigaL has not only made
vyAkyAnams for srimad rahasya trya sAram but also for several swami desikan
slokams and most importantly swami desikan prabhandam. He has also
written vyAkyAnams on Lord Oppiliappan's suprapAdham, prapatti and
mangaLam. He also had thorough and indepthe knowledge of poorvAchAryAL's
work that is being mentioned above as the prerequisite. People wanting
to conclude on what they think as swami desikan might have meant
must first read these vyAkyAnams of Sri vangipuram swamigaL.
Coming to thirup paNAzwAr it is uncomfortable to note
that there was a total
misconception based on lack of comprehensive understanding of
swami desikan's works was presented such that swami desikan
somehow implied that "thirup pAnan" who simply appeared as the
(avathAram of Sri Krishna - as per our belief)
and who was not born in the normal way a
baddha jivan would be born, was a mere baddha jivan. One must
read Swami desika prabhandam in detail if they want to draw some
conclusion as to how Swami desikan considred azwar's avatharam and
aruLich cheyALs especially about thirup pANazwAr. This makes me
feel that i must write about the 3 pAsurams on "nam paNa NaTHAN"
that ends swami desikan's prabhadham "amirtha swathini" in great
detail, in saraNagathi journal at a later date. *If commanded* by
Sri Sadagopan and Sri Anbil Ramaswami, I will consider it as a
bAgyam to present the numerous insights and further and related
quotes of swami desikan on thirup pAnAzwAr. It will run
into several posts and hence it will be written in the
SDDS journal "saraNagathi" that is blessed by achAryALs
and bagwathALs such as Sri Anbil Ramaswamy and Sri Sadagopan.
> In any case, Sri Bhuvarahachariar is an esteemed authority
> on Divya Prabandham and the traditional commentaries thereon.
> Very, very few scholars today can match his erudition.
>
> Mani
>
>
The following arguments are presented for everyone in this forum
understand as to what is popularity and scholarship , erudition
in tamil and being well known in tamil
circles. It may be helpful for thsoe who enjoy
azwar poetry and would love to discuss them in this forum. One
may also want to expand their understanding of tamil circle and
tamil works and
understand as who is considered the most popular tamil author for
the TAMIL language. It would be beneficial also to know as to
what he delivered about azwars when commanded by Lord Arangan. I
would not otherwise present the argument in this way. It is
impolite to imply to someone and ask them indirectly to accept
someother on
the basis of mere popularity in certain circle alone. If such was
not meant i aplogise for presenting this interesting observation in
this way. For now, I may have to
take the same line that was taken earlier ie.. the line of
popularity erudition and nyAnam in tamil and azwar poetry.
Sri kambanAtAzwar was ordered by Lord Arangan when he went
to do samarpanam of his work Srimad kamba rAmayanam. Lord Arangan
asked him "did you deliver about sadagOpan (nammAzwAr ?)". The
result was that as instructed by Lord Arangan Sri Kamba nAtAzwAR
delivered sadagOpa ranthAthi.
Srimad kamba nAttAzwar is the master of all the tamil works
deliverd prior to his time and i donot think Sri kamba nAttAzwAr is
any less to anyone who are born then and are living now in 20th
century. I am aware of many tamil scholars who are proficient in
both drAvida vEdam and poorvachAryAL's work. I studied my
education in tamil medium and am exposed to the tamil community to
a large extent including the "kambar sangam", that did so much
research into Sri Kamban's work.
The paguththaRivu kazhagam and dravida movement in tamil
nadu considred Sri Kamban as the forefather of all the tamil works
that were delivered so far and to be delviered as Sri kamaban set
new standards in nadai and ilakkiyam itself. Infact dravidian
leaders such as Sri M.KarunAnithi (the CM of tamil nadu) and
Justice Mohan, Justice Ismail (former chief justice of madras high
court) were all one time president or thalaivar of kambar sangam.
The reason i am bringing this point is that even non religious and
non hindu persons were so much devoted to researching Sri Kamban's
work in Tamil country. Hence if some one thinks of proving
something on the basis of how popular a person in certain
community, one must see without fail Sri Kamban and his known
credentials in THE TAMIL SOCIETY. ie., If we see on the basis of
who is considred by all current tamil scholars in tamil circles as
the most knowledgable person in tamil poetry and as well as all
tamil works including azwar poems one must acknowledge without fail
that it is Sri Kamban. Whether or not our religion accepts Sri Kamban's
vyAkyAnams, it is important to note as to what he has delviered
about the azwars' birth when he was commanded by Lord Arangan
HIMself.
I donot mean to disrespect Sri Boovaraga swami in anyway.
I seek hs forgiveness if these arguments that are merely
presented to counter someone's argument that was presented above
in some way. If it may be understood by someone as it
it implies swami in anyway i seek their forgivenss as well.
I am still a student of prabhandam
and will learn inner meanings of prabhandams from many scholars
such as him. However, it is
argued in implication in this forum that one may consider some
presentations
merely on the basis of how the presenter is well known in certain
community. The community to be considred is TAMIL community in
chennai and Sri Kamban is the scholar in azwAr pAsurams and was
even commanded by lord Arangan to deliver on nammazwar. Lord
ARANGAN DIDNOT ASK MANY OF OUR ACHARYALS TO DELIVER ON NAMMAZWAR
BUT ASKED SRI KAMABAN. I CONSIDER THIS AS THE STRENGTH AND THE
MOST PORPULAR BASE erudition FOR THE PRESENTER OF SADAGOPAR ANTHATHI
OUR SRI KAMBANATTAZWAR. We still think he is unshakable for years
to come.
Having said that one can take a glance at the above pasuram
from sadagopar anthAthi.
In sadagopar anthAthi that he
delivered that
"bAvagath thAlthan thiru avathAram pathinonRip
poovagth thAR aRiyAtha vaNNam thannaiyE pugaznthu
nAvagath thAR kavi Ayiram pAdi nayanthaLiththa
kOvagath thAR kanRi enpuRath thAr sey kuRRavElkaLE "
sadagOpar anthAthi 78
it is said that the Lord took 10
thiruavathAram (AndAL is boomi devith thAyAr's avathAram) and
without these mortals of boologam knowing it (boo vagath thAr
aRiyAtha vaNNam). ie., at the time of HIS thiru avathAram as 10
azwArs, HE took such thiru avathArams without the booLoga vaasis
knowing it. And then Sri kamba nAAttAzwar goes on to say,
thannaiyE pugaznthu" ie by taking such avathAramas azwars the lord
praised HIMself through these pAsurams.
My final observation:
We all see our many current day achAryAs from their poorvasaramam. Once they
become achAryAL we stop calling them baddha jivAs even though we may have seen
their life as similar to a baddha jiva's life in their initial days of
poorvasramam. When we discuss their birth (and life) we still call as
avathAram and we no
more address them as baddha jivAtma. Same way even if we assume that the
Lord has simply chosen to enter their bodu only at the time of their birth,
or at the time of their appearance, we all know that they surrendered at the
feet of the lord and attained
mOksham. The moment the Lord supposedly entered their body they become
mukthAL. To my knowledge once they started delivering these pasurams
after becoming mukthAL, they never went back to their life of so called
baddha jivatams. Even if they were mere baddha jivAs prior to birth, when we
address them now after listening to their pAsurams that show us the path, can
we still call them as baddha jivAs ? Can't we not call them the same way as
similar to our achAryAs (who infact worship these azwArs) and address their
birth as avathAram whatever their poorvAsramam was ? I respected Sri Sudarsanam
iyengar when he conveyed me the same view of thenAchArya sampradhAyam with more
thorough analysis of swami deikan's work than presented earlier,
which i am not sharing here.
I discussed the same briefly with Sri VN Gopala desikachAr and he came
out with very eloquent explanations of the same point as to how our vadakali
sampradhAyam
accepts azwars as avathArams of Lord. *Some* of us mere chElAs and we still
have
to learn from these scholars prior to concluding many things ourselves.
Finally i apologise to Sri Mani and many others if anyone is offended by these
observations.
Sri Kamba nAttAzwar thiruvadiukaLE saraNam
thirup pAN azwar thiruvadikaLE saraNam
adiyEn
Sampath Rengi
- Next message: Parthasarati Dileepan: "Re: Azhwars Nitya suris or baddha jivatmas"
- Previous message: V. Sadagopan: "Sri Badrinarayan's question on the absence of palasruthi"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
