rAmAnusa nURRanthAdhi – 99 – Part 1

SrI:  SrImathE SatakOpAya nama:  SrImathE rAmAnujAya nama:  SrImath varavaramunayE nama:

Full Series

<< previous (idumE iniya suvarggaththil?)

Introduction (given by maNavALa mAmunigaL)

When said ‘nammai nam vasaththE vidumE – manamE naiyal’, isn’t this the place having people in abundance who reject or misinterpret vEdhas, who remove intellect when there is tendency to gain it; amudhanAr replies – you see, after emperumAnAr incarnated they all became losers.

Introduction (given by piLLailOkam jIyar)

In the previous pAsuram as he talked about staunch faith as he said whether after surrendering to emperumAnArnammai nam vasaththE vidumE’?

that is true, but isn’t this the place ruled by the trouble makers who reject or misinterpret and badly affect the vEdhas that give true knowledge and also practices in accordance to that knowledge?

After emperumAnAr who due to his ability to grant all the destinies  and so is called ‘kaRpakam’ (desire fulfilling tree that grants all the wishes) incarnated in this big world, those in the path of such lowly philosophies were lost along with their roots, says amudhanAr.

{
Note: There are 11 philosophies that reject vEdhas (or, give meanings completely outside of vEdhas), and 6 philosophies that misinterpret vEdhas – this is as shown by nampiLLai in eedu.
In this pAsuram, 9 philosophies are specified, as shown by commentator – we consider them as upalakShaNam for rest of the philosophies.
Sankarar of those days was vaishNava adhvaithi; vaLLalAr et al were Saiva advaithis (follow Saiva Agamam but do not accept form, characteristics etc. of Sivan); nAyanmArs were Saiva viSishtAdhvaithis (they accept that there is form and characteristics for Sivan); AzhvArs and AchAryasSrIvaishNava viSishtAdhvaithis);
}

thaRkach chamaNarum sAkkiyap pEygaLum thAzh sadaiyOn
soRkARRa sOmbarum sUniyavAdharum nAn maRaiyum
niRkak kuRumbu sey neesarum mANdanar neeNilaththE
poRkaRpakam em irAmAnusa muni pOndha pinnE                     –  99

Listen

Word by word meaning (given by maNavALa mAmunigaL)

As said in ‘tharukkinAl samaN seydhu [periya thirumozhi – 2.1.7]’ (~samaNa (kShapaNa) philosophy just based on tharkkam (arguments)),

tharkkam – maintaining their philosophy by the ability to do tharkkam (debates/suppositions),
chamaNarum –  Arhathar (jaina), and,
as said in ‘chamaNarum sAkkiyarum’,  when counting those who reject vEdhas, then these are there for the 2nd finger in the counting, such neighboring/thOL theeNdi (rubbing the shoulder, standing next to each other; are together for bad ways) –
pEy – like ghosts, not knowing when to hold on and when to leave, but always holding on to whatever wrong they hold on to,
sAkkiyargaLum – baudhdhar, and,
thinking that the world should worship him as eeSvaran, for that,
thAzh sadaiyOn – with full of long matted hair, performed thapas as means, and by the permission of emperumAn spread the mOha SAsthram – that rudhran’s
sol – words of such Agamam (works), (pAsupadham)
sOmbarum – Saivas that are of thAmasa (lazy, lethargic, smear ashes from crematorium, etc.) characteristics
kaRRa – who learned that Agamam;
and, those who say that there is no pramANam, pramEyam, or pramAthA,
sUniya vAdharum – that are the mAdhyamikas who argue that everything is non-existent,
and unlike them,
nAl – that which is of four types, viz rig, etc.,
maRaiyum – while accepting such vEdhas as authoritative reference, as said by ‘thishtathsu vEdhashu’ (even in the presence of vEdhas),
niRka – even when it is present,
saying wrong meanings that are not related to vEdhas in any way,
kuRumbu sey – and setting vEdhas aside (in to a corner),
neesarum – the lowly mis-interpreters,
mANdanar – were all finished
irAmAnusa muni pOndha pin – after the arrival of emperumAnAr
neeL nilaththE – in to the big world,
pon – (gold) who is very desirable
kaRpakam – and very generous like kaRpakam (tree that gives anything wished for),
em – and who helped us (too) learn it (vEdhas, the debates) correctly.
Through SrIbAshyam he won each of such philosophies and subdued them (asathkalpam), and so they lost, is the point.

sAkkiyar is – sAkthEyar.
When mAdhyamikar  are also in the group of sAkkiya, it is mentioned separately here due to its terrible ways.

vyAkyAnam

thaRkach chamaNarum – As said in ’tharukkinAl samaN seydhu [periya thirumozhi – 2.1.7]’ (~samaNa (kShapaNa) philosophy just based on tharkkam (arguments)), unlike using the arguments that go with that of authoritative references, creating a philosophy based on arguments matching their own liking, and nurturing that – such Arhathar (jaina);

Or,

thaRkach chamaNarum – are those who say that the reason (for everything) is minute atom (paramANu),  and naiyAyikar and vaiSEshikar who say ‘pAshANa kalpA mukthi:’ (losing everything and becoming like stone is mOksham), and the jaina who reject vEdham and its path;

Saying in thamizh as chamaNar for kshapaNakar.

Since naiyAyikar and vaiSeshikar mainly use tharkkam,  it is reasonable to refer to them also as thaRkar.

sAkkiyap pEygaLum – when counting those who reject vEdhas, then these are there for the 2nd finger in the counting, such neighboring one (thOL theeNdi (rubbing the shoulder, standing next to it – are together for bad ways) – who do not have any sense of what is to be followed and what is to be rejected, graheetha grahi (holding on to their understood arguments (without thinking)), that is – baudhdhar, and,

sAkkiyar  is – sAkya:

jainar are – As said in ‘angeekruthyathu Sabhdha bangi kusruthim syadhasthi  nAsthi adhikAm viSvam thvath vibhavam jagajjinamathEnEkAnthamAchakshathE’ (can accept the (wrong) arguments seven in number in combination of something as present, not-present, and cannot say definitively (e.g., a thing is present in one place, but it is not present in another place, etc) – this is how jaina establish about the world), in the form of cause/effect and source of action/result (kArya kAraNa) (e.g., mud is cause (no change in it), and pot/cup, etc., are effects (changed to become these items),  jagath (world) would be – having vikAram (bhinnam/changes) and not having vikAram,  eternal  (mud is always existing in some form) and not-eternal (as the resulting pot may break and become mud), and, is true and untrue,  and,

as said in ‘sva dhEhamAnAhyAth mAnO mOhAth dhEhAbhimAnina: – krimikeetAdhi paryantham dhEha panjara vardhina:’  (in the body that is a cage, there are worms etc., living; AthmA would take the size/form of the body it takes, since AthmA is affected by the effects of body),  AthmAs would be having size/form as the body that is based on each of their karmas, is their philosophy, and,

as said in ‘prANijAthamahim santha: manOvAkkAya karmabhi: dhigambarAScharanthyEva yOginA brahmachAriNa: ((they are) great in mind, speech, and body, and are bachelors, quite naked)   – mayUrapinja hasthAsthE krutha veerAsanAthikA: (holding a bunch of peacock feathers, sitting on veerAsanam (posture)) – pANipAthrEshu bhunjAna: (they don’t eat out of a plate/vessel, but by hand only), lUnakESAScha maunina:  (they tie their hair by picking each strand at a time, and they do not talk but keep mum) – sadhA kshapaNakAchArya  kruth manthrA dhurAsathA: – gurUpathishta mArggENa gyAna karma samuchchayAth (they think that knowledge and karma (deed) together give mOksham which is as their guru taught to them) – mOkShO bandha virakthasya jAyathE bhuvi kasyachith’ (in these ways one gets mOksham and avoids samsAram (being in this material world)),  by maladhArnAhimsA etc., (applying feces on their body, etc.,), and by knowledge of AthmA, they are liberated from material realm, and keep going (no concept of reaching) in upper path – that is mOksham,  is how they would say, whatever comes to their mouth, in detail, such contradictions to vEdhas.

Saying chamaNar – is including chArvAkar (smart speeches) (lOkAyatha philosophy (they say believe only what is seen in the world).  They were included as chamaNar in eedu (vyAkyAnam to thiruvAimozhi) as well.

They (chArvAkar) are – as said in ‘prathivyApasthEjOvaryurithi thathvAni’ (only accept pruthvi, appu, thEjas, and, vAyu as thathvams, and not accept AkASam, and such bhUthAntharams)they say that thathvam (truth/existence), is pruthvi, etc., such four only; they say that AkAsam, etc., such bhUthams do not exist, and

as said in ‘thEbhyaS chaithanya kiNvAdhibhyOmadha Sakthivath’ (like alcoholic beverage (surA bAnam) having some power in it which is not visible, but that power which we get when we consume), and, ‘kramukapala thAmbUla dhaLa avayavAdhishu prathyEka vidhyamAnasyApi ragasyEvAvaya vini samyOga viSEshAdh dhEhArambaka paramANu samSlEsha viSEshA dhEva dhEha chaithanya AvirbhbhAva na anupanna:’,  like how if we take the surA drink in a pot and keep it in sunlight, then it would undergo changes (vikAram) of movement, etc. which seem to appear automatically by itself,  and

like how when biting together betel leaves, pAkku (betel nut), and suNNAmbu (lime calcium paste), a new item would form, in the mix of pruthvi, appu, thEjas, and vAyu, a chaithanyam  (knowledge) would form,  and,

as said in ‘prathyakSha gamyamEvAthi nAsthyadhrushta madhrushtatha:  (only what is seen is truly existing and there is nothing existing that cannot be seen) – adhrushtavAdhibhiSchAbinA: na adhrushta dhrushtamuchyathE – kvAbi dhrushtamadhrushtanchE thadhrushtram pruthak Evatham – nithyAdhrushtam kathamsathsyAth SaSaSrungAthi sannibam – nakalpyau sukha dhu:kabhyAm dharmA dharmauparairiha – svabhAvEna sukhee dhu:kee bhavEnnAnyaththi kAraNam – SikinaSchakrayEth kOvAkOkilAnka: prakUjayEth – svabhAva vyadhirEkENa vidhyathE nAsya kAraNam – iha lOkAth parOnAnya ssvargO asthi naragOnavA’ (there is no other world than this, there is nothing present as heaven or hell),

there is only the meaning of those which can be seen physically, there is nothing else; the happiness and sadness of that AthmA (product of pruthak, etc.) are the heaven and hell; there is no other good or bad karmas, or the rights or wrongs created by them, and

as said in ‘mOkshasthu  maraNamaprANa samgyavAyu nivarththanam, athasthadharththan nAyAsam karththum ahathi paNditha:’ (if breath goes away then that is mOksham), that death which is understood is only the mOksham, there is nothing else out there – – and so they would confuse by saying a line of arguments contradicting Sruthi.

{ Note:
Typical arguments among philosophies are in the following: what is AthmA, what is the cause of world, what are thathvams, what is pramANam by which we learn,  what is the means for getting mOksham, and what is mOksham.
}

naiyAyikar vaiSEshikar are –  As said in ‘prathyakSha: anumAna upamAna SabdhA: pramANAni’ (What is seen, understood based on inference, are examples, sound (heard from elders) are the authoritative references), and, ‘thrithA pramANam prathyakSham anumAnAam AgamAdhithi, thribhErithai: pramANaisthu jagath karthA avagamyathE (using the authoritative references we need to understand the cause of creation of the world) – thasmAth adhuktha karmANi kuryAth thasyaiva thrupthayE (the karmas said in SAsthram, what the brahmam says  to do, should be done for the satisfaction of that brahmam), bhakthyai va cha archaneeyOsau bhagavAn paramESvara: (that paramESvaran can also be worshiped by devotion),  thath prasAdhEna mOkshOssyAth karaNO paramAthmana: (by the blessing of that brahmam itself, mOksham would be attained) – karaNOparamEdhyAthmA pAshANavath avasththitha:’, (losing everything, being like a stone, is mOksham),

that is, prathyaksham (what is seen), etc., the four are authoritative reference, and since Sabdham (heard from elders; SAsthram) is based on prior learning (anumAnam), only the rest, that is, prathyakshAm etc., are authoritative references;  and upAdhAna kAraNam (cause, like mud that would become pot) of world are paramANu (most fundamental unsplittable element), and, nimiththa kAraNam (instrumental cause only, like a potter) is AnumAnika eeSvaran (can know eeSvaran by anumAnam (inference) only);  samsAram is eternal, by eeSvarOpAsthi (by meditating on eeSvaran), happiness and sorrows would go away and become pAshANa kalpam (become like a stone) which is the mOksham – is how they say showing such arguments in limelight (uthprEskha).

(akshapAdhar, kaNAdhar belong to naiyAyikar vaiSEshikar).

(They gave an example as proof of their argument – like how small strings are joined together to form a cloth, in the same way, small, unsplittable, “parmANu”s would join together and so on and form the world;  emperumAnAr posed – in the given example, the strings join only on two sides with other strings, and there are some parts of the string that are not touching any strings; so in a cloth there are parts that are not joined, and parts that are joined; so when two “paramANu”s join, there should be parts that touch and not touch; is that the case?

They replied – let it be so. emperumAnAr then asked – that means a paramANu has a part that is touching and another part that is not touching – that means a paramANu must be size enough to split. Do you accept that? They replied  – no, paramANu cannot be split; in that case, by theory, paramAnu cannot join to make the world was emperumAnAr’s conclusion to them).

thAzh sadaiyOn sol kaRRa sOmbarum – That the whole world should worship him by (wrongly) thinking of him as eeSvaran, and to qualify for that, wearing full long matted hair, being in the form of penance (sAdhanam), as said by ‘mOha SAsthrANi kAraya’ (you shall create the mOha SAsthram), by the permission of emperumAn, he spread mOha SAsthram – such rudhran’s words of religious text (Agamam) is what they learn, the ones who are having very much the thAmasa qualities; they are the pAsupathar.

In this pAsuram, after talking about baudhahar, the pAsupathar are mentioned – this is to show that they are also those who reject vEdhas;

As said in ‘pradhAna kAraNathvAbhyugama sAmyAth –  SAnkya nirAsana ananthara bhAvithvE pASupadha nirAsansya prApthErabhi – saugathA Arhatha nirAsana anantharam thath prathikShEpa: thasya athyantha vEdha bAhyathva gyApanAya krutha:’  (Like Sankya philosophy, pAsupathar also accept that prakruthi (pradhAnam / material) is the source of world (upAdhAna kAraNAm (like a mud used for pot, the world); both accept  an eeSvaran as nimiththa kAraNam (like a potter); so why jaina and baudhdha are talked about and only after that the pAsupathar, by vEdha vyAsar? Since sAnkyar is an incarnation of emperumAn (to confuse away those who are not following vEdhas), if pAsupadhar is said next, then one might think that may be pAsupathar is also emperumAn; so to avoid that, pAsupathar is said after jaina and bhaudhdha.)

– so divined SruthaprakASikAchAryar, when explaining (sangathi) for the (SrIbhAshya) adhikaraNam named ‘pathyurasAmanjasyAth’;

(similar to how maNavALa mAmunigaL  in upadhEsa raththina mAlai included madhurakavi AzhvAr  along with ANdAL and emperumAnAr for their being subservient to their AchAryan);

They (pAsupathar) are – pradhAnam (prakruthi / material realm) is upAdhAna kAraNam (source) for world, nimiththa kAraNam (like potter) is Agama sidhdha eeSvaran (rudhran); and

as said in ‘mudhrikA shatka thathvagya: paramudhrA viSaradha:’ (one must wear six marks in their body, etc.,; such person does not have next birth),
bhagAsanastham AthmAnam’ (think of Sivan as present above yOni),
dhyAthvA nirvANamruchchathi ‘ (by constantly thinking of Sivan in that way, one attains nirvANa (liberation) –
kaNdikA ruchi kanchaiva guNdalancha SikAmaNi: – (wearing specific things in their  (1) body (2) neck, (3) ears, (4) head),
‘basma yagyOpaveethancha mudhrAStakam prachakShathE’  (5) smear ashes in body, (6) wear holy string, are the six marks)
– Abhir mudhritha dhEhasthu  nabhUya iha jAyathE (body which is marked with these six, would not be born again in this world)
– rudhrAkSha kankaNam hasthE jatAchaikAchamasthakE (wearing rudhrAkSha seed garland in neck, having matted hair in head, bracelet in arm),
‘ kApAlam basmanA snAnam’ (holding skull in hand, bathe in ashes in a crematorium),
dhyAnam praNava pUrvakam’ (uttering the SlOka on Siva),
‘ dheekShA pravESa mAthrENa brAhmaNO bhavathi thathkShaNAth’ (if one attains such devotion, will become a brahmaNa),
kAbAlam vrathamAsththAya yathirbh bhavathi mAnava:’ (any type of person would then become a sage),

as said in the Agamam of all-knowing rudhran, in the pAsupatha Agamam – wearing six marks, meditate on Sivan held above yOni, worshipping the demi god with surA (alcoholic beverage), set oneself among the burning dead bodies in a crematorium and take the ashes and smear on oneself, and utter the SlOka on Siva, by such deeds, and thereby becoming equal to pasupathi is mOksham

– this is how they would completely support and talk about completely contradicting the meanings of Sruthi (SAsthram).

sUniya vAdharum { to be continued in part 2 }.

—–

From AzhwAr thirunagari SrI u.vE. vi(dhwAn thirumalai nallAn chakravarththi rAmakrishNa iyengAr’s ‘amudha virundhu’ :

Part 1

thaRkach chamaNarum – Just by the strength of tharkkam and without being considering to be meaningful as per pramANam (authoritative reference),  they protect their philosophy – they are jainar.

The things we see in this world as existing are not really existing, and are really non-existent – is the contradicting quality that they prove in one thing itself using the strength of the tharkkam (logical arguments);

sAkkiyap pEygaLum – Many among them did not know what to hold on to and what to reject, and did not follow the teachings of their guru bhudhdhar but held on to their own principles unreasonably, and so are referred to as pEy.

bhudhdhar had at first taught his disciples that ‘sarvam sUnyam’ (everything is imaginary/false/void); He advised them that by four types of continuous meditation (bhAvanai) one should get the supreme destiny.  Some who heard these advises accepted the four types of bhAvanai, and reasoned that if everything is sUnyam, then like the things outside, the knowledge that is inside also would have to be considered sUnyam; in that case the whole world would be blind; so they accepted that only those outside (that is, world) is sUnyam, (that is, prathyakSham (what is seen) is imaginary/does not really exist), but considered knowledge as existing; and they asked questions to their guru but held on to their belief;  these were called yOgAchAra – since they asked questions (yOgam) to their guru (and concluded that his answers are what they thought they were), and since they accepted the four types of bhAvanai and implemented them in their custom and practice, they were called yOgAchArar  (yOga – knowledge; AchAra – practicing).

The four types of bhAvanai are – Thoughts that everything is kshaNikam, dhu:kam, svalakShaNam, sUnyam.

kshaNikam are – that get destroyed in just one moment (moment to moment);  due to this bhAvanai, everything falsely appear to be ever-present;

dhu:kam – this bhAvanai prevents falsely viewing as pleasures;

svalakShaNam – this bhAvanai is the thinking that since everything is destroyed in just one moment, it is not possible to show a thing as an example for another thing, and so they don’t have a generic quality, and so each thing is unique to themselves; due to this the confusion that everything is of common quality is removed;

sUnyam – by this bhAvanai, the confusion that this a true thing is removed.

A few other disciples said that it is not acceptable to say that there is no knower or things that are known by the knower; if they are truly not there, then how is it possible to form different types of knowledge? Due to the wonderful nature of mind, what it perceived as actually existing, must be actually existing – this is known by anumAnam (guessing based on experience of prior sighting).

These people were called ‘sauthrAnthikar’; that is, after listening to their guru, they held on to the view that based on anumAnam the world is understood. Now, it can also be said that since they asked ‘Till what end would the sUthram apply? (Only I know the end of the sUthram told by the guru: sUthra antham – sauthrAnthikar)’, they are known by this name.

Some others said – it is wrong to say things are understood based on anumAnam (guess based on prior knowledge/sighting); for them who say there is no prathyakSham (sighting), how would it be possible to know about something by anumAnam which depends on prior sighting? By prathyakSham, reason possible (hEthu sAdhyam), it is to be accepted to  be inseparable, isn’t it? ; It is also contradictory to what is experieneced directly in the world;  Like how the things outside are accepted based on experience (anumAnam), in the same way due to the experience of sighting them (prathyakSham, the outside things are also true as seen by authoritative reference of prathyakSham (seen). While they are having the internal knowledge and outside things as known/visible by prathyakSham, guru advised them that everything is imaginary/just perception, so that they would gain vairAgyam (asceticism). For those who hold on to belief that knowledge only is truth, he told that everything other than knowledge is sUnyam; for those who are adamant that like knowledge the outside things are also true, he advised that even though the outside things are true, they are only known by anumAnam;  this is a contradicting statement.

So they are known as ‘vaibhAshikar’ (vi-bhAsha – saying things by changing their truth).

Other than saying that the things outside are also present by prathyakSham, there is no difference between sauthrAnthikar and vaibhAshikar.

baudhdhar of these three sort did not accept fully the advice of their guu, and were controlled by the ghost that is there adamence, so he refers to them as ‘sAkkiyap pEy’.

Among all these three, there is no differene of opinion about saying that everything get destroyed in a moment, and knowledge of that is AthmA. So, all the three are talked about together here.

SrI parAsara bhattar also shows this in Sri rangarAja sthavam, uththara Sathakam – 8.

thAzh sadaiyOn sol kaRRa sOmbarum – that is, rudhran having matted hair.  It shows the appearance of being engaged in penance. purANas show that he performed thapas and by the permission of emperumAn, authored Saiva Agamam, that is a mOha SAsthram.

The upAdhAna kAraNam that changes to world is prakruthi thathvam.  Saiva philosophy is that eesvaran shown by Agamam is nimiththa kAraNam. Philosophy of vEdham is that both upAdhAna kAraNam and nimiththa kAraNam is parabrahmam shown by vEdhas, that is, SrIman nArAyaNan only.

vEdha vyAsa bhagavAn too had first criticized sAnkya philosophy which acepts prakruthi thathvam as upAdhAna kAraNam, but at that point did not criticize pAsupatha philosophy of same opinion, and instead he criticised baudhdha and jaina next whose philosophies are completely irrelevant to vEdham, and then only did he criticize pAsupatha (Saiva) philosophy – to show that it is also completely irrelevant to vEdham. This is clearly explained in SruthaprakASika as well.

amudhanAr’s opinion is also that like how emperumAn came in a concealed way as budhdha and spread mOha SAsthram (to ruin those who were completely against vEdhams), He gave permission to rudhran to spread Saiva Agamam in the same vain, and so amudhanAr talks about this among the baudhdhas.

sUniya vAdharum  – { to be continued in part 2 }.

– – – – –

Translation: raghurAm SrInivAsa dasan

archived in http://divyaprabandham.koyil.org

pramEyam (goal) – http://koyil.org
pramANam (scriptures) – http://granthams.koyil.org/
pramAthA (preceptors) – http://acharyas.koyil.org
SrIvaishNava education/kids portal – http://pillai.koyil.org

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *