|
||
|
| ||
|
Sri Hari
GURUJI SRI MURALIDHARA SWAMIGAL MISSION |
||
 | ||
|
SWAMIGAL SPEAKS |
MISSION |
NÃMA BHIKSHA KENDRA |
VEDA PATASHALA |
PUBLICATIONS/PERIODICALS |
|
||
|
|
||
|
| ||
|
Sri Hari
GURUJI SRI MURALIDHARA SWAMIGAL MISSION |
||
| ||
|
SWAMIGAL SPEAKS |
MISSION |
NÃMA BHIKSHA KENDRA |
VEDA PATASHALA |
PUBLICATIONS/PERIODICALS |
|
||
|
Premika Bhavanam, Chennai
Page 1 Page 2
Sri Swamigal has been rendering ‘Upanyãsam’ (discourses), in Tamizh, in Premika Bhavanam. This is being brought to you here. There may appear to be variations in the ‘tense’ of the language. This is due to the fact that great effort has been taken to maintain the original style of the ‘Upanyãsam’. Therefore, we request you to keep this in mind while reading the translated ‘words’ of Sri Swamigal.
Sri Swamigal,
"JAI JAI GOVINDA JAYA HARI GOVINDA!
"Rangesamãmpãhi! Rangesamãmpãhi! Rangesamãmpãhi! Rangapprabho! "HARE RÃMA HARE RÃMA RÃMA RÃMA HARE HARE " Bhãva is Bhakti. Srimad Bhãgavatam says this and so do we. If we desire such a high state of Bhãva to bloom in our hearts it comes only through the grace of a Mahãtma who has such high Bhãva. Only such a Mahãtma can bestow us with this fine feeling. As already said the first five songs give the ‘avatãrikai’ in detail. Beginning with ‘Mãrgazhi thingal’, Ãndãl gives the details of the month, the ‘titi’, the nakshatra (star), the week and the year of taking up the ‘nonbu’. The month is obviously seen as ‘Mãrgazhi’, the star is ‘Thiruvãdirai’, ‘shukla paksha’, the day being ‘Thingal’ (Monday) and while speaking of the year it is the fifth year from Nala Varusha. Ãndãl was born in Nala varusha that is the ninety-eighth year from the birth of Kali. So say the Mahãtmas. Ãndãl was five years old when she took up the ‘nonbu’ (penance/worship). So, whatever year fell five years after Nala varusha was the year that Ãndãl had taken up the ‘nonbu’. She did ‘anukarana’ of this ‘nonbu’ in ‘Bhãva loka’. But the ‘Bhãva avesa’ remained in her only till the twenty-ninth pãsuram and was not seen in her in the thirtieth. How and why is it deemed to be so? Because in her thirtieth song she is aware of who she is - for, she sings, ‘Bhattarpirãn Kodai sonna’( as told by the daughter of Bhattar!). She completes this thirtieth pãsuram being fully aware of who she is, i.e. of being the daughter of Bhattar. Even if all the thirty songs are gems, the first five are considered gem of all gems! This is because they give the ‘avatãrikai’. Amongst these the fourth pãsuram has come in ‘prasangãt’. In the following ten pãsurams, from the sixth ‘Pullum silambinakãn’ till the fifteenth ‘Elle Illangkiliye’, Ãndãl wakes up the Gopis, one by one. This has been referred to as waking up the ten Ãzhwãrs. Even though there are twelve Ãzhwãrs, Ãndãl is counted out as she enjoys the status of the consort of the Lord; Madhurakavi Ãzhwãr is also counted out as he exhibited ‘Ãcchãrya bhakti’ (devotion to the Guru/Master) in his praises of Nammãzhwãr. Moreover, Periyãzhwar and Ãndal (father and daughter) were both contemporaries while Nammãzhwar and Madhurakavi Azhwar were also contemporaries. Thus, counting these two out we get ten Ãzhwãrs. Bhagavãn’s Avatars were ten and here ten Ãzhwãrs had come to sing the ten Avatars! In these ten pãsurams, Ãndãl wakes up the Gopis, one by one. With the pãsuram ‘Elle illangiliye’ these ten pãsurams are completed.
In these ten pãsurams each and every gopi was woken up and in yesterday’s we saw
Click here for Thiruppãvai (14) in Tamil
‘Chengal podikkoorai venpal thavatavar
- In these we saw how the teeth of the Sadhus were white and their dress dirty. This is because they are deeply dispassionate.
In those days, Sanyãsis (ascetics) did not eat ‘tãmboolam’ (the custom of a householder to take betel leaves with nut after food that helps digestion). Eating ‘tãmboolam’ would have given a red tinge to their teeth. Nor did they consume any ‘lãgiri vasthu’ (substances that incite the senses). So their teeth were dazzling white. They did not bother about their ‘vastram’ (dress). They did not attach any importance (‘lakshyam’) to it.
When it is said that in each pãsuram Ãndãl wakes up a gopi and thus in the ten pãsurams ten gopis are being woken up, does it mean that there were only ten gopis? No, it does not mean just ten gopis but ten kinds of gopis. ‘Ãikudi’ means five lakh families. So, even if there had not been five lakh families in Srivilliputtur as it had been in Vrindãvan there should have been atleast a hundred or two hundred little girls who had taken up the ‘nonbu’ along with Ãndãl. Therefore, waking up ten girls means waking up ten kinds of girls. One was sleeping inside while another was lying down in a different style - ‘kodu kalamudaiya’, ‘notrucch chuvargam puguginra ammanãi’ - (one who shall attain heaven through this penance). She uses a different ‘vilicchol’ (address) for each gopi. Each gopi is in a different ‘reethi’ (style). The term ‘Pillãi’ (‘Oh! Girl!’) refers to the three kinds, viz. ‘pravartakan, siddha, siddha siddha in Bhagavat (Godly) matter.
The first kind is ‘pravartakan’ - one who has just entered a Satsang and begun doing japa (repeated chanting of a Nãma/Mantra) and dhyãna (meditation). He will possess a disturbed mind, as he has not yet been able to take a proper hold.
In the first pãsuram she calls out ‘pillãi ezhundirai’ - ‘Oh! Girl! Wake up!’ Later, she says that another Gopi is in a state wherein Bhagavãn Himself comes to her and gives her the joy of experiencing Him. Ãndãl has been showing different kinds of Bhaktãs. Mahãtmas have given vyãkyãnas (commentaries) for this Thiruppãvai. Sri Ramanuja is known as ‘Bhãshyakãra’ (one who gives commentaries!), as he has written commentaries for Brahmasutram, Gita, and theUpanishads. But, he prefers to be addressed as ‘Thiruppãvai Jeeyar’ (!) rather than Bhãshyakãra that refers to all his vyãkyãnas for Shastras. This is because Thiruppãvai is filled with ‘Bhagavat vishaya’- speaks only about Bhagavãn. Ãndãl feels totally transformed into a shepherdess, herself - ‘idai nadai’, ‘idai udai’, ‘idai mudai’ - her walk, her dress and her talk had all been transformed into one of a Gopi of Vrindãvan (who were shepherdesses). If Ramanuja himself felt so deeply involved in this, it only goes to show the kind of special place (‘sreshta’) Thiruppãvai holds. Periavãcchãnpillai in his ‘vyãkyãna’ picks out two out of the thirty as gems (‘Ratnas’). Even though all the thirty are real gems, he picks out two - ‘Elle illangilliye’, the 15th pãsuram and ‘Nãyaganãi ninra’, the 16th pãsuram as special gems. Why place these two pãsurams on the pedestal (‘yetrram’)? Of these one shows how a bhakta - a dãsa (devotee) should be and the other shows how Bhagavãn should be! That is why special treatment is meted out to these pãsurams. The ‘Bhakta lakshana’ (qualities of a bhakta) is depicted through the pãsuram ‘Elle illangilliye’ - how should a person who serves the Lord, does ‘dãsya’ to the Lord, feels totally bound by the Lord, be. Later, in the pãsuram ‘chitrranj chirukãle vandunnai sevitu’ Bhagavãn’s qualities are depicted and it says whom we should follow and seek protection from (‘ãshrayikavendum’). So, it occupies an important place.
'Elle illangkiliye! Innum urangidiyo?
Click here for Thiruppãvai (15) in Tamil In ‘Elle illangkiliye’ - the word ‘elle’ is a ‘vilichol’ - a way of address. Here, it is one of exclamation, one of surprise and wonder. What is surprising is the way this gopi is sleeping; the palace (‘tirumãligai’) she is sleeping in; the beauty of her stature while lying on the bed; all bring forth the surprise in the tone (‘ãsccharya dwani’). So, ‘Elle!’ Then comes the address ‘Illangkilliye’ - a young parrot - why is she being addressed as a young parrot? For various reasons and these are being listed out here by the commentator. In the first place she is repeating the words that had been uttered by them. She is repeating ‘pangayak kannanai’, ‘pangayak kannanai’ - the lotus-eyed Lord! Our cry at the previous door calling out to that Gopi ‘pangayak kannãnai pãdelo rembãvãi’ has indeed fallen in her ears. Only a parrot repeats anything that it hears. So, ‘illangkilliye’. And here in this pãsuram this gopi is singing ‘pangayak kannanai’. So, she is being questioned whether she has already heard them and is, therefore, repeating their words. The next reason for her being addressed as a parrot is - if a parrot is not fed properly it will not be healthy (‘pushti’). It will not possess the pleasing deep green (‘pacchai pasel’) colour but will be anaemic instead. But she is healthy and is radiating divine lustre as a consequence of clandestine ‘Krishnãnubhava’ (Krishna experience). Hence, she is addressed as ‘illangkilliye’. Her lips are red (‘komala bimbãdara’) like that of the parrot’s beak. The parrot’s beaks are red like the ‘kovai pazham’ (a kind of small fruit of deep red colour). The probability of a ‘stree’ (woman) possessing such red lips under ordinary circumstances is remote indeed; therefore, in this Gopi’s case this must be due to ‘Krishnãnubhava’ (Krishna experience). So, ‘illangkilliye’. ‘You are a parrot, indeed, because you are repeating the words uttered, you are full of lustre (‘kãnti’ and ‘tejas’) due to ‘Krishnãnubhava’, your lips are red and moreover you are not an old parrot but a young one! So, ‘illiangkilliye’ - young parrot. If Ãndãl herself was only five years old then how old would her group of friends be? ‘Innum urangidiyo?’ - (eh! young parrot!) are you still asleep? Is it nice of you to be still in bed while you have so much to your credit?
In this pãsuram is found something that was not found in the earlier nine pãsurams. Until the
ninth all had been calling out for the gopis from outside but there was absolutely no response
from within. The one inside did not respond in any way. But, here this Gopi responds! She says,
‘chillen razhaiyenmin nangaimeer podarginren’.
While waking a child, one should do so uttering the mother’s name. While in the forest Vishwãmitra woke up Lord Rama with the words, ‘Kausalya supraja Rama….’
The Sage wakes up Rama calling out the name of Rama’s mother, Kausalya. Even a Maharishi, a muni, a tapasvi knows the ‘loka dharma, loka reeti’ (the way of the world). A child should be woken up with the name of its mother.
But here, the gopi from inside shoots back, “Don’t cry out calling all sorts of names! (
‘chillen razhaiyenmi’) Stop shouting! I have woken up! Am just coming.”
‘Vallãnai konrãnai, mãtrrarai mãrrazhikka
First, the Swamy gives vyãkyãna of ‘Mãyanai mannu vada madhura maindanai’ (5th pãsuram). The Lord is referred as ‘Mãyan’ (the wondrous one). The Swamy starts off with this description of the Lord as - ‘Tam adbutam bãlakam…(the wonderful child--- Srimad Bhãgavatam). The Swamy describes all the divine lilas (‘Maya cheshtitam’) of Bhagavãn even before He (Krishna) was born! In describing this incarnation of Bhagavãn, the Swamy says, ‘In Sri Vaikuntam (the abode of the Lord Vishnu) ‘Thiruvãrãdanam’ (abhisheka, archana and ãrati) is performed every day in which ‘karpoora hãrati’ (camphor ãrati) is done. Before the ‘Karpoora hãrati’, ‘dhoopa’ (lighting of incense) is shown. So the whole place is filled up with smoke. A curtain of smoke is formed and the Lord is not to be seen. The ‘Nitya suris’ (the devotees who serve the Lord in Sri Vaikunta) stand with folded hands and closed eyes. It is at this time that the Lord incarnated as Krishna on the earth, lived for 125 years performing innumerable divine lilas and returned to Sri Vaikunta before the cloud of smoke formed due to camphor and incense cleared! So, for the ‘Vibhava’, the Swamy takes this term of Mãyan!
‘Vallãnai konrãnai, mãtrrãnai mãrrazhika
Here Ãndãl does not make use of terms (‘padam’) like ‘sooranai or veerãdi veeranai’- to denote the valour of the Lord as he had destroyed the elephant or the asuras. Why has she not used any such term to denote His valour? The Swamy explains why she has sung ‘vallãnai mãyanai pãdelo rembãvai’? --- Bhagavãn, before coming to kill the wrestlers (‘mallars’) sees Kubja who is taking the sandal paste to Kamsa. On seeing Krishna she offers it to Him. Krishna applies the sandal paste (‘chandana kãppu’) all over His body and walks down the streets. All the ladies of Mathura see Krishna. One lady’s eyes were like that of a dove, another’s were like that of a fish, yet another’s like that of a deer, so on and so forth. When these ladies look at Him with love filled eyes their gaze left a mark on His sandal paste-covered body! His body was thus filled with these marks left by these ladies’ gaze! He went and fought the elephant and the wrestlers successfully without in any way disturbing either the sandal paste or the marks on them! He is therefore, Mãyan! Those ‘pãrvai regai’ (the marks left by the ‘gaze’ of the ladies) were not disturbed in the least! The Swamy says how a Vaishnava should conduct himself. What is Vaishnavatatva? What is Sadhu ‘lakshana’(quality)? When you are accused of some wrong act just own it up quietly even if you have not done it! This is only Vaishnava lakshana. He refers to Yasoda as one who speaks sweetly. In ‘Elle! Illangkilliye! the Gopi is being accused of (deceptive) sweet and smart talks. She does not contradict them but just accepts their ‘abusive’ verdict. ‘Valleergal neengale , nãnedãn ãyiduga!’ - All that she says is, ‘Well! Let it be so; as you deem me to be!’ This is ‘dãsya lakshana’ (the qualities of one at the service of the Lord). This is Vaishnava Lakshana while just wearing the ‘Tirumann’ (the sign worn on the forehead) or the upanayana samskãrãs (wearing the holy thread) or the claim that one is a Vaishnava is not to be considered so. Only one who is humble (‘vineetan’) is a Vaishnava. Only those who are like this are Sadhus. They are indeed like this, full of humility. Take the life of Ekanãtha who says, in one his kirtans, ‘Always be at the side of the one who throws abuses at you. If you stay beside those who praise you, your ego that is already a boosted one will only get fattened up further! Think that these abusers are cleansing your mind, as one removes dirt with soap! So, do not get angry with your abusers.’ There once lived a Sadhu in Vrindãvan. Many people performed Pãda Puja (worship of the Feet) to him. After the Pãda Puja he went around the streets with his sishyas (disciples), performing Krishna Kirtan. As he moved along the streets one morning, there was this woman who was at her doorstep wiping it clean and drawing ‘kolam’. The Sadhu who was in the Krishna kirtan reverie did not notice her and tripped on her. She took it to be an intended mischief on his part and picking up the bucket containing the water mixed with cow dung and poured it on him! And taking up the broomstick beat him with it and called him names! The Sadhu felt very happy and thanked her for it! He said, ‘Mother! Everyone praised me and attributed to me high qualities, that I do not possess. It is only you who speak the truth and I thank you for it.” Mahãtmas are of this calibre. The Swamy shows that true Vaishnavatatva is to take the blame for even those mistakes not committed by one. Does any glory lie in accepting the mistakes committed by one? The Swamy shows several examples in this connection. Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa says go to the place where you are abused and not where you are praised. The one who abuses you is your friend and the one who praises you, your enemy. In the first pãsuram, She says, ‘Nangãi ezhundirãi; nãnnãdãr! nãvudaiyãi!’ in which ‘nãvudayãi’ refers to the smart talk. Sweet tongued is different from being smart tongued. So, it is said here that an Ãchãrya (Master/Guru) should know to speak both sweetly and intelligently. This is ‘Ãchãrya lakshana’ (requisite quality for a Guru). Ãndãl, while describing the various qualities, sings ‘nãvudayãi’ in one pãsuram and subsequently 'illangkilliye’! The Swamy takes up an incident from Ramanuja’s life. Pillaiurangãvilidãsa was a wrestler. He was a six-footer, strong, sturdy and well built. Ramanuja had a big following of 700 sanyasis and 1200 householders. Desikan, in Yatirãja saptathi, prays, “There is no more ‘janma’ (birth) for me because I have won the relationship of Sri Ramanuja’s Lotus Feet. If, however, I were to have another ‘janma’, I should be blessed to be born as the sand and remain wherever the Lotus Feet of Sri Ramanuja touches the soil of Sri Rangam! Wherever the streaks of His Lotus Feet touches there should I remain as the sand.” This Ramanuja is walking around the ‘saptha prahãra’ of Sri Rangam, when he is astounded by what he sees. He sees a sturdy, well-built man, holding an umbrella for a woman (by name Ponoãcchi). Just as one walks backwards facing the Lord, to avoid showing his rear to the Lord, which amounts to disrespect, this well-built, huge man was walking in front of the lady, holding an umbrella over her head. He did not seem to be affected by anything or anyone around. Nothing else seemed to draw his attention. He seemed totally absorbed in his own service to the lady! Ramanuja calls him and asks, “There are so many people in Sri Rangam. I am a sanyasi passing this place with so many disciples behind me. You do not seem to be bothered about others criticizing you for holding an umbrella for a woman. Do you not feel ashamed to be possessed by her whatever the reason be? He said, “Did you not notice her beautiful pair of eyes? I am unable to take my eyes off those beautiful eyes of hers. Such a beautiful pair of eyes is not found anywhere else. The Sun’s rays will form circles around the eyes; I am, therefore, holding an umbrella so that the Sun’s rays do not touch any part of her body.” Ramanuja says, “Well! What would you do if I showed you a pair of eyes that is unparalleled in its beauty?” Pillaiurangãvilidãsa assures, “If you would only show me such a pair of eyes I would become slave to it! I would serve her (!) who owns the most beautiful pair of eyes.” Ramanuja, an Yateshwara, immediately seized his hands and pulled him to Sri Ranganatha’s temple. He entered the temple from the Southside tower (‘terku gopuram’) crossed the ‘Ranga vilas mantapa’, then ‘Kãrtigai mãsa mantapa’, the two ‘thirumana toongal’ (pillars) in Ranganatha’s sannidhi and arrived at Kulasekara padi in front of the Sanctum Sanctorum. Ramanuja made Pillaiurangãvilidãsa stand here and demanded of the Lord, “Show him the beauty of your eyes. Not those that were shown to Kamsa, nor those shown to Sisupãla (both were asurãs who were killed by the Lord) but those that You showed Thirupãnãzhwãr!” The Lord opened His beautiful Lotus shaped eyes and looked at Urangãvilidãsar. The one who had been attracted by the beauty of a mere mortal’s eyes, would he not fall for these divine ones? He gave himself up totally to the Lord and served Him. He wore an ‘angi’ (robe), held a sword and guarded the Lord. Even if a fly were to sit on the Lord he would cut himself with the sword! He guarded the Lord with such deep devotion. Was he not one who had held an umbrella for a Ponnãchi? How deep his love (‘parivu’) should then have been for one who is verily the Lord of Vaikunta (‘sãkshãt’ Vaikuntapati), Lord of all Lords (‘Devãdi Devan’), the Lord of the Universe (‘Jagat Prabhu’)? Until some 100 years back people from his lineage continued to offer this service to the Lord -- wearing the robe (‘angi’) and holding the sword in hand they used to guard the Lord when He came out in procession. Ramanuja had spoken sweet words to him. Here Bhagavat Gita or Brahma sutra discourse would not have made an impact on him. So, Ramanuja did no such thing. Instead he bound him with his own chord! The Guru should know how to take one into His fold! This is how Ramanuja had handled this man! Taking up the smartness of Ramanuja in handling this man and taking him to the Lotus Feet of the Lord, the Swami says, ‘Nãvudaiyãi, ‘illangkilliye’! -- Smart talk and sweet talk were used to take him unto his fold. Similar is the incident of the son of Periya Nambi, which I have narrated earlier, whom Ramanuja takes unto his fold. The Swamy then conducts an enquiry to see if indeed there was a Vaishanva who had taken on himself the blame for a wrong act not committed by him. Has anyone been so magnanimous? The Swamy in his vyakyãna says, “We can catch hold of Perumal only through Sadhus - Ãzhwãrs.” This is the reason that here Ãndãl subtly sings the praises of Ãzhwãrs. In this pãsuram the Swamy says that Dasarata pleads with Kaikeyi pointing out many good reasons for refusing to instruct Rama to leave the Kingdom for the forest. When Dasarata is unable to bring himself to offer Kaikeyi the promised boons, she directly informs Rama about it. However, Rama at once sets out to the forest. Sumanthra leaves Rama at the outskirts of the Kingdom and returns. Valmiki describes here that Dasarata is lying down unconscious due to grief caused by the departure of Rama. Sumanthra informs the half-conscious Dasarata that even the trees had dried up and no flowers were to be seen. Dasarata asks, “Have none watered these trees properly?” Being in a bewildered state he does not understand Sumanthra’s words. “Not only the people but also the cows wept (‘ãvum karaindana’); Even the calves wept (‘ãvudaiya kanrum azhudadu’),” says Kamban (the author of Kamba Ramayanam- the Tamizh text of the great epic). Cats have the peculiar behaviour of entering the house when people leave so that they can drink up the milk and eat up the dishes. “But here in Dasarata’s palace even the cats went to the door and wept (‘nãnmãdakoodalil poosalum azhudade’) because the Lord had left for the forest”, writes Kamban. Dasarata is dead. Bharata and Shatrugna who are away in their maternal grandparents’ palace are brought back. Bharata rushes to Kausalya first and enquires where his father is; he then rushes to Kaikeyi and learns that his father is dead. He weeps and wails. Valmiki and Kamban write that Bharata wonders how and why his father met with death; why Rama has left for the forest. On conducting a mental enquiry in this connection his anger at first turns towards Kooni (the maid who had accompanied his mother Kaikeyi at the time of her entry into Ayodhya, after marriage). What enmity could Kooni nurture against Rama? Here, the Swamy describes the childhood play of Rama. In his childhood Rama used to practice shooting of arrows with clay balls. He then used to aim them at Kooni’s hunchback. When the clay ball that shot out of the arrow of the five year old Rama hit her bent back it straightened up only to bend back once more. Rama used to take pleasure in this play of his. He used to do it ten or twenty times and Kooni used to feel insulted. She decides to avenge this insult. After describing this in his vyãkyãna, the Swamy advises, “Do not ill treat or insult those who work for you - servants, subordinates. Do not dishonour them, for, later you might have to face hardships as Rama did. Do not be indifferent towards them.” Two Ãzhwãrs sing of this Kooni incident in the charitra of Rama. But the two Ãzhwãrs sing this lila of Rama as one that had been played by Krishna - Govinda! This is because none will enjoy Rama behaving so. Such lilas (divine play) do not sit well on Ramachandramurthy! As ‘Bãla-Rama’ (child) he had been up to some pranks. Even if it has been true, it does not go well with this name! Whereas, all these pranks, mischief, naughtiness and tomfoolery go well with Krishna! So Ãzhwãrs sing even this prank of Rama as that done by Krishna. The Swamy, in his vyãkyãna says, “Poor Krishna, He is blamed even for others’ mischief!” Bharata thinks, “Kooni is angry because of my brother Rama’s childhood action. It is she who has disturbed my mother’s mind, so it is Kooni who is to be blamed. When Kooni brought the news of Rama’s coronation to Kaikeyi, it made her very happy. She said, “Bharata is Kausalya’s son but Rama is mine. So my heart gladdens at the news!” She possessed such deep love for Rama but it is Kooni who sowed the seed of suspicion in her. So, it is this Kooni who is to be blamed. I will beat up this woman.” But after some thinking he feels that it was not Kooni but his own mother, Kaikeyi, who is the cause for all that had happened. “Where was Kaikeyi’s power of reasoning? Even if Kooni were to advise her wrongly should she have paid heed to it? What is her (Kaikeyi’s) family background, what a great man she has married! Should she not have used her own intellect? People will offer different opinions. Each will advise differently. It is only we who should use our intellect (‘buddhi’) on deciding any matter. So it is only my mother who is to be blamed for this situation.” He then thinks a while and feels, “After all she is a mother. Any mother would feel protective about her son”, and concludes that it is Dasarata who is to be blamed. “Could he not have used his smartness and handled everything secretly? In the first place he should have refused this boon to Kaikeyi or dealt with her in some other way; after all could he not have used his office in avoiding the situation that had arisen? So it is only Dasarata who is to be blamed.” But with some more thinking he feels, “Those who have come in the lineage of Ishwãgu are truthful. Therefore, Dasarata cannot be blamed. It is only Rama Himself who is to be blamed. Should he have immediately set out to the forest? Could he not have waited for me?” But a little more thinking and finally he feels that he himself is to be blamed. “I am the cause for the misfortune.” Bharata took the blame on himself. This is ‘Vaishnava lakshana’! Someone else starts the trouble but he takes it all on himself. There is a worldly (‘loka reethiyãna’) example cited for this. A man once decided to burgle a house. So he tried to make a hole in the wall of the house. While doing so the wall crumbled down on the man and he died. The burglar’s wife sought justice from the King. “My husband died due to the crumbling of the wall while he was trying to make a hole in it. I demand justice in the matter!” The King called the owner of the house and asked him, “Why did you build such a weak wall. It has killed a man. Own up your fault.” But the man pointed his fingers at the builder (‘mestri’). The ‘mestri’ pointed to the one who mixes the cement and sand (‘chittãl’). The Chittãl said, “Every day a pot maker used to sell a pot to me. That day the pot sold to me was bigger than usual and I had poured more than the usual quantity of water. So it is the pot maker who is to be blamed for this!’ The pot maker pointed his fingers at a prostitute - “Daily I make the pot in a particular size but that particular day while I was mixing the clay a prostitute passed by and my attention was turned to her feet. That is the reason that the pot made that day was bigger than usual.” The prostitute was summoned and questioned, “Why did you pass that way even as the pot maker was making the pot?” The prostitute explained, “It is the dhobi who is to be blamed. He had delayed in bringing my sarees and I had to go in search of him!” The dhobi said, “It is the Buddha Bhikshu who sat in my way, in dhyãna, who is to be blamed. I could not cross him over and go to deliver the sarees. Hence I got delayed.” So this Buddha Bhikshu was caught and beheaded for the wall crumbling down and killing the one who tried to make a hole in it to burgle the house! See how things work! Someone commits a mistake and it is blamed on some innocent person! Bharata’s thinking is on these lines! The Swamy cites many such examples. Sita, in ‘Asoka vana’ (as a captive in Ravana’s palace) laments, “Rama! I am in deep grief here. But many a King would be willing to offer the hand of his daughter in marriage to you. So many princesses will be willing to live with you. Marry someone and be happy!” However, She then consoles herself and says, “Rama, I am lamenting in a fit of the mental disturbance caused due to separation! What will you do if the sins that I have committed are so grievous?" Lakshmana did not react to Sita’s abuses directed at him while in the forest. Rama had gone chasing the deer that Sita desired to have. On hearing Rama’s cry she asks Lakshmana to rush to his aid. She showers abuses on Lakshmana who assures her of Rama’s safety and refuses to leave her alone. But Lakshmana is not angry with Sita. He just bends his head down and walks away in search of Rama. He does not even worry over her words. To accept any blame is the test of the ãtma (‘ãtma parisodanai’). The Sadhus face such tests boldly and successfully; the Vaishanavas face such tests boldly and successfully. This is Sadhu ‘lakshana’. Thus, through ‘Elle! Illankilliye!’ pãsuram is shown the qualities of a Vaishnava and through the pãsuram, ‘Chitranchiru kãle’ the qualities of Bhagavãn. " Page 1 Page 2
NOTE: Any discrepancy/lapse in the translated version of the Upanyasam is the sole responsibility of the person/s who translated the work from Tamizh into English.
Radhe Krishna |
|||||
Thiruppãvai - Day Fourteen (PAGE 1) 
