Ramanujar vaishnavam was not A new invention; it was a religion with
different book, flag and map created out of the old pot smartha, in another
language of the state, telling them as if, ONLY NOW ALL ARE EQUAL WITH
DWAYAM, SARANAGATI ETC. Buddha did, out of one concept DESIRE; Jains
Mahaveer, on one concept JEEVA KARUNYAM. Breaking away from Sanatana
dharma, a conceptual dharma branched out which had caused factions in
India. North DID ITS COURSE INTERNALLY, normally, since shat-Matha worship
was prevalent there casually. But some, who were great people in History,
went off the line, paving way for the distorted politics in TN. The
religion was the root or cause or the tool of politics in TN, since Sangam
periods. There were many who, as Vadivel joke, retained the Vedic root but
pruned different trees, asking people to have all of them as a remedial
measure. In this, Vaishnavism was made in Tamil, using the vedam as root,
but camouflaging into another robe, with a local trinity of worship of
dvayam etc. The mode looked different from the sanatana dharma but, though
appeared in a new bottle, was only the old wine only. Hence Nammalwar words
used as difficulty, might be difficult to understand, but the content is
only from the old bottle. Here incidentally, it can be said that copy and
paste from the old bottle. A few who had only a shallow knowledge and
hardcore thinking, believed that if any one, especially myself writing from
the scriptures, is ONLY A COPY AND PASTE; but lacks the courage to address
past gurus from doing only such things. Hence vision of copy and paste was
prevalent since ages behold; it is because no one can write the truth as
originally from their minds. We are all copy and paste only. But where the
copy and paste is untruth, there that kind of action is incorrigible; thus
there are distinctions; can any one originally write the theory of
Einstein?
The Vedam in Sanskrit was reincorporated in Tamil, , as written by
Tiruvalluvar, thirumanthiram, Padikam, etc etc, as Prabandham. Nammalwar
would not have felt any difficulty as they were there already but only the
acquisition of that knowledge was essential. Ilam ulan etc were in
Upanishads. The Sanatana dharma spoke about the Brahmam inclusive of all,
but Nammalwar distinguished Purusha and Prakriti, Jivatma and Paramatma,
eliciting only conducive evidence from Brahma sutram B G etc. The
proclamation was all are equal; Mrs Ramanuja conducted herself as she was
taught then partially; she went for another bath and cooking because one
below ate the food she already cooked; she had the mind of prakriti; the
same mind existed in all the people from brahmin to low caste then; but he
called every one and changed them, to vaishnavism, as if oneness came then
only; Sarve jana sukino bhavanthu was in sanskrit already; but Ramanuja
divorced away from wife by self-kshayam. Why could he not change her when
so many non brahmins were made narayanites? Why did Vaishnavism not spread
to the north? Buddisn and Jainism were restricted why? BECAUSE AS
KANNADASAN KNEW , EVERY ONE KNEW, "UNDENDRAAL ADHU UNDU ILLAI YENDRAAL
ATHU ILLAI. AHAM CHA BRAHMA; ANNAM CHA; TIRUMULAR WOOD AND ELEPHANT
AVVULAGU IVVULAGU ETC
In my view Koanai peridhu udaithu = after breaking the curved
surface of the universe or not straight perception given any wheere except
only in NETI NETI sense aka negative science as finding the salt and acid
in chemistry lab as not this , not this. How can I say about Perumal who is
not seen by me but only having heard.
K Rajaram IRS 11 12 23
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Chittanandam V R <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 05:45
Subject: Fwd: Nammaalvar by Sujatha - மிகக் கடினம்
To:
மிகக் கடினம் *- சுஜாதா *
'கோணை' என்ற ஒரு சொல்லுக்கு பொருள் என்ன என்று சமீபத்தில் பார்க்க
வேண்டியிருந்தது. கோணை என்றால் crookedness, வளைவு, கோணைக்கத்தி, கோணைக்
கழுத்தன், கோணைப்பேச்சு, கோணைவாயன்... போன்ற
பிரயோகங்களில் இந்தச் சொல் பயன்படுகிறது. திவ்ய *ப்*ரபந்த காலத்தில்
அதற்கு மிறுக்கு, பிரயாஸம், அனுபத்தி போன்ற அர்த்தங்கள் இருந்தது.
சம்ஸாரிகளின் கோணைப் போக்கி என்று ஒரு வியாக்கியானம் உள்ளது. Difficulty -
கஷ்டம் என்ற அர்த்தத்தில் நம்மாழ்வார் திருவாய்மொழியில் திருமாலை
வர்ணிக்க முயலும்போது இந்தச் சொல்லைப் பயன்படுத்துகிறார்.
"ஆணல்லன், பெண்ணல்லன், அல்லா அலியுமல்லன்;
காணலும் ஆகான்;உளனல்லன், இல்லையல்லன்;
பேணுங்காற் பேணும் உருவாகும் அல்லனுமாம்;
கோணை பெரிதுடைத்து எம்பெம்மானைக் கூறுதலே."
(அல்லா - பயனல்லாத, பேணுங்கால் - விரும்பும்போது)
உலகத்தில் நாம் பார்க்கிற ஆண்களைப் போல் அல்லன், அவன். பெண்களைப்
போலவோ, உதவாத அலியோ அல்லன் அவன். அவனைக் கண்ணால் பார்க்க
முடியாது. இருப்பவனில்லை; இல்லையும் இல்லை. வேண்டும்போது வேண்டும்
உருவில் தோன்றுவான்; தோன்றமாட்டான். என் பெருமானைக் கூறுவது கஷ்டமாக
இருக்கிறது.
உலகின் சிறந்த கவிஞர்களில் ஒருவரும், பிரபந்தத்தில் திருவாய்மொழி மூலம்
வேதத்தின் சாரத்தைக் கொண்டுவந்த நம்மாழ்வாரே திருமாலை இன்னவன்
என்று கூறுவதற்கு எவ்வளவு கஷ்டப்படுகிறார். எப்படிச் சொல்வது என்று
தெரியவில்லை. "கூவும் ஆறு அறிய மாட்டேன்" என்கிறார் பாருங்கள்.
நம்மால் முடியுமா? வார்த்தைகளால் அவனைச் சிறைப்பிடிக்க முடியாது.
*- சுஜாதா *
***************************************
*சித்தானந்தம் *
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZoqGqhsTYqzkwpbSNbMNdB7Lf3sZb1OUMpeE-KxXSfR0OQ%40mail.gmail.com.
