Deivathin Kural # 5 (of Vol 2 )

Om Namah Sivaya.
Deivathin Kural # 5 (of Vol 2 ) of 08 June 2007.
(Continued from Deivathin Kural # 4 (of Vol 2 ) of 06 June 2007.)
26. Prior to Sankara Acharya, his Guru Govinda and his Guru Gowdapada, (mentioned in the Sloka,) does not mean that there have been no other human Gurus after Sukha till Govinda. Narayana to Sukha, are included in the Guru Parampara, by Non-Adwaitins too. But Gowda Pada and Govinda Pada, maintained that Adwaita was the ultimate quintessential philosophy, in which all other principles end. They disproved or discarded other philosophies as intermediate steps. However there have been some great thinkers and proponents of Adwaita, prior to these three Acharyals. Let me mention at least the names of some of them. Athreya Brhma Nandi, was one; there was one Sundara Pandya, (sounds like the name of a South Indian King); Barthru Prapancha was another; Barthruhari and Brhmadatta were also there. The last mentioned Brhmadatta, is said to have written a commentary on Brhma Sutra. One more is Dravida Acharya. This gentleman Dravida Acharya is reverred by followers of Visishta Adwaita philosophy too. Though whatever these phlosophers have written are not fully available, later day Adwaitins including Sankara Acharya have quoted from their writings. Amongst them, we are mainly concerned with 'Dravida Acharya'.
27. 'Tamizh' is the correct pronounciation of the word Tamil. Tamil is Dravid, not beause of any race or caste but because, Tamil becomes Dravida in sanskrit. It is a custom in Sanskrit, that 'tha' becomes 'thra'. Thodaka Acharya mentioned earlier, becomes 'throdaka'. Some people over Sanskritize in making, 'deham' into 'dreham'. In Ta-mi-zh, 'ta' becomes 'tra' or 'dra'; 'mi' becomes 'vi'. Philologists will give many examples for this convertion of 'va' into 'ma' amd vice-versa. For example, 'salgravam' has become, 'salagramam' and 'mandodari', can become 'vandodari'. Thus, 'dravid' is 'dramid'. 'zha' and 'la' exchanges places with each other and are very close to 'da'. In Ramanathapuram district, 'vazhaip pazham' becomes 'valaippalam' (the 'la' is the double 'lla'), and you would often hear, "vallappallathil vallukki villundidppore, be careful". In all, 'tha' > 'da' > 'dra', 'mi' > 'vi', 'zh' > 'dh': 'thamizh' has become 'dravid'.
28. Since now-a-days, showing the Tamil connection gives special happiness, I showed the same in relating 'Dravida Acharya' to Tamil.
Sri Sankara Baghawat Pada himself has used this phrase of 'dravida sisu', in Soundarya Lahiri, in saying, "Amma, you did give milk to the Tamil Child". When I say Tamil is Dravid; do not get carried away with the wrong interpretation that, I am talking of 'Arya - Dravida' race theory. If we look in to the Vedas and Sastras, there is no evidence of the existance of two different races of Arya and Dravida, whatsoever. The Britishers as per their strategy of 'devide and rule', have created this canard of two different races theory!
29. What is there in Sastras about this? There is no race as Aryan. The word 'arya', means 'respectable'. In Gita Sri Krishna while telling Arjuna, "What is this? You have lost heart like a coward!", he uses the word, 'anaryam'. Like 'happy' and 'unhappy', the prefix 'un' is a negative. 'Anaryam' is the same as 'un-Aryam', meaning 'disrespectable'. There is no connotation of any 'race' here. In old dramas, the queen addresses the king as 'arya putr'. Then she should not be and cannot be 'arya putri', if the word is supposed to mean a reference to 'race'. The word was only meant as 'dear sir or respectable sir', as otherwise, all the heroines must have been 'dravida putris', to call all the heros as 'arya putra'.
30. Let us say, an Iyer girl marries an Iyengar boy. Then when addressing him she may say, 'You son of an Iyengar!'. When she is herself daughter of an Iyengar, would she say that? WhenSita called Rama, 'Arya Putra', in Ramayana, if you give the race-connotation, then she will become a Dravidian girl!! Here also there was no race or caste being referred; but only meant, 'respected sir'. In all my readings, nowhere have I come across, either 'Arya or Dravida' to allude to any race or caste or creed!
31. The whole of India was one race, the Indian Race. Those living North of the Vindhyas, were Gowda and those living South of Vindhyas were Dravida. The division was regional and not racial. The entire land mass North of Vindhyas was Gowda Desam and South of it was Dravida Desam. Gowda Desam was regionally divided into five parts called Panch Gowdas. In the far North, Kashmiris were Sarasthawas; in Punjab and Central West, were Kanyagubjas; in UP and Bihar, were Mythilas; In Orissa were Utkalas; and finally in Bengal and East of it. simply Gowdas. Thus, Saraswathas, Kanyagubjas, Mythilas, Utkalas and Gowdas were Pancha Gowdas. In the South of Vindhyas, were Pancha Dravidas. They were Gurjaras (may be Gujjars and Gujrathis,); Maharashtras; Andhras and Karnatakas; and finally the Southern most were Dravidas or Tamilians. Malayalam is a derivative of Tamil in the recent ten centuries.
32. Not two different races; ten regional divisions. Gowda and Dravida became the name for the Easternmost and Southernmost areas. To-day, Gowdas has come to mean Bengalis and Dravidas has come to mean Tamilians. Sri Krishna Chaitanya was a Bengali. The Math that has started on his name is known as Gowdiya Math. Similarly, Dravidas has come to mean Tamilians. It is funny that it is these two areas cought on to British customs and education very fast. They provided the English educated clerical cadre for running the country.
33. When one set of people shift residence to another area within the country, it has been the custom to call them by the place name of their origin. In Maharashtra, after their natural names, many are called, 'telang', which is considered a caste name. It is a fair guess to conclude that their forefathers must have gone from the 'Telugu' land and settled in Maharashtra. Similarly, many brahmins in Uttar Pradesh have, what is seemingly a caste name, such as 'Dravid' and 'Kannad'. Point to note is that they are all brahmins. As per the so called 'Race theory', brahmins are non-dravidians or even enemies. But in North India, it is brahmins who have, 'Dravid and Kannad' as surname. It is clear that the surnames stand for the forefathers place of origin and not their race.
34. As per Tamil pronounciation rules / customs, 'Dravid' is 'Tamizh'. What comes in Sanskrit as half a consonant + ra, the ra drops off; sramana becomes samana; pravala becomes pavala and dra becomes da. In talking about 'Dravidacharya', I have covered so much ground about philology and race theory! I said that he was an Adwaita Siddhanti, preceding Sri Sankara Bagavat Pada.
Vedane Raja; Jeevane Brhmam.
35. Sri Sankara Bagavat Pada and other commentators while writing the Bhashyam on Santokya Upanishad's third and fourth chapters on 'Madhu Vidya and Samvarga Vidya', have quoted Dravida Acharya. In this Upanishad is the Maha Vakya, 'tat tvam asi', meaning 'You are that Brhmam'. Sweatakethu's Father and Guru Uddalaka Aaruni, repeats this nine times. In 'Tat - Tvam - Asi', 'Tat' is the Paramatma Brhmam; 'Tvam' is You, meaning Jeevatma or its personification Swetakethu; 'Asi' means are. Father is telling the Son, "You are Brhmam. Not that you are going to become Brhmam one day in the future. You are that already. Not somethig becoming Brhmam. Everything is already Brhmam only."
36. 'Then what is the need for Sadhana, to get to know this, if I am already one and why is that we do not know this?', can be the doubt. 'Had we known this, we would not suffer all this deprivation, anxiety, fear and hate. We would have been the ocean of happiness, encompassing the entire space, waveless as peace personified. Are we not going about without being aware that such a state of peacefulness could even exist ? Now if you tell me, that I am that, how to accept this fact?' To make us accept the fact of existance, Dravida Acharya, has told us of the story of the 'hunter boy who is a prince'!
37. Sri Sankara Bagavat Pada, while commenting on the Brhadaranyaka Upanishad (II - 1 - 20), while explaining the mantra on how the entire universe has evolved out of Atma itself, describes how the Spider spins out the web, from out of itself and the fire throws out the sparks out of itself; has quoted this story by Dravida Acharya, without mentioning his name, 'there is a story like this from someone who knows it all' - 'atra sampradayavida agyayikayam samprakshate', he says. Ananda Giri, who wrote further explanatory notes on Sankara's Bhashyam, has given the name of Dravida Acharya.
38. In the story, did the boy who was thinking of himself to be a hunter, change into a Prince? Did he transform? Did he convert? No. Even when he was thinking himself to be a 'Vedan' or hunter, he was still a Prince only. He did not know the truth. So he lived the life of a 'Vedan'. (There is an appropriate 'pun' on the word Vedan. Vedan means hunter. Vedan also means Veshan, which means 'someone wearing a garb'.) The hunter boy, who was always a Rajakumara, once he realised that he is a Rajakumara, lived as a prince. There was no change and no two persons involved. The change is only in awareness. Initially he did not know himself. Once realised, he claimed and obtained his rightful place as the King.
39. Like the prince in the garb of a hunter(in veda vesham), we the jeevatmas are all thinking of ourelves to be, son, daughter, father, teacher, engineer, lawyer and so many other things than the real self. Though our garb changes, what is inside is Paramatma only. Pulled by the senses, we are hunting in this world, for this and that elusive prize to be captured. Even when we know this, our own senses, will not let us accept the truth.
Though he was a prince, he had to train himself in archery and other princely capabilities, before he could become the king himself. Similarly, we who are Parabrhmam only, start with good attitudes and behaviour of Karmas acceptable in Dharma; and progress via the path of Bakthi or devotion; fight the inner enemies through Atma Sadhana; win over to Atma Gnana; thereby become the king of Atma Samrajya. Atma Gnani is called the Samrat in Upanishads.
40. Ice and Spatikam or crystal, are look alikes. Ice can melt into water. Crystal cannot. Because, ice is wearing a garb / vesham. It can and will become the original water, given the right circumstances. Brhmam frozen into jeevan can revert back to its real self. Ice melts on its own we are refusing to melt. Thayumanavar has come down to our level and sung on our behalf:-
kallenum ayya oru kalathil urugum
en kal nenjam urugavillaiye !
41. To melt us back to our reality, we need some thing. As in the story, to make the prince come back to his senses, he needed a minister, who despite the resitance from the boy'side, could pull him back to princehood. What we need is someone, who could turn us away from the pull of the senses, towards divinity and reality. Is there someone like that availabale? Yes, he is the Guru, who would pull us back to our real self. That Mantri is the Roopakam for the Guru, to make us realise our real self. Someone who could tell us the Parama Atma Tatva, make us experience it in practice, make us do the necessary Sadhana, and till our balance Karma is worked out stand by us, spending his tapasya in doing so; is the Guru.
Sambhomahadeva.