DEIVATHIN KURAL # 04 (Vol # 5) Dated 07 Jun 2011

DEIVATHIN KURAL # 04 (Vol # 5) Dated 07 Jun 2011

(These e-mails are translations of talks given by PeriyavaaL of Kanchi Kaamakoti Peetam, over a period of some 60 years while he was the pontiff in the earlier part of the last century. These have been published by Vanadi Padippagam, Chennai, in seven volumes of a thousand pages each as Deivathin Kural. Today we are proceeding from the second para on page No 22 of Vol 5 of the Tamil original. The readers may note that herein 'man/he' includes 'woman/she' too mostly. These e-mails are all available at http://Advaitham.blogspot.com updated constantly)
32. To understand the question, let us look at it again, ‘tat hetoreva tat hetutve madye kim tena?’ In this there are two ‘tat’. At the end there is a ‘tena’ which is also the third conjugation of ‘tat’ meaning ‘by that’ only. The meaning of the sentence is, ‘that being the cause for the second ‘tat’ also, why bother with one more cause?’ Not understood? Think again! The first ‘tat’ is the ‘upa lakshyam’or secondary aim. The second ‘tat’ is the main aim. So, the meaning of the sentence is, “when the cause of the secondary aim is already the cause of the original main aim, why trouble ourselves with the secondary cause for the secondary aim? Let us simply do with the original cause for the original first aim!” If I give an example, the question will be correctly understood.
33. Let us say that we have to buy a bag of rice. To purchase a bag of rice is the main aim. We think that if we go to the nearby wealthy land lord, he will be able to give us a bag of rice at a price of course. But he will do so on the words of a nearby shop keeper. The first ‘hetu’ becomes the ‘upa lakshyam’ for which the shop keeper becomes the ‘hetu’. Now the funny thing is that, without any other recommendation the shop keeper himself could supply the bag of rice, becoming the ‘hetu’ for the main lakshyam or aim! So, why go to the land lord through the shop keeper, when the shopkeeper himself could supply what we want?
34. Here there is the lamp with five faced arrangement. Say we have to light up the east faced wick for which we have to light it with the help of a match stick by striking the same against surface pasted with the chemical. Instead why should we first light up the west faced wick and then using that wick light up the east faced wick? (PeriyavaaL laughs!) When we could light up this wick directly why make the process complicated by bringing in another wick? “tat hetoreva tat hetutve madye kim tena?” How is this logic applied to PiLLaiyar, in the mangala sloka in ‘Nyayendu Sekharam’?
35. At the start of the sloka what we do normally is described. For education we pray to Saraswathi. For wealth we approach Lakshmi. For our eyes to be healthy we do Surya Namaskara (Sun worship) and so on. That is, for various purposes we pray to many deities as the ‘hetu’. Whatever the deity we are praying to, so as to obviate any problems in the process, we first do prayers to PiLLaiyar by making a symbolic idol of PiLLaiyar in turmeric powder. This is what is said in the first part of the sloka.
36. Then it says, “apyanyaamaram aariraadayishataam”, means that ‘even for those who wish to pray to deities other than PiLLaiyar’; ‘amara’ means deathless deities; ‘api’ means also; ‘anya’ means other; ‘aariraada ishatam’ means the one to whom wish to pray to. Even those who wish to pray to other deities know that they must first pray to the lotus feet of the one, so as to obviate any obstacles in their endeavour; that is the meaning of, “yat paada pangeruha dwandwa aaraadanam antraaya hataye kaaryam tu avasyam vidu:”.
37. There is a word ‘dwandwam’ in Sanskrit, which over time became ‘dondam’ in Tamil to mean connecting attachment. The actual meaning of the word in Sanskrit is ‘twin’. The pair of lotus feet is ‘paada pangeruha dwandwam’. The relation is called in Tamil as ‘sondam’, ‘bandam’ and ‘dondam’. The word ‘sondam’ means kith and kin as they are related to ‘swa’ the self, me and mine. The word ‘bandam’ is the knot (may be by marriage) from which evolves the word ‘bandu’ for relations. The word ‘dondam’ is used in a slightly derogatory way to mean, unavoidable commitment! Similar to saying that ear rings or shoes or people in friendship are pairs; when two people become arch enemies and fight, it is said to be a ‘dwandwa yuddham’.
38. The lotus like pair of feet is “paada pangeruha dwandwam”. The words ‘pangeruham’ and ‘pankajam’ are synonymous. The clean, dirt free, beautiful and fragrant lotus sprouts out of dirty, murky and slimy water. ‘Whatever are your origins, you can raise yourself to be clean and pure’; is the thought that comes to one’s mind, while looking at the lotus flower. From the mire the lotus is ‘pangeruham’; from any water source it is ‘neerajam’ or ‘sarasijam’ or ‘amboruham’ or ‘vaarija’. In our confused mind also the flower bloom is God’s lotus feet!
39. Even those who prayed to other deities were aware that so as to obviate any interference in their worship it is necessary to pray to this somebody. Accordingly they were doing ‘paada pooja’ to this somebody it means. The meaning of ‘antarayam’ is ‘vignam’ or obstacle. To obviate such blockades, ‘antarayam hataye’, they not only knew that it is good to do so, they were aware that it was essential. That action is not only simply good but, ‘kaaryam tu avasyam’ becomes ‘tvavasyam’!
40. Who is this necessary person to be prayed to, is not directly mentioned. Putting that word ‘api’ (also) at the beginning, without telling as to who is this deity, to later reveal that deity’s identity, is a trick of the poet to sustain interest in his narrative. Accordingly, ‘yat paada pangeruham’ meaning, ‘the one to whose lotus feet they pray to’, whosoever He may be, His greatness is revealed, is it not so?
41. If there is some interference in the prayers to other Gods and Deities, they do not have the power to block such, which somebody else has. Otherwise why should devotees of other Gods do pooja to Him? Let anybody be the ‘Ishta Devata’ of theirs and however much they may believe in that God, since they are aware that this one will solve any present and future problems, they have to catch hold of this One’s feet! In the third line of the sloka it says, ‘knowing him to be the one supreme God, knowing ‘tat hetu nyaayam’. Even here it does not reveal as to who is being referred to but, ‘yam’ meaning whom, ‘devam yam ekam param’, God of all Gods, the Deitiy of all Deities without a second; to Him we should be praying to, the sloka reveals without mentioning that God’s name! In Tamil ‘yaar’ means who? ‘Pillay’ means child or baby, ‘baby who’ is ‘PiLLaiyar’. Thus in the last line, ‘tat hetu nyaayam’ is connected aptly to PiLLaiyar!
42. For some gain or advantage when anyone prays to whichever God, he is afraid that there could be some interference to that process of prayer itself. Is it correct to fear so? Does it not show a certain paucity of faith in his Ishta Devata? It is prayer to God that he is starting. Then will that God or Goddess let anything come in the way of his prayers? That can be a genuine question. But, there is sense in this man’s fears. His fear is based in what he sees in the Saastraas and Puraanaas. His Upasana Murthy and so many other Devataas too, when starting any action even for the common benefit of the humanity at large, have had to face many difficulties in their way and got the relief by praying to PiLLaiyar only. When such is the case of theirs, ‘who am I but a small fry’, can be his thinking. “May be I could be faced with many a problem. May be there can be unexpected problems or some untoward incident one comes across. These are problems specific to me. May be my Ishta Devata could also have to face such things. So it is better that we pray to that God first, to whom our own Ishta Devata prayed to”, can be his logic.
43. So, a normal human is likely to pray to PiLLaiyar first to obviate any such ‘Vignam’ in his endeavour. The author of the sloka is not one of those ordinary devotees. He is known to be ‘tat hetoriti neetivid’, as a man who is an expert in Tarka Saastram! So he is likely to come to a decision after due deliberation. In the case of PiLLaiyar, what decision does he come to?
(We will see that in the next e-mail. To be continued.)
Sambhomahadeva.