DEIVATHIN KURAL # 127 (Vol # 5) Dated 13 Feb 2012

DEIVATHIN KURAL # 127 (Vol # 5) Dated 13 Feb 2012

(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 789 of Vol 5 of the Tamil original. The readers may note that here in 'man/he' includes 'woman/she' too mostly. These e-mails are all available at http://Advaitham.blogspot.com updated constantly)
752. After Mahendra Varma it was Nrusimha Varma who came to power. His Senapathy aka chief of armed forces was Maamaathra Brahmin Paranjoti. It was he that later became a devotee of Siva and famous as Sirutthonda Naayanaar. To test the intensity of his devotion Siva himself came in the guise of a Bhairava Upasaka. He claimed, that as per the customs and traditions of theirs, he partakes food only once in six months. The food has to be made by slaughtering and cooking the only son of a family, he said. His six months of fasting was over and that today he would like to be fed.
753. Siruthondar thought about the request, “Though an outlandish demand, he seems to be a devotee of Siva coming all the way from somewhere in North India to our house, having fasted for six months! Since I have taken upon myself to look after all devotees of Siva, it is my duty to take care of his need. When I have the only son of my own, it is not in the rightness of things to ask any other family to sacrifice their offspring!” Without any hesitation he took his son to the backyard and arranged to get him cut and cooked! His wife, the very mother of the child also did not show any hesitancy! As demanded by the Bhairava, his son SeeraaLan by name who was just five years of age, was killed, cut, cooked and served to the guest of the house. In India they go by the dictum that the ‘Atiti’ the guest, is God in human form! So, they did not even tell the Bhairava guest that it was their own son. When he sat down to start eating, the guest said, “I am not to eat alone. Call your son to sit next to me and eat.”
754. Siruthondar prayed to Siva in his heart, “Oh God! Your Upasaka Bhairava is sitting for eating food. It is my duty to abide by his wishes. It is your responsibility to ensure that this Atiti does not get angry and walk away from eating.” Then he called for his son, “Come SeeraaLa, come here!” To the surprise of the father and mother, their son came running inside. It became apparent that this was a drama played by God who had come in the guise of a Bhairava Upasaka, to prove the high quality of commitment of Siruthondar, to the task of taking care of devotees of Siva, even to the extent of sacrificing one’s own offspring, that too the only child!
755. Our AachaaryaaL has written many Stotras in the metre known as ‘Bujanga Prayatam’ of 12 Aksharaas per line about Ganesha, Kumara aka SubrahmaNya, Devi, Bhavani, Sharada, Vishnu and Rama. Amongst them there is a ‘Siva Bujanga Stotram’ also. In it, in the 13th sloka he says, “I do not know as to how to please you. I am not able to betray anybody’s trust, whereas you have been kind enough to take care of even those who have betrayed their own wife, father or son!” As ‘kanta drohi, suta drohi and pithru drohi’, the sloka has pointed out three Naayanmaars as having been recipients of God’s largesse.
756. ‘Kanta Drohi’ was Iyarppagai Naayanaar – when Siva came in the form of a devotee of Siva (Sivanadiyaar) and asked for his wife to be loaned to him, Iyarppagai Naayanaar promptly obliged! About him, in Thiru Thonda Thogai Sundara Murthy SwamigaL says ‘illaiye ennaada Iyarppagai-kkum adiyen’ meaning that, ‘I am subservient to Iyarppagai also who did not know as to how to say No!’ Then that story also ended on a happy note like the Siruthondar – SeeraaLan episode. But for the information that he was a businessman in Cauveri Poompattinam, there is no other information available about the time of Iyarppagai Naayanaar.
757. The next mentioned ‘Suta Drohi’ is the story of Siruthondar. He was the Army Commander of Nrusimha Varma when he went to war with ChaLukhya kingdom and defeated them in Vaataapi, in the middle of the 7th Century A.D. Then only after getting to know that he was a great devotee of Siva that the king retired him with much respect, celebration and presents and sent him back to his village Thiru Chengattaankudi. Then he got a child and that incident of visit by Sivanadiyaar Bhairava Upaasakar took place, in the latter half of the 7th Century A.D. So it is said that our AachaaryaaL’s time could not have been predated, as he mentions this incident in his Siva Bujangam!
758. ‘Pitru Drohi’ is about Chandikeswara, eulogised as another great Siva devotee! He was conducting Siva Pooja in which he was pouring pots of milk as Abhishekam on Siva lingam. His father angrily objected to his wasteful behaviour and was about to kick one of the pots. The son cut his father’s legs for this offence. Siva appeared personally and resolved the issue. This Brahmin boy known as Vichara Sarma was renamed Chandikeswara from then and made the leader of all devotees of Siva for all times. He was also accepted as part of the Pancha Murthy-s, the Family of Siva that is, Sivaperumaan, AmbaaL, Vinaayakaa, Muruga and the now accepted Chandikeswara! In the Sivan temples, you will find a small Sannidy at the point where all the Abhisheka Teertam from inside the Sanctum Sanctorum pours out through a fount. His time is eons before historical times and so this reference by AachaaryaaL cannot come in the way his belonging to the period of 6th Century B.C.
759. The objection to his belonging to 6th Century arises out of two other references. One is about a king by name PoorNavarman. In Brhma Sutra Bhashyam II.1.18., in saying that ‘to compare ‘sat’ and ‘asat’ is improbable’, he has given an example of, ‘before the coronation of PoorNavarman, the son of an infertile mother was the king!’ The intension of our AachaaryaaL is to bring out the incongruousness of comparing an existing person with an imaginary non-being! From the example we can easily see that the name could have been anybody and irrelevant to the purport of the message. But they went on a wild goose chase to find out as to who the PoorNavarman being referred to could have been, in trying to fix the likely period of the life of our AachaaryaaL!
760. They identified two kings with that name PoorNavarman. In the Far East where Indian influence was apparent long back, there was a PoorNavarman in the island of Java (aka Yaavagam) in the 4th Century A.D. There on a rock his feet have been sculpted as we do the Vishnu Paadam with an inscription comparing that king by that name as being equal to Maha Vishnu. But that name is discarded on the grounds that it is not likely to be well known to the Indian intelligentsia who are likely to read the book like Brhma Sutram. So they continued the search for such a name amongst Indian royalty, setting aside the Java King.
761. Then they identified another PoorNavarman who had ruled over the western part of Magada Desam in the earlier half of the 7th century A.D., as mentioned by the Chinese visitor Hsuan Tsang. So he must have been the person mentioned by AachaaryaaL, the researchers have decided. AachaaryaaL wrote the Brhma Sutra Bhashyam in Kasi that is close to the west part of Magada Desa, closely related to Bhodha Gaya. There a king by the name Sasank, who was an enemy of the Buddhism, had cut the Bhodhi tree. PoorNavarman replanted that tree (may be another sapling in generally the same area) and nourished its growth. The Orientalists and research scholars have concluded that he must have been the PoorNavarman referred by Sankara AachaaryaaL and thereby come to the conclusion that AachaaryaaL must have been of a time later than that!
762. Now about the second such king. Though our AachaaryaaL may not make a reference about a king in the Far East in his Bhashyams or Slokas, there could be some references about AachaaryaaL in the Far East, because our Vedic religion and Buddhism did spread in those places. There are temples of our Gods and Buddha Viharas and statues of our saints, Agasthya, Buddha and Bodhisatva and so on. There are also stone inscriptions about such things in those places. Cambodia is referred in our ancient literatures as Kaambhojam. There a Sanskrit stone inscription was found. It is by one Indra Varma. His Guru’s name was Siva Soman. He is said to have learnt the Sasstraas from one ‘Bhagawan Sankara’ – ‘yenaatheetaani saastraaNi bhagawat sankarahvayaat’ – then the inscription eulogises the greatness of the ‘Bhagawat Sankara’ saying – that his lotus feet are being thickly invested by honey bees – of the heads of highly knowledgeable well read people; meaning that the world of intelligentsia was all virtually in his feet – nissesha soori moordaali-maalaa leedaangri – pankajaat’!
763. This Bhagawan Sankara can be none else other than our Sankara AachaaryaaL the Orientalists decide. They bring out that such a person to be venerated by the whole of ‘Vidvat Samooham’, was not to be found in the whole of Cambodia and that he had to be Sankara Bhagawat PaadaaL in India, saying that ‘Bhagawat Sankara’ and ‘Sankara Bhagawat’ are only two ways of saying the same name! This Indra Varma’s time has been decided to be the latter half of the 9th Century A.D. His Guru Soman might have been some 30 to 40 year elder to him and he could have been a direct disciple of Sankara AachaaryaaL and so his period of time being fixed as A.D. 788 to 820, seems to be absolutely correct they feel!
764. The Orientalists’ Humour and Animus! Having so decided, they make fun of our lack of historical recording that is, chronological keeping of records of past. It is our habit to consider everything old with respect as we often say that ‘old is gold’! As it becomes older and older, its value, divinity, authority and such things keeps increasing due to our blind beliefs, they say. We say that Manu and Maandaata were there so many thousands of millions of year before the time, when the multi cellular life form came in to being as per the modern man of science! We say that the present Chatur Yuga started some 43,32,000 years back . Kruta Yuga lasted for 17,28,000 years, Treta Yuga lasted for 12,96,000 years, Dwapara Yuga went on for 8,64,000 years and Kali Yuga will go on for 4,32,000 years out of which some 5,000 odd years have been completed; we claim. Then we claim that in the olden days, people lived for thousands of years. We do not stop at that, but say that there have been many such cycles of Chatur Yuga and talk in terms of Manvantaram and Kalpam of Lacs of Crores of years! All that is considered as cock and bull stories, full of false claims and bluff! In the same vein, they say that our estimation of the time of our Sankara Bhagawat Paada AachaaryaaL as 509 to 477 B.C., to be wrong and laughable!
(To be continued.)
Sambhomahadeva.