guru kripA vilAsam (On the Greatness of the Guru)

[saidevo]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

14: pp.124-243
pages 124-126

Thus informing SannidhAnam, Justice Chandrashekhara aiyar and his thandaiyAr--father, went to their jAhai--residence. Having darshan of shrI ShAradA ChandramaulIshvara puja on that evening and the next morning, receiving tIrtha prasAdam--sacred water offered, and after having vishrAnti--rest, at their jAhai, they went to the SatchidAnanda vilAsam Ashram on the other bank of the TungA river.

As they were told there that SannidhAnam on that day started and went to the KAla Bhairava Alayam--temple, as eary as four in the morning, they somehow reached that place. There, only our pUrvAshrama--of earlier stage in life, SrInivAsan and this lekhaka--writer, had gone with SannidhAnam and were reciting antAdi shlokas.

Asking them to be seated, and looking at KuppusvAmi aiyar, shrI SannidhAnam made all such inquiries as, "Did all of you have shrI ShAradAmbAL darshan? Received tIrtha prasAdam? Did you have at least some peace of mind in your arrival here?"

KuppusvAmi:- shrI ShAradA ChandramaulIshvara darshanam and the tIrtha prasAdam--all were received in Anandam--to our happiness. Even then, like the kind of nimmati--peace, that arises in this ekAnta saMnivesham--settlement in solitude, and having darshan of SannidhAnam, it does not arise in other places. The mind is not also willing to leave SannidhAnam.

shrI SannidhAnam:- Isn't this the place where the RShyaShringAdi mahAmunis--great ascetics, resided? What surprise is there for the mana vishrAnti--mental abatement, arising for those who are here?

KuppusvAmi:- In this town, we were staying for some nADika, nAzhikai (Tamizh)--time measure of 24 minutes, in the dharmashAla--free quarters for boarding and lodging, and then for sometime at shrI ShAradAlayam and in many other saMnidhis--deity abodes. But then we feel attaining an asAdhAraNa nimmati--unusual peace, when coming to this saMnidhAnam. We cannot have this in the other places!

shrI SannidhAnam:- You have started your purANam--tales, again. Alright...

The sage asked this lekaka to continue the antAdi shloka giving the phrase प्रकृतमनुसरामः--prakRutamanusarAmaH. This man too recited his shlokam and completed it. When our SrInivAsan's turn came next, he recited his shlokam and finished with भजे शारदांबामजस्रं मदंबाम्--bhaje shAradAMbAmajasraM madaMbAm, it happened that SannidhAnam had to recite a shlokam starting in the ba-kAram--the letter 'ba'. After thinking over a little,

बालेन्दुप्रविभासिमौलिरनिशं स्मेराननः शंकरो
वीणावादनसादरा विधिसती कारुण्यपूर्णेक्षणा ।
मत्सान्निध्यसमुज्ज्वलं सहसुतं भक्ताग्रगण्यं कविं
पायान्मुक्तिवधूकरग्रहविधौ दत्वाऽऽनुकूल्यं जवात् ॥

bAlendu-pravibhAsimauliranishaM smerAnanaH shaMkaro
vINAvAdanasAdarA vidhisatI kAruNyapUrNekShaNA |
matsAnnidhyasamujjvalaM sahasutaM bhaktAgragaNyaM kaviM
pAyAn-muktivadhUkaragrahavidhau datvA&&nukUlyaM javAt ||

[Can someone translate this shloka for me?--sd]

--as he recited this shlokam beautifully with pauses, Ananda bAShpam--tears of joy, started issuing out of KuppusvAmi aiyar's eyes. Bowing, he said in paravasham--self-obliterating happiness, "sadguro, only today I became dhanya--fortunate/happy. It is only the same shloka that was already spoken by SannidhAnam in the shrImukham--foreword, for stava ratnAvalI, has come out now with some changes. It is written in a sAdhAraNa--common, manner in the shrImukham. Since now we have received such AshIrvAdas--blessings, through SannidhAnam's mukham--mouth, we are all parama dhanyas--very fortunate."

Whereas SannidhAnam, hiding it all as if he knew nothing of it, said with mandahAsam--smile, said, "Since no other shlokas could be found readily in the ba-kAram, I uttered this shlokam; there is no other kAraNam--reason." When thinking how we all became Ananda paravasha listening to his words, it gives goosebumps even today.

(In the letter shrImAn Chandrashekhara aiyar wrote to this lekaka after he got into the sthAnam--position, of a Judge of the Supreme Court, reminiscing the incident which happened on that day at the KAla Bhairava temple at Shringagiri, since on that day, SannidhAnam in-sAkShAt--visibly, did anugraham--divine favour, to him also along with his appA--(Tamizh)father, as सहसुतं--sahasutaM, this higher padavi--post, was received by him, so he requests this lekaka that he should have the anugraham for that guru-bhakti to continue in him without any change. By this, readers might understand, how far the kRpA-vilAsam--shining compassion, of our GurunAthar can reach, and cause all sorts of adbhutas--wonders.)

 

[saidevo]

14: pp.124-243
pages 126-128

As with the previous day, the next day too, sAyaMkAlam--in the evening, those pitA-putra--father and son, did vandana--reverence, and took part in the antAdi shlokas.

That particular day's conversations and shlokas turned out to be vairAgyaparam--about renunciation of desires. As the lakAram--the syllable 'la', came up in the order of antAdi shlokas, SannidhAnam, with some purpose,

लोको नापुत्रस्यास्तीति श्रुत्या त्वभाषि को लोकः ।
मुक्तिः संसरनं वा तदन्यलोकोऽथवा नाद्यः ॥

loko nAputrasyAstIti shrutyA tvabhAShi ko lokaH |
muktiH saMsaranaM vA tadanyaloko&thavA nAdyaH ||

uttered this prabodha-sudhAkara shlokam and asked if anyone there knew the shlokas that follow it. Since the others did not say anything, he ordered this Lekaka to recite them, which are as follows:

सर्वेपि पुत्रभाजः तन्मुक्तौ नैव संसृतिर्भवति ।
श्रवणादयो अपि उपायाः मृषा भवेयुः तृतीयेऽपि ॥

तत् प्राप्त्युपायसत्वात् द्वितीयपक्षे अपि अपुत्रस्य ।
पुत्रेष्ट्याधिकयागप्रवृत्तये वेदवादो अयम् ॥

sarvepi putrabhAjaH tanmuktau naiva saMsRutirbhavati |
shravaNAdayo api upAyAH mRuShA bhaveyuH tRutIye&pi ||

tat prAptyupAyasatvAt dvitIyapakShe api aputrasya |
putreShTyAdhikayAgapravRuttaye vedavAdo ayam ||

[The meaning of the three verses:
..::Nama Dwaar ::.. Prabodha Sudhakara 35

'There is no world for a man without a son.' What is the world spoken of by this utterance of Veda? Is it liberation or worldly existence or a world other than these two? It is not the first (i.e. Liberation).

All men have sons. If it is that they would get liberated on this account, we see that transmigratory existence alone arises. In this case, means such as shravaNa etc would also be futile. Even in the third alternative (i.e. other world), there are other means to attain the same.

Not the second case (worldly existence) as there are other means to attain this too. So these declarations of the Veda are only eulogical statements in order to induce a man in religious ceremonies like ‘putra kAmeshti’ the sacrificial ritual to obtain a son.]

*****

As he ordered this Lekaka to tell the meaning too, the latter started explaining only the meaning that is at the sthUla--verbal level.

Namely, what is the meaning of the shruti vAkyam--Vedic statement,

नापुत्रस्य लोकोऽस्ति
nAputrasya loko&sti?

The meaning is, "for he who has no putra--son, there is no world?", right? What is the world mentioned therein, asks our AchAryAL (Shankara).

To say that it is mukti--liberation, won't be suitable. Because, (wouldn't it mean that) everyone who has a putra can attain mukti? If everyone in that manner attains mokSham--liberation, wouldn't the saMsAra--world process, be deprived of its prashakti--power of dominance?

• In addition, it would result in there being no prAmANyam--authority/authenticity, for the (bRhadAraNyaka) upaniShad vAkyam

आत्मा वा अरे दृष्टव्यः श्रोतव्यो मन्तव्यो निदिध्यासितव्यः

AtmA vA are dRuShTavyaH shrotavyo mantavyo nididhyAsitavyaH
[The Self should be seen, heard, worshiped, and always meditated on.]

found in the maitreyI bhrAhmaNam.

• This is because, it that very maitreyI bhrAhmaNam, AtmajnAnam as the sAdhanam--means, for mukti is mentioned earlier:

अमृतत्वस्य तु नाशास्ति वित्तेनेति

amRutatvasya tu nAshAsti vitteneti
[By knowing Him one becomes immortal.]

येनाहं नामृतः स्यां किम् अहं तेन कुर्याम्

yenAhaM nAmRutaH syAM kim ahaM tena kuryAm
[Tell me what I must do to become free of death.]

• By such statements, indicating mokSham as amRutatvam--immortality, and saying that AtmajnAnam--as in आत्मा वा अरे दृष्टव्यः--AtmA vA are dRuShTavyaH--is the sAdhanam--means to attain it,

as to what is the sAdhanam for that jnAnam--knowledge, how that AtmajnAnam can arise,

the three sAdhanas of shravaNam, mananam, nididhyAsanam are mentioned in the statement which says

श्रोतव्यो मन्तव्यो निदिध्यासितव्यः
shrotavyo mantavyo nididhyAsitavyaH.

• Therefore, since it is stated in the maitreyI bhrAhmaNam that having attained AtmajnAnam through shravaNAdi--means like listening to, worshipping and meditating on,

only through that (AtmajnAnam) can the mokSha padavi--path of liberation (that leads to amRutatvam--immortality) be attained, and the shravaNadi sAdhanas are prescribed for it,

and as the putrabhAgyam--fortune of having a son, is not mentioned as a sAdhanam,

it would not be suitable to say that mokSha can be attained by having a putra--son.

It cannot be stated with certainty that putra is the sAdhanam for ihaloka saukhyam--welfare in this world, or paraloka saukhyam--welfare in the other world.

• This is because, तत्प्राप्त्युपायसत्वात्--tatprAptyupAyasatvAt, only dana-dAnyAdi--wealth and charity, are mentioned as the sAdhanam for ihaloka saukhyam and yAgAdi--Vedic sacrifices, etc. for paraloka saukhyam.

• shruti vAkyas such as

ज्योतिष्टोमेन स्वर्गकामो यजेत्

jyotiShTomena svargakAmo yajet
(agnihotra or other sacrificial acts are the means to attain the heavens.)

prescribe in-spaShTam--clearly, that yAgam--sacrifice, is the means to svargam--heavens.

• Therefore, the shruti
नापुत्रस्य लोकोऽस्ति
nAputrasya loko&sti

is only an arthavAda-vAkyam--an eulogistic statement, and not a vidhivAkyam--statement that prescribes a rule of conduct or means.

• This statement should only be considered as an arthavAdam for the vidhi--rule,

पुत्रकामः पुत्रेष्ट्या यजेत्
putrakAmaH putreShTyA yajet.

*****

In other words, he who desires a putra should do the putrakAmeShTi yAgam says a vidhivAkyam.

• Considering that if there is no putrakAmana--desire to have a son, people might not perform that yAgam--sacrifice, to make them be interested in that putrakAmeShTi yAgam, the arthavAda vAkyam

नापुत्रस्य लोकोऽस्ति
nAputrasya loko&sti

has arisen.

• If they are threatened that there will be no lokam--world, for them if there is no putra, people with no putrabhAgyam would perform the putrakAmeShTi yAgam as Dasharatha mahArAja did in the rAmAyaNam;

and the vedavAkyam that prescribed the putrakAmeShTi yAgam would also become saphalam--bear fruits.

it is with this consideration, that the mImAMsakas--followers of mImAMsA philosophy, compel such kAmya yAgas--sacrifices for fulfilment of a desire, too.

 

[saidevo]

14: pp.124-243
pages 128-130

• But then viewed in the context of the Vedanta shAstra which is parama-siddhAntam--supreme philosophy, it is seen as unnecessary. 'Will the shruti compel one who has no putra-kAmana--desire for a son, to perform the putrakAmeShTi yAgam?' asks BhagavadpADAL.

नाकामतः क्रिया काचित् द्श्यते कस्यचित् क्वचित् ।
यद्यद्धि कुरुते जन्तुः तत्तत्कामस्य चेष्टितम् ॥

nAkAmataH kriyA kAchit dRshyate kasyachit kvachit |
yadyaddhi kurute jantuH tattatkAmasya cheShTitam ||
--manu smRti 2.4

2.4. Not a single act here (below) appears ever to be done by a man free from desire; for whatever (man) does, it is (the result of) the impulse of desire.

• In no place in the world does a man do something without a desire. In the nyAya-prakAra--manner of the NyAya, that every act of a prANin--living creature, happens only due to the urge of desire, for one who has no desire, there could be no pravRtti--activity (for him) in karma--rites, and that in kAmya-karma--action done by selfish motives?

• Will a shruti compel us to perform putrakAmeShTi yAgam, whether we have the desire (for a son) or not! Therefore the tIrmAnam--(tam)conclusion is that the shruti-vAkyam नापुत्रस्य लोकोऽस्ति
nAputrasya loko&sti is only an-arthavAda-vAkyam]--praise that occurred to praise the putrakAmeShTi yAgam.

• Thus, when this Lekhaka exemplified the artha--meaning that is sthulam--literal, approving it, SannidhAnam taught us still more distinguished ideas.

लोके व्यवायामिषमद्यसेवा नित्यास्तु जन्तोर्नहि तत्र चोदना ।
व्यवस्थितिस्तत्र विवाहयज्ञसुराग्रहैरासु निवृत्तिरिष्टा ॥

loke vyavAyAmiSha-madya-sevA nityAstu jantornahi tatra chodanA |
vyavasthitistatra vivAha-yaj~ja-surA-grahairAsu nivRuttir-iShTA ||
--shrImad bhAgavatam 11.5.11

(In this world, seeking strI-bhogam--enjoyment of women, mAmsam--meat, madyam--liquor, as they arise naturally in the living creatures, there is no urge of the shAstram in this matter. The shAstra does-nirNayam--determines in such matters through vivAha-—by sacred marriage, yajna-—sacrificial offering, and surA-grahaiH-—acceptance of ritual cups of wine. The opinion of the shAstra is that apart from these occasions, these things should not be indulged in.)

SannidhAnam took this bhAgavata shloka as SannidhAnam--of similar qualities, for this subject.

• Only if a man is to suffer in the saMsAram--worldly life, he should get married, otherwise there is no compulsion. Similarly, only if he is to experience viShaya-sukham--sensual pleasures, he should get married, so it is not compulsory for others (who do not want it).

• Another man might take to gRuhasthAshramam--family life, with a wish to do-anuShThAnam--peform with strict observance, either such smArta karmas--rituals prescribed by SmRti, such as aupAsanam and vaishvadevam, or the shrauta karmas--rituals prescribed by Shruti, such as agnihotram.

No shruti-vAkyam has arisen to compel a virakta--dispassionate, who has no such abhilAShA--wish, to get married. It cannot be compelled too.

• All that the shruti prescribes is a way to do-nivRtti-of--renounce any kAmana--desire, a man may have; it does not advise anywhere, to have desires or do-vRtti-of--sustain/practice, them.

Would a mother save or encourage a child who is about to fall into fire or a dangerous pit? In the same way, vedamAtA--Veda, the Mother, only shows a good path to divert people going astray in many other ways, being urged by their desires, that's all.

• That is, a niyama--restraint, check, called vivAham--marriage, has been created to turn a man towards a good path, when he, urged by his desire towards viShaya-bhogam--sensual enjoyment, in order to satisfy it, goes in many durmArga--bad ways.

The shruti has no opinion that a man must get married. The opinion of the shruti stays pUrNam in lifting a man up from his desires that has arisen from the janmAntara vAsanas--impressions of past births, by (urging him towards) doing-nivRtti--renouncing, of them (gradually).

• If it is all discipline to do-nivRtti-of the desires, no fruits will be attained it. Won't many apAyas--dangers/deaths, happen when after a pravAham--flood, it is sought to be controlled in a single stroke? The viveka--discretion, would lie in regulating to a single course, the floods that have already occurred.

 

[saidevo]

14: pp.124-243
pages 131-133

Only to regulate the kAma-pravAham--flow of lust, into the shAstrIya mArgam--path in conformity with scriptures, that the niyamas--restraints, such as vivAham--marriage, have arisen.

• The opinion of the shruti is that doing-anusaraNam--following those niyamas, let the kAmanA-nivRtti--cessation of lust, be done. This is mentioned in the yoga vAsiShTha:

शुभाशुभाभ्यां मार्गाभ्यां वहन्ती वासनासरित् ।
पौरुषेण प्रयत्नेन योजनीया शुभे पथि ॥

shubhAshubhAbhyAM mArgAbhyAM vahantI vAsanAsarit |
pauruSheNa prayatnena yojanIyA shubhe pathi ||

"The pravAham--stream, of the nadI--river called janmAntara vAsanA--impressions of former lives, runs through the paths of both good and bad. A man by his efforts should prevent its going in the path of bad and let it flow through the path of good."

[I found this quote in the muktikA upaniShad 2.5. Any clarifications would be helpful.--sd]

• Thus, describing the mano-vRttis--dispositions of the mind, and the vAsanAs--impressions, as a river in great flood, it is mentioned that the buddhishAlitvam--mark of wisdom, lies in directing it in the good path, as it is an impossible task to block it in all the paths of its course.

• Let it not be thought that it is compulsory for even those with vivekam--discrimination, and vairAgyam--dispassion to get married.

• If that be the case, wouldn't the shruti vAkyam--shruti statement, "यदि वेतरथा ब्रह्मचर्यादेव प्रव्रजेत्--yadi vetarathA brahmacaryAdeva pravrajet--Otherwise, one may become saMnyAsin--ascetic from brahmachArya--bachelorhood", go waste?

If the vivAham is compulsory, would the jAbAla shruti thus do-goShaNam--proclaim aloud, that one can obtain saMnyAsam direct from the brahmachArya (Ashram)?

• Therefore, vivAham is ordained for only those who have kAmana--sensual interests, in the viShayasukhAdis--pleasures of the senses. It is not compulsory for others.

• This is what is mentioned in the bhAgavata shlokam as
"नहि तत्र चोदना
--nahi tatra chodanA". The reason why it is not compelled is also mentioned as "नित्यास्तु जन्तो--nityAstu janto".

[The related bhAgavata shloka is as under:

लोके व्यवायामिषमध्यसेव नित्या हि जन्तोर्न हि तत्र चोदना ।
व्यवस्थितिस्तेषु विवाहयज्ञ सुराग्रहैरासु निव्त्तिरिष्टा ॥

loke vyavAyAmiShamadhyaseva nityA hi jantorna hi tatra chodanA |
vyavasthitisteShu vivAhayaj~ja surAgrahairAsu nivRttiriShTA ||
--bhAgavatam 11.05.11

"The urge of sex, flesh-hunger, and wine-thirst,
Are ever there and need no stimulus.
The institutions of the marriage bond
And ceremonial sacrifice were made
To limit them; better is abstinence."
--Tr. BhagavAn Das--sd]

This means that since the viShaya-pravRtti--attachment to objects, is rAgaprApta--gratifying the senses, the opinion is that there is no necessity for shruti to compel indulgence in it.

• In that case the saMdeham--doubt, as to what for are the vidhis--rules, such as ऋतौ भार्यामुपेयात्--Rutau bhAryAmupeyAt might arise. Only to do-nivRtta--remove, that saMdeham, it is mentioned as आसु निव्त्तिरिष्टा--Asu nivRttiriShTA--"of these, cessation/abstinence is the desired end."

• Except that the opinion of the shruti is that the kAmanas--sensual interests, arising on the balam--strength of the janmAnarIya vAsanAs--impressions of past births, should be destroyed, there is no vidhi--rule or compulsion to do Rtu-gamanam.

• But then as to what is the tAtparyam--purpose/meaning, of upeyAt--let him approach,

यदि उपेयात् तर्हि ऋतावेव भार्यामेव उपेयात्
yadi upeyAt tarhi RutAveva bhAryAmeva upeyAt

"A man who has the kAmana--sensual interests, should only seek his wife; and that only during her RtukAlam--time after her courses."

the tAtparyam for shruti is in these two kinds of niyamas--restraints, and not in the vidhi--rule, upeyAt--must seek--this is known clearly.

Even the mImAMsas--followers of the pUrva mImAMsA darshana, who don't do-anggIkaraNam--approve of saMnyAsa vidhi--regulations for ascetics, have agreed to this.

• Some of them argue that the saMnyAsa-Ashrama is only for those who are blind, dumb, or deaf, and not for those who are dRDha-gAtras--firm-bodied. Even they do not say that vivAham--marriage, is only for viShaya-bhogam--enjoyment of sense objects.

• As they have agreed that vivAham is a sAdhanam--means, for karmAnuShThAnam--religious practices, and prajA-vRddhi--increase of offspring, it amounts to their doing-anggIkaraNam--consenting, in a way, that the tAtparyam--purpose, for shruti lies in kAmanA-nivRtti--cessation of lust.

• Haven't the mImAMsakas too have done by this vivAha niyama vidhi--regulatory rules of marriage, by which a man by the rise in him of the abhilASha--desire, for viShaya-sukha--pleasure of the senses, cannot go in some other durmArgam--bad ways, and get their iShTa--wish, fulfilled?

• Therefore, haven't the mImAMsakas too agreed that, although they have their purpose sadA--always, in pravRtti mArgam--life in the three worlds (in this case), without their knowing it, as said in

आसु निव्त्तिरिष्टा--Asu nivRttiriShTA--"of these, cessation/abstinence is the desired end.",

for the vivAhAdi--marriage and allied regulations, the ultimate aim is only in kAmanA-nivRtti--cessation of lust?

• That being the case, can't it be said that the vedAntins who always have their tAtparyam--purpose, in the nivRtti-mArgam--life of renunciation, would (readily) do-anggIkaraNam--consent to, (the truth) that the purpose of vivAhAdi is only in kAmanA-nivRtti?