Re: satsangaH: bhakti, jnAna, karma yoga
guru kripA vilAsam (On the Greatness of the Guru) Vol. 2
From: The Tamil Publications by the devotees of Shringeri Sri ShAradA PITham
Gracious Words
pp.227-231
For SrImad AchAryAL (Sri Chandrasekhara BharatI MahAsvAmigaL), the mAtru bhAShA (mother tongue) was Telugu; desha bhAShA (regional language) was KannaDa; the language he was trained in, was Samskrutam; and the language he made parichayam (acquaintance) with for the sake of his shiShyas was Tamil. He would often say that he did not have a thorough parichayam in Tamil. Still, on some occasions it transpired that he had more knowledge in Tamil than many Tamilians.
AchAryAr: In Tamil, what is the difference between (the usages) 'piRavi (birth) and piRappu (taking birth)?
shiShya: Both are the same.
AchAryAr: If they are the same, whey then two words?
shiShya: There might be many words with the same meaning.
AchAryAr: It is not nyAyam (logical) to be so in any bhAShA. If a word is to denote a padArthaM (meaning), it would 'do pravRutti' (express activity) 'doing avalamba' (resting upon) of a visheSha aMsha (specific feature) of that padArthaM. They would call it pravRutti nimittam in SamskRutam.
Both agni and vahni might denote 'fire'. Still, he gets the name agni by the nimittam (sign, cause) that he 'carries forward' (in tortuous movement) and the name vahni by the nimittam that he 'reaches the havirbhAgas (shares of oblation) to the devatas (gods)'. In the same way, that same agni bears the name dahana since he burns everything, and anala since it swallows and digests everything demanding more.
Therefore, in this manner, although we don't find any difference between the words piRavi and piRappu in everyday usage, there must be distinct inner meanings for them; I asked you as to what those (meanings) are.
shiShya: It is not known to me.
AchAryAr: Can it be this way? The term jananam refers to the kriyA (action) of taking birth; janma refers to the sthiti (state) that ensues after the action of birth is over. That is, one is the action and the other the janya-phala (fruit of birth) of that action. Similarly, can we have it in Tamil that piRappu refers to the janana-kriyA and piRavi refers to the janma-rUpa-phala?
shiShya: Now it seems the same way to me too.
AchAryAr: Mostly, in all languages, if there is parichayam in that lipi (letter), the letters can be read as such. But the meaning would be known only if there is bhAShA jnAnam (knowledge about the language). That is, the shabda jnAnam (knowledge of words and sounds) would first arise and then the meaning has to be searched.
It seems that this krama (order) is different in Tamil. Here, only if the meaning is known first, the akSharas (letters) can be properly pronounced and the text read. For example, let us say that the word palam is written. Should it be read as palaM that refers to a measure of weight, phalaM that refers to a fruit, or balaM that refers to the sharIra shakti (bodily strength)? Only after knowing the meaning appropriate to the prakaraNa (occasion, treatment, context) of this word, it can be pronounced correctly? This seems to be a unique distinction for Tamil.
shiShya: It happens this way because we have only one akSharaM that denotes four sounds. There is only one letter 'ka' for 'ka, kha, ga' and 'gha'.
AchAryAr: Add 'ha' to that list.
shiShya: vAstavaM (true). One letter for five sounds.
AchAryAr: Why, isn't there one letter for seven sounds? Only 'cha' for all 'cha, Cha, ja, jha, sha, Sha' and 'sa'?
shiShya: Yes.
AchAryAr: Thus, if there is one letter for many sounds, there would be good avakAshaM (occasion, opportunity, room) for zleShas (puns) in Tamil?
shiShya: Yes, there is.
AchAryAr: The zleSha that arises due to differences in pronunciation would not be that much shuddha zleSha (clean pun). It is shlAghyaM (praiseworthy) only when there is pun without any pronunciation difference. There could be such puns in Tamil also? Tell me an example.
shiShya: Nothing occurs to me now.
AchAryAr: (considering it for a few moments and then with a smile) It is ordained in our Dharma ShAstras that while we pass through a street and a brAhmaNa is seen, we should cross/overtake him without showing our left profile to him. If that niyama (restraint) is expressed in Tamil, it would be satisfactory to some people in these times. "பார்ப்பானுக்கு இடம் கொடேல்"--"pArppAnukku iDam koDEl"--"Don't give left/room to a brahmin" is only good Tamil, right?
*** *** ***
AchAryAr: In Tamil Desham, if we ask a man "what are you doing?" he says, "வெறுமென இருக்கிறேன்"--"veRumena irukkiREn". Another man says, "தேமேனு இருக்கிறேன்"--"dEmEnu irukkiREn". A different other man says, "சும்மா இருக்கிறேன்"--"summA irukkiREn". What is the difference between these three (usages)?
shiShya: There is no difference at all. They are used only in the meaning, "I remain without doing any kAryaM (work, task)."
AchAryAr: The meaning might be the same. What is the reason for the difference in the shabda (words) in tAtparyaM (purport, aim)?
shiShya: The reason is only their habit (of saying it).
AchAryAr: This reason is not enough. That would give occasion to ask why the habit differs.
shiShya: It is not known to me.
AchAryAr: Can it be this way? If it is "veRumena irukkiREn", "veRum ena irukkiREn", that is, the meaning "I keep my mind empty without any saMkalpaM (wish, desire) therein" seems 'to be in dhvani' (echoed, hinted at) there.
shiShya: It might be so.
AchAryAr: What they say 'dEmEnu' seems to be a maru (Tamil 'maruvu', corruption) of 'deyvamE ena'. That is (for the usage "dEmEnu irukkiREn"), the meaning could become "I leave everything as daivAdhIna (subject to fate or God's will) and remain without myself having any saMkalpaM (wish, desire) or making any pravRutti (activity, exertion)." I have heard some people also say, "சிவனேனு இருக்கிறேன்"--"sivanEnu irukkiREn". Perhaps they too use "sivanE enRu" in the same tAtparyaM.
shiShya: It might be in that same way.
AchAryAr: Those who say "summA irukkiREn", I think, say it with the thought, "svayam Aha irukkiREn--I remain as my Self, that is, knowing my state I remain as my Self with the nishchaya buddhi (firm conviction) that there is no kAryam that need to be done by me."
shiShya: It is not known if at least one person speaks it knowing this much of its tAtparyaM.
AchAryAr: Not necessary that one should know it (the purport). Still, it is known that this knowledge is fixed basically in the people's mind in saMskAra rUpam (as an impression of knowledge). They say "brahmAnandaM" when they experience some visheSha sukhaM (distinct happiness, comfort). Do they say it only after experiencing brahmAnandaM? The saMskAra (impression of knowledge) that brahmAnandaM is the most uttama (lofty) sukham among those traditionally experienced, is fixed in mind.
Similarly, our ShAstras do ghoShaNam (proclammation) that is no kAryaM (task, act) is there to do for
• one who stands in yoga-niShTa (meditative union) doing nirodha (restraint, control, locking up) of all chitta-vRuddhi (expansion of mind);
• one who remains in bhakti-niShTa (meditative devotion) keeping no pravRutti (activity, exertion) for himself and 'doing arpaNa' (consigning) of all kinds of his aMshas (characteristics) and surrendering to BhagavAn (God); and
• one who is in laya (absorbed in dissolution) in jnAna-niShTa (meditative knowledge) as kevala-akhaNDa-chaitanya-rUpaM (abstract, unbroken form of knowledge) setting aside all his dehendriya manobuddhi (body, senses, mind and intelligence) as not his Self.
It seems that having heard this knowledge from the elders, the saMskAram has arisen in people, to describe their actionless state as "veRumena" as a yogi, "deyvamE ena" as a bhakta and as "svayam Aha" as a jnAni.
Last edited by saidevo; 07 August 2009 at 09:45 AM.
रत्नाकरधौतपदां हिमालयकिरीटिनीम् ।
ब्रह्मराजर्षिररत्नाढ्यां वन्दे भारतमातरम् ॥
To her whose feet are washed by the ocean, who wears the Himalayas as her crown, and is adorned with the gems of rishis and kings, to Mother India, do I bow down in respect.
--viShNu purANam
Bookmarks