1. Maha:Great
2. Mahâ in Tamil
3. Mahâvakyas of the Hindu Tradition
4. Hinduism & Rationality - The Dynamic Tension of Di-Poles
5. Hindu Egalitarianism and Western Modernity
6. The Four MahaVakyas of the Upanishads
7. The Mahâyajñas of Hindu Praxis
8. Bhâshyas and Mahâbhâshya
9. Mahâkavis and Mahâkâvyas
10. Hindu Philosophies
11. Hindu Philosophies (contd)
12. The World is Acattu NOT False
13. Mahâkavi Kâlidâsa
14. Ushavandanam - Kalidasa
15. 36 Tattvas and Beyond - Mind and Beyond
16. Raghuvamsa
17. Kumârasambhava
18. The Death of the Autonomy of the Soul - Vallalar
19. The Mahâbhârata
20. More on the Mahabharata
21. Some Other mahâs
22. The Religious Madness and Evil Karmas - Vallalar
23. The Evolution and Liberation - Nammalvar
24. Philosophy of Nammalvar
25. Karma and the Theory of Pebbles in a Pond - Wave Resonance
26. Realities and Ultimate Realities
27. Kacciyappa Sivacharyar (Sivâcâriyâr)
28. Sarabha Upanishad - Sarabha Destroys Narasimha
29. Annapurna Upanishad
30. Advaya Taraka Upanishad - on Spirituality
31. Pasupata Brahmana Upanishad - on God's Will
32. The First Word and Hymn: Agni - by Visvamitra
33. Siddhanta and Vedanta - Advaita Relationship
34. Searching for the Gods
35. The Vedas on Women
36. Catur-words
37. Ramayana Made Easy
38. Appar on BEING as the World Itself
39. Siddhanta Mukti
40. Siddhanta Mukti (contd)

.

.
-----------------------------------------------------

Maha:Great

I will begin my reflections on Sanskrit with one of the most frequently
occurring sounds in the language: mahâ. Without going into the grammatical
details I will simply note that this prefix is derived from mahat: great. When
placed in front of a noun, it acquires the connotation of something that is very
special or unusually great, as will be seen in the examples to follow.

The word mahâ is related to the Greek mega which also means great.
That’s why a big city (polis in Greek) is called a megalopolis. A megaphone
refers to a device that makes sound great, or as we would say, that magnifies
sound. The word magnify comes from the Latin magnus which again means great.
Recall that the Great Charter of English history is known by its Latin name,
Magna Carta. In scientific metrology, mega- is a prefix for one-million. For
example, one million hertz is a megahertz.

In Hindu metaphysics, âtma(n) refers to the soul. With the prefix mahâ
added to âtma, we get mahâtmâ: great soul. This is an honorific given to
extraordinary individuals, people who have distinguished themselves by character
and spiritual strength. The best known use of this title in modern times was for
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869-1948), who is often referred to as Mahâtmâ
Gandhi.

The term âtmiya could mean a sanctified region. Combined with mâhâ (an
older form of mahâ), it gives mâhâtmiya: which refers to a great place of
pilgrimage. The term also refers to a genre of writing that tells of stories
associated with such places. An important poem venerating Shakti (Cosmic
Principle) describes her exploits at specific sacred spots when She came to rid
the world of evil forces. This work is known as Devi Mâhâtmya. It occurs in the
MarkanDeya PurâNa. It invokes Mahâkâli, Mahâlakshmi, and Mahâsarasvati. It is
considered by some to be a scriptural work. there are 700 (saptasatI) verses in
13 chapters in this work. It is a magnificent narration of mythic visions of how
evil forces and miscreants came to be subdued by the Mother Goddess to protect
the world. It may be taken as a parable to reminds us of how maternal love will
not brook any danger that might confront the offspring. Devi Mâhâtmya dates
back to the 5th-6th century CE.

The word kavi means poet and kâvya is a sophisticated poetic work. In
classical Sanskrit literature at least six major works are known as mahâkâvyas.
The correspopnding mahâkavis are Kalidâsa, (5th century CE), Bhâravi (6th
cent.), and Bhartrihari (7th cent.), Megha (8th cent.), Kumâradâsa (7th cent.),
and Shriharsha (12th cent.).

Yâna refers to a path or something that takes us along a path: a
vehicle. With mahâ, it gives us mahâyâna: the branch of Buddhism that deifies
the Buddha and speaks of Bodhisattvas who are divine beings. mahâyâna was
propagated by Nâgârjuna in the first centuries of the CE. We see here an
example of Sanskrit terms in Buddhism.

V. V. Raman
March 14, 2007

The Sanskrit prefix mahâ has entered the Tamil language in two different ways.
First, since the sound ha is not intrinsic to Tamil, mahâ becomes makâ, and may
be pronounced magâ. With this connotation, most Sanskrit words with mahâ have
their Tamil equivalents. Thus, for example, one has in Tamil magâdevan (the
Great God, an epithet for Lord Shiva), magâsakti (The Great Cosmic Energy),
magânyâni (a great enlightened man), etc. The word for a trillion is
magâpadumam. [In later Tamil, letters for the Sanskrit sounds sha, sa, ksha, ja,
ha were also introduced.]

The tenth lunar asterism is magam (maham). Roughly every twelve years there
occurs a full moon with this asterism. It is noteworthy that Hindu astronomers
observed such rare celestial phenomena. This event is called a magâmagam (or
mâmagam). This is a religious day for Shaivas. Mâmagam became mâmângam in
colloquial Tamil. To say that someone has seen five mâmângams means he has lived
for sixty years: an important landmark in a Tamil male's life.

Sometimes, as also happens in Sanskrit, the long gâ becomes a short ga. Thus
one speaks of mageshan (mahesh: maha + ish) and magarishi (maharishi in
Sanskrit).

It happens frequently that mahâ is contracted to mâ in Tamil. Thus, many words
with this prefix denote great. A great sinner (a very wicked person) is
referred to as a mâpâvi (mahâpâvi). Likewise, mânagar (mahâ-nagar) means a great
city; great austerities are called mâtapam (mahâtapas). The name magâpalipuram
(Town of Mahâbali) becomes mâpalipuram. This ancient port city contains
magnificent Dravidian-Buddhist sculptures dating back to the 7th –9th century
CE. The 2004 tsunami had the effect of unearthing some ancient carvings which
had been hidden underground till then. This has become a boon for Indian
archaeologists.

Sometimes the use of mâ reflects the worldview of the people. Thus, kari means
an elephant, and mâkari means a male elephant. Brahmins were known as mâcanangaL
(great people: mahâjans); the word piLLai means a boy or a son, while mâppiLLai
(great son) means son-in-law.

In Bengal one refers to Goddess Kâli as Mâkâli, meaning the Goddess Mother.
However, in Tamil, this means Mahâkâli.

The Tamil word for tree is maram. the word mâmaram (great tree) means a mango
tree. Now, a raw unripe fruit is called kâi. Therefore, the berry from this tree
is known as mânkâi or mângâi. A Sanskrit-derived Tamil word for fruit is pazham
(from phalam). A great fruit thus becomes mâ-pazham which becomes (due to
euphony) mâmpazham. This is the Tamil word for mango fruit. This word entered
Portuguese and then English, to become mango. Thus, in a peculiar way, the name
of this delicious fruit contains the Sanskrit word mahâ, which one would have
hardly suspected.

This reminds me of the word ambalam which, in Tamil, means a wide open space.
In could also mean a hall of justice. An important commercial sector of the city
of Chennai is called Mâmbalam (a great open space). In the context of the
complex Hindu culture, I may point out that there is a Shiva-Vishnu temple in
Mâmbalam, a not very common place of worship of this interfaith kind in India.

The various planetary influences of classical Hindu astrology are known as
mâdisai (great directions) in Tamil astrological books.

In Tamil literature, the poet Nammâzhvâr (9th – 10th century CE), whose hymns
to Vishnu are part of Tamil Vaishnava scripture, is reckoned as a magâkavi.

V. V. Raman
March 16, 2007

The Tamil word for mouth is vâi. From this is derived the word vâkku: speech or
saying. Note that the word vocal, which is derived from the Latin vox (voice)
sounds somewhat like this. I am not sure about the exact origin, but in
Sanskrit, the word vâc (pronounce vâch) means voice or talk. In the Vedic
worldview, Vâc is personified. We read in the Aitareyaka ÂraNyaka that "Vâc
enters into the rishis." Vâc is also described as the Mother of the Vedas. The
gâyatri mantra is said to be a manifestation of Vâc.

The Sanskrit word vâkya, reminding us of the Tamil vâkku, also means speech or
saying. A saying is a statement of significance that has come into current
usage. In ancient Greece, for example, one spoke of the sayings of the Seven
Sages (the Greek hepta sophoi: saptarishi). These include pithy statements like
"Meditation is best' (Cleobulus of Lindus), "Master anger" (Periander of
Corinth), and "Look at the end of life" (Solon of Athens).

In Sanskrit too, there are many important vâkyas like these. But some of these
which occur in the Upanishads are known as mahâvâkyas (Great Sayings). They are
all simple statements relating to the same theme. The four mahâvâkyas are:

Aham Brahmâsmi (Brihadâranyaka Upanishad, I.4.10): I am Brahman. Note here the
basic verb asmi (am), and compare it with the Latin sum : I am.

Brahman, in Hindu vision, is the spiritual substratum of the universe. It is
cosmic consciousness. The idea here is that whereas one imagines oneself to be a
separate entity apart from the rest of the world, one is actually an integral
aspect of the Totality.

The next mahâvâkya is: tat-tvam-asi: Thou art That (Chhândogya Upanishad,
VI.8.7). The first is a statement of self-realization ; the second reads like an
instruction that a guru gives to a disciple. It is to make us realize, or remind
us of, what we really and ultimately are.

The third mahâvâkya is from the Aitareya Upanishad (V.3): Prajnânam Brahmâ:
Ultimate knowledge is Brahman, That is to say, whatever we may know or think we
know, the essence of all knowledge should be the identity between the individual
self and the Supreme Self.

The fourth mahâvâkya is: Ayam âtmâ Brahmâ (Mândûkya Upanishad, 2). This
(individual) âtman is Brahman. Again, it is the same idea as in the above three,
namely the equivalence of the personal and the universal.

In other words, the Upanishadic view recognizes the finitude of us all here on
earth, and reminds us of our ultimate links with Infinity.

I recall here that one of the Greek mahâvâyas, attributed to Chilon (as also to
Socrates) is gnoti seaton: Know thyself. Sri Ramana Maharishi expressed it
famously as a question : nân yâr : who am I ? One may say that the Sanskritic
mahâvâkyas are responses to these reflections. From Vedantic perspectives, the
essence of spirituality is enshrined in the Upanishadic mahâvâkyas. In the Tamil
tradition, makâvâkyam is any sacred syllable in Vedantic framework.

On Periyar and the Dravidar Kazhagam

1.  The Dravidar Kazhagam (DK) is committed to rationalism.  I have no issue with such a stance.   Repeated demonstration and promotion of the use of reason as the preferred approach towards discovering, evaluating and/or developing opinions, viewpoints and facts is consistent with the methodology of modern science.  There cannot be (as yet) an excess of rationalism in a society that, on the one hand, has been for long largely uncritical about superstitions and wasteful (in terms of time and resource) religious practices, and, on the other hand, is now slipping deeper into mindless aping and mimicry of the consumerist and sensualist ways of the West.  DK is serving an important societal role by so determinedly highlighting and confronting issues arising on both fronts.
 
2.  DK is also carrying forward the anti-Brahmanism of Periyar.  It has to be admitted that such commentaries by DK do cause discomfort and sometimes come through as abrasive.  But when viewed against the continuing ‘mischief’ by the likes of Cho Ramasamy and Sujatha in their writings, and the manner in which measures to promote the use of the Tamil language in education and governance in Tamil Nadu continue to be challenged and subverted, DK can be reasonably seen to have been left with no alternative.
 
The language situation in Tamil Nadu is discussed in a recent post:
 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/akandabaratam/message/26666
Mon Mar 19, 2007 1:58 am
PMK to strive for Tamil "in all fields at all levels"
 
 
3.  Periyar is a Hindu rationalist.  This has been discussed in:
 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/akandabaratam/message/26013
Sun Jan 28, 2007 10:50 am
 
QUOTE
Sugrutha is right in saying that Periyar should not be cloaked in spiritualism.  There is no need.  Let Periyar remain as the pole star of rationalism in the Hindu sky.  That is why Kalaignar has talked about Periyar being, in effect, the Hindu rationalist.  And that appears to be his way of pointing out - in the fewest possible words - the direction in which Hinduism ought to evolve.   It is about paving the way for the interpenetration of spiritualism and rationalism.  It is not the disabling contradiction of opposites, but the dynamic tension of di-poles.  Isn't that what Siva's dance all about?
UNQUOTE
 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/akandabaratam/message/25995
Sat Jan 27, 2007 9:35 am
 
QUOTE
As if extrapolating the developing trend in science, Periyar went the full distance in the social space of the Dravidian world.  Unlike Socrates of ancient Greece, Periyar felt NO need for God to tell him what he had to do for his people.  He saw for himself that the minds of people around him had been long numbed by superstitions and elaborate rituals spun around puranic conceptions of gods.  He, therefore, felt that people had to be first liberated from such mental and emotional fetters before they can be expected to gain confidence in the uniquely human gift - human reasoning.  It is by fostering the spirit of reasoning in them that Periyar hoped to bring people to recognize the servile state to which they have been reduced for centuries.  Only then would they rise up against the debasing and unjust social order.  
 
Therefore, Periyar, who had started life as a believer (a devout Hindu), openly challenged the Brahmanical doctrine of varnashrama dharma.  He urged people to break free of the shackles of the socio-religious order that had been so cunningly imposed on them by the Dharmists in the name of Hindu gods. 
 
Periyar has succeeded spectacularly!  The results are already there to be seen in the social landscape of the entire South, though there is still alot more work pending.  Understandably so, as it is about dismantling more than 2,000 years of legacy.
 
DMK, that emerged as a political organization from Periyar's DK, had always operated somewhere along the continuum between the two poles, belief(theism) and disbelief (atheism). Periyar positioned himself right atop the latter pole, in the vicinity of which the Buddha had also been some 2500 years ago.
 
Anyone who understands change dynamics would be able to appreciate the 'shock value' in Periyar's approach: so would physiotheraphists who administer 'shock therapy' to stimulate healing in some parts of the human body! 
UNQUOTE
 
4.  I, therefore, think that the positioning of the statues of Periyar outside temples would be no more than symbolic reminders of the other (atheist) pole of Hinduism, perceived broadly as above. 
 
It was the brazen use of "brutal force" to destroy the first installation of Periyar statue in Srirangam - a particularly bold act in Periyar's Tamil Nadu - that provoked a sharp retaliation:
 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/akandabaratam/message/25571
Tue Dec 19, 2006 12:53 pm
Govt. has done its duty well: Karunanidhi
 
Anbudan
ARUL
http://anbudanarul.blogspot.com

Egalitarianism In the Sacred and Secular Spaces

A question arose in the past as to whether Hindu liberalism and egalitarianism
is modernism. No, it is there in the vedas and in tamil texts. Sangam
literature, Kural, Aathicoodi, Punitavathi and Appar are clear on this both in
the secular as well as in the sacred spheres. Too many to quote. So no questions
about it. After centuries of domination it surfaces again today simply because
of democracy, with the people demanding it. That it synchronises with western
liberalism or is further inspired by it in this era is of academic interest.

While the Indian constitution has more or less established a free and
egalitarian secular society in law, it is found wanting in the sacred spaces,
where the constitution may not be able to encroach into.

'Hindu Liberalism' does not conflict with Hindu values, rather in sync with it,
more still, it demands it. Hindu egalitarianism is aram - justness and
virtuousness (or chariya, or dharma). It is on the basis of aram that worship
can commence and built on it. My own firm and tested belief is that unless aram
is established, worship of gods is pointless, the door is firmly shut and any
striving will lead to dead ends. Maanikkavasagar says he got enlightenment
simply by ONLY serving devotees, serving society - tondu or service. A Rotarian
can be considered an ideal Hindu.

Inspite of these movement towards liberalism in its practices, there is no
change in Hindu beliefs - in God, and His relationship with souls, as well as in
worship and meditation. The changes are in sacred practices, not beliefs.

modernism - a movement that aims to break with classical and traditional forms,
modifying traditional beliefs and practices with modern ideas.

First Questions - the Larger Looming Question on Culture

But in Hindu egalitarianism there is no change in beliefs! And neither are the
ideas new.

"There have, for example, been frequent declarations that non-Western
civilizations typically lack a tradition of analytical and skeptical reasoning
and are thus distant from what is sometimes called 'Western rationality.'
Similar comments have been made about 'Western liberalism', 'Western ideas of
right and justice', and generally about 'Western values'. Indeed, there are many
supporters of the claim [articulated by Gertrude Himmelfarb with admirable
explicitness] that ideas of justice, right, reason and love of humanity are
'predominantly, perhaps even uniquely, Western values.

... this artificial distinction between the East and the West in the area of
values is *not* historically justified. A good example is the Emperor Ashoka in
India, who during the Third Century BCE covered the country with inscriptions on
stone tablets about good behavior and wise governance, including a demand for
basic freedoms for all -- indeed he did not exclude women and slaves as
Aristotle did. The claim that the basic ideas underlying freedom and tolerance
have been central to Western culture over the millenia and are somehow alien to
Asia is, I believe, *entirely rejectable*."

"It is worth recalling that in [Mughal Emperor] Akbar's pronouncements of four
hundred years ago on the need for religious neutrality on the part of the state,
we can identify the foundations of a non-denominational, secular state which was
yet to be born in India or for that matter anywhere else. Thus, Akbar's reasoned
conclusions, codified during 1591 and 1592, had universal implications. Europe
had just as much reason to listen to that message as India had. The Inquisition
was still in force, and just when Akbar was writing on religious tolerance in
Agra in 1592, Giordana Bruno was arrested for heresy, and ultimately, in 1600,
burned at the stake in the Campo dei Fiori in Rome."

Amartya Sen
Nobel Laurate

.
Its a worldwide movement too, as people everywhere are beginning to speak up,
questioning the orthodox status quo, demanding justice and equality.

"Our immediate policy, therefore, should be to lose no time in "Our Our
immediate policy, therefore, should be to lose no time in waiting for the
enlightenment of our neighboring countries (far east) in order to join them in developing
Asia, but rather to depart from their ranks and cast our lot with the civilized
countries of the West. We should deal with them exactly as the Westerners do."

Yukichi Fukuzawa
Meiji Era Reformer

.
"Chinese civilization has been around for several thousand years now, while
Western civilization has only been around a mere several centuries. Chinese
people cannot change a past civilization into a modern one. This is why people
say that China is the most conservative and that is the reason for its
accumulated poverty ... we, the modern people of China, are all useless, but if
in the future we use Western civilization as a model, we can easily turn
weakness into strength, and the old into the new. I think that everyone should
go to the West and find something new, then go to the East and find something
old, and if we Chinese can bring this about, then there will be nothing hard
about the old turning into the new."

Sun Yat Sen

.
"The search for the sources of India's strength and for her deterioration and
decay is long and intricate. Yet the recent causes of that decay are obvious
enough. She fell behind in the march of technique, and Europe, which had long
been backward in many matters, took the lead in technical progress. Behind this
technical progress was the spirit of science and a bubbling life and spirit,
which displayed itself in many activities and in adventurous voyages of
discovery. New techniques gave military strength to the countries of Western
Europe, and it was easy for them to spread out and dominate the East. This is
the story not only of India, but of almost the whole of Asia."

Jawaharlal Nehru

.
"The fez sat upon our heads as a sign of ignorance, fanatacism, obstacle to
progress and attaining a contemporary level of civilization. It is necessary to
abolish the use of the fez and adopt in its place the hat, the head gear used by
the whole civilized world."

Kemal Ataturk

.
"I become more and more surprised to see how far higher, in reality, our
European civilization stands than the East, Indian and Persian, ever dreamed of
... this fraud of looking up to them -- this wretched worship-of-Tagore attitude
-- is disgusting."

D.H. Lawrence,
1923
(his condescension of Indian spirituality and liberalism admired by the west)

.
"The triumph of the West, of the Western idea, is evident first of all in the
total exhaustion of viable systematic alternatives to Western liberalism ...
what we may be witnessing is not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of
a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that
is, the end point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of
Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government."

Francis Fukuyama
The End of History

.
"...in the year 2050 out of the four largest economies, three will be Asian:
China, USA, India, and Japan [in that order]."

Goldman Sachs Report
(all four are socially liberal egalitarian societies)

.
"The selective memory that so easily forgets the decisive contributions of
rationalist Muslim thinkers like Al-Farabi [10th century], Avicenna [11th
century], Al-Ghazali [12th century], Ash-Shatibi [13th century] and Ibn Khaldun
[14th century] is reconstructing a Europe that practices self-deception about
its own past. If they are to reappropriate their heritage, Muslims must
demonstrate in a manner that is both reasonable and free of emotional reactions,
that they share the core values upon which Europe and the West are founded."

Tariq Ramadan
International Herald Tribune
in response to Pope Benedict's recent quote of a Byzantine emperor.

Pathma

These are the four Grand Pronouncements ( = mahA-vAkyas):

praJAnaM Brahma – Rgveda, aitareyopanishad, 5.3
Absolute Consciousness is brahman

aham Brahma asmi – yajurveda, bRhadAraNyaka Upanishad, 1.4.10
I am brahman

tat tvam asi – sAmaveda, cAndogya Upanishad, 6.9.4
Thou art That

An important concept in Hinduism is yajña, a term that is loosely translated as
sacrifice. The word sacrifice brings to mind some kind of killing, of goat or
bull or whatever. However, the root word here is yaj which means adoration or
worship. It is true that the offering of animals to the gods (bali) became a
practice which continues in our own times in some regions/temples of India.
However, in its more original form yajñas referred to any mode of prayer or
worship of the divine. In particular, it refers to the sanctification of
something, and consecration of any act or thought.

Now what would be a proper worship mode? In principle, as long as there is
humility and devotion to the Cosmic Mystery, any manner of showing respect to it
could be called yajña. In traditional Hinduism five specific modes of worship
are prescribed. These are referred to as the mahâyajñas.

The traditional mode of yajña is performed at the fire altar (havan). Its goal
is to commune with the cosmic principles. This was common in the Vedic age, and
continues in our own times on sacramental occasions such as marriage. Marital
vows are taken with fire as witness: fire is eternal, as seen in the sun and the
stars. However, the fire altar is not a necessary concomitant of yajña.

First, simple prayer to the Divine (deva) without a fire altar constitutes
devayajña. This could be simply the pûja that many Hindus perform at home or in
temples, and a routine recitation at the altar which is part of most Hindu
homes. The careful, reverential, and systematic recital and study of sacred
works is also counted as a yajña. Since such efforts reveal to us the ultimate
nature of brahman, this mode of worship is known as brahmayajña. The third of
the mahâyajñas is related to departed souls. Traditionally, one remembers them
and offers special prayers to and for them periodically, using sanctified water.
This is referred to as pitriyajña or yajña to the ancestors. In addition to the
departed elders of one's own family, there are believed to be several other
spirits in the world. Their worship constitutes a fourth type of yajña which is
known as bhûtayajña. [I prefer to interpret bhûtas as the primordial elements in
the material world.] Next, one might wonder, while one is thinking so much about
gods and ancestors and spirits, what about fellow humans? Well, serving
fellow-humans is also listed as a yajña. It is called narayajña.

Not unlike the Islamic injunction for five namazes a day, traditional Hinduism
requires the faithful to do these mahâyajñas every day. Clearly this is
impractical, if not impossible. So it has been said that the mere repetition of
the gayatri five times a day has the same effect as doing all the five yajñas.

We may note two here that the mahâyajña is meant to connect us to the Cosmos,
the dear departed ones, transcendental knowledge, spirits (physical world), and
fellow humans beings It has been said that the worshipers' bodies are made up of
earth; the recitation (sound) occurs in the air; ancestral worship calls for
water; havan involves fire; and the Divine is in the ethereal realm. The
mahâyajñas involve all the mahâbhûtas: five elements of ancient science.

Spirituality is to be distinguished from scholarly understanding : the first is
experiential and the second is intellectual. In most traditions, including the
Hindu, the first is held at a higher level. Indeed, many swamijis and gurus
are wont to deride scholars for their rational analytical approaches to
religious texts. Some have gone so far as to say that scholarly inquiry into
sacred works should be disallowed, because it has the potential for sowing seeds
of doubts.

Not many denigrators of scholarship realize, however, that the cultural
continuity of traditions depends heavily upon scholarly exponents who present
the meanings and significance of religious texts generation after generation.
Furthermore, theologies evolve as a result of critical rational analysis, even
if it sometimes provokes one to wonder about some of the questionable
contentions in sacred scriptures. In any case, most of our ancient texts would
be utterly incomprehensible to us without scholarly commentaries on them. In the
Sanskrit tradition, commentaries on traditional writings are known as bhâshyas.
The corresponding Tamil word is pâDiyum.

[The literal meaning of Bhâshya is speaking. Bhâshâ is simply language in most
Indian languages. As an instance of Indic cultural influence overseas, we may
mention that the language in Indonesia is called Bhâsha Indonesia ; likewise we
have Bhâsha Malaysia.]

Plato said in his Republic that good epic poets were not masters of the subject,
but were inspired and possessed which is what enabled them to express their
ideas in magnificent meters. This may be true of Vedic sage-poets as well. Their
works are not always immediately clear to the reader. That is why, though many
purohits repeat them by rote, few really understand their meaning, let alone any
symbolism that might be implicit in them. In this context, the 14th century
commentaries on the Vedas by SâyaNa, with their strict injunctions as to how
Vedic hymns are to be recited, are of great importance in our efforts to grasp
the significance of the Vedas. There are several bhâshyas in Sanskrit. For
example, Govinda Bhâshya, a highly regarded VaishNava text, is a commentary on
Vedânta Sûtra. Scholars like Shankarâ, Râmânuja, and Madhvâ have written
canonical bhâshyas on the Brahmasûtras and the Bhagavad Gîta.

Such bhâshyas correspond to what are called exegeses in the Western tradition
which call for thorough study and critical interpretation of scriptural texts.
Exegeses play important roles in Christian, Judaic, and Islamic theology.

However, not all bhâshyas are on sacred writings. The classic Sanskrit grammar
of PâNini, known as Ashtâdyâyî, which has been described as 'one of the greatest
intellectual achievements of any ancient civilization.... ' was the first
treatise on linguistics. Though traditionally regarded as part of Vedânga, this
work is a systematic study of the structure and grammar of the Sanskrit
language. Patañjali's bhâshya on PâNini's work is known as Mahâbhâshya: The
Great Commentary. The term is somewhat like magnum opus: great work.

In the 19th century, commentaries were written on the Mahâbhâshya, both by
Sanskrit pandits with a deep knowledge of the language, and by Western
Orientalists who, with all their objective modes of inquiry, were often
insensitive to the profounder cultural context of the works they were commenting
upon. Often they viewed Sanskrit primarily as another ancient language like
Latin and Greek, with little empathy for the living language that Sanskrit is in
the cultural and philosophical life of the Indian people. But they too have
contributed significantly to our understanding.

Poetry is the ornament of any language. It is what makes a language beautiful.
Poets are the supreme wielders of the tongue. If a language is compared to a
musical instrument, then its poets are like its virtuoso players, bringing out
the best melodies the instrument is capable of. And poets are more than that:
They often convey great truths and insights about the human condition. In
classical times, they were held on the highest pedestal. In the Indic tradition,
poets were always regarded with the greatest respect. As Longfellow wrote,

The bards sublime,

Whose distant footsteps echo

Through the corridors of time.

The Sanskrit (also Tamil) word for poet is kavi. Vâlmîki, the author of the
RâmâyaNa, is described as Âdikavi: the first poet. The word kavitâ means poem.
Kavi also means a person who is blessed with insight and wisdom.

As elsewhere, Sanskrit poetry, from Vedic hymns to modern works, is governed by
very strict rules of prosody. One cannot write any inspired work and call it
poetry. Each stanza is to have a well-defined number of syllables, ranging from
eight to twenty-one. Writing poems is somewhat playing a game with very rigid
rules, and becoming a winner.

Every language has its own great poets who stand toweringly above all others.
These are the mahâkavis (great poets) of its literary tradition. Homer for
Greek, Virgil for Latin, Goethe for German, Dante for Italian, Shakespeare for
English, and Bharati for Tamil, are examples of mahâkavis.

A long poetical work with a well-defined plot is called a kâvya. Sanskrit
literature has many kâvyas. Some of these epic works have attained the status of
mahâkâvyas. Thus, Kamban's RâmâyaNam, Virgil's Aeneid, and Dante's Divine
Comedy, may be regarded as mahâkâvyas.

In Sanskrit literature, a number of major works have attained the status of
mahâkâvyas. Among these may be mentioned Kîrâtârjunîya by the poet Bhâravi. This
work narrates the episode from the Mahâbhârata: in which the valiant Arjuna of
the Pandava brothers encounters Lord Shiva in disguise as a Kirâta (a wild
mountain-dweller), and acquires a powerful weapon. Another mahâkâvya is by Sri
Mâgha, entitled Shishupâla Vâdha. This work narrates the annihilation of the
evil king Shishupâla at the hands of Lord Krishna during a yajña which was
conducted by Yudishthira during which Shishupâla insulted Krishna.

As yet another mahâkâvya we may mention the work of the poet Bhatti, and called
Bhattikâvya. It is essentially the story of Rama, re-told beautifully again, but
its chapters are artfully constructed to explain and teach various rules of
grammar and structure in Sanskrit. This is a remarkably clever didactic approach
to teach the correct usage of the language. This work reflects not only the
extraordinary ingenuity of the poet, but even more the fact that in classical
India many thinkers were fascinated with words and word-play as much as with
spirituality and after-life: a fact that is seldom given sufficient importance
in commentaries on Indian culture, either by Indians or by alien commentators.

We may note that practically all the mahâkâvyas take their themes from the
RâmâyaNa and the Mahâbhârata: works that are the ultimate fount of Indic
culture.

V. V. Raman
March 26, 2007

Read most books on Hinduism and it lists philosophers as below:

Kapila
Patanjali
Gautama
Kanada
Jaimini
Vyasa

Shankara
Ramanuja
Madhava
Vallabha
Nimbarka
Chaitanya

Which is a terribly lopsided and unrepresentative view of Hindu
philosophies, partly because of ignorance and partly deliberately
perpetuated with an agenda.

Here is a A Fuller List, dates may vary + or - by a few centuries.

1000 BCE Pasupata monastic orders
700 BCE Kapalika monastic orders
700 BCE Kalamukha monastic orders

600 BCE Kanada, Vaisisekha
600 BCE Bhoga Rishi
600 BCE Agastya
600 BCE Lopamudra (or Kausitaki), Lalita Sahasranama
500 BCE Kaundinya, Panchartha Bhasya
500 BCE Kapila, Samhkya
400 BCE Vyasa
300 BCE Jaimini, Purva Mimamsa
250 BCE Nandinatha, Nandikesvara Kasika
200 BCE Tirumular, Tirumantiram
200 BCE Patanjali, Yoga Sutras
200 BCE Gautama, Nyaya Sutras
200 BCE Tiruvalluvar, Tirukural

100 CE Auvaiyar I, Purananuru poems
200 CE Lakulisa, Pasupatha sutras, Karavana Mahatmya
200 CE Kusika
200 CE Garghya
200 CE Maitreya
675 CE Guhavasi Siddha
775 CE Rudrasambhu
800 CE Vasugupta, Siva Sutras
800 CE Adi Shankara
850 CE Kallata, Spanda Sastra
850 CE Somananda, Siva Drishti
850 CE Ugrajyoti
850 CE Sadyojyoti
900 CE Utpaladeva, Pratyabijna Sutras
975 CE Abinavagupta, Tantraloka
900 CE Matsyendranatha

1000 CE Gorakhsanatha, Siddha Siddhanta Paddhati,
1056 CE Srikumara, Tatparyadipika
1100 CE Basavanna, Vacanas, Sakthi Visishadvaitha
1100 CE Allama Prabhu, Mantra Gopya
1200 CE Aghorasiva
1200 CE Ramanuja
1300 CE Auvaiyar II, Aathicoodi
1300 CE Meykandar
1300 CE Nimbarka
1300 CE Madhva
1500 CE Vallabha
1500 CE Chaitanya
1600 CE Appaya Dikshitar, Sivarkamani Dipika

There are several hundred more but any book that does not deal with
at least *this list* is not representative of Hinduism, which means almost
all books. Not included in this my list are saints, and sangam poets
who are also philosophers. (there is just too many).

A quick glance reveals that the characters in the former 'abbreviated'
list are now lost in a crowd, and no longer of significance, and 'vedanta',
whatever that is, is relegated to a minority view. Besides most of these
characters are much later in a long line of them and their works are
commentaries of even earlier commentaries, bhasya of a bhasya. In other
words, not really original. If there happens to be a yarn in the first bhasya,
it gets a booster in the second one. Trouble is commentaries usually has
one, by default; its easy to spot. So I don't bother with commentaries. That is also
because they are not commentaries on any agama, which would force me
to consider them as it directly underpins the religion.

As I have mentioned before more than half the extant Hindu literature
today is in tamil, and any book or philosophy that does not deal with the
body of tamil literature, is not representative of Hinduism or its
philosophies, is not talking about Hinduism, it is talking of something else.
As the major part of sanskrit literature is written in ancient tamil grantham
script, and is not available in nagari or devanagari at all till today, not
available north of the vindhyas, one wonders how those philosophers or
scholars could have read those texts and write about Hinduism and its
philosophies.

At the ground level we have temples, home shrines, dieties, pujas, bakti
hymns, festivals and ascetics. This is agamism, built on metaphysics and
a philosophy woven thru and around it. If one is not talking of Agamism
one is not talking about Hinduism at all. One can't just superimpose
upanishadic philosophy on Agamism. That would be too simplistic, and
besides, Agamism has its own independent 'stand alone' philosophy. One
has to quote the agamas to show the philosophy is agama-compliant,
which many did not.

All the classical Hindu philosophies, called the shad dharsanas, including
the Uttar Mimamsa which is popularly but errroneously termed 'vedanta',
really are dead with no relevance to the Hindu. It has been that way for a
millenium. Some sects theologically rests on this foundation.

Dear Pathma
 
Thank you. But I feel that the history of Indian philosophies must begin from Sumerian where as I have shown you find the central elements of even Buddhism and Jainism in the Gilgamesh Epic. Samkhya and Yoga are present quite visibly in many Sumerian texts. Right now I am studying the Solar Cosmology in the Sumerian Kinglist and which is with us through Rig Veda, etc.
 
We must  include such texts as below: 
3000 BC: Suruppaks' NeRi
2300 BC : Enhudu Anna's Exaltations of In-Anna Kes Temple Hymns
2000 BC Sulgi's Hymn B
1800 BC Hammurabi's Legal Code
Many Incantation Texts
 
I have listed here only the texts I have studied. There are many more.
 
Loga

.
Yes you are right Dr. Loga. Many other scholars say so too including Swami
Prabhananda which link I posted two days ago. The jain tirthankara
Rsabhadeva is mentioned in the vedas too. The Padma Purana says Rama
built a temple and worshipped Muniswrathanath, the 20th jain tirthankara.
So it is quite silly to say that the agamas antecedent the vedas. They were
contemporaneous or anterior. Prevedic texts cannot be overlooked anymore.
The rest have yet to connect the dots. Here is the revised list.

PreVedic
3000 BCE Suruppak, NeRi
2300 BCE Enhudu Anna, Exaltations of In-Anna Kes Temple Hymns,
2000 BCE Sulgi, Hymn B
1800 BCE Hammurabi's Legal Code
1800 BCE Many Incantation Texts

Vedic Period
2500-1500 BCE >420 rishis, Vedas and Agamas

PostVedic
1000 BCE Pasupata monastic orders
700 BCE Kapalika monastic orders
700 BCE Kalamukha monastic orders

600 BCE Kanada, Vaisisekha
600 BCE Bhoga Rishi
600 BCE Agastya
600 BCE Lopamudra (or Kausitaki), Lalita Sahasranama
500 BCE Kaundinya, Panchartha Bhasya
500 BCE Kapila, Samhkya
400 BCE Vyasa
300 BCE Jaimini, Purva Mimamsa
250 BCE Nandinatha, Nandikesvara Kasika
200 BCE Tirumular, Tirumantiram
200 BCE Patanjali, Yoga Sutras
200 BCE Gautama, Nyaya Sutras
200 BCE Tiruvalluvar, Tirukural

100 CE Auvaiyar I, Purananuru poems
200 CE Lakulisa, Pasupatha sutras, Karavana Mahatmya
200 CE Kusika
200 CE Garghya
200 CE Maitreya
675 CE Guhavasi Siddha
775 CE Rudrasambhu
800 CE Vasugupta, Siva Sutras
800 CE Adi Shankara
850 CE Kallata, Spanda Sastra
850 CE Somananda, Siva Drishti
850 CE Ugrajyoti
850 CE Sadyojyoti
900 CE Utpaladeva, Pratyabijna Sutras
975 CE Abinavagupta, Tantraloka
900 CE Matsyendranatha

1000 CE Gorakhsanatha, Siddha Siddhanta Paddhati,
1056 CE Srikumara, Tatparyadipika
1100 CE Basavanna, Vacanas, Sakthi Visishadvaitha
1100 CE Allama Prabhu, Mantra Gopya
1200 CE Aghorasiva
1200 CE Ramanuja
1300 CE Auvaiyar II, Aathicoodi
1300 CE Meykandar
1300 CE Nimbarka
1300 CE Madhva
1500 CE Vallabha
1500 CE Chaitanya
1600 CE Appaya Dikshitar, Sivarkamani Dipika

Pathma

Appar Meditating on Death 10 (Final)

The World is Acattu NOT False (or deluding)

Some of the central metaphysical concepts in some Indian darsanas are the concepts of Cat (Sat) and its negation Acat (Asat) and where the root appears to be the Sumerian zid-de where the meaning ‘in proper light', proper view etc. This has become Cat meaning however the absolutely True and where in Tamil in such uses as CattaRivu, it means Axiomatic Truths, truths that are there always and in the mind of all. Here Acattu, its negation does not mean false, illusory, a delusory and so forth but only truths that are NOT absolute, axiomatic. The Acattu are also truths but which can be displaced and hence transcended. The Cat in contrast does not allow this transcendence this going beyond. The understanding that shows itself as true and which cannot be further transcended is recognized as Cat and hence absolute.

The word ‘maayam’ is used in this sense of Acattu here.

Thus Meykandar notes that all human understanding that comes with temporality of time consciousness is Acattu, true but not absolute. Such understanding that are Acattu, invite a going beyond and reaching the absolute ground. The soul in view of this duality is also called Cat-Acat at least since the days of Tirumular.

In the following verse, this appears to be the way Appar views the relationships even within a nuclear family. A soul lives as the father and another as Mother. There are many who move along as the siblings all these relationships inviting passionate attachments so that there is no alienation. Similarly as one becomes an adult male, a female becomes a wife and through her some as children and so forth.

Appar is puzzled by such emotional ties and wonders how they come to be and then at the point of death disappear. It all looks so uncanny, so bewildering for a philosophic mind.

Now such social relationships constitute the support system for embodied existence where the problem of loneliness is overcome by such relationships. Such a person is NOT an orphan with nobody committed to help him out even with considerable self sacrifices.

But despite such marvelous qualities of such filial and other ties, they are NOT absolutely permanent- they are only Acattu - there in the world for a while and then specially at the point of death no more.

Now in contrast to this, BEING remains the genuine and TRUE Father for even after death where the soul ceases to have a body, BEING continues to be Father (Mother) etc i.e a Power who cares. Such a BEIING has as His name the Mantra namaccivaaya and which means He is the Lord of the Pancha Krityas, the One who does all the fundamental processes in the world. Thus there is NOTHING beyond such a person and once blessed by Him one can in fact enjoy a life in the celestial world, an eternal existence free from becoming embodied again.

10.
tanatai aar taay aar udan piRantaar
taaram aar puttirar aar taam taam aaree
vantavaaRu eGGanee poomaaRu eetoo
maayaamaam itaRkeetum makizveeNdaa
cintaiyiir umakkonRu collak keeNmi
takaz matiyum vaaL aravum taLaikkunj cenni
entaiyaar tirunaamam namaccivaaya
enRu ezuvaarkku iru vicumbil iruttalaamee

Meaning
Someone become my father my mother and brothers and sisters. Someone else becomes my wife who also brings about many offspring as my children. But really these souls who are they? How do they become my intimate ties as members and my family and how at the point of death all these dissolve into nothing? It is all uncanny and certainly not absolutely real and so do not rejoice at having them. And now let me tell you something. There is BEING who shows Himself as Siva wearing the crescent Moon and bright snake and who is the real father of all. If you can see His name is the mantra Namaccivaaya and raise yourself up in the spiritual realms then you can also be placed in the vast celestial world.

Kâlidâsa is reckoned as the greatest of the gifted poets of the Sanskrit
tradition. There is a story to the effect that in the context of a dispute over
who was greater, he or Dandi, a rival poet of great stature, the two went to
Sarasvati, the Goddess of Learning, to get Her judgment. She declared
unequivocally that Dandi was the one, and explained to Kâlidâsa with the phrase:
tvam-eva-aham: Thou art the same as I, suggesting that he was the very
embodiment of Sarasvati. The story is a measure of the admiration that Kâlidâsa
enjoys in the Sanskritic literary world.

As with Shakespeare, Kâlidâsa has been read and remembered as much for his plays
as for his poetry. His Mâlavikâgnimitram is the story of a servant girl called
Mâlavikâ and a prince named Agnimitra. The prince sees a picture of Mâlavikâ who
had been exiled, and he falls in love with her. This throws his queen into a
rage, and she has the object of her husband's affections thrown behind bars.
Eventually it is found out that the maid actually belongs to the royal family
which makes the king's affections acceptable. The play suggests that already in
those times (early C.E. centuries) there used to be captivating portraits in
India. Sadly, few relics of them have survived. The play also reveals caste
constraints in love and marriage.

Another of Kâlidâsa's plays is entitled Vikramôrvashîya: The Winning of Ûrvashi
through Valor. It was inspired by the legend of the celestial nymph Ûrvashi,
mentioned in the Mahâbhârata.. King Puruvaras falls in love with Ûrvashi, and
she sends him love letters on leaves. In heaven Urvashi acts in a play in which,
by mistake, she utters Puruvara's name. This was against the rule, and she is
sent down to earth, and would return to heaven only when her earthly husband
lays eyes on their progeny. Eventually, she is freed of the curse, and the two
live happily on earth. There is much charm in the way the play unfolds.

The most famous play of Kâlidâsa is no doubt Shakuntalâ, although the original
title of the play is abhijñânashâkuntalam: The Recognition of Shakuntalâ. It is
the classic story of how King Dushyanta met perchance the fair maiden Shakuntalâ
in a garden, their instant love, their marriage, and his returning to his
kingdom for a while; the anger Shakuntalâ provoked in an ill-tempered rishi who
cursed her to the effect that her husband would forget her unless he saw their
marital ring, the loss of the ring when she goes to see him at the palace as a
pregnant wife, his refusal to see her; how her celestial mother Menakâ takes
Shakuntalâ to heaven, how some years later the ring is discovered in the
entrails of a fish and brought to king Dushyanta, whose mind flies back to his
once-beloved Shakuntalâ; and how he eventually sees a young lad - their son
Bharata - in heaven. This is perhaps the best known and most beautiful Sanskrit
play of all, rendered into most Indian languages and into some European tongues
as well. It was gloriously praised by Goethe who wrote that the name of
Shakuntala evokes flowers and frets, all that delight and sustain, all earth and
heaven.

Long before Vivaldi's magnificent music on The Four Seasons, Kâlidasa wrote a
great poem called Rtusamhara: Cycle of Seasons which lyrically describes
seasonal changes and their impacts on nature and on human emotions. One also
finds here keen observations on how heat and cold, spring and rain affect man
and beast. There are references to forest fires, amorous scenes in cool nights,
the gushing of waters after a downpour, flowers in blossom, harvests in autumn,
and to winter's mute passivity. In this poem Kâlidâsa reveals himself as a
gifted nature-poet as well.

The adaptation into English of its beautiful lines. It is important to note that this is not an invocation TO Dawn. Rather, the poet speaks to us as Usha (Dawn).

Look to this Day!
For it is Life, the very Life of Life.
In its brief course lie all the
Verities and Realities of your Existence.
The Bliss of Growth,
The Glory of Action,
The Splendor of Beauty;
For Yesterday is but a Dream,
And To-morrow is only a Vision;
But To-day well lived makes
Every Yesterday a Dream of Happiness,
And every Tomorrow a Vision of Hope.
Look well therefore to this Day!
Such is the Salutation of the Dawn!
Listen to the Exhortation of the Dawn!
Look to this Day!
For it is Life, the very Life of Life.
In its brief course lie all the
Verities and Realities of your Existence.
The Bliss of Growth,
The Glory of Action,
The Splendor of Beauty;
For Yesterday is but a Dream,
And To-morrow is only a Vision;
But To-day well lived makes
Every Yesterday a Dream of Happiness,
And every Tomorrow a Vision of Hope.
Look well therefore to this Day!
Such is the Salutation of the Dawn!

BTW, this reflective poem, along with quotes from Gandhi, the Gita, Kabir, and Sarojini Naidu, has entered the hymn book of the Unitarian Universalist Church.

We have to keep in mind that the entire world of experience, of matter
and mind, is within the confines of time and space, and subject to the
physical and mental laws of mind and matter. The mind provides us a
three-dimensional experience. These things we are talking about is
BEYOND the mind, and beyond time and space. As we know mind only
operates within these confines of time and state. We are no longer in
the realm of physics but transcended into the realm of metaphysics. This
is the fourth-dimension, outside the box, where there is no mind.

When we transcend into this realm of metaphysics, where the mind does
not operate; the Self can cognise the experience, but it cannot
understand or explain, as the mind is not working. Everything is known
instantly as the mind is not there to block, limit or filter it due to
acquired mindsets. The Self experiences it without the usage of a
three-dimensional mind.

As there is no mind or intellect working, there are no questions. The
Self is stunned. When it returns to the normal experiential level, the
mind describes the experience as 'wonderful, blissful, peaceful, a
oneness with the universe and a oneness with all humans and plants
and animals'. In other words, indescribable, loss for description, for
want of concepts, for there are no words from the three-dimensional
realm that can describe the realm of metaphysics. Because the mind did
not experience the metaphysical realm, only the Self experienced it.
The mind cannot describe what it did not experience.

Yet this stage is subject to, or within the confines of anava, karma and
maya, as the chart of tattvas shows below. Not yet samadhi, not yet a
jivanmukta. That comes with the grace of god when these bonds are
shattered, leading to a fifth-dimensional experience of Oneness with
God.

But there is some more. When the unfettered soul experiences the
Unknown, or the transcendent Siva, which is beyond even the 36 tattvas.
This would be the sixth-dimension. One cannot even say whether there
is a oneness or twoness with God at this level, whether god exists or even
the soul exists. The rigveda says 'only Rudra alone knows the
relationship between god, souls and the world, and no one else'.

The 36 Tattvas: Categories of Existence

http://www.himalayanacademy.com/resources/books/dws/dws_r8_charts-tattvas.pdf

TRANSCENDENT
Atattva:Parasiva (Absolute Reality), beyond all categories - the 6th Dimension

IMMANENT - realm of jivanmuktas/unfettered souls/5TH DIMENSION
1) Siva tattva: Parâsakti-Nâda (Satchidânanda, pure consciousness)
2) Sakti tattva: Paramesvara-Bindu(Natarâja, Personal God), light and love
3) Sadâsiva tattva: the power of revealment (Sadâsiva)
4) Isvara tattva:the power of concealment (Maheshvara)
5) Suddhavidyâ tattva: dharma, pure knowing, the powers of
dissolution (Rudra), preservation (Vishnu) and creation (Brahmâ)

IMMANENT - realm of fettered souls, temporary transcending/4th DIMENSION
6) mâyâ tattva: mirific energy
7) kâla tattva: time
8) niyati tattva: karma
9) kalâ tattva: creativity, aptitude
10) vidyâ tattva: knowledge
11) râga tattva: attachment, desire
12) purusha tattva: the soul shrouded by the above five tattvas

INDIVIDUALITY - WITHIN THE 3RD DIMENSION - the mind
13) prak®iti tattva: primal nature
14) buddhi tattva: intellect
15) aha?kâra tattva: external ego
16) manas tattva: instinctive mind
17) ßrotra tattva: hearing (ears)
18) tvak tattva: touching (skin)
19) chakshu tattva: seeing (eyes)
20) rasanâ tattva: tasting (tongue)
21) ghrâ?a tattva: smelling (nose)
22) vâk tattva: speech (voice)
23) pâ?i tattva: grasping (hands)
24) pâda tattva: walking (feet)
25) pâyu tattva: excretion (anus)
26) upastha tattva: procreation (genitals)
27) ßabdha tattva: sound
28) sparßa tattva: feel/palpation
29) rûpa tattva: form
30) rasa tattva: taste
31) gandha tattva: odor
32) âkâßa tattva: ether
33) vâyu tattva: air
34) tejas tattva: fire
35) âpas tattva: water
36) p®ithivî tattva: earth

All of us are operating within the 13th-36th tattvas. When we sleep,
meditate, worship, or sometimes stumble in, we go into the realm of
the 6th to 12th tattvas temporarily. Those who have been graced and
their fetters shattered permanently, operate all the time in the 5th to 1st
tattva, as well as beyond the 1st tattva (atattva), and are able to see and
experience god and the various forms of god.

This is the geography of the three worlds, and beyond, and our
ascensions into it.

Raghuvamsa

We who live in an age of democracies and dictatorships seldom realize that
once many great civilizations were ruled by kings who gained authority by virtue
of their birth in a royal family. The system still continues in nations like
Great Britain, Holland, and Scandinavia. In ancient times, they were also common
in Egypt, China, and India as it is in Thailand today. The rulers of such a
hereditary lineage of rulers constitute a dynasty.

In Indic culture, there are two histories: a secular history and a sacred
history. The latter has a semi-mythic dimension. In Indic sacred history, one
finds two principal dynasties which are said to owe their descent from the
Sun-God (Sûrya) and the Moon-God (Soma). The epic hero Rama was a scion of the
Solar Dynasty; while Krishna, the other illustrious epic hero, was a scion of
the Lunar Dynasty. In ancient Egypt too there was a Sun-dynasty, and a French
king (Louis XIV) called himself le Roi Soleil (the Sun-King).

The Solar-Dynasty is referred to as Raghuvamsa in Sanskrit, a name that
originates from one of its most illustrious kings: Raghu. [Literal meanings of
the word raghu include fast-moving and light.] According to one reckoning, there
were more than 120 monarchs in this dynasty, reigning for hundreds, even
thousands of years. The famed Ayodhya was their capital. The founder of the
Solar Dynasty was Ikshvâku who had a hundred sons. The epic hero Rama is known
as the Lord (pati or nâtha) of the Raghus.The last king of the Solar Dynasty was
a certain Sumitra who was exiled from Ayodhya by a certain Nanda in the 4th
century C.E.

One of Kâlidâsa’s two mahâkâvyas is Raghuvamsa. The work is in 19 cantos.
Scholars are not agreed that Kâlidâsa wrote all of them. The poem starts from
the reign of King Dilîpa, then talks about his son Raghu II, who was the 61st
monarch of the dynasty. Then we go on to read about Ajay, Dasaratha, Râma, and
three more.

Raghuvamsa speaks eloquently about the conquests of Raghu in the east and the
west, in the north and the south. It says that womenfolk in Kerala fled on the
onslaught of Raghu, leaving their jewels behind. The reddish dust from their
path colored their curly hair like kum-kum. It says that Raghu’s soldiers bathed
in the Kâveri river with their elephants. Raghu with his army also went way
beyond the borders of India, attacked the Huns. The poet says that “the cheeks
of Huna women glowed with embarrassment by the action of Raghu in waging war
with their husbands.” Raghu “removed the blooming flush of wine from the
lotus-like faces of Yavana women when he encountered their men.”

Recall that the fierce Huns flourished in about the 5th century CE (perhaps
Kâlidâsa’s lifetime). Thus, the anachronism in Raghu, the great grandfather of
Rama, conquering them becomes apparent. But we must realize that the goal of
epic poetry is not to record history, but to inspire readers within a cultural
group by portraying grand and noble heroes.

Raghu was a worshiper of Nandini, the wonderful cow which he once saved from
the attack of a lion. The lion was, in fact, a heavenly being, and as mark of
appreciation for Raghu’s act, he was blessed with a son. Raghu’s son Aja marries
Indumati who, alas, dies in a garden when a downpour of flowers from heaven
descends on her. Aja does not mount the funeral pyre of his wife because he did
not want his people to say he gave up his life for a woman. This is interesting
because there is the implication here that male sati was a practice.
We read in Raghuvamsa that there was at least one king of the dynasty
(Agnivarna) who was a womanizer who neglected his royal responsibilities.
Ignoring its chronological inconsistencies, Raghuvamsa has secured place of
honor in Sanskrit literature.

V. V. Raman
March 30, 2007

Kumârasambhava

On a clear summer night (in the northern hemisphere) one can see a cluster of
six or seven stars in the constellation Taurus. This is the Pleiades. Known as
Krittika in Sanskrit, this star cluster has been variously interpreted in the
mythologies of the world, from Babylonian and Greek to Chinese, Mayan, Hindu,
and more.

In the Hindu mythic vision, different legends are associated with them. Perhaps
the most important of these relate to the six-faced God known as Kârttikeya
(Murugan or Shanmugan in the Tamil tradition) who is one of the two sons of
Shiva and Pârvati. Kârttikeya, regarded as the God of War, is also known as
Kumâra. There are references to Kumâra in Skanda PurâNa, Mahâbhârata, Chândogya
Upanishad, and other works. (The Bhâgavata PurâNa says that Kumâra was one of
the 22 avatâras of VishNu.) Kumâra in Sanskrit (kumâran in Tamil) means (a
handsome) son, boy, youth, prince, etc..

Sambhava (Together-Being). means origin or birth. As verb, it refers to
occurring, appearing, birth, as in Krishna's famous phrase in the Bhagavad Gita:
sambhavâmi yuge yuge: I am born (appear) from age to age. One of Kâlidâsa's two
mahâkâvyas is entitled Kumârasambhava: The genesis of Kumâra. It is told in 19
chapters.

In the RâmâyaNa the gods approach Brahmâ for help to rid them of the râkshasa
RâvaNa. In Kumârasambhava we read that the gods went to the world of the
self-born (svayam-bhû) for help to rid them of the asurâ (demon) Târaka. Only a
son of Shiva could destroy this demonic being. This meant that Shiva, the
scantily clad ascetic in Kailâsa, peacefully meditating while seated on a tiger
skin, had to be aroused to sire a son. Umâ, the daughter of the Mountain God
Himalaya, tried to woo him, but in vain. Thereupon Indra dispatched Kâma (the
god of Love) with his consort Rati (Enjoyment) and Vasanta (Spring) to
accomplish this, but Kâma was turned to thin ash by Shiva's third eye, for his
anger was aroused by the attempt to distract him. Pârvati began to engage in
strenuous asceticism herself. Because of this, Shiva who "grants all desires
and is himself without any desire, who resides in the crematorium and yet gives
life to all" decided to take Umâ as wife. Disguised as an old man, he sent the
Seven Sages (Saptarishi) along with Arundhati (the chaste wife of one of them)
to ask Himâlayâ for his daughter's hand. The marriage was agreed upon, but only
three days later. Shiva waited with great difficulty. If such emotions tormented
Shiva, asks the poet rhetorically, how would ordinary persons be tormented by
them? Shiva and Pârvati are married, their son Karttikeya is born, he kills
Târakâsura, and restores the glory of Indra.

In some of the passages of Chapter VIII the romantic embrace of Shiva and
Pârvati is described in language that has been described as erotic. Such
elaborations in the shringâra rasa (erotic style) may offend some modern readers
who are conditioned by Victorian moral standards, but they were not uncommon in
classical Indian sculpture and poetry. In this matter, the Hindu world was way
ahead of the Western. Ironically, some modern Hindus frown upon present-day
laxity in language and public behavior that one finds in the West. On the other
hand, the molders of public taste and values of modern India, in their crass
imitative mode, have adopted the Western display of lurid amorous intimacy in
movies and magazines.

It must be pointed out, however, that even in the classical world, not everyone
applauded eroticism in the religious context. An eminent 11th century literary
critic and admirer of Kâlidâsa, compared it to describing the love-life of one's
own parents. One legend says that Kâlidâsa died of leprosy for such writing
about Shiva and Pârvati.

VaLLalaar’s Garland for Mahadeva- 74

The Death of the Autonomy of the Soul

This is very difficult verse to interpret and understand for it raises a dilemma: If everything done by a soul is in fact directly or indirectly that of BEING, then where is the autonomy and freedom of the soul? In the mind of VaLLalaar an excruciating DOUBT arises throwing him into a metaphysical dilemma a puzzle about human autonomy.

It goes back to one of the most profound metaphysical insights of Appar and many others of the Bakti movement- aadduvittaal aar oruvar aadaataaree: If played by BEING who can refuse to play? Where it also carries the implication that human agency in actions is not there.

All human actions are only seemingly the actions of the acting soul but actually not. BEING prompts the soul to act letting the soul think that it is in fact acting by concealing Himself and remaining the Supreme Unconscious, the MaRai Porul, the hidden and concealed. The acting agent is conscious of the action and its consequences only partially - most of the processes grounding the action and in particular how in fact BEING is managing all behind the scenes remains unknown, unconscious etc. This is the concept of UNCONSCIOUS in Saivism where it simply means hidden and concealed.

Then gradually when the ego gets destroyed and the soul becomes egoless, it dawns that what the soul thought was his own autonomous actions, were not in fact so. The soul has not been genuinely autonomous at all - it has been led only to think so. The real agent has been BEING all along.

Thus VaLLalaar notes that he as an embodied creature endowed with the five senses studied the physical world and when sufficient has been learnt, then the worldly learning terminated where even this termination is in fact the action of BEING. Then having made the soul withdraw from the physical world and the pleasures there, made the soul attach itself firmly to the FEET of BEING so that it becomes totally spiritual and hence interested only in metaphysical matters.

When VaLLalaar sees this having happened to him, believes that he is like the great souls of the past who have received the Grace of BEING. But because against the understanding that only BEING is the real agent, a problem or a dilemma arises here. He was led only to think that he acted as an autonomous one but not really so as he cannot do anything on his own. So when he feels he just simply played as such, was he in fact playing or was it BEING who was playing as thus?

This question has no answer and it is NOT a genuine question at all. When the soul becomes the same as BEING with the destruction of primordial alienation (anniyam) and now as Meykandar notes there is no alienation but only sameness. This very question is artificial - not natural. The natural situation is to become deeply silent and enjoy the absence of alienation with BEING which also puts an end to existential repetititon.

74.
paditteen poy ulakiyanuul entaay niiyee
padipittaay anRiyum appadippil iccai
muditteen naan muditteenoo oduppittaay pin
unnadiyee tuNai ena naan uRutiyaakap
piditteen maRRu atuvaaka nii pidippittaay ip
peetaiyeen innaruLaip peRRoor poola
naditteen em perumaan ii tonRum naanee
naditteenoo allatu nii nadittaayoo?

Meaning:
O my Lord! I studied the world as a text where in fact it was You who taught me all. And when I lost interest in such studies I terminated my interests where again You were the one who terminated it all. Then since You caused my withdrawal from the physical world and cling to Your Divine Feet as my support , I grasped it very firmly where again You were the One who made me act as so. At this point having realized Your presence everywhere I thought that I am like those great souls who were graced by You profusely. But I only pretended thus and I am not sure whether I really did it. Perhaps it was You who played again like this but making me think that I in fact played acted and so forth . Tell me which is the case.

Loga

Of all the mahâ's that enrich Indic culture, the best known is the Mahâbhârata,
one of the two epic poems that have inspired India's civilization. It is
believed to have been composed by more than one author, and over several
generations. Like many things ancient and Indian, its origins are shrouded in
the mists of unrecorded history. No one knows precisely when the work was put
down to verse, much less anything certain about its relationship to historical
facts. But enterprising scholars have been probing into the matter and advancing
theories based on their interpretations. Not unlike Bishop Ussher who
categorically stated in the 17th century that the world was created on October
3, 4004 BC, one Indian scholar has stated that the climactic Kurukshetra War
detailed in the epic began on October 16, 5561 BCE.

Every Hindu has heard of the Pandavas and the Kauravas: the antagonist-families
in the epic. The divine Krishna also appears here. The epic enshrines one of
the most sacred works of the Hindu world, the Bhagavad Gîta which is a
philosophical, spiritual, and ethical wonder-work that has been subjected to
literary, historical, and scholarly analyses such as few other works in the
cultural legacy of humanity. Not as well known is the fact that the Vishnu
Sahasranâma is also from the Mahâbhârata.

Because most Hindus have read the Mahâbhârata primarily through one of its
abridged editions in various languages, English and Indian, or through
picture-book versions and TV serials, many interesting aspects of the work are
not widely known. Thus, for example, not many may know that in its original form
the work was called Jaya. Its initial 8,800 verses were received by Krishna
Dwaipayâna Vyâsa who elaborated it into a work called Bhârata with 24,000
verses. And few remember Rishi Paila who assisted Vyâsa in his colossal
undertaking. Vyâsa's work eventually grew to more than four times that length,
and acquired the name of Mahâbhârata. Bharata, the king and son of Shakuntala is
well known, but bharata was also the name of an ancient clan whose descendants
came to be called bhâratas. It is their grand story that is called Mahâbhârata.
Modern India is named after them as Bhârat.

The Mahâbhârata is as weighty and complex as the history of the subcontinent,
with episodes both historical and of pure fantasy. Like India, it is peopled by
characters noble and petty, enlightened and narrow, selfless and selfish too.
Its parables and ideals reflect the basest and the most sublime aspects of human
behavior.

There are at least three recensions of this huge epic. A mammoth project,
lasting more than forty-five years, was launched by the Bhandarkar Oriental
Research Institute in Pune, and was completed in 1966 with a comprehensive and
comparative 19 volume study of various extant manuscripts of the epic. The
Mahâbhârata was fully translated into English in the 1880s, and a century later
it was produced as a TV series, which enjoyed immense popularity.

From considerations of the meter in the poetry of the epic, one scholar has
argued that the work was probably composed by a shûdra for shûdras. Another
scholar has challenged this thesis. Such debates may mollify or acerbate caste
conflicts, but to me they neither enhance nor diminish the grandeur of this
magnificent work which is a wonderful expression of the human spirit, unique in
that aside from its fascinating narrative painted on an incredibly vast canvas
with innumerable side stories, ethical teachings and reflections on life, the
Mahâbhârata has had an indelible impact on the worldviews, visions, arts, and
evolution of a great civilization, such as no other literary work has had.

The MB was not authored by Vyasa (though he is a contributor), not
scribed by Lord Ganesha (as gods don't need to do that), that it is a
collection of puranic stories retold in new ways, local legends, fables and
some history, all woven together into a one piece, that over time it
accreted to twelve times its original size, that no such dialogue as in the
gita took place, that is is merely the handbook of traveling minstrels, that
it is a play-novel much like and in the category of Shakespeare, Homer and
Kalidasa (imagine Aladdin and the 40 Thieves being the standard reading
texts on islam), that it contains a hodge podge of philosophies, and much
more..

Most Hindus believe it to be their shastra, the infallible words of god,
events that actually happened and are trying to date the non existent events.

Though it is based on puranas (historical kathas), it is to be taken as
metaphorical explanations and elaborations on truths, nothing more. (It
would not be too farfetched to say that the teachings of the MB has no
basis in the vedas or agamas, but I would not like to discuss this.)

This is not to say that it should not be read, rather it should be read with
the proper perspective like one reads Marvel, Anime, Manga and Amar
Chitra Kathas, and be inspired. To elevate it to the point of 'shastra' is a
folly that has bedevilled us, trapping minds in myths and fantasy, and
(mostly young Hindu) people don't take Hinduism seriously. Its easier to
find people believing in the Virgin Birth, UFOs, etc.

It did serve its purpose before as an inspirational mass educational system
though, so overwhelmingly that the overarching success has now become
a drawback.

Today we can trace much of the confused Indian mass mind (including
athiests, p-secs, communists) to these texts like the MB and Ramayana,
where fiction, myths, superstition and fantasy remains the foundation of
religion and mistaken for spirituality.

For Hindus to be reminded of this is to emerge from the dark ages. (Notice
Dr. Raman did not use the word 'shastra' in that article.) Its a simple mind
change.

In the last few essays I have referred to a few terms where mahâ- occurs as a
prefix, signifying something very great or important. Indeed there are many,
many more such instances in the Indic cultural, philosophical, and metaphysical
framework. Before moving on to another frequently occurring word, I’d like to
mention a few more mahâ- terms to illustrate how this prefix can also alter, and
give a special meaning to, a word.

For example, the notion of mâya is central to one school of Indian philosophy.
Already in Vedic times, it referred to a magical power, which could affect the
appearance of things. In the advaita (non-dual) philosophical system, mâyâ
refers to the illusory mode that hinders our recognition that everything is but
One: brahman. It is sometimes spoken of as a veil that stands in the way of our
recognizing the nature of Ultimate Reality. But the epithet Mahâmâyâ (the Great
Mâya) is one of the 1008 names by which Shiva's consort Shakti (the Cosmic
Energy) is known.

The Latin word for father is pater, and in Greek the word is patir. In
Sanskrit, pitri (plural) refers to one's paternal grandfathers. This word also
connotes the originators of the (mythological) gods and other beings. Some Vedic
hymns are devoted to the pitri. The word pitâ also stands for father. Pitâmaha,
literally means Father Great. However, it is an epithet for Brahmâ, the Creator
of the Universe. In the Mahâbhârata, this is used as an honorific for Bhîshma,
the highly regarded elder of the Pandava-Kaurava families.

Or again consider the word râjan: king. The corresponding Latin word is rex,
regis. Therefore mahârâjâ simply means great king. The term was often a title
assumed by Hindu kings who had vassals under them. This is also a respectful
appellation, which is reserved for certain spiritual leaders of the sect founded
by Vallabhâcârya (16th century). These mahârâjâs dress up in a lordly manner,
and are treated to sumptuous feasts by their followers. In Gujarati, the term
could also refer to a cook.

The Sanskrit word for a vehicle or chariot is ratha. This gives mahâratha,
literally great vehicle. It can also mean a great warrior who can single
handedly fight against many opponents. The word is used in this sense in the
first chapter of the Bhagavad Gita.

One word for state or national entity is râshtram. Thus, mahârâshtram would
mean a great state or country. Indeed, this was the name of an ancient kingdom
in the Indian subcontinent, which extended southwards from the Vindhya
mountains. Now this is the name of one of the states of modern India. Sanskrit
writers referred to the language spoken here as Mahârâstri, whence the modern
language Marâthi. Perhaps the only other nation that has great as a prefix is
Britannia: Mahâbritannia would be Great Britain.

The word tapah literally means heat or fire. From this comes the word tapas,
which refers to ascetic austerities. It is the persistent effort to attain
spiritual enlightenment by subjecting oneself to extraordinary physical and
mental disciplines. Hindu lore is replete with men and women who undertook the
most grueling tapas in order to attain all sorts of things. In Hindu sacred
history, some aspirants performed tapas for hundreds, even thousands of years.
Usually, at the termination of such long austerities, Brahmâ (or Shiva or
VishNu)) appeared to grant the tapasvin (one who performs the tapas) any boon of
his or her asking. These powers were sometimes misused. It was then that God
incarnated to rid the world of such powerful evil individuals. From tapah, we
get mahâtapah: the Great Fire or the Great Ascetic. This is an epithet for
VishNu in the VishNu Sahasranâmah (VishNu's Thousand Names).

The Indic world has many other words and concepts with mahâ as a key
component..

V. V. Raman
April 8, 2007

The Religious Madness and Evil Karmas

VaLLalaar so noted for his very loving disposition, is moved to say that the presence of Prarabta Karma in the world and which installs a life happiness for some but an immensely painful one for others is grossly unfair. He laments at this seeming cruelty and appears to lack a comprehension of it after deliberating on it for long.

Now this is how he sees the unfairness. He projects himself into the metaphysically ignorant, the Peetai and notes that because of the ignorance he is moved to become a religious fanatic where he is overcome with hatred for other religions, and seeks to destroy them like a devil incarnate falling into a life of great pains and miseries not only for himself but also for others.

The word ‘matam’ means both religion and fanatical zeal, a virtually uncontrollable mental state etc. VaLLalaar must have observed all around the reign of religions such as Christinaity and Islam etc where despite the many good things they brought there were also religious violence, where innocent people were killed mercilessly.

Applying the Karma doctrine he notes that such people do not prosper at all and will Nali - suffer, decay and disappear. What they do are EVIL and such actions elicit karmas that will ensure that they decay and decline. Such actions are the Viizcci VinaikaL and will cause the FALL of the agents more and more into Malam, making them hasten to their own premature and painful death as is the case in the world.

To such evil people stand opposed the GOOD ones who are compared to the farmers who sow good seeds and cultivate the soil so that the yields are plenty and pleasant. The good ones are the Anbar, the Lovers of BEING and people who also Meel eeRi, who climb up the developmental ladder, make an evolutionary CLIMB so that they are CLOSER to BEING than to Malam and hence enjoy a life full of happiness.

This is well known as part of Agamism where it is recognized that creatures EVOLVE if good actions are done and FALL if evils are done.

But here comes the lamentation of VaLLalaar. BEING agrees with the good people and blessing them with the higher stages of evolution also moves along with them and in that continuously guides the souls in their metaphysical odyssey towards Moksa.

But looking at the great pains and miseries inflicted upon not only themselves but also others in the world, cannot BEING the most powerful and who rules over all, do something else other than installing the mechanism of Karma for regulating the movement of the souls towards moksa so that such great miseries are not there?

The religious fanaticism so ferocious is uncalled for and BEING should not have allowed for it. The presence of such cruelties is NOT justified at all and BEING should not have allowed for it.

75.
matteeRi alai tayir pool vanjca vaazkkai
mayaleeRi viruppeeRi matattinoodu
piiteeRi uzalkinRa manattaal antoo
peeyeeRi nalikinRa peetaiyaaneen
vitteeRi viLaiveeRi makizkinRoor pool
meeleeRi anbarellaam viLagkukinRaar
oyyeeRi uyirkkuyiraay niRainta eGkaL
udaiyaanee itu takumoo uNarkileenee

Meaning:
I the ignorant fool, gets to be pushed about and suffer great miseries in this earthly existence like the milk being churned violently to separate the butter. Out of metaphysical ignorance, I develop fanatical desires seeking to establish my religion as the religion of all and with these thoughts filling my mind I move about in the world. Thus I became devilish in my actions inflicting pains and sufferings not only on others but also myself. In contrast to me, there are great souls who love BEING and like good farmers who enjoy good harvests only because they sowed good seeds, do many good actions and reap the benefits as a joyous kind of life in this earth They also develop spiritually and climb up the ladder of evolution reaching great heights in spirituality. O my God! You are with all and not only cause such upward movements but also remain with them in total agreement with all such souls. It seems to be very unfair that You should allow for one group of people to suffer and another group to enjoy. I just simply don’t understand the reasons at all.

The Evolution and Liberation

The Dravidian metaphysical thinking has several features to it that are immensely scientific in the hermeneutic sense. Both the Azwars and Nayanmars freely raised deep questions within the framework of HS already well formulated in Tolkaappiyam and because of which they came to develop an Evolutionary Theory where BEING is said to DANCE to make the souls enjoy Moksa. Despite the freedom of choice the creatures enjoy there is also an urging them on to evolve to free themselves from the Malam, the primordial cause of all sufferings which are ultimately related to death. Thus every event in the world discloses the joint presence of both Malam and BEING and where the GOOD prevails over evil, we have the Grace of God prevailing over the devilish and fiendish forces of Malam. BEING and Malam, are forever in serious combat and which combat is the substance of the puranic battles between the Devas and Asuras with the Devas always winning.

In this eternal battile between BEING and Malam, there are those who go along with BEING and EVOLVE to enjoy Moksa and Namazvar having noted this raises some fundamental metaphysical questions about the soul by way of elucidating more on this evolutionary process.

First he notes that BEING who stands above the souls and as an autonomous entity, violently enters into the souls and staying there together causes by various games the evolution of the souls so that they are taken to enjoy Njaanam that brings along joys happiness and so forth. Somewhere on the way the soul is alerted about all these great blessings of BEING and overcome with infinite gratitude, the soul gives up its ego and hence independence and autonomy and stands as one and the same as BEING with NO WILL of its own. This loss of ego and hence individuality along with freedom autonomy end so forth, is such that it is permanent- never to be recovered.

Because of this BEING possesses the soul, overpowers it completely so that there is NO THOUGHT of individual will anymore. If BEING does not overpower the soul so completely and totally, then it can slide back into Malam and re-enter the world of Ego and begin to suffer again This would constitute a regression to prevent which BEING possesses e the soul completely so the return of the Ego, the I-ness etc is impossible.

But in the wake of this understanding of BEING as the Kuuttan, the Dancer as Namazvar himself calls, he is moved to raise some metaphysical questions about the soul that have kept the Dravidian philosophers busy for centuries and which struggle still continues.

He asks what is the relation between Ego-self ( naaN : I ) and the soul itself (aavi) It is also implied that the ego-self is something that is given by BEING only provisionally and which is gradually withdrawn. BEING gives (tantu) but gradually recalls all (koNdu) and in that making the soul pure and clean and hence ready to enjoy Moksa. While evolving involves getting more and more of Tatvas initially, then comes a point where these Tatvas are withdrawn and the soul deprived of them but all only to liberate them.

This I believe is the meaning of the crucial phrase: tanta nii koNdu aakkinaiyee. It is BEING who provides all for the ego functioning of the soul but all of which are WITHDRAWN irrecoverably at some point so that the soul is egoless and in that the same as BEING.

Thus there is an interesting dimension to the Evolutionary Theory of Namazvar - evolution involves not only the giving of various facilities for ego functioning but also their gradual withdrawal. The souls are enmeshed in Tatvas and then freed of them so that they are absolutely Pure and Clean - free of not only Malam but also all tatvces.

4.
enatu aaviyuL kalanta peru nal utavik kaimmaaRu
enatu aavi tantozinteen ini miiLvatu enpatu uNdee
enatu aavi aaviyum nii pozil eezum uNda entaay
enatu aavi yaar? Yaan aar? Tanta nii koNdaakkinaiyee

Meaning:
O my Lord (Mother) You imploded into my soul (engulfed totally in Malam) and blessed me with many good things and on account of which overcome with immense gratitude, I offered my own ego and in such a way that it will not ever return to grip me again. Now You have become my soul itself possessing it totally. I am puzzled greatly by it all. Who is the soul and who is the ego, the I-ness? It appears that You, who have swallowed the whole of cosmos, also provided me all, made me function as an ego-self and then deprived me of all in order make me pure and clean.

We have now another great task that of recovering the philosophy of Namazvar as the SAME as Siddhanta though there are some differences that are only superficial. However look at the following verse of Namazvar:

avaravar tamatamatu aRivu aRi vakaivakai
avaravar iRaivar ena adi adaivarkaL
avaravar iRaiyavar kuRaivu ilar; iRaiyavar
avaravar vitivazi adaiya ninRanaree

Meaning:
Here we find the essence of Agamism, that all souls no matter what forms of deities they worship stand to reach the FEET of BEING. There is nothing wrong in the choice of icons to worship and that these differences are Karmic (viti) but they will overcome all and finally reach BEING(enjoy Moksa).

I believe this is the essence of the best Saiva philosophers as well, as I am pointing out in my studies.

The Theory of Wave Resonance

Karma is the law of cause and effect, which is easily demonstrable in life. It is 'reap what you sow'. The good life we have now is simply because of a good education in the past. It gets complicated when the effect is staggered over a long period or over lives. This makes it largely 'unpredictable'. At low level physical realm it can be predicted. We can predict whether its rice or corn. Because sanchitta is an 'unknown', karma or vidhi here cannot be predicted. Astrology makes some attempt to predict the outcomes of prarabda karma, the karma of a lifetime.

It is true that karma theory is unfalsifiable, just like god and souls. It is a posit to make the philosophy stand, to explain the nature of things. All three are posits in any religion of philosophy.

Predictability also does not exist, made further unpredictable due to the grace of god, as well as the will of a soul. This gives hope. The two are also 'unknowns'. There are too many permutations and combinations of events that can happen, that makes predictability void. I guess it is for this reason Valluvar does not pay any attention to praradba karma at all. The poem Yaadum Oore, goes further to say that, we cannot say why things happen the way it does. This underscores unpredictability of events in life.

Non falsifiability does not apply to these 'metaphysical' philosophies, because it is metaphysical. Meaning it is beyond time, space, mind and causation. Its realms are outside mind and matter, within tattvas 1-12. Falsifiability applies in the realms within mind and matter, within tattvas 13-36. The minute we discuss god, souls, bonds, karma, maya, etc - all these are not of this physical or mental realm.

Regarding the theory of karma's;
(i) lack of utility (practical value) as a result of not being predictive, and
(ii)harmfulness in terms of limiting or narrowing human thinking, and dampening human initiative.

It is agreed. As Valluvar says, only one's actions count. Just do good deeds. Uphold one's commitments. Karma theory serves as a posit for metaphysical theories, for better understanding and for a human need to philosophise to satisfy the intellect. As a moral warning and an incentive to remain virtuous. No more than that. It cannot explain life, outcomes, etc.

My own personal experiences is that effect is immediately after cause or rather it is almost simultaneous. For instance the minute one tells a lie, there is an immediate impression in the mind and the subconscious produces a feeling of guilt, which carries on till the truth is told. At the physical level the effect is staggered as we only slowly see the damage that lying can cause to oneself and others as it unfolds.

Karumam also means ' the obligations or obligatory rites that must be performed or duties that must be performed'. But that is not meant here in the theory of karma.

As regards the words, if I am not mistaken, the original tamil word was kanmam, later it evolved into karumam but both means the same thing. It would be the same as vannam, varunam or varna. I could be wrong. Vinai is deeds. Vithi is outcome (prarabda). We accept our vithi, explain it has kanmam, do vinai.

The entire world is interconnected. Our deeds has the effect of 'like dropping a pebble in a lake that creates waves radiating out resonating or affecting the whole pool'. That means everyone's deeds affects everyone else but because the worldwide permutations are so massive, it is ignored and not attributed to any one particular person. This therefore attests "Theethum Nanrum Pirar thara Vaaraa". The resonance is endless or timeless which means the karmic effects of persons who lived centuries ago is still resonating (weakly) and merging with the current world pool of karmas. Because our own actions in the past contributed to the world pool of karmic effects radiating out and now guides the actions of others, which returns to us as global shared karma or vithi (what has unfolded). Thus the rapist and victim are both victims, both past and present contributories to the world pool of karmas, both recipients of the world pool of karmas. Therefore we accept our vithi as the Purananuru poem by Kanniyan observes.

Pathma

Satyam which means 'the ultimate truth or reality' means, "that which exists in all the three periods of time (past, present and future) without undergoing any change; and also in all the three states of consciousness (waking state, dream state and deep-sleep state)." This is therefore the absolute Reality — birthless, deathless and changeless — referred to in the Upanishads as Brahman or Siva, and to jivas (souls) too.

This does not mean that the world of maya is unreality, rather the world is relatively real, relative to brahman.

Not all âcâryas wrote only in Sanskrit. A great scholar-poet of the Tamil
tradition by the name of Kacciyappa Sivacharyar (close of 11th century C.E.) is
best known for his grand epic. [The letter r at the end of his name is a Tamil
mark of respect.] This devout Shaiva was from the sacred and scholarly city of
Kâncîvaram. He was also versed in Sanskrit. His epic masterpiece is said to be
an adaptation from the Sanskrit Skanda PurâNam, via perhaps a southern version
of this work. But Sivacharyar's work is original, and is no translation, just as
Kalidasa's Kumâra Sambhava is a poetic narrative of the genesis of Kumâra or
Skanda. Kandan is also known as Murugan, the quintessentially Shaiva deity of
the Tamils all over the world.

PurâNâ is a genre of classical Indian mythic literature. [I plan to discuss some
of them in future essays in this series.] In the Tamil world there are three
types of purâNams (as they are called). Some are adaptations from a Sanskrit
PurâNa. Some are related to a particular place of pilgrimage. And some are lives
of saints. KandapurâNam is both an adaptation and a place-specific purâNam.

This work may be looked upon as a Shaiva version of the Ramayana in that here it
is the incarnation of the Shiva principle that is the hero. [Recall that all the
ten avatâras were of Vishnu.] Here too, the goal is to rid the world of an evil
miscreant (Cûrapadman). Here too the hero weds, except that the Tamil Kandan
marries two women who have become divinities in the Tamil world: VaLLi and
Devayâni. In the Sanskritic tradition, Karttikeya is a bachelor.

KandapurâNam is appropriately compared and contrasted with Kamban's RâmâyaNam,
both in content and style. Though, in sheer poetic power, the former falls short
of the latter, it has acquired a level of popularity and sanctity among Tamil
Shaivas that Kamban's work probably hasn't among Tamil Vaishnavas. Long passages
from KandapurâNam are still recited in Shaiva temples, especially on auspicious
days.

As per the lore, one night Sivacharyar had a fantastic dream in which Lord
Subrahmaniya (another of the many names for Kandan) appeared and said: "Dear
one, of the six sections in Skanda Purana, Shankara Section is the first part,
and it embodies esoteric knowledge of Shiva. It contains my saga. I want you to
narrate this as a mahâkâvya in Tamil."

It was in accordance with this command from Murugan Himself that Sivacharyar is
said to have composed his massive work. He wrote one hundred verses a day,
taking 104 days to complete its full 10,345 stanzas. It is also believed that
none other than the divine Murugan dictated the opening stanzas of the epic
verbatim to the poet. This is not said in a metaphorical way, but in a literal
sense, for when some purist scholars objected to a particular use of diphthongs
in the opening stanza, the poet said it was not his creation, but of the Lord
above, and he was excused.

KandapurâNam was formally presented to the public over a period of a whole year
during which the members of the audience were treated to a feast every day of
their attendance. I am not aware of any other poem that saw the light of day
with such pomp and circumstance. Episodes like this speak as much about the
admirable cultural richness and values of classical Indian society as some
others reflect its not so commendable aspects.

It must be pointed out that just as there was Vaishnavism long before Ramanuja
who established it on firmer grounds, the worship of Murugan has been there in
the Tamil world for centuries, but the work of Sivacharyar gave it a tremendous
boost. The role of poet-seers in Tamil culture has few parallels in world
history.

Translated by P. R. Ramachander
Published by celextel.org

I am saluting that primeval God who is the Lord, who is the best, who is the father of the world, who is the greatest among gods, who has created Brahma, who gave all Vedas to Brahma in the beginning, who is the father of Vishnu and other devas, who merits praise, and who at the time of deluge destroys the world. He is the only one who is greater than everybody, who is the best and who rules over others. 1-2

That very strong Maheswara took the horrifying form of Sarabha and killed Narasimha who was destroying the world. 3

That god with his sharp claws tore Vishnu who took the form of Narasimha. He who was wearing the hide became Veerabhadra. 4

For every one desiring to get all occult powers, he is the one who should be meditated. Salutations to that Rudra who tore away the fifth head of Brahma. 5

Salutations to that Rudra who kicked Kala the God of death and made him fall and also him who drank the burning Halahala poison. 6

Salutations to that Rudra whose feet were worshipped by the flower of Vishnu’s eyes and who being pleased gave him the holy wheel (Chakra). 7

The one, who has crossed sorrows, sees that God, who is atom within an atom, gross among the gross, who as Atma hidden in the heart of beings and who is beyond physical action, clearly because of these reasons. 8

Salutations to that Rudra who is the greatest god, who holds the Soola (spear) in his hand, who has a big swallowing mouth, who is the Maheswara and whose blessing has good effects. 9

Sarabhopanishad, as contained in the Atharva-Veda.

end

Sarabha is a manifested form of Shiva which is a combination of eagle, lion and man. This upanishad, which can be read and interpretated from many angles, demolishes the concept of avatara by the killing of Lord Narasimha. Since it is an upanishad, shruti, it overrides and overrules puranas and itihasas. Lord Sarabeshvara is still worshipped today but usually for cures from ailments.

Pathma

[This message has been edited by Pathmarajah (edited May 02, 2007).]

[Here sage Ribhu explains to sage Nigadha the highest state one reaches as a jivanmukta (Liberated One) and then continues to live in this world without desires or attachment.]

III-15. As a bird, for flying in the sky, leaves the net (in which it was enmeshed), the great sage sheds (his) identification with the sense-organs; then (he sheds) his awareness of limbs which has become illusory.

III-16. He has won the knowledge of a new-born infant; as if the air should give up its power to vibrate, he has terminated the proneness of consciousness to attach itself to objects.

III-17. Then, attaining the unqualified state of Consciousness – the state of pure Being –resorting, (as it were), to the state of dreamless slumber, he has stayed immovable like a mountain.

III-18. Winning the stability of dreamless sleep he has attained the Fourth; though gone beyond bliss, (he is) still blissful; he has become both being and non-being.

III-19. Then he becomes that which is beyond even the range of words which is the nihil of the nihilist and Brahman of the knowers of Brahman;

III-20. Which is the pure blemishless cognition of the knowers of cognition, the Purusha of the Sankhyas and Ishvara of the Yogins;

III-21. The Shiva of the Shivagamas; the Time of those who affirm Time alone (as the basic principle); the final doctrine of all Shastras, and what conforms to every heart;

III-22. Which is the All, the all-pervading Reality, the Truth. He has become That, the unuttered, the moveless, the illuminator even of lights;

III-23. The Principle whose sole proof is one’s experience of It – he has remained as That.

III-24. That which is unborn, deathless, beginningless and the First immaculate state, whole and impartite – he has remained as That; a state subtler than that of the sky. In a moment, he has become the hallowed God.

Excerpts from the Annapurnopanishad, as contained in the Atharva-Veda.

Comments:
The jivanmukta becomes the inexplicable Brahman, Purusha, Ishvara or Siva. These four terms are used by different schools to mean the same thing. To further note the mention of Siva agamas.

Pathma

In the middle of body there exists the Sushumna Nadi which is as bright as the sun and as cool as the moon. It starts from Mooladhara and goes up to Brahmarandra which is in the top middle of the skull. It is well known that in the middle of it there exists Kundalani which is as bright as crores of suns and as thin as the lotus thread. The man who sees that with his mind’s eye attains salvation by getting rid of all sins.  2

One who sees constant light in the top portion of his, in the middle of his forehead has attained mastery of yoga  3

Wherever it is, if there is light above the head of a one, he is a yogi.  4

That which can be realized by sensory organs is one which has a form. That which is in between the eye lids is without form...6

Excerpts from the Advaya-Tarakopanishad belonging to the Sukla-Yajur-Veda.

Comments:
This seeing of the light within the head would be the goal of all Hindus, whether they are on the bakti path worshipping god, or on the path of meditation. One can just sit quietly for some fifteen minutes and check and see if there is a light glowing within the head. It serves as a useful self check to see if we are still on the path.

Pathma

Shiva, who is the Lord of all beings (Pasupathi), is always witness for everything. The minds of all people are controlled as well as sent to different topics by Him only. The soul acts because of him. The words talk because of Him. The eyes see shapes because of Him. The ear hears everything because of Him. Even other organs only perform the actions allotted to them because of Him. This act of His is not due to the nature but by illusion.

Whatever has been taught as “What is heard?”*, to the beings, has been taught so by Shiva who is Pasupathi and He gives the nature of “What is heard?” to them. He enters the minds of souls, sits there as its nature and gives it the position of the mind. He is different from all things that are known to us through organs. Of all that knowledge taught to the different organs, He is the one who is there taking suitable forms, and gives the being the relevant experience. Therefore eyes, speech and other organs do not go to His great self-shining form. That shine of the soul, which is not due to its action, is due to the soul itself and not the organs.

By having a discipline in food habits, mental discipline develops. By mental discipline, one gets wisdom. Step by step. the problems in the mind are solved.

Excerpts from the Pasupata-Brahmanopanishad, as contained in the Atharva-Veda.

Comments:
* 'What is Heard' means the vedas. Siva gave us the vedas.

This upanishad attests that All is Siva's Will. Pasupati means 'lord of bonded souls', and lord means the driver, and the soul cannot act on its own as it has no power.

Pathma

Rigveda Samhita: Mandala 1

1.1.1 agnim iiLe purohitaM yajnasya devam Rtvijam
hotaaraM ratnadhaatamam

I glorify Agni, the high priest of the sacrifice, the divine, the ministrant, who presents the oblation (to the gods), and possesses great wealth (which he presents to the worshipper).

Comments:
The very first word in the rig veda is Agni the very first hymn is to Him. The contribution of every rishi in the Rigveda begins with several hymns to Agni, then to Indra and then to the other devas. This hymn by Vishvamitra address Agni both as a God (deva), and as a fire - a medium through which oblations are presented to Him and the gods, and a medium through which He and the gods presents benedictions to the worshipper. Agni is the ministrant of the oblations - He summons the gods to the sacrificial ceremony to receive the oblations and bestow benedictions on the worshipper.

Agni is described as a bright shining radiant Being, a God, a possessor of wealth and goodness and by implication bestows the sacrificer with wealth, fame and progeny.

1.1.2 agniH puurvebhir RSibhir iiDyo nuutanair uta
sadevaaM eha vakSati

May that Agni, who is praised by both present and ancient sages, bring the gods here.

Comments:
It is Agni that brings the gods to the sacrifice. Agni stands as the door between two worlds, as a bridge between man and the Gods.

1.1.3 agninaa rayim ashnavat poSameva dive-dive
yashasaM viiravattamam

Through Agni the worshipper obtains wealth which increases day by day, which is the source of fame and multiplier of mankind.

Comments:
Through Agni who is the source of wealth, one obtains wealth, and through wealth comes fame and progeny.

1.1.4 agne yaM yajnam adhvaraM vishvataH paribhuur asi
sa iddeveSu gachati

Agni, the sacrifice is perfected as you encompass (and protect it), assuredly (the oblations) reaches the gods.

Comments:
With the all prevading Agni protecting the sacrifice from all sides assuredly the sacrifice is perfect and the oblations reaches the gods.

1.1.5 agnir hotaa kavikratuH satyash citra shravastamaH
devo devebhiraa gamat

May Agni, the wise presenter of oblations, truthful, most gloriously great, The God, come here with the gods.

1.1.6 yad aNga daashuSe tvam agne bhadraM kariSyasi
tavet tat satyam aNgiraH

Whatever blessings, Agni, bestow upon the giver (of the oblation), that verily, Angiras is indeed thy truth.

Comments:
Angirasa, the progenitor of the angiras people, is also a name of Rudra (1.31.1).

1.1.7 upa tvaagne dive-dive doSaavastar dhiyaa vayam
namo bharanta emasi

To You, Dispeller of the night, O Agni, day by day with prayer we approach you with reverence.

Comments:
Agni - Dispeller of the night, or Dispeller of darkness. (Lead me from darkness to light.)

1.1.8 raajantam adhvaraaNaaM gopaam Rtasya diidivim
vardhamaanaMsve dame

Ruler of sacrifices, Radiant One, the constant illuminator of truth, increasing in your own abode.

Comments:
The constant illuminator of truth can also be read as who illuminates (to us) Rta (or dharma).

1.1.9 sa naH piteva suunave agne suupaayano bhava
sacasvaa naH svastaye

Agni, be easily approachable by us, even as a father to his son; be ever present with us for our good.

Comments:
With this first hymn we understand Agni as an all prevading Radiant God, as the medium of fire through which we offer oblations to Him and to the other gods, as the doorway to the inner world of the gods, as the One who summons and brings the other gods to receive the offerings of the sacrifice, as the source and provider of wealth, fame and progeny, as the administer of the sacrifice - ensures the offerings goes to the gods, who dispels the darkness in us and illumines our minds with truths.

We also understand that Agni is distinct from the other gods; each of them have their own individualities and identities.

From other hymns in the rig veda, 1.31.1 and 1.72.4 & 5, we know that Agni is Rudra - one God but two names are used interchangeably (Hindu Gems, Page 11). Hymns to Agni are called Rudri_ya (Sayana), and He is called rudrah-agnih or Agni-Rudra. Later He came to be simply called Rudra (Taittiri_ya Sam.hita_ 1.5.1). Later still simply as Siva (Krishna Yajur veda).

The entire rig veda samhitas are hymns of salutations, adoration, devotion to the gods, prayers of thanksgiving and beseeching benedictions. These hymns are sung to the gods in devotion in homa sacrifices as well as in temples. Singing to the gods has been the Hindu tradition continued in the bakti hymns till this day.

Today there are only a few temples and icons of Agni in the world. However Agni is present in all Hindu rituals; the passing of the flames during puja and passed to the devotees as sacrament, the oil lamps, in the kindling of the homa fire, in marriages as the Agni-Witness, even as Agnideva of the kitchen firestove, in the preparation of the burnt and purified vibhuthi (cosmic-fire) ash which is smeared on the forehead as a sacrament after prayers and finally consigning the dead body to the jaws of Agni in a cremation - the ultimate sacrifice. All Hindus sacrifice to Agni eventually in much the same way "the gods abandoned the rest of their bodies in sacrifice" (RV 1.72.5) after realising Agni-Rudra, as shown above. Agni is today also worshipped as Siva.

The meditator on attaining Siva (as saguna Brahman) sees a brilliant central sun or Agni, first shining as a light at the top of the head, then as sitting in the light, then as being one with the light. This light is then known to be the Great Pillar of Flames that appeared before Brahma and Vishnu. This column of flames is Agni.

On Agni
http://www.vedah.com/org2/literature/rig_veda/gods_of_veda/agni.html

Pathma

Advaita Relationship
 
According to Advaita Vedanta, God or Brahmam is the only Reality. Soul is not different from Brahman. Individual self is Brahman himself. Among the varying views in Vedas, this view is also seen among them. “It is One only; Brahmam is without duality (without a second)” (‘Ekam eva, Athvidiyam Brahmam’) is a sentence giving this view. Sankara’s Advaita concept is consistent with it.

Vedanta is considered as the culmination of Vedas. Similarly, Saiva Siddhanta is considered as the culmination of Saiva Agamas. It is for this reason Siddhanta is sometimes referred to as ‘Agamanta’. Unlike the Vedanta, Saiva Siddhanta considers three kind of relationship of God with the Soul. God is one with the Soul, along with the Soul, and different from the Soul. This aspect of relationship in three states (onraai, udanaai, veraai) is the Advaita relationship mentioned in Siddhanta philosophy.
Above-mentioned Vedic sentence is interpreted in this background. According to the Saiva Siddhantists, after telling, “It is One only” (‘Ekam eva’), it is not necessary to tell again “Advidiyam Brahmam” (Brahmam is without a second’); It only means that there is no Being equal to or same as Brahmam.

The three kind of relationship of God to the soul can be explained with an analogy. Soul is one with our physical body. Similarly God is one with the soul. The soul is along with the body and animates it. Similarly God is along with the soul and animates it. Yet the soul is different from the body. Similarly God is different from the Soul.

The second Aphorism of Sivajnanabodham speaks of the Advaita relationship in Siddhanta philosophy as follows:

“The primal Being, God, is non-separable from the souls, being one with them, different from them and making them to take births and deaths ceaselessly, experiencing the fruits of the twin karma. This is done by His Sakthy who is eternally in implicit union with Him.”

We have been in union with Anava malam from the beginning-less period. St. Thayumanavar says that this advaita relationship with Anava should cease and we must have this relationship with God who is One of wisdom. (‘Anavaththodu athuvitham aanapadi meignaanath thanuvinodu aththuvitham aakunaal ennaalo’).

The Advaita relationship of God with us always exists. Only we don’t realize it and are not prepared to understand this relationship. St. Meykandar says that once this realization comes, we will be moving towards the Divine.

Our true nature is not to be with sensual objects, but to be with the Divine. This is a message given by Meykandar. This is a Saiva Siddhanta concept, which is seen even in early Tamil works. Thiruvalluvar speaks extensively of it in the chapter on ‘Realising the Reality’ (“Meiyunarthal’) in his Thirukkural text.
 
By nature, man associates himself with the sensual objects, his body, the internal instruments and the world surrounding him. He clings to them for his support. They condition his thoughts, words and deeds. This state of association often becomes the root cause of his illness, his problems. To free himself from this illness, he must understand the One, which is a real support to him and stop his clinging on to the sensual objects. This is explained in Thirukkural as follows:

“Sarpunarnthu sarpukeda ozhukin matrazhiththu
sarthara sartharu nooi”

Meaning of this verse is, ‘if one realizes the One (God) with whom he should associate and behave himself by cutting off his association with (attachment to) the sensual objects, then he would not suffer the illness caused by them’.

From: "Dr.K.Ganesalingam"
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 07:39:27 -0700 (PDT)

....

This is a very, very good concise summary of the similarities and differences between siddhanta and vedanta. As one can readily see, siddhanta is far more sophisticated, and in fact bridges non-dual, dual and plural relationships of god, soul and the world. Everyone should read and memorise this short essay.

Chandra should note that this what I was trying to convey some years back, that siddhanta is not different from vedanta, just more sophisticated in explaining the relationship of the triad. Which is why sages and scholars say vedanta is general and siddhanta is specific. This makes vedanta dated, passe, and well, obsolete, as we have moved far forward from being mere simplistic.

It is for this same reason that vedantists will not, cannot argue with siddhantists, and they would rather not study siddhanta at all. For the same reasons siddhanta and agamism is neglected by scholars. Besides its largely in tamil. So I suggest vedantists just study and memorise *this* essay. Thats enough.

Additionally, the explanations of the three-fold relationships within siddhanta gives rise to monistic theism (advaita isvarapada) and pluralism, although both agree on all the points, that souls are beginningless, there is actual embodiment (sariraka) and disembodiment.

Once again I commend Dr. Ganesalingam as a worthy scholar.

THE LORD APPEARS AS THE ENDLESS TOWER OF FLAME

Before the creation of this world (the bhuloka and antarloka), a quarrel ensured between Brahma and Vishnu as to who between them was greater. Then a huge unknown towering pillar of fire appeared before them, a linga of flame. Brahma and Vishnu decided to seek the ends of the pillar of fire. It was a futile and useless search. When the gods surrendered in humility and worshipped the Endless Column of Fire. The Great God appeared and revealed himself.

Today, as always in the past too, people search to 'measure' or determine god, by pouring through the books, studies, philosophies, comparisons, arguments, challenging, converting to other religions, etc., - all of which is bound to end in abject failure. Note that a person searching for God in books and philosophies, is a completely lost soul.

Only when one surrenders these efforts, stands in humility and worships God with pujas and singing of hymns (as the gods did (RV 1.72.4), does God reveal Himself as the Great Flame, the Column of Fire, the Central Sun, Agni, Siva, who is within ourselves as the soul of our soul.

It is for this reason Hindus wrote hymns in the vedas, thirumurais and prabandam - hymns to be sung to the Gods.

End the search for His revelation to begin. Begin the worship with singing of hymns.

Pathma

Men Should Emulate & Follow Women
Atharva Veda Samhita, Part 2, Kanda 27, sukta 107, sloka 5705.
"The sun god follows the first illuminated and enlightened goddess Usha (dawn) in the same manner as men emulate and follow women."

Women Encouraged to Study the Vedas and Strive for Enlightenment
Atharva Veda 14-1-64?
O bride! May the knowledge of the Vedas be in front of you and behind you, in your centre and in your ends. May you conduct your life after attaining the knowledge of the Vedas. May you be benevolent, the harbinger of good fortune and health and live in great dignity and indeed be illumined in your husband's home."

Women Have Equal Rights to Conduct Worship
Rigveda Samhita, part 1, sukta 79, sloka 872.
"The wife should do agnihotra (yagna), sandhya (puja) and all other daily religious rituals. If, for some reason, her husband is not present, the woman alone has full rights to do yagna."

Initiation Equally to Both Men and Women
Rigveda 10-191-3
"O women! These mantras are given to you equally (as to men). May your thoughts, too, be harmonious. May your assemblies be open to all without discrimination. Your mind and consciousness should be harmonious. I (the rishi) give you these mantras equally as to men and give you all and equal powers to absorb (the full powers) of these mantras."

Women are Worthy of Worship, Equally as God
Rigveda Samhita, Part 1, sukta 73, sloka 829.
".. This Agnideva is pure and worthy of worship just as pativrata women."

Women are Praiseworthy?Rigveda amhita, Part-2, sukta 21, sloka 3287
"Just as Indradeva is praised like tree bearing fruit and warriors dexterous in the use of weapons and by newly trained rishis, we too pray to the much adorned and venerated Indradeva just as man praises his wife."

Pray to the Bride for Acceptance as a Husband
(prayer read by grooms in a marriage ceremony)
Rigveda Samhita Part -4, sukta 85, sloka 9702
"O bride! I accept your hand to enhance our joint good fortune. I pray to you to accept me as your husband and live with me until our old age. …"

Women, Be the Empress in your Home, not a Child
Rigveda Samhita Part -4, sukta 85, sloka 9712
"O bride! May you be like the empress of your mother-in-law, father-in-law, sisters-in-law and brothers-in-law (sisters and brothers of the groom). May your writ run in your house."

http://www.ivarta.com/columns/OL_070503.htm

Four-letter words are often profanities in English, but in many languages the
word for God has four letters: YHVH (yahveh) in Hebrew, theos (where theta for
th is a single letter) and Zeus in Greek, Deus in Latin, Gott in German, Dieu in
French, Dios in Spanish, Odin in Norse, Lord in English, BHaGaVâN in Hindi, and
KaDaVuL in Tamil..

The word for four is catur in Sanskrit. Its auspiciousness is reflected in the
fact that there are four Vedas: caturveda. And those who have studied them or
are affiliated to them are known as caturvedis. The word has become a family
name, and does not necessarily refer to any scholarship.Such a designation (as
also terms like dvivedis and trivedis) implies that not all Hindus subscribed to
all the four Vedas in classical India. Knowledge of all the four Vedas is called
caturvidya. Its closest equivalent in English would be Biblical Scholarship.

The word for limb is anga. Metaphorically it could refer to a military division.
Thus caturanga refers to the four divisions of the armed forces of a country.
Like army, navy, and air-force in our times, in classical India there was
infantry, cavalry, elephant-riding fighters, and charioteers. This reflects the
sophistication of the military in ancient India.

The word ânana means face/head. Thus gajânana (one with an elephantine head) is
an epithet for Lord Ganesha. The terms caturânana (four-headed) and caturmukha
(four-faced) refer to Brahmâ.

The word bhadra could mean something that is auspicious. This gives rise to the
word caturbhadra (four auspicious matters) which are the four principal pursuits
of life, namely, righteous behavior (dharma), economic well-being (artha),
physical enjoyment (kâma), and ultimate release (moksha). Another word for this
is caturvarga.

In the classical Hindu framework, one spoke of four kinds of sacrifices (medha):
horse sacrifice (ashvamedha), human sacrifice (naramedha), universal sacrifice
(sarvamedha) and sacrifice to the departed ones (pitrimedha). One who has done
all these is a caturmedha.

The framework of the four traditional varNas (brahmaNas, kshatriyas, vaishyas,
and shudras) is known as caturvarNa. The four âshramas or stages of life are:
brahmacharyâ, gârhasthya, vânaprastha and samnyâsa constitute caturâshrama.

In traditional Hindu cosmology, the universe evolves and dissolves in four
cyclic phases, each of which is called a yuga, each lasting several hundred
thousand years. They are known as satya-yuga, treta-yuga, dvâpara yuga, and
kali-yuga. The collective term for all the yugas is caturyuga.

The word ûrdhva means above, higher, more than, etc. Pad is foot. Thus we get
the word catur-ûrdhvapad which implies having more than four feet. This is, in
fact, a name for the mythical bird Sarabha which is described as having eight
legs.

Bhuja is arm. Caturbhuja means having four arms. It is an epithet for Lord
Vishnu, and also for Lord Ganesha. A synonym for this is caturbâhu. Caturdanta
(literally four teeth) refers to the elephant Airâvata which was owned by Indra.
This animal is said to have four tusks. Vâhana refers to a carriage or a
vehicle. A carriage which is drawn by four horses or four oxen is therefore
called a caturvâhin.

According to some shâstras, the consummation of a wedding is supposed to occur
only on the fourth day of the wedding. This event is therefore called
caturthi-karma.

The word for fourteen is caturdasha (exactly as in German Vierzehn:
four-ten). During the classic ocean-churning (samudra-mathana) episode in Hindu
sacred history, fourteen jewels are said to have emerged, such as the moon, the
four-tusked Airâvata, etc. They are collectively known as caturdasha-ratnam.

Hindu myths are a metaphorical explanation of truths. In this sense all myths are valid as a communicative media. The ramayana is the finest example and I shall use this as everyone knows it. It tells us how to live, and how to realise God.

Rama (and Ravana) both worshipped God Siva. A situation befell Rama whereby he was banished from society, and then his wife was kidnapped. We cannot know why things happen in life the way they do. Theories abound though.

Rama accepted his vithi (fate) without blaming anyone and set out to free his wife and punish the wrongdoers. He wanted to 'uphold his commitments' and 'fulfil his obligations'. As the Tirukural mentions, "when a man declares he will advance his family, God Himself will wrap His robes and lead the way." Sure enough, even the elements and animal kingdom bowed and cooperated with him and led the way. Walking out of the forest with just his brother to accompany him, by the time he reached the shores of Rameshvaram, he had an army of a half million.

Always maintaining ethics and updolding justice, eventually after many agonising circumstances and battles, he freed his wife and punished the wrongdoers. He fulfilled his commitments.

Once he had accomplished that, that is, once he had accepted his fate cheerfully, upheld his commitments and fought injustice, while all along worshipping God, then in the end he came to realise that he is God. Self realisation took place. He became illumined and enlightened and was a jivanmukta for the rest of his life.

This is what we are asked to do, rather than incessantly worshipping, chanting, meditating, doing tapas, argueing on philosophy, etc. For success in life and our own enlightened we are taught in the ramayana to;

1. worship God Siva,
2. accept whatever the situation or station we are in without blaming anyone,
3. deal with the situations as they arise, always upholding our commitments and fighting injustice,

Once the above is satisfactorily accomplished, rest assured that self realisation will dawn automatically, that we are God, the same 'One' we worshipped previously. Tat tvam asi. Aham Brahmasmi. Rama realised that *eventually* and so will we realise the same thing eventually.

There is no need for sannyas, chant mantras, and endless rituals etc. There is no need to change the world, but accept everything as it is without blame, but always stand for justice and uphold our commitments to our family and immediate surroundings. With this, self realisation is assured.

This is the way to read and understand the ramayana. We all are waiting to realise God like Rama did 'The Easy Way', just by living our life justly and fulfilling our obligations.

Notice I have not used the words dharma, karma, reincarnation, varnashrama, avatar, Vishnu, etc. Or worship of Rama! All this is not necessary. The ramayana is unequivocally clear to all who wish to plainly read and see, of the path of worship, how to live, be successful and achieve moksha. Is there anyone who wishes to read?

Pathma

Appar on BEING as the World Itself -5\6.

The Position of Vedas In Tamil Saivism

As I have mentioned several times before the way Vedas were understood by Tamils was quite different from the Vedantic Brahmins of later times. Throughout the Bakti period the Nayanmars and Azwars appropriate the Vedas in their own terms and where the evil VarNasrama Dharma was never understood as part of Vedic lore. One of the themes of Meykandar in his majestic Botham is the correction of the distorted manner in which the Vedas have been understood by the Brahmins who already established exclusive claims over them, contrary to the initial situation where probably it was open to all as it appears to be case during the Sangam epoch of the Tamils. Perhaps bulk of the Rishies who sang the slokas were not the later day Brahmins at all but raher an archaic branch of Tamils.

Appar in this verse notes correctly that Vedas have the worship of BEING as Fire (agniyaay yaathiyaakiya veetam) and which is very correct as all will acknowledge. But as something very characteristic of the OPENNES of Tamil Saivism, we have Appar immediately follow this with the observation that BEING in addition to standing as the Vedas of this essence He also stands as all the various other sacred treatises not only in Tamil and Sanskrit but also in almost all world languages. BEING as Siva becomes all languages and discloses Himself in all these languages so that no language is specially favored by Him and so forth.

In the Vedas Siva discloses Himself as Agni and which disclosure goes back to the Sumerian times itself but not in other scriptures. But are the icons that Appar mentions with special fervor over and above the Vedic Agni ?

He mentions that in addition to disclosing Himself as the Fire and which is retained in the iconography of Siva Nadarajah where He holds the burning Fire in one of His hands He also discloses Himself as the Siva who wears the White Moon and the Ganges and other sacred rivers on His tuft. Fire Water Wind Earth and Space are five basic elements and these archetypes also disclose the fact BEING stands as these and their various local realizations like the seas rivers brackish waters and so forth

He also mentions that Siva also shows Himself as the rider of the Bull to show that He provides the youthful virility for the embodied souls to enjoy life and struggle along and destroy the hold of Malam in their soul

Thus we see that the Tamil Saivites like Appar avoid the authoritarian and such other claims that a number Vedic Brahmins came to impose on the Vedas and with that develop the ideology of VarNasrama Dharma to the great shame of Hinduism. This was avoided by understanding the Fire form of Siva is just one of the basic iconic forms and therefore the Vedas that focus on BEING as Agni do not exhaust the spiritual understanding of BEING. The Fire form of BEING does not exhaust BEING at all and hence the Vedas do not contain an exhaustive understanding of BEING. Any way as the Saivites keep on saying as do many others, BEING cannot be exhausted by any scripture or any word or symbol . He remains always a Surplus, an Excess.

6.
agniyaay yaatiyaay veetamaaki
arumaRaiyoodu aimnpuutham taaneeyaakip
pangayamaay pal collum taaneeyaakip
paal matiyoodu aatiyaayp opaanmaiyaakik
kangaiyaayk kaaviriyaak kanniyaakik
kadalaaki malaiyaakik kaziyaaki
engumaay eeRuurnta celvanaaki
ezunj cudaraay emmadikaL ninRavaaRee

Meaning.
This is how BEING, the rising brilliance stands as the world. He becomes the Agni and in that the ground of all and in which form also becomes the Vedas along with many other scriptures (like the Agamas and so forth). He also becomes the various languages and all the scriptures in all these languages where He discloses Himself as the divine lotus, the bright Moon and the foundation of life. He becomes the five fold basic elements and also their differentiations into the Ganges Kaveri and such other rivers, the seas the hills the brackish waters and so forth. He spreads all over and shows Himself also the Rider of the Bull.

Dr.K.Loganathan

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/akandabaratam/message/27639

The philosophy described
is a unique advaita, but why do so many describe it as 'pluralism' beats me.

It is clear that Meykandar's siddhanta deconstructs all other existing
philosophies and establishes itself based on reductionism. It is based on
rationality.

What I pointed out earlier in discussions on tattvas is that rationality
operates within the limits of the mind and matter. Whereas God, soul (psyche)
and the primordial tattvas are beyond mind. What is beyond the mind cannot be
grasped by the mind. When one has trancended the mind in his meditations, the
mind has come to a standstill, deep freeze, while consciousness/awareness
remains. He is fully aware but the mind and the senses are not operating, there
is no knowledge of the past, no subconscious mind to relate to, and it cannot
record the experience in the subconscious, and neither has it any point of
reference to relate to (since there is no time and space in these experiences).

While in this transcended state he is aware of himself just as a point of
consciousness, and he is aware of a presence called God. There is no other point
of reference. His mind is not operating. He cannot say whether he exists,
whether God exists, whether he is one and the same with God, or different. Only
the mind can say that. Since the mind has not experienced it nor recorded it in
its memory, no one can say anything with certainty. One can only describe it as
indescribable, or 'That' or 'tat', and the relationship as 'asi' or 'not
different' or 'non dual'. One cannot say with certainty that it is 'one' or
'two'.

The soul remains and is not annihilated. I like the description as the 'soul is
in perfect harmony with the Diety, perfect synchronity, indistinguishable from
the Diety, its activities are in fact the activities of the Deity, homogeneity
with the Diety, the impossibility of distinguishing the soul from the Diety, the
soul does not do anything the Diety does not, there is total loss of free will,
the soul is the Diety as far as behaviour goes, there is an inability to
establish a fissure between the soul and the Diety, an inseparable unity of the
soul and the Diety'.

Yet soul and God is not equal as we know as the soul possesses no Power. It can
only reflect the Power of the Diety, and that too if it was granted. The soul
retains Consciousness (chit or awareness) and Love (bliss or ananda) at all
times, and this Consciousness and Love is one and the same with the Diety. It is
a absolute unity.

But the fact that the soul does not enjoy any Power means there is no absolute
Oneness. The Diety alone possesses all Power at all times. The Diety may grant
some Power to the soul but this is rare and temporary.

So there is unity as well duality.

Because these are matters that are quite indescribable, the saints of the past
like Tirumular, the many rishis, Agastya, etc did not venture into writing down
a proper philosophy. That was the best decision. All those who attempted to
write a tight philosophy ended in it being deconstructed, by Meykandar.
Meykandar's philosophy stands, but only as 'that which cannot be deconstructed'.

Thats because it has moved into the area beyond the mind, where falsifiability
or non falsifiability cannot apply! How to disprove him? Why even try? But the
beauty and glory of Meykandar still remains because it wasted all the other
philosophies! More than that I cannot say. Which means we are back to a pre-shad
dharsanas philosophyless Hinduism. Which is great. Now the agamas, vedas,
tirumantiram and yoga sutras of Patanjali can stand without being clouded and
crowded by the numerous 'opinions', which are called philosophies today.

More than that, this is what I can say.

In my view some of the Mahavakyas of siddhanta are these;

1. ondraai, udanaai, veyraai (one, together, different)

2. Ekan, anekan, iraivan ( One, not one (many), Ruler)

a. He is One, the only thing that exists and there is no other, no other entity
exists at the deepest level. At this level we are in perfect oneness with him
and souls dont exist.

b. He is not one, meaning He is many - in fact, He extends as all creation, but
giving each its own unique and distinct identity. Yet He remains together with
all of His creation (udanaai) as the devadeva - divine of the divine.

c. He is the Absolute Power and Will, Iraivan, a Personal God, who rules all the
time, and as this we are totally different from Him (veyraai).

All these three relationships co-exists at all times, except during Mahapralaya
when the second and third relationship comes to an end, or earlier if He wills
it to end, whereby He absorbs the souls. But this we'll never know. Discovering
the always existing threefold relationship is what is called self realisation.

[This threefold relationship extends to the other gods too in my view, as they
have their own distinct identity and Powers and are not just temporary iconic
forms. Temporary iconic forms would relate to Goddess Shakti, Kali, Vishnu,
Brahma, Veerabhadra, etc., but not to Ganesha, Muruga, Hanuman, Indra, etc who
are permanent dieties with Power. Anyone
who thinks he can get past Ganesha or Muruga is wasting his time. Inorder to be clear and not start a
controversy, temporary iconic forms are Siva Himself or 'That'. It is the same
Being in a different 'mode'. Each of those 'modes' are called Vishnu, Rudra,
Shakti, etc but the sum total of these modes is what saivas refer to in a
generic word as Siva.

It is too simplistic to say all the gods are one and the same. Yes at the
deepest level, the self of the gods is Siva Himself, and thats why He is called
devadeva - divine of the divine or soul of the soul (or god). Even in the
temporary iconic forms there is a temporary distinction. A knower can percieve
the different dieties and their different powers and personalities just as one
can distinguish one friend from another over a telephone conversation. Hindu myths
confirm that. Anyway, this requires a separate discussion.]

Apart from the philosophy, what we have is the testimonies of those who have
been there through these relationships in their worship and meditations, into
and out of samadhi daily. In my thousands of discussions with jivanmuktas, some
of whom are dead now, and some of whom are living, is this.

When one enters the 'white light' there is an experience of distinct
separateness of the soul and the Diety (the white light). This white light state
can be called the 'lower' saguna brahman. It is udanaai and veyraai at the same
time.

Later when one transcends the white light and enters the 'golden light' (pon
oli), then there is a oneness and no more separation. One becomes the golden
light. This state is variously called saguna brahman, satchitananda, parashakti
or simply Siva. At this stage there is absolute ondraai.

Later still one transcends into yet another higher state where there is 'The
Nothing', 'The Unknown', variously called parasiva, parabrahman or nirvana. At
this stage nothing can be said of it. The soul does not know for sure with
certainty whether the souls exists, or if God exists, or not exist, or whether
it is a oneness or twoness. Nothing can be said of this stage. Nobody knows, and
nobody has ever known or will ever know. The vedas say 'only Rudra alone knows'
and not even the other gods or iconic forms know, as Rudra brings all of them (the
gods and iconic forms) to an end at mahapralaya.

On coming out of this samadhi experience, the soul moves/steps down, from
oneness to twoness and then back to 'reality' of daily live. The soul remains
intact but lives in the bliss of satchitananda which continues to flow
throughout the day. This is what you would refer to as amutham or amrita that
heals and is pure knowledge. But no power at all.

I have checked, double checked and checked a thousand times on this issue. If I
want I'll check again tomorrow, and the next day and the next.

Pathma

end

.
To: esuvadi@yahoogroups.com
From: "Dr.Narayanan Kannan"
Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 01:14:13 -0000
Subject: [min-suvadi] Fwd: [akandabaratam] Re: SIDDHANTA MUKTI: AN ENQUIRY INTO THE ULTIMATE END OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

This is indeed an excellent summary. If, what is explained here, is
Saiva Siddhanda then this is almost undistinguishable from Sri
Vaishnavam & Vedanta. Of course there are subtle variations in
explanations but in essence that is what Hindu philosophies are
driving at.

Since these enquiries happen at the realm of space & time (in essence
in the field of malam), an absolute clarity is difficult to obtain.
We need to trust either the Vedas, Tamil maRais or direct teaching
from a Guru (a jevan muktar). That is where rationality (scientific
enquiry) ends and personal conviction, belief come in to existence.

J.Krishnamurti derives the same conclusion with Dr.David Bahm when
they enquire on this.

Now the differences, the oneness that Buddhist, Saivites and
Vaishnavites talk about is some times refered as 'kEvala moksham',
where there is no more disdinction of any sort. However, Vaishnava
experience, including that of Nammalvar, is different. The soul has a
choice, even at the very last of its existence (a free will)to choose
either in a state of non-duality or in a state of duality where
Bakthi is still possible (nitya dhasyam). There exists a state of
divine expression where he reveals himself in nithya mangala vigraham
which is 'aprakirutha' in a state of ever new, ever fresh, ever
untiring form (not iconic)to be experienced. Of course, this is
revealed only to whom this is desired.

The one, you may call Siva and explain or Sriman Narayana and
explain. The explanation varies according to your school of enquiry.
Sankara talks about 'panchikaranam'

http://www.tamilheritage.org/blogcms/?query=Sankara&amount=0&blogid=1

where through reduction you reach this state.

Nammalvar prefer this status to be obtained through his grace. He
talks about a story of Mahapralaya with Ciranjivi Markandeya. He
survived up to the last few seconds of Mahapralaya, as he was blessed
by Siva as Chiranjivi but then comes a stage he witnessed a small
baby floating on the pralaya jalam (primordial waters). While he
admired that form he was sucked in to HIM. It ends there. Then only
that (sat) remains.

According to Vaishnava explanation all other deities, including
trimurthis are expressions of HIM. Any worship done to any deity is
indeed a worship to HIM. He is the inner spirit.

Good effort. Congratulations!

Further to my previous comments, I feel like adding the following
passage:

In recent years logicians and semanticists have carried out a very
thorough analysis of the symbols, in terms of which men do their
thinking. Linguistics has become a science, and one may even study a
subject to which the late Benjamin Whorf gave the name of meta-
linguistics. All this is greatly to the good; but it is not enough.
Logic and semantics, linguistics and meta-linguistics--these are
purely intellectual disciplines. They analyse the various ways,
correct and incorrect, meaningful and meaningless, in which words can
be related to things, processes and events. But they offer no
guidance, in regard to the much more fundamental problem of the
relationship of man in his psychophysical totality, on the one hand,
and his two worlds, of data and of symbols, on the other.

In every region and at every period of history, the problem
has been repeatedly solved by individual men and women. Even when
they spoke or wrote, these individuals created no systems--for they
knew that every system is a standing temptation to take symbols too
seriously, to pay more attention to words than to the realities for
which the words are supposed to stand. Their aim was never to offer
ready-made explanations and panaceas; it was to induce people to
diagnose and cure their own ills, to get them to go to the place
where man's problem and its solution present themselves directly to
experience.

-- Aldous Huxley from the Introduction to
The First and Last Freedom by J. Krishnamurti

Kannan

It is not that siddhanta suddenly burst on the scene in the 13th century. All the bakti saints were siddhantists. On top of the some 30 southern siddhanta schools, there were at least a dozen north Indian sanskrit based siddhanta schools in the pre-Meykandar eras.

It is not that siddhanta suddenly burst on the scene with Tirumular too. He simply wrote for the first time the teachings of the agamas and vedanta into tamil. The entire upanishads is siddhanta too. That word 'siddhanta' is used there. With temples, there is triadism there, and so there is siddhanta, which pushes it into the first millenium BCE, and prior to that.

Siddhanta underwent three stages of development:

1. Nandikesvara in the 2nd century BCE (confirmed by Panini) and his disciple Tirumular are the first known ones to propagate it, the former in sanskrit (Nandikesvara kasika which is monistic) and the latter in tamil (Tirumantiram).

2. Aghorasiva in the 12th century combined the northern sanskrit and the southern tamil schools, and in rituals. He paved the way for the beginning of a pluralist interpretation.

3. Meykandar in the 13th century which deconstructed all other existings schools including Shankara, Ramanuja, the buddhists and jains. We celebrate Meykandar because he demolished Shankara's mayavada.

Today when people think siddhanta, they think only of the Meykandar, and tamil, and pluralism, which is erroneous.

So we see a evolution of siddhanta from monism to a unique non-dualism.

This answers questions of what is 'mainstream' siddhanta. To me the Tirumantiram which encompasses and straddles both monism and dualism without a tight philosophy would be mainstream.

http://www.answers.com/topic/shaiva-siddhanta

http://www.saivism.net/sects/siddha/siddhasaivism.asp

The first known guru of the Suddha, or "pure," Shaiva Siddhanta tradition was Maharishi Nandinatha of Kashmir (ca 250 BCE), recorded in Panini's book of grammar as the teacher of Rishis Patanjali, Vyaghrapada and Vasishtha. The only surviving written work of Maharishi Nandinatha is the twenty-six Sanskrit verses, called the Nandikesvara Kasika, in which he carried forward the ancient teachings.

Tirumular put the vast writings of the Ågamas and the Suddha Siddhanta philosophy into the Tamil language for the first time.

Tirumular's Suddha Shaiva Siddhanta shares common distant roots with Mahasiddhayogi Gorakshanatha's Siddha Siddhanta in that both are Natha teaching lineages. Tirumular's lineage is known as the Nandinatha Sampradaya, while Gorakshanatha's is called the Ådinatha Sampradaya.

A New Siddhanta

It was in the twelfth century that Aghorasiva took up the task of amalgamating the Sanskrit Siddhanta tradition of the North with the Southern, Tamil Siddhanta. As the head of a branch monastery of the Åmardaka Order in Chidambaram, Aghorasiva gave a unique slant to Shaiva Siddhanta theology, paving the way for a new pluralistic school.

In strongly refuting any monist interpretations of Siddhanta, Aghorasiva brought a dramatic change in the understanding of the Godhead by classifying the first five principles, or tattvas (Nada, Bindu, Sadasiva, Èsvara and Suddhavidya), into the category of pasa (bonds), stating they were effects of a cause and inherently unconscious substances. This was clearly a departure from the traditional teaching in which these five were part of the divine nature of God. Aghorasiva thus inaugurated a new Siddhanta, divergent from the original monistic Shaiva Siddhanta of the Himalayas.

Despite Aghorasiva's pluralistic viewpoint of Siddhanta, he was successful in preserving the invaluable Sanskritic rituals of the ancient Ågamic tradition through his writings. To this day, **Aghorasiva's Siddhanta philosophy is followed by almost all of the hereditary Sivacharya(saiva-brahmins) temple priests,** and his paddhati texts on the Ågamas have become the standard puja manuals. His Kriyakramadyotika is a vast work covering nearly all aspects of Shaiva Siddhanta ritual, including dîksha, saµskaras, atmartha puja and installation of Deities.
In the thirteenth century, another important development occurred in Shaiva Siddhanta when Meykandar wrote the twelve-verse Sivajñanabodham.

end of quote.

In our discusssion on siddhanta mukti only, we can see that my views, approached and presented quite differently, is hardly any different from Meykandar as presented by Dr. Loga. And I say that Meykandar's philosophy, insofar as the relationship between god and soul, is not pluralism but a unique monism or advaita.

Kauai Aadheenam calls their philosophy 'advaita isvarapada' or monistic theism. It is non dual. At the same time since there is Isvara, a Personal God, there is dualism, and as there is padam, there is worship which makes it outright dualism as the path or marga. (However I am not speaking on their behalf.)

So while there is no major differences of opinions with Meykandar in so far the relationship between god and soul (except for some hair splitting), differences arises over the question of creation or non creation of souls and the world. I just wish Meykandar had not addressed that and had left the mystery remain.

In the beginning there was neither existence nor non existence. Nothing was there. Suddenly Brahma and Vishnu sprang forth from Nowhere, and were wondering who they were, and from where did they come from, what they should do, and whether they should create the world, and if so, who should do it. Then they were astonished to see an infinite linga of light arise from the Nowhere. So they decided to find its origin and end in order to prove their own greatness.

Today, like the two gods, scholars want to do the same thing. They want to 'measure' god, find the ends, figure out and map the entire route, leave no mystery behind, no stone unturned. Isn't this what all philosophers do - try and 'measure' God? We are the 'gods' searching for causes and reasons for creation, and just how exactly dissolution is going to take place, all in minute detail, step by step, frame by frame detail, with footnotes thrown in.

Even Brahma and Vishnu couldn't and surrendered in abject humility. Only then He revealed it to them, and even after that, the gods could not describe it for the benefit of us all, for posterity. We better do the same thing. I propose we too surrender so that He may reveal to us. It seems like a wiser idea.

Earlier I had explained that here is an area, the state called parasiva, which cannot be explained. In this transcendent state no one can even say if God exists or not, or if soul exists or not, let alone the relationship is one or two. In this area, its best to leave it as an inexplicable mystery that only Rudra would know.

The same logic applies in that matter of creation of souls and worlds. We will only end up with very logical and rational explanations but based on non falsifiable postulates. Since creation is very difficult to explain, we *might* have a better chance at exploring dissolution. Understanding cosmic dissolution may give us some understanding on creation.

We observe atrophy in this universe and its logical to infer that dissolution in the world is already taking place. We are well into mahapralaya. The texts tells us that all including the gods and all iconic forms will dissolve into that great Nothingness, the inexplicable parasiva. At that point only Rudra exists, and there will be no one to ask Him any questions, like, why? There will be no one to observe what He does after absorbtion. And how long the period of rest lasts. (This does not arise as time and space too will be absorbed.) And whether there will be any re-creation, and if so, how Rudra does it.

Nobody knows. The questions don't arise as there is no one around to ask and record for posterity, and accordingly there are no answers. The same applies on creation. This is where we must stop the 'measuring'. The ends - creation and dissolution should always remain as the mysteries of god, and not as subjects of philosophies.

Regards.

Pathma