Why flowers are used in worship of God ..

Flowers are so lovely to behold. 

Earth seems to smile at us, being touched by the rays from the sky. 

Colours sing with a fragrance. 

The contours of petals wink at us with a violent goodliness of heart. 

We can ask the bee its opinion 

vagrant and sweet, 

like a king or differ from it 

like God. 

But a flower, the earthly smile at the divine, 

teases always our eyes 

and also our noses 

but teaches our mind 

again and again 

notes of divinity. 

I am musing on reading 

these lines of Havelock Ellis 

on flowers and God : 

' Flowers are of all things most completely
and profusely the obvious efflorescence
of loveliness in the whole physical
world. 

Gods are of all things the
most marvellous efflorescence of the
human psychic world. 

These two Lovelinesses,
the Loveliness of Sex and the
Loveliness of Creation, bring the whole
universe to two polar points, which yet
are in the closest degree resemblant and
allied."... 

And perhaps it is because
men and women are in function flowers
and in image gods that they are so
fascinating, even enwrapped in the rags,
physical and metaphysical, 

which sometimes
serve but to express the Flower-
God beneath.' 

Flower to the Divine... 

there flows my mind. 

Srirangam Mohanarangan 

***

What is Vedanta? 02

To quote verbatim Sayana, may not sink with the modern aptitude of reading. And also his commentaries are in Sanskrit and only a small portion or passages have been translated into Tamil or English. So if need be, the relevant passages can be given separately in the last as notes. But my preference is the research method of giving the quoted passages both in original and translation then and there. 

Anyhow coming back to our enquiry, Veda denotes that body of knowledge which informs us about the transcendental issues and the supra-natural means suited to solve such issues. But here one question arises. The problems may be beyond the ken of our ordinary means of knowledge but when you offer even transcendental solutions you have to express them in the ordinary language of human beings, so that they can understand what is being told. But the intention of that transcendental message has to be abstract and the purport of the words cannot be the ordinary sense we derive on first reading or literal reading. We may argue about the actual words used. But the project's original intention is not on the surface but deeply couched in all linguistic ways of communication or suggestion. 

Even in literature, in poetry, we never waste our time in the denotative sense of the poems but the connotative and suggestive nuances of meaning implied. And for all that, poetry deals with aesthetic dimensions of our day to day experience in the world. Even for that we agree to lend ourselves to the process of purport, if at all we care about poetry. Poetry most often resonates from the visceral layers of language and words. 

So if we really care about transcendental issues we cannot afford to be adamant in our non-cooperating with the text of transcendental issues and means, call it revelation or Veda. Why is it called revelation? Because the issues being beyond the ken of our ordinary means of knowledge, naturally the solutions and knowledge of the means to solve such issues could not have been attained through the same ordinary means of knowledge and hence this body of knowledge is called revelation. 

So there is a gap between the Veda or the revelation, which informs us about the transcendental through the language of human beings and our understanding the same by our usual and surface methods of meaning. How to lead us from our apparent understanding of obscurity towards a clear grasp of the transcendent intention, that is at the bottom of the text. This venture of interpretation, which takes us by employing various linguistic means across the gap to the original sense intended is called hermeneutics. So hermeneutics does exactly the opposite of what the language of expression does at the start. The language couches the meaning, hiding it inside various forms of expression. Hermeneutics brings out the hidden meaning, out from all the forms of expression. What essence the language hides, that very same essence hermeneutics brings out to the patient and passionate enquiring minds. 

This 'essence' is what is meant by the word 'anta' in Sanskrit. So the 'anta' of the Veda or the essence of the Veda is what is called Vedanta. And in Upanishads we will quite often see the enquirers discussing about philosophical issues in various ways and exclaiming now and then 'this is what is meant by that Rik or Rig Vedic mantra'. That means the process of hermeneutics is in action in bringing out the hidden meaning or the essence of the great text of Veda. Hence the Upanishads are primarily signified by the term Vedanta (Veda anta). 

Srirangam Mohanarangan 

***

What is Vedanta? 01

If you type-in the word 'Vedanta' in any dictionary, say Merriam-Webster or Oxford, you get something like a Hindu system of philosophy with an added phrase of Sankara or qualified monism. May be some details pertaining to the Upanishads may be there. If you go in for the meaning of the word 'Vedanta', then you may have to split the word into two parts. 'Veda' and 'anta'. So we are now left with two questions: what is 'veda'? what is 'anta'? So, now, understanding what is meant by the word 'Veda' is basic to all further questions about Vedanta. Where to refer and whom to consult to arrive at the meaning of the word 'Veda'? 

If we refer again some dictionary or some encyclopedia or some online search, surely it is going to be something like 'vedas are four', 'Rig Veda, Yajur Veda, Sama Veda and Atharva Veda' and something about mantras and yajnas and all that. So too many new words pop up and make things obscure and what little effort we want to take, we withdraw from anything further. Ultimately we make a package in our mind as 'Hindu religious things or books'. This is not knowing really but stop-gaps we have to roll on. 

So where to refer to get at the real meaning of the word 'Veda'? Sayana, in the 14th century has written commentaries for all the four vedas. He was a great Vedic scholar and a minister of Vijayanagar Empire in one. In his commentary on Rig Veda and Yajur Veda he has dealt with this question, namely, 'what is Veda?'. If we understand the main point in what he is saying, it will give us a clear basis in understanding next what is Vedanta? Now, what does Sayana say? 

Sayana takes up the nature of basic human action. What is human action? It is the effort taken by human beings, by virtue of their belonging to the human species, towards achieving something which they want or avoiding something which they do not want. All human actions are born out of this basic issue. Achieving the wanted or avoiding the unwanted. Based on this fundamental nature of human effort as such, Sayana begins to explain the meaning of the word 'Veda'. 

To achieve what they want or to avoid what they do not want, human beings adopt various means. The means are natural and rational. Why natural? Because we can see them or experience the means. That is, the means are tangible in some way or other. Why rational? Because every means we adopt has a reason behind it, a purpose. Only if the means are suitable for our purposes we adopt them. So the means we employ are basically natural and rational. In our day to day worldly experience and also consulting others or consulting the records of others' experiences we are able to make sure the best means suitable for our purpose. We don't need any divine revelation or communications from the beyond to guide us in these our efforts in the world. Actually the usual methods of knowing, like perception and inference and we can add scientific knowledge in our times, are all quite sufficient and enough for our living and achieving what we want or avoiding what we do not want. 

Now, sometimes in the usual run of life and experiences, transcendental questions pop up and we are faced with such issues which transcend our senses and experience and which are beyond our regular methods of knowing. For example, rather than birth what is shocking to us is death. Actually 'birth' should be also shocking to us. But it becomes an occasion of joy and celebration and our expectation being satisfied, we do not probe any further the sudden occurrence of being. But the sudden stopping of being is very rude on our regular experience and we are thrown into transcendental questions. What is after death? Who was here with us, whose form is still around, which we have been transacting with but the being inhabiting that form is gone. That being, strangely we have not perceived literally in our worldly experience. So this our worldly experience is suddenly breaking to pieces over this issue and we are left to gape at the unseen mystery. 

Then we appropriate the whole predicament on to us personally and we are in the grip of a problem. To solve this the regular means of knowing, are they sufficient? May be or may not be at the present state of progress. But this transcendent issue which has broken our regular smoothness is not going to wait. And it is occurring again, again and yet again. When it is going to be our turn we do not know. But a problem without any tangible means has suddenly cropped up amidst our living experience. And any means which are otherwise regularly natural and rational are not going to answer these transcendent issues and questions. That much we know. But are there any transcendent means suitable to avoid this discomfort and to achieve the transcendental comfort? Sayana says that the knowledge which informs us about such transcendental means and giving answers for such transcendental questions, such knowledge is called Veda. And only such knowledge alone is called Veda. 

Srirangam Mohanarangan

Sri Ramakrishna and Veda Vyasa saying the same thing

Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa was living in Dakshineswar and he used to visit people of merit and goodness like Keshab Chandra Sen, Iswara Chandra Vidyasagar and others. Feelings of pride and reservation were absent in him. He used to slip into ecstatic states, totally forgetting the surroundings and even his body, due to any chance reason like divine names, divine songs or even remote kindling of divine sentiments. Last five or six years of his life till 1886 have been recorded as detailed conversations by M, the Master Mahasay Mahendranath Gupta, the school headmaster, who came into contact with Sri Ramakrishna in 1881. His detailed records of the conversations of Sri Ramakrishna were brought out in five volumes by M himself as Sri Ramakrishna Kathamrita. It was later translated into English and brought out as a chronologically single book, beautifully edited by Swami Nikhilananda in 1942 under the title 'The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna'. 

From that time onwards, the book remains one of the core books of great guidance-value for any mystic or spiritually inclined person in the whole world, of any nationality or culture. Dialogues of Plato, Enneads of Plotinus, Bhagavad Vishayam commentaries of Tiruvaimozhi, Talks with Sri Ramana Maharishi, The Life Divine of Sri Aurobindo and so goes on the list of the essential mystic library and in that, an important place is occupied by The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna. 

In The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna, coming to the date of August 5, 1882 we see, recorded by M, an interesting meeting of Sri Ramakrishna with Iswara Chandra Vidyasagar. Sri Ramakrishna as usual with his custom, is visiting Vidyasagar. Sri Ramakrishna perhaps as a pleasant remark, says that 'at last he has come to the ocean', punning on the word Vidyasagar - Ocean of Knowledge. Vidyasagar is also very much alive to the humor, replying back that Sri Ramakrishna can take back perhaps a little salt water from the ocean. With a jovial start the conversation proceeds. In that conversation Sri Ramakrishna is saying a very beautiful thing on the Ultimate Transcendent Supreme Reality, Brahman, which is truly beyond words and thoughts. Here follows M's record of his words: 

"Vidyasagar was very reticent about giving religious instruction to others. He had studied Hindu philosophy. Once, when M. had asked him his opinion of it, Vidyasagar had said, “I think the philosophers have failed to explain what was in their minds." But in his daily life he followed all the rituals of Hindu religion and wore the sacred thread of a brahmin. About God he had once declared: “It is indeed impossible to know Him. What, then, should be our duty? It seems to me that we should live in such a way that, if others followed our example, this very earth would be heaven. Everyone should try to do good to the world." 

Sri Ramakrishna's conversation now turned to the Knowledge of Brahman. 

MASTER : “Brahman is beyond vidya and avidya, knowledge and ignorance. It is beyond maya, the illusion of duality. ..... 

"What Brahman is cannot be described. All things in the world - the Vedas, the Puranas, the Tantras, the six systems of philosophy - have been defiled, like food that has been touched by the tongue, for they have been read or uttered by the tongue. Only one thing has not been defiled in this way, and that is Brahman. No one has ever been able to say what Brahman is.” 

VIDYASAGAR (to his friends): “Oh! That is a remarkable statement. I have learnt something new today.” 

(The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna, pp 101 -102, First Ed., 1942, Sri Ramakrishna Math, Mylapore, Chennai - 4) 

This has a very close parallel with something recorded in Vayu Purana, way back millennia ago regarding Veda Vyasa. The sages like Saunaka and others are conversing with Suta, the Pauranika regarding an important matter. They have all heard Suta recite the eighteen puranas in entirety and they have had detailed discussions on Vedanta, Sankhya and other systems of philosophy. But something, they feel, has been left out unsaid. Either Vyasa should have refrained from telling that or Suta, most loyal to Vyasa, should have concealed that last piece of knowledge. And who else they can ask if not Suta? 

" O Suta, O blessed one, eighteen Puranas have been entirely narrated along with the connected anecdotes in the manner of Upakrama (beginning) and Upasamhara (conclusion), by you, the holy one, who have understood all the sacred texts by the favour of Vyasa. 

" It is not known whether there is or not anything beyond this that is excellent and worth knowing. Could it be that Vyasa or you, holy sir, are hiding anything ? Please clear our doubts in this respect, since you are a complete Pauranika (knower of Puranas)." 

(original slokas: 

Etat anyaccha vividham purANEshu nirUpitam | 

ata: param kimapi asti na vA bOddhavyam uttamam || 

na jnAyEta yadi vyAsO gOpayEt atha vA bhavAn | 

atra na: samsayam chindhi pUrNa: paurANikO yata: ||) 

Suta replied to Saunaka: "It is a difficult question you have asked. It is a very secret matter difficult to broach. After doing all the Puranas, even Vyasa, the great son of Parasara, began to enquire in his meditations, this secret transcendent purport of all the Vedas." 

(atigOpyataram divyam anAkyEyam prachakshatE 

parAsara sutO vyAsa: kritvA paurANikIm kathAm 

 sarvavEdArtha ghaditAm chintayAmAsa chEtasI) 

Vyasa racked his brain as to the ultimate transcendent meaning of the Supreme Reality as taught in the Vedas. 

(srutyarthE samsayApannO vyAsa: satyavatI suta: 

vichArayAmAsa chiram na prapEdE yathAtatham) 

In a cave Vyasa did his meditation for a long time but at last he was made to understand one thing. The Supreme Reality or the Supreme Transcendent Being or Brahman is beyond texts, beyond words, beyond mind. All the texts are 'touched by tongue'. But Brahman or the Supreme Being alone remains untouched by words or thoughts. It is portrayed very poetically in Vayu Purana that the Vedas took a form and appeared before Vyasa and told him the very same thing which Sri Ramakrishna was telling Vidyasagar in our excerpt. 

(tasyA AtmanOpi AtmabhAvatayA pushpasya gandhavat 

rasavadvA sthitam rUpam avEhi paramam hi tat 

na cha tatra vayaam saktA: sabdAtItE tadAtmakA: ) 

Vedas: 'we are not capable of telling you the Ultimate Reality' 

So many thousands of years separate the two records, one by Vayu Purana, by Suta about Vyasa and another in our times by M about Sri Ramakrishna talking to Vidyasagar. The topic is the same - Brahman. The conclusion and the teaching is the same - Brahman is untouched by the tongue. How parallel the occasions and the great personages! 

Srirangam Mohanarangan 

***

Sri Ramakrishna's teaching is the message taught in Vedas, Upanishads and Puranas

Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, born in 1836, in Kamarpukur, West Bengal, was a great man of God. Even from his very boyhood years he evinced deep devotion and intense involvement in Divine Mother Kali. His biographies tell us that he attained God Realisation in the form of 'Seeing and talking to Kali face to face'. When Narendra Nath, who later became Swami Vivekananda, approached him and asked whether Sri Ramakrishna has seen God directly, Sri Ramakrishna replied to him as a matter of fact that he had seen God in a very real and palpable way. The sincerity and truthfulness that were evident in the sage's words attracted Narendra Nath more than anything else. Later in 1896, Swami gave a lecture on his master Sri Ramakrishna, captioned as 'My Master'. In it he says: 

" I heard of this man, and I went to hear him. He looked just like an ordinary man, with nothing remarkable about him. He used the most simple language, and I thought “Can this man be a great teacher?” - crept near to him and asked him the question which I had been asking others all my life: “Do you believe in God, Sir?” “Yes,” he replied. “Can you prove it, Sir?” “Yes.” “How?” “Because I see Him just as I see you here, only in a much intenser sense.” That impressed me at once. For the first time I found a man who dared to say that he saw God, that religion was a reality to be felt, to be sensed in an infinitely more intense way than we can sense the world. I began to go to that man, day after day, and I actually saw that religion could be given. One touch, one glance, can change a whole life." 

Sri Ramakrishna was considered as an incarnation of God by many ardent devotees. Did Narendra Nath also think of Sri Ramakrishna in the same way? To think of God as 'very much real' should have been in itself a problem to a modern educated youth, who was firm in applying reason to any problem. Not to speak of the idea that a human being just like us can be thought of as an incarnation ! What should have been the mentality of Narendra Nath then or later when he became a Swami, is an interesting information. Later when Swami Vivekananda was talking to one of his disciples, Sarat Chandra Chakravarty, the conversation goes on like this: 

"Disciple :—Did Sri Ramakrishna out of his own lips ever say that he was God, the all-perfect Brahman?”

(And what was Swamiji's reply?)

”Swamiji:—Yes, he did so many times. And he said this to all of us. One day while he was staying at the Cossipore garden, his body in imminent danger of falling off for ever, by the side of his bed I was saying in my mind, “Well, now if you can declare that you are God, then only will I believe you are really God Himself.'' It was only two days before he passed away. Immediately, he looked up towards me all on a sudden and said, “He who was Rama, He who was Krishna, verily is He now Ramakrishna in this body. And that not merely from the standpoint of your Vedanta !”* At this I was struck dumb. 

 

"Even we haven't had yet the perfect faith, after hearing it again and again from the holy lips of our Lord himself - our minds still get disturbed now and then with doubt and despair - and so, what shall we speak of others being slow to believe? It is indeed a very difficult matter to be able to declare and believe a man with a body like ours to be God Himself. We may just go to the length of declaring him to be a “perfected one,” or a “knower of Brahman.” 

 

Well, it matters nothing, whatever you may call him or think of him, a saint or a knower of Brahman, or anything. But take it from me, never did come to this earth such an all-perfect man as Sri Ramakrishna ! In the utter darkness of the world this great man is like the shining pillar of illumination in this age I And by his light alone will man now cross the ocean of Samsara I" 

 

(Talks with Swami Vivekananda, pp 43, 44 , 2nd Ed., 1946, Advaita Ashrama ) 

 

If even such a soul like Swami Vivekananda expresses the difficulty in such a manner, we need not be shy of our doubts or hesitations. 

Sri Ramakrishna's teachings throw an enormous light of clarity both in the socially active arenas of religions and also in mystical progress of individual, spiritual aspirations. By his advent, the whole field of Religion as it were is made simple and correlated with human development. What were once, the bases of endless wranglings and debates before, have now become instances of aesthetic variety and appreciation. Regarding the existence of many religions and methods of worship, Sri Ramakrishna's teachings are so clarifying and ennobling! 

"In a potter's shop there are vessels of different shapes and forms - pots, jars, dishes, plates, etc. - but all made of the same clay. So God is one, but He is worshipped in different ages and climes under different names and aspects." 

"As the same sugar is made into various figures, of birds and beasts, so the one sweet Divine Mother is worshipped in, various climes and ages under various
names and forms." 

"Various ornaments are made of gold. Although the substance is the same, they are called variously and appear different m form. So one and the same God is
worshipped in different countries and ages under different names and forms. He may be worshipped in various ways according to different conceptions - some loving to call Him as father and others as mother, some as friend and others as beloved, some again as the innermost treasure of their heart and others as their sweet little child - but it is always one and the same God that is worshipped in all
these diverse relations." 

"Once a dispute arose among the learned men at the court of the Maharajah of Burdwan as to who was the greater of the two Deities, Siva and Vishnu. Some of the courtiers said that Siva was greater, while the others gave preference to Vishnu. When the dispute grew hot, a wise Pandit remarked, “ Sir, I have seen neither Siva nor Vishnu. How can I say who is the greater of the two? Similarly, do not try to compare one Deity with another. When you will see one of them, you will come to know that they are all the manifestations of the same Brahman." (Sayings of Sri Ramakrishna, Seventh Rev Ed., Advaita Ashrama) 

What Sri Ramakrishna has taught is not only original but also proves to be a great way of bringing back alive the ancient messages that lie forgotten in Vedas, Upanishads and Puranas. This point I will illustrate in this essay by references from the scriptures. Even the Rig Veda clearly states even at such an early date, that 'the Supremely Existing Being is only One; only the sages describe it in various ways as Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni, Suparna, Yama, Matarisvan etc.' (R.V.10.164.46). Sayana also in his commentary on Rig Veda, in his introduction itself elaborates on this point quoting this very same hymn from the Rig Veda itself and comments on it in this way :'It is the One Supreme God who is worshipped in various names like Indra, Mitra, Varuna etc. as stated in the hymn (R.V.10.164.46). To quote his original text: 

"tasmAt 'sahasra siirshA purusha:' ityuktAt paramEswarAt yajnAt yajanIyAt pUjanIyAt sarvahuta: sarvai: hUyamAnAt | yadyapi indrAdaya: tatra tatra hUyantE tathApi paramEswarasya Eva indrAdi rUpENa avasthAnAt avirOda:.." 

In Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (Br U I.4.6) also the same message is conveyed more or less in the same words. While discussing about various yajnas or worships conducted for various deities, the Rishi openly says that even though in ordinary parlance people are talking 'do yajna for this deity; do yajna for that deity', as if they are doing all these worships to various different deities, they do not know in reality that all these worships go to the One Supreme Soul and there is no difference really in deities. All the deities are simply various forms of the One Supreme Spirit. To quote the text of the Upanishad: 

"thadyat idam Ahu: amum yaja amum yaja iti Ekaikam dEvam Etasya Eva sA visrushti: Esha u hi Eva sarvE dEvA:" 

The commentary of Sri Adisankara is very elucidating: 'It is the same Supreme Being who stands in the forms of all the deities.' 

"..yasmAt Etasya Eva prAjApatE: sA visrushti: dEvabhEda: sarva:" 

In the Puranas also the same concept viz., the One Supreme Being assumes different forms for the sake of Anugraha (Grace) is explained in different places. In the Vayu Purana, when the sages ask Suta a difficult question, the same answer is given. 

The sages asked: 'who is the greatest among Brahma, Vishnu and Siva?' 

Suta answers: 

'Just as the crystal jewel assumes various colours due to its purity, and as a result of the contact with other objects, the colours and sizes being in accordance with those objects, so also the self-born assumes shapes and sizes due to the Gunas. In its singleness and separateness this is the example cited.' 

'Just as the cloud, though single, remains (or seems) different in colour and form so also the self-born Lord, though single one, assumes different forms due to Gunas and appears single, double or triple. The single entity has the three forms of Brahma (the creator), Anniihilator and Purusa.' 

'These three bodies are remembered as those of the single self-born Lord. The three bodies are Brahma, Purusha and Antakari.' 

'One among them, the Rajasa body creates all the subjects; the Sattvika one staying in the ocean, blesses; and the Tamasa one swallows the subjects and overthrows them at the proper time.' 

To quote the original slokas: 

" Rishis: prajApatEscha vishNOscha bhavasya cha mahAtmana: | 

antaram jnAtum icchAmO yascha yasmAt visishyatE || 

 

Suta:  maNirvibhajatE varNAn vichitrAn spatikE yathA | 

vaimalyAt AsrayavasAt tatvarNa: syAt tadanjana: || 

tadA guNavasAt tasya svayambhO: anuranjanam | 

EkatvE cha pruthaktvE cha prOktam Etat nidarsanam || 

EkO bhUtvA yathA mEgha: prutakthvEna avatishthatE | 

rUpatO varNataschaiva tathA guNavasAt tu sa: || 

bhavatyEkO dvidhAchaiva tridhA mUrti vinAsanAt | 

ekO brahmA antakruchchaiva purushaschEti yE traya: || 

EkA tu kurutE tAsAm rAjasI sarvata: prajA: | 

EkA chaivArNavasthA tu sA anugruhNAti sAtvikI || 

EkA sA kshipatE kAlE tAmasI grasatE prajA: || " 

The wonderful teaching of Sri Ramakrishna is literally, word to word, borne testimony by Vedas, Upanishads and Puranas as is seen from what I have illustrated by references. 

Srirangam Mohanarangan 

***

Thoughts Universal in Human Society 01

Various situations of birth, climate, culture, customs and beliefs, traditional practices define the various beginning conditions of all of us. It is really a wonder that we are able to communicate with each other, converse, exchange thoughts and share in feelings, become mutually sympathetic. Actually it would not have been surprising if it was all opaque amongst and between us. So much of difference of habits, dress, opinions and external situations! But we are meaningful to each other and it is happy that the modern science, technology and communications make us all necessary to each other. 

We as various people are becoming more and more valuable, becoming values to be cherished. Becoming intensely aware of our existence as human beings make us more connected by resonating stances we have to take in regard to reality. In this interesting scenario, becoming intelligently aware of our past is part of our engagement with the present. It is enriching also of our future. 

Perhaps there is much meaning in saying that poetry forms the religion of the future human person. Literature will be not simply a pastime, but an aesthetic discovery of one's own self. Philosophy is becoming a sophisticated way of expressing the agony of understanding the explosive data abounding all around. Thinking and interpreting are made more precise human functions by the emerging development of AI. 

Any community in our world cannot afford to get disconnected from the total humanity, under any pretext of beliefs, traditions or old texts. A human being is compelled rather to assume the role of a world citizen. To do this existential necessity in an effective way and be an efficient global citizen, to become aware of literature (or poetry) and philosophy (or interpretative thinking) forms an important tool. In a much more abstract way we have to become yet again a tool-user, which role we started with at the dawn of civilization. 

Srirangam Mohanarangan 

***

When Kaliyan was talking to God ! (Translation of Kaliyan Arulpadu) 02

(continued) 

Then Tirumangai Azhwar began to pour out his great compositions starting from Periya Tirumozhi, which starts with 'vAdinEn vAdi' (I did suffer and suffer and having suffered); he was of the firm conviction that the temples are the ultimate refuge of aspiring souls; the temples are called Divya Desams (Divine Topos) or Ugandarulina Nilangal (lands on Earth most cherished by the Divine), of those temples it is Srirangam 'which is primemost and which houses the self-manifested Vimanam named Rangam'; that Srirangam is the foremost of all the places of archavatarams of Bhagavan which is the fondest place to live in for all groups and groups of devotees as sung in Tiruchandaviruttam 52, 'devotees who have no worldly attachments so lovingly surround that place Srirangam. surrounded by cool waters of Kaveri'. Azhwar chose that Srirangam as his permanent residing place. 

Everyday he use to get involved in the beauty of Sri Ranganatha, feeling 'Oh, the limitless beauty of the Blue Form, adorned by the garlands of pearls, such comely necklaces of great jewels, it has completely filled my heart and brimming' (Amalanadipiran 9) In such manner the Azhwar was deeply engrossed in the Divine Form of Periya Perumal and wishing for all good things to happen for ever, he engaged himself totally in the upkeep of the temple like building the tower, the rampart walls, mantaps and the cooking places for offerings. Also he was a great scholar in Dramida Sastras, leader of the Tamil poets and he was called Nalukavipperumal (great one excelling in four genres of poetry) as expressed in the verse Periya Tirumozhi 1.7.10 which says that Azhwar was 'the sage of the vast books of Tamil and leader of Tirumangai'. 

And Tirumangai Azhwar always engaged himself in the great works of Nammalwar and it was so dear to his heart. Nammalwar out of his intense experience and wonderful involvement in God sang Tiruviruttam, Tiruvasiriyam, Periya Tiruvandati and Tiruvaimozhi. The beauty of the very words and the profundity of meanings and the great charm of the sentiments, all these aspects of Nammalwar's works captivated the heart of Tirumangai Azhwar. Especially Tiruvaimozhi, after completing which Nammalwar attained the Infinite Bliss, it was this Tiruvaimozhi in which Kaliyan was losing himself so happily. 

Srirangam Mohanarangan 

***