PRAVRAJIKA SHUDDHATMAPRANA RELIGION AND PHILOSOPHY

Sri Ràmànujàcàrya (III) (In Honour of His 1,000th Birth Anniversary)

PRAVRAJIKA SHUDDHATMAPRANA

àmànuja then resumed giving regular fulfilling the second of the promises classes in the temple on the hymns of Ràmànuja made to Yàmuna. In this Rthe âlvàrs, but unfortunately no commentary, generally referred to as The Six notes of them were left. However, one of Thousand, Pillan ‘records the interpretations Ràmànuja’s disciples, Tirukkurukaippiran of several àcàryas, including Ràmànuja. It Pillan (generally known as Pillan, or includes several stories connecting the verse Kurukesa), who was a cousin of Ràmànuja, with Ràmànuja or an incident involving was asked by ‘all the preceptors’ to request him.’43 Moreover, ‘in many places he [Pillan] Ràmànuja to write a commentary on the also interweaves long phrases of devotion works of the âlvàrs ‘so that the inner from Ràmànuja’s works.’44 Most of the later meaning is made manifest’. Accordingly, commentators based their commentaries on Pillan humbly approached Ràmànuja at an Pillan’s. assembly one day and said: There is a beautiful story that explains You have graciously [composed] the Sri- how Pillan became known as the spiritual bhàshya, and after a victorious expedition son of Ràmànuja: ‘Once Yatisvara the philosophy (darshana) has been firmly [Ràmànuja] was near the monastery, established. Could you now comment on the contemplating the meaning of the Tiruvaimoli and other divine works (divya- Prabandha [ie, the works of the âlvàrs— prabandham) of the âlvàrs and thus protect most likely a verse from the Prabandha]. them? Utaiyavar [Ràmànuja] thought about Purna’s son [Pillan] was thinking of the this and then commanded Pillan, If we [same] meaning and, seeing Yatisvara, told [meaning, himself] do a commentary on the him about it. Yatisa was startled that [Pillan] ‘graciously said words,’ those of dull knew the meaning he was thinking about. intellect may think that there is only this [limited] meaning. This is improper; the Then he said, “This is the greatness of songs of the âlvàrs will increase according Nàtha’s clan!” He embraced [Pillan] and to the understanding of each person. said, “You are my spiritual son [jnàna- Therefore it may seem as if I have created a putra].”’45 In other places Pillan is known as boundary for the ‘graciously said words.’ Ràmànuja’s mànasa-putra, his son of the You [referring to Pillan] do a commentary in mind, and his sandals [servant]. the same manner [or in some way] on the Ràmànuja’s third promise made to 42 Tiruvaimoli. Yàmuna at his death—that is, to honour the In this way, the first commentary on memory of the sages Paràshara and Vyàsa— Nammàlvàr’s Tiruvaimoli was written, thus was fulfilled through Kuresha and Andàl.

6 Bulletin of the Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture July 2017 SRI RâMâNUJâCâRYA (III) (IN HONOUR OF HIS 1,000TH BIRTH ANNIVERSARY)

According to the Koil Olugu: Once it was influence, and wanted to force him to raining heavily all day and night, and convert to . As this incident Kuresha could not go out to beg for alms, as happened around 1100 AD, Kulothunga I he normally did then. That night, when his would have been the only possible Chola wife, Andàl, heard the temple bell ring, king at that time. However, records from the indicating that the Lord’s night food was Srirangam temple show that the Chola kings, being offered in the temple, she mentally including Kulothunga I, gave many gifts and complained to the Lord, saying that while endowments to the Srirangam temple and He was eating, Kuresha was starving. Soon other Vishnu temples, as well as to Shiva after, a temple servant came to their door temples. And so did some of Kulothunga I’s with offered food from the temple. Kuresha own officers. Thus, the story of his extreme suspected that Andàl had something to do fanaticism is cast in doubt. But there seems with this, and he asked her about it. Andàl to be no doubt that Ràmànuja was forced to then admitted she had mentally complained flee at this time for some reason. According to the Lord. ‘[Kuresha] gave two parts of the to Hari Rao: ‘The Chola monarchs of this prasadam to his wife and took one part period were, as a rule, tolerant and they himself. As a result Andàl conceived and extended their patronage to Shaiva and after ten months gave birth to two male Vaishnava shrines. However, the possibility children.’46 For the rest of their lives, the two of this general rule of toleration having been boys were honoured as Lord Ranganàtha’s broken on a particular occasion need not be own sons. ruled out.’47It is said that the family deity of Ràmànuja was delighted to hear the the Chola kings was Nataràja Shiva. news, and when it was time for the babies to There is a clue, however, in one event be named, he came to Kuresha’s house with that happened right after the king’s death. Embar and gave them the names Paràshara Apparently, immediately after Ràmànuja Bhattar and Vedavyàsa Bhattar (also known fled Srirangam, Kulothunga I took control of as Srirama Pillai). Paràshara Bhattar (usually the Srirangam temple. Then, according to referred to as Bhattar) later became, the Koil Olugu, after Kulothunga I’s death, according to the Tengalais Srivaishnavite his son and successor Vikrama Chola, with branch, the leader of the Srivaishnavas after the approval of the Chera and Pàndya kings, Ràmànuja’s and Embar’s passing away. came to Srirangam and returned the control (According to the Vadagalais branch, Pillan of the temple back to Ràmànuja. The Koil became the next leader.) Olugu states:

In exile The Chola made consultations with the Some time after Kuresha’s sons were Chera and the Pandya [kings] in the born, Ràmànuja was forced to flee following manner: ‘The ancients, with the Srirangam with a few disciples and live in idea that lords and kings should not investigate into the temple endowments and exile for twelve years. According to the Koil the like, had left them under the control of Olugu and other biographies, a fanatical the brahmins. Even now we have witnessed Shaivite king of the time, Kulothunga I the sufferings which my father underwent (known as Krimikantha, the ‘worm-necked’, having become a bad old man. Now I shall by the Srivaishnavas), feared Ràmànuja’s call back Udayavar [Ràmànuja], and in your

Bulletin of the Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture July 2017 7 PRAVRAJIKA SHUDDHATMAPRANA

presence, shall give away the management it does not seem that he did this to any other of the temple to him, severing my Vaishnava temple. It seems more likely that connection with it.’ . . . the king had a personal grudge against [After sending a messenger to bring Ràmànuja. Perhaps Ràmànuja offended him Ràmànuja back,] Kulottunga Chola in some way, so he wanted to take revenge [actually, Vikrama Chola] came to by removing him. These are just some Srirangam and, making obeisance to Emberumanar [Ràmànuja], entirely parted thoughts I am throwing out. After a thousand with his authority over the temple in his years, it is anybody’s guess as to what really [Ràmànuja’s] favour, giving him the deed of happened. But there is no doubt that gift and sanctifying it with ‘pouring of Ràmànuja had to flee and live in exile for water.’ He then begged that he be enlisted twelve years. among the shishyas of Udayavar, who With a few minor differences, the willingly attached him to Andan following is the story according to most [Dàsharathi] and made him execute a deed accounts: When some messengers from the of gift giving away the sacred shrine of king came to Srirangam to meet Ràmànuja, Srirangam to Andan and caused these details to be inscribed on the Aryabhattal Kuresha suspected something was wrong. gateway.48 He sent word to Ràmànuja to leave, and he himself put on the ochre robes of a monk First of all, we should note that the said and told the men he was Ràmànuja. There inscription on ‘the Aryabhattal gateway’ has was no doubt that it was in the interest of the never been found, so historians have whole Srivaishnava community that doubted this story. However, they also Ràmànuja remain safe, so he was at last concede that it could have been destroyed, or persuaded to flee. As the messengers took removed later while making repairs. Here we Kuresha away to see the king, Mahàpurna should also note that major repairs and decided to go with him. renovation work had to be done all over the When they arrived at the palace, temple after the destruction and occupation Kuresha’s disciple Naluran was there as an of the temple by Muslim troops in the 14th officer of the court, and he informed the century, and also after the occupation of the king that the man in the ochre robes was temple and damage done by the French actually Kuresha, and not Ràmànuja. Some troops in the 18th century. If this story of the say that Naluran was a spy when he became Aryabhattal gateway is true, it could a disciple of Kuresha. But whether or not possibly give an explanation as to why this is true, Kuresha understood that Naluran Kulothunga I, who made gifts to the was in on the plot to bring Ràmànuja to the Srirangam temple, would want to remove court, and this pained him deeply. Except for Ràmànuja. his terrible grief over his separation from It seems, according to this story, that the Ràmànuja, this betrayal by Naluran would king wanted control over this particular pain Kuresha more than anything else that temple. But there must have been something was to follow—not because of what the king thought he would gain thereby. happened later, but because of the great sin After all, if he was actually a fanatical that the disciple had committed. Shaivite, why would he take control of a However, the king did not seem to mind Vishnu temple and keep it functioning? And the impersonation, as Kuresha was known to

8 Bulletin of the Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture July 2017 SRI RâMâNUJâCâRYA (III) (IN HONOUR OF HIS 1,000TH BIRTH ANNIVERSARY) be Ràmànuja’s right hand. He then gave a the Sundarabahu Stava in praise of the palm leaf to Kuresha which stated, ‘Shivàt ‘Beautiful-armed Lord’ (Lord Alagar at parataram nàsti’—that is, ‘There is no God Tirumaliruncolai). At the end of this stotra greater than Shiva.’ The king told him to one can feel his great grief when he says: sign it, in effect, giving his approval. O Lord at Vanagiri! Kuresha pretended to agree, but when he O Ocean of Compassion! signed it, he added the line, ‘Dronamasti Please assent to my sincere [request]! tathàparam’—meaning, ‘There are measures May I [once again] be in one corner of bigger than that.’ (The word Shiva also the Abode of Srirangam meant a measure of weight, as did the word absolutely subject to drona.) Seeing this, the king became furious Ràmànuja the Noble and ordered his men to take out the eyes of just like before! Kuresha and Mahàpurna. (Some say that O Creator of Brahma! O Lord at Vanadri! Kuresha then plucked out his own eyes for O Lord! O Sundara! the sin of having seen the king.) A few men Looking to your position (possibly disciples who had accompanied as the bestower of boons, Kuresha and Mahàpurna) were asked to by all means hear [my request]. Enhancing day-after-day guide them back to Srirangam. But before the glory of Srirangam they could reach there, Mahàpurna, and expressly refusing Ràmànuja’s beloved guru, died from the the request of our adversaries, trauma and was cremated by Kuresha. accomplish [things] in such a manner When Kuresha reached Srirangam, he that [life there] becomes ever enjoyable tried to go inside the temple, but he was for Your devotees! stopped by a temple servant. The temple was O Nectar-ocean of Pity! now under the control of the king, and the O Lord of the dharma! servant would not allow him to enter unless O You of truthful intent! he renounced his connection with Ràmànuja. O Possessor of Sri! Though another servant protested that O Lord! Kuresha should be allowed to enter, as he O Sundara! was ‘a great and virtuous person’, Kuresha O One Who has motherly affection himself refused to enter. He put his hands for good people! Drive away all the worthless ones and over his ears, with the thought: ‘What! forgiving in the twinkling of an eye Should my personal qualifications serve to all the offenses committed by good 49 dissociate me from my âcàrya!’ He turned people away and went to his house. make the glory of the Srirangam Abode The next day Kuresha left Srirangam ever enjoyable [for Your devotees]!50 with Andàl and their sons to go to Tirumaliruncolai, a holy place in a forest Love and service of the untouchables near that is sacred to Vishnu. They Meanwhile, Ràmànuja had left the remained there, worshipping Lord Alagar, Chola territory with a group of disciples and till Ràmànuja’s return to Srirangam. But it entered a part of what is now Karnataka, was a painful separation for Kuresha. At which was then under the control of the least one of his stotras was written here— Hoysala dynasty. On their arrival in one

Bulletin of the Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture July 2017 9 PRAVRAJIKA SHUDDHATMAPRANA

area, exhausted and hungry, they were denied to them in other temples. He also helped very much by a group of gave them the title ‘Tirukulattar’, which untouchables. Ràmànuja was deeply touched means ‘people of noble descent’. His own by their unselfish and loving service to them. guru Mahàpurna had once been persecuted The king of the Mysore territory was named by other brahmins for helping an Vittaladeva and was a Jain. But when he untouchable, and it grieved Ràmànuja that heard that Ràmànuja had come, he invited this type of discrimination should go on. him to his court. After hearing Ràmànuja Though he tried to bring about reforms in speak in an assembly on , this regard in the Srirangam temple, he was Vittaladeva converted to Vaishnavism, and not able to do so because of caste prejudices. Ràmànuja gave him the name But in Melkote he was relieved to be able to Vishnuvardhana. With the patronage of this do something to honour the help that the king, Ràmànuja moved about in this area untouchables gave. It was not, in fact, until until he came to Yadavadri (or the 20th century before untouchability was Tirunarayanapuram, now known as banned, and those who had been so Melkote). designated were able to enter Hindu temples One night Ràmànuja had a dream that in . Vishnu was asking him to serve Him there. After twelve years, when Ràmànuja The next day, as Ràmànuja was walking by heard that Kulottunga I had died, he decided some tulsi plants, he noticed part of an to return to Srirangam. Naturally the people image in the ground under an anthill. The in Melkote were deeply distressed at this villagers helped him dig it up, and he news. At their request, Ràmànuja agreed to found it to be a beautiful image of Vishnu. have an image of himself installed in the The villagers immediately built a temporary temple after breathing life into it. Only then thatched structure so they could worship did the villagers agree to his departure. This the image, and gradually a permanent stone image is still worshipped today in a shrine temple was built and the Lord was installed inside the Melkote temple. there.51Ràmànuja also had a tank built so According to some accounts, Ràmànuja the water could be used for the Lord’s went on a tour of some pilgrimage places worship. He loved this place so much that before he returned to Srirangam. First he he decided to have his headquarters here went to Tirumaliruncolai, where he must until he could return to Srirangam. Besides have met Kuresha and his family. There he having the temple built, Ràmànuja also fulfilled a vow that the poet-saint ândàl had established a monastery and gathered many made long before in one of her poems. In her disciples around him. One of these Nacchiyar Tirumoli (9. 6-7) she pledged that disciples was Andhrapurna, who became if the Lord would come to her she would one of Ràmànuja’s attendants. To offer thousands of pots of sweetened milk Andhrapurna, Ràmànuja was his God and and rice, and thousands of pots of butter. But his all-in-all. as she was united with the Lord without this Ràmànuja was so impressed by the pledge having been fulfilled, Ràmànuja devotion and help that he received from the decided to make the offering for her. For this untouchables in this place that he allowed reason, he became known as ândàl’s elder them to enter the temple, a privilege that was brother (Godagraja, or Koilannan). From

10 Bulletin of the Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture July 2017 SRI RâMâNUJâCâRYA (III) (IN HONOUR OF HIS 1,000TH BIRTH ANNIVERSARY)

Tirumaliruncolai he went to ândàl’s Kuresha and addressed the disciples thus: “It birthplace, Srivilliputtur, to offer his is a triumph for our religion that we have worship, and then went to worship at Kuresha as one belonging to us. He has Nammàlvàr’s birthplace, Alvar Tirunagari. secured moksha for his enemies and through After this he finally returned to Srirangam, him I can seek the liberation of one and where he worshipped Lord Ranganàtha and all.”’52 returned to his monastery. However, in a separate story, Kuresha asked for another boon from Lord Kuresha’s prayer Ranganàtha. Whether this was in addition to While he was in exile, Ràmànuja had the two previous boons, or was a separate heard the news of Mahàpurna’s death and boon is unclear. At any rate, he asked the Kuresha’s blinding, and he had been deeply Lord to let him go ‘at once to Paramapada, distressed. He could not forget the sacrifice Lord Vishnu’s Supreme Heaven’. According they had made. Soon after his return to to the Prapannàmritam: Srirangam, he called Kuresha to him and asked him to compose and recite a hymn to Distressed at the coming separation from his beloved disciple, Ràmànuja slowly returned Lord Varadàràja in Kanchi in order to get to his matha with his eyes full of tears. In the Lord’s favour so that his sight would be contrast, [Kuresha’s wife] Antal responded restored. As it was the command of his to the news of her impending widowhood guru, Kuresha agreed. According to one with a surprising equanimity: ‘[On being version, Ràmànuja and some disciples told by Kuresha of his choice of accompanied him to Kanchi for this. As Paramapada as a boon, she] declared herself Kuresha was singing the hymn, Varadàràja in agreement with his idea, and bowing (whose name means ‘the Giver of Boons’) down to her husband’s feet, stood near him spoke through the priest, saying, ‘My child, with her hands in the position of supplication, without any kind of [inner] name thy wish.’ Kuresha had never gotten disturbance.’53 over his anxiety about Naluran, the disciple who had betrayed him to the king, and Soon after receiving these boons, without any further thought he replied, ‘My Kuresha passed away. Ràmànuja then put his Lord, make Naluran the object of your cousin Govinda in charge of instructing supreme grace.’ ‘Be it so . . .’ said the Kuresha’s two sons. Some say that Lord. Ràmànuja never left Srirangam after this. Everyone stood there in shock. Then But according to Hari Rao, when Kulottunga Ràmànuja said: ‘Can there be anyone equal II (Kulottunga I’s grandson) removed the to you, my son? You have prayed for the image of Govindaràja from a shrine at the welfare of your enemy at the cost of your Cidambaram Shiva temple, the Vaishnavas eyes. This is the day for the Vaishnavas to there took the image to the temple. rejoice.’ He then asked Kuresha to pray Ràmànuja then went and formally installed again. So Kuresha said to the Lord, ‘Give the image in a shrine in Tirupati. The me back my sight if only to see your desecration of the Vaishnava shrine in bewitching beauty.’ The Lord replied, ‘I Cidambaram is well documented, and the grant your wish and you will not see any tradition of Ràmànuja’s reconsecration of it other material object.’ ‘Ràmànuja embraced in Tirupati is also strong.54

Bulletin of the Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture July 2017 11 PRAVRAJIKA SHUDDHATMAPRANA

According to some, Ràmànuja lived seen in stories of the lives of later âchàryas another sixty years after Kuresha’s passing of the tradition. We can give one example away; others say twenty years. Ràmànuja is here: Nampillai, who became a leader of the said to have lived 120 years, and the Srivaishnavas a couple of generations later, traditional dates given for him are 1017 to was once walking with a disciple when they 1137 AD. However, there are several came across a Srivaishnava lying on the problems with these dates—not least of all ground. When this Srivaishnava did not get the fact that his cousin Embar, plus up as they passed, the disciple scolded him Kuresha’s wife, Andàl, and other disciples, for not showing proper respect to Nampillai. must have had similarly long lives—or even The Master immediately left the disciple’s longer. Also, the removal of the Govindaràja side and hurried on. The disciple then ran to image in Cidambaram is said to have Nampillai and asked if he had offended him happened around 1140 AD. In Swami in any way. ‘“Yes,” said Nampillai. “An Tapasyananda’s biography of Ràmànuja, he insult to a fellow-being is an insult to quotes the dates given by John B. Carman as me. . . . All of us are His creatures and I do 1077-1157. This seems more reasonable, not think I am in any way superior to that and it also accommodates the documented Srivaishnavite whom you have insulted. You story of the Govindaràja image. Other dates have not imbibed the spirit of true proposed are 1056-1136 or 37.55 Hari Rao Vaishnavism, my boy.”’58 believes he passed away in 1150.56 Before Ràmànuja passed away, two more images of him were made and installed Ràmànuja’s last message (in addition to the one at Melkote). One was When Ràmànuja knew he was about to at his birthplace in Sriperumbudur, and the pass away, he called all his disciples to him other was in Srirangam itself. As with the and gave them his last message, exhorting one in Melkote, these images are still them to honour and serve the gurus, worshipped today in special shrines. In fact, Srivaishnavas, and the sacred images in the besides the image of him at Srirangam, temples; to study the sacred texts, especially Ràmànuja’s own body is also installed in the the songs of the âlvàrs and the âchàryas; to shrine dedicated to him there. cultivate love for the names of God; and to Though Ràmànuja is known to have avoid worldly influences. Again, he given his discourses in the Srirangam temple especially urged them to be firm in their in Tamil, his written works are all in self-surrender to the Lord, and to be Sanskrit. These works, he knew, would have humble. more influence outside of the Tamil- Ràmànuja’s standard for self-surrender speaking area if they were in Sanskrit. He was very high. Regarding this, he said: ‘He left his disciple Pillan to present his thoughts who has truly surrendered himself at the on Nammàlvàr’s Tiruvaimoli, which Pillan feet of God should not bestow any thought did in a commentary written in on his future, which is entirely at His Manipravàla—that is, a mixture of Tamil disposal; for the least anxiety felt in that (mani, or jewel) and Sanskrit (pravàla, or connection betrays the hypocrisy in his self- pearl). In the years following Ràmànuja, this surrender.’57 style of writing became increasingly popular The type of humility he stressed can be with the àcàryas.

12 Bulletin of the Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture July 2017 SRI RâMâNUJâCâRYA (III) (IN HONOUR OF HIS 1,000TH BIRTH ANNIVERSARY)

Ràmànuja’s Sanskrit works apparent that this commentary was written for a different audience, a broader audience. Ràmànuja’s Sanskrit works are said to Ràmànuja did not intend it to be instructions be: for those following the devotional path of 1. Sribhàshya, his commentary on the Srivaishnavism. For Srivaishnavas, Brahma-sutras. This was his major work, especially at that time, instructions on this and the main one that he used to present his subject were very sacred—and perhaps arguments for the Vishishtàdvaita view of secret. God and His creation. According to some 3. Vedàrtha-sangraha, a treatise on the scholars, this commentary is the one most philosophy of the Upanishads. Ràmànuja did faithful to the intent of the author of the not write separate commentaries on the Brahma-sutras. This is not to say that major Upanishads, as Shankara did. But in Advaita Vedanta is ‘wrong’. Rather, it his Sribhàshya he quoted from many seems, according to some scholars, that the Upanishads and also commented on these author of the Brahma-sutras held a similar quotes. In this short treatise also he quoted opinion as Ràmànuja did on these issues. from some Upanishads and gave comments A brilliant commentary on Ràmànuja’s on them based on Vishishtàdvaita. commentary—the Shrutaprakashikà—was 4. Vedànta-dipa, an abbreviated written a few generations later by commentary on the Brahma-sutras. Sudarshanasuri, the grandson of Vedavyàsa 5. Vedànta-sàra, also an abbreviated Bhattar (the second of Kuresha’s twin sons). commentary on the Brahma-sutras, but The only manuscript of this was saved by the intended for beginners. âchàrya Vedànta Deshika from certain 6. Nitya-grantha, a manual for destruction when Malik Kafur and his troops Srivaishnavas with instructions on daily sacked the Srirangam temple in 1323. In a duties related to the worship and dramatic escape, Vedànta Deshika grabbed remembrance of the Lord. the manuscript from the temple (after 7, 8, and 9. The Gadyatraya, three walling up the inner shrine) and fled with devotional hymns: Sudarshanasuri’s two young sons. But a. Sharanàgati-gadya, a prayer on Sudarshanasuri himself was killed. surrender to the Lord. According to Francis 2. Gitàbhàshya, a commentary on the X. Clooney, ‘. . . [this hymn] may be Bhagavad Gità. This must have been written understood as a fulsome reflection on the when Ràmànuja’s commentary on the Dvaya mantra [a mantra that Srivaishnavas Brahma-sutras was well-established, as here repeat every day, taking refuge in the Lord] he does not go into so many arguments to and as a dramatic enactment of it, just as the establish a philosophy. It is based on his Dvaya Mantra is a kind of distillation of the philosophy, but is much more simple in style much longer work by Ràmànuja.’59 Here and content than his commentary on the Ràmànuja, in an emotional prayer, first to Brahma-sutras. Though some scholars Sri and then to Nàràyana, surrenders himself object that he did not present any strong fully to the Lord, and the Lord also responds views on self-surrender—especially in verse in a beautiful passage. The hymn is said to 18.66 of the Gità, where it would seem to be be an actual conversation that Ràmànuja had called for in the Srivaishnava context—it is with the Lord while in an ecstatic state. As

Bulletin of the Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture July 2017 13 PRAVRAJIKA SHUDDHATMAPRANA

M. Yàmunàchàrya says: ‘There is a sense of hymns—can doubt that they are the basis certainty, an atmosphere of utter serenity, and foundation of the Vishishtàdvaita that prevails in the Sharanàgati Gadya, the philosophy. Ràmànuja’s philosophy is hymn of self-surrender which is said to have steeped in âlvàr devotion, even when it is poured forth from Ràmànuja’s heart on not presented in devotional terminology. seeing a beatific vision of the Lord on the Moreover, Ràmànuja’s commentaries were occasion of a temple festival.’60 not meant for Srivaishnavas, though b. Sriranga-gadya, also is a song of Ràmànuja encouraged his followers to read surrender to Lord Ranganàtha, the Lord of the Sribhàshya. Rather, the commentaries Srirangam. ‘Here [Ràmànuja] expresses the were meant for Sanskrit scholars who did common denominator of all prapannas not know Tamil. This was the audience he [those who take refuge]: professed inability wanted to reach. But the commentaries to practise the yoga that will give one the basically said in philosophical terms what direct mental vision of the Lord in dhyàna, Nammàlvàr and other âlvàrs said in coupled with confidence that the Lord is devotional terms. The Srivaishnavas nevertheless one’s protector—a confidence understood all this. that comes from taking refuge at his feet.’61 c. Vaikuntha-gadya describes the Ràmànuja, the great steamship heavenly region of Vishnu, known as What if Ràmànuja had not lived? What Vaikuntha, or Paramapada. It is ‘the abode if he had not done all that he did? Perhaps of all that is beautiful, good, and true, where the âlvàr devotional movement would have the Lord abides in a community of free slowly faded away. After all, it was souls.’62 presented in Tamil, a language known only Objections have been raised by Western to one section of the Indian subcontinent. It scholars that the devotional Gadyatraya would most likely have been considered could not have been written by Ràmànuja, as merely a local movement and not taken these hymns are so different in style from his seriously. Perhaps this movement would philosophical works. These objections have have eventually died out even in Tamil been thoroughly refuted—linguistically, Nadu. stylistically, etc., etc.—and, we believe, But thanks to Ràmànuja, an finally laid to rest by Vasudha Narayanan in extraordinary devotional movement her book, The Way and the Goal.63 Similar gradually spread all over India. The waves objections were made about Shankara’s went on and on, eventually sweeping the hymns. The fact is that in India, whole country—from to philosophers and philosophy have never Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, then to been divorced from religion and devotion, as Kerala and Maharashtra, then further north, has been the case in the West. And Western then eventually east to Bengal and Orissa— scholars are only beginning to understand then,beyond. The movement changed its this. character somewhat in different areas, but There is no doubt that Ràmànuja was the rich devotion remained the same. And a both a product and a proponent of âlvàr/ thousand years later it is still with us, having Tamil devotion. No one reading the hymns spread all over the world. of the âlvàrs—and especially Nammàlvàr’s Just as Lakshmana became like a mother

14 Bulletin of the Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture July 2017 SRI RâMâNUJâCâRYA (III) (IN HONOUR OF HIS 1,000TH BIRTH ANNIVERSARY) to Ràma and Sità when they were in the teachers were like huge steamships that forest, looking after them in every way, so could carry thousands across the ocean. also Ràmànuja became like a mother to the Ràmànuja was such a steamship. In this âlvàr and Srivaishnava movement by connection,Vedànta Deshika wrote: nurturing it and enabling it to grow. As Mutaliyantan [Dàsharathi—a nephew and Bhattar wrote, regarding Nammàlvàr’s disciple of Ràmànuja] said, ‘When a lion Tiruvaimoli: leaps from one hill to another, the little The Veda of Tamil [ie, the Tiruvaimoli] in insects on its body are transported with him. 1000 (stanzas) which are composed on the Similarly, when Bhàshyakàra [Ràmànuja] great fame of Ranganàtha, who is at the leaped over the cycle of birth and death, we place where are a number of gardens and were saved because of our connection with 65 rampart walls, has for its first and natural him.’ mother, Satakopa [Nammàlvàr]; those Now we understand that Ràmànuja’s hymns are nursed by Ràmànuja as a loving saving grace did not end with his disciples. foster-mother.64 He is still taking people across the ocean of Ramakrishna used to compare some this world. Moreover, how much he has spiritual teachers to small fishing boats that enriched our lives in doing so. The debt we could only take a few passengers. But other owe him can never be repaid.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

42 The Way and the Goal, p. 213. Moreover, there is an almost identical story 43 Ibid., p. 89. connected with the Srirangam temple. 44 Ibid., p. 116. 52 Parthsarathy, pp. 45-46. But according to 45 Ibid., pp. 113-14. Swami Ramakrishnananda’s biography, 46 Koil Olugu, p. 103. Kuresha fully regained his eyesight. 47 Ibid., p. 110 fn. 53 ‘The “Other” Antal’, p. 217. 48 Ibid., pp. 107-08. 54 see History, pp. 62-63. 49 Ibid., p. 106. 55 see Cult of Jagannàth, pp. 22 & 144. 50 Praise-Poems to Visnu and Sri: The Stotras 56 History, p. 63. of Ràmànuja’s Immediate Disciples, trans. 57 Bhakti Schools of Vedanta, by Swami by Nancy Ann Nayar (Bombay: Tapasyananda (Madras: Sri Ramakrishna Ananthacharya Indological Research Math, 1990), p. 22. Institute, 1994), pp. 122-23. Sundarabahu 58 Parthasarathy, p. 47. Stava, shlokas 129-131. In this last shloka 59 Beyond Compare, by Francis X. Clooney, SJ (shloka 131), it is believed that Kuresha is (Washington DC: Georgetown University referring to his disciple Naluran, when he Press, 2008), p. 150. speaks of ‘offences committed by good 60 Ràmànuja’s Teachings, p. 128. people’. 61 The Way and the Goal, p. 93. 51 There is often a story related here about a 62 Ràmànuja’s Teachings, p. 131. Muslim princess in Delhi who had in her 63 see The Way and the Goal, pp. 88-92. possession the second image of Vishnu for 64 Srivaisnavism: An Insight, by K. K. A. this temple, and about how Ràmànuja and Venkatachari (Mumbai: Ananthacharya his followers went there to retrieve it. Indological Research Institute, 2006), However, as the Muslims were not ruling in p. 18. Delhi at that time, it does not seem credible. 65 The Way and the Goal, pp. 151-52.

Bulletin of the Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture July 2017 15