Thiruvonum's Weblog

Our Poorvacharya lineage ends with Manavala Mamunigal*. There are several preceptors, who have graced spiritual works before Mamunigal’s time. Yet, there is an extra-ordinary greatness about Swami Mamunigal, that is not ascribed to any other preceptor – that is His exceptional supremacy as a scriptural authority.  One should not immediately plunge into the debate if other preceptors were not authorities on the scriptures. There are many types of scriptural authorities.  It is a well embraced understanding that one who does not speak or write in a manner conflicting the scriptures is a scriptural authority. While presenting meanings for future generations, if the author has to present some unique concept/meaning that has previously been graced by a spiritual great(mahaan), it is proper for the author to indicate that “this meaning has already been explained by this preceptor”.  If such indications are not made, one shall not immediately cease to be an authority on scriptures. It is sufficient that the work  of the author is consistent with the scriptures and truth. Only they, are not scriptural authorities who learn the words of elders, but instead of speaking what is learnt, preach whatever comes to their mind and even go to the extent of declaring those meaningless words as the words delivered through the sacred lineage of preceptors thereby fooling people.  Others are still scriptural authorities who do not indicate the original evidence or authorship of the words they quote, but present the true meaning obtained from their preceptors. The last sentence is true with respect to all other preceptors, and this means no blemish.

As it has been mentioned as “Mamunigal’s exceptional supremacy as a scriptural authority”, it is essential to speak on a separate note about Mamunigal. Mamunigal, Himself has shown several unique meanings in His works. This is not the subject of discussion. Mamunigal also handles the meanings already delivered by His predecessors. There are many examples for this. One can clearly understand this aspect from my earlier work “Mamunivan merkol vilakku”. There is not one single place in all His works where Mamunigal has not shown that “this meaning was already graced by this person”. Let us leave the people who do not learn the works of Mamunigal out of meaningless indifference. I have found in my experience that even those who have had the fortune of learning His works do not dwell deep and understand the greatness.

For the moment I shall show one concept in the spirit of sthalipulaka-nyaya. “Atma gunangalil pradhaanam samamum damamum” is the 96th sutra in Srivachanabhooshanam. In the commentary Mamunigal says “Samamaavadhu antahkarana niyamanam; damamaavadhu baahyakarana niyamanam“. Then, Mamunigal graces an evidence for this interpretation as “Samaschiththaprashaanthisyaath damaschendriya nigraha“. Immediately, Mamunigal rushes to produce an evidence from the words of Poorvacharyas as “kshama sathyam damassamah” – ‘damah – bahyakarananam anarththa vishayebhyo niyamanam, samah – antahkaranasya thatha niyamanam'[Gita Bhashyam] endrire Bhashyakarar arulicheydhadhu, thereby quoting the Gita Bhashya words of Swami Emperumanar. After this much, Mamunigal says “mari sollum idamumundu”. The meaning is, there is no compulsion to strictly take “sama” as control of internal senses and “dama” as control of external senses. It can be taken the other way too.  That is dama is antahkarana niyamanam and sama is bahyakarana niyamanam. To first interpret a statement and provide two evidences for the same, and then deviate to an opposite interpretation does not fit into the nature of Mamunigal.  Therefore, it is necessary to investigate why Swami Varavaramuni writes in this manner. Listen. Mamunigal does not say “mari solluvadhumundu”. He says “mari sollum idamumundu”. (He does not say “It is also told otherwise”, He says “There is a place where this is told otherwise”) This statement immediately follows the evidence shown from the Gita Bhashya of Swami Ramanuja. So the meaning to be understood is this – Swami Bhashyakarar Himself has stated the meaning in the other way in some other place !!! If such a place had not existed, Mamunigal would have never wrote such words. This is the truth. That is why the whole world praises Him as “Poyyiladha Manavala Mamuni!”.

Listen again! Swami Ramanuja has given the “other” meaning in the same Gita Bhashyam itself. (i.e) In the sixteenth chapter hymn one “daanam damascha yagnascha” and hymn two “tyaagas saanthih apaisunam” also, there is an explanation for dama and sama.  The previous interpretation was provided for the fourth hymn of the tenth chapter. The interpretation in the sixteenth chapter differs from that. Here, Swami Bhashyakarar calls antahkarana niyamanam as damam and bahyakarana niyamanam as samam. It is not that Swami Ramanuja conflicted with Himself too. Swami Himself has seen scriptural evidences of both interpretations and hence rightly used one of those interpretations for one hymn and the other for another hymn. As Swami Mamunigal is the re-incarnation of Swami Ramanuja, both meanings dwell in His heart and so He says “mari sollum idamumundu”!

*The Poorvacharya lineage starts from Periya Perumal and ends with Manavala Mamunigal. The disciple-generations of this lineage have continued until today in the form of our current-day preceptors.