Muthuswamy Dikshitar Kritis on Lord Shanmukha

Carnatic composers (other than performing vidwans)
Post Reply
balusatya
Posts: 320
Joined: 13 Dec 2007, 17:17

#126

Post by balusatya » 13 Apr 2008, 09:44

Why not we list out songs of other Vaageyakaras who have sung in praise of Subramanya(muruga) apart from Kotiswara Iyer's Kanda Ganamrutam ,Periasamy Dooran,PS.I thought discussing in this thread better for continuity.
0 x

kartik1
Posts: 3
Joined: 08 Jun 2008, 22:36

#127

Post by kartik1 » 08 Jun 2008, 22:50

The patantara of our school which belongs to the sishya parampara of Sri Dikshitar through its founder Brahmasri A Ananthakrishna Iyer (wo did gurukula under Sri Ambi Dikshitar), says the phrase is "Venkateswara naamarupena" . It is interesting how these different versions come into being and whoever is distorting the original version of a composer deserves condemnation.
0 x

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

#128

Post by vgvindan » 08 Jun 2008, 23:15

kartik,
This kRti and the pAthAntara 'vEnkatESvara nAmarUpEna' has already been discussed in one of the threads. This pAthAntara seems to have been coined by someone who did not like the words 'vEnkatESvara supUjitEna' - how can Lord Venkatesvara worship Lord subrahmanya? - thus would go the argument. Such manipulations - to suit somebody's tastes are found in Thyagaraja Kritis also.
0 x

ts
Posts: 18
Joined: 06 Feb 2006, 16:00

#129

Post by ts » 12 Jun 2008, 20:51

vgvindan wrote:kartik,
This kRti and the pAthAntara 'vEnkatESvara nAmarUpEna' has already been discussed in one of the threads. This pAthAntara seems to have been coined by someone who did not like the words 'vEnkatESvara supUjitEna' - how can Lord Venkatesvara worship Lord subrahmanya? - thus would go the argument. Such manipulations - to suit somebody's tastes are found in Thyagaraja Kritis also.
I think the original pATAntram might have been "nAmarUpENa" ,which was changed later to "supUjitEna".
The secret lies in another krithi "venkatEswara yAdava bhUpatim" in megaranjani, where the actual pallavi according to SSP is "venkatEswara eddappa bhUpatim". SD states in SSP that this krithi has references to Veknateswara Eddappa Maharaja as accroding to hindu mythology, Maharaja is Mahavishnu's avadharam.

The krithi Subramanyena has the same reference where the Maharaja is considered the avadharam of Subramanya.

Now the "tampering" could have happened for one of two reasons (or both actually).

1. Venkatesa "Eddappa" maharaja's image was totally battered by the likes of Ma.Po.Si by making Virapandiya Kattabomman a Hero (which according to many, he was not).
2. To coverup any "narastuti" references by MD in a world that had so many Tyagarajophiles who were MDPhobic.

In both cases, the main idea was to protect the composer and his works.
0 x

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

#130

Post by vgvindan » 12 Jun 2008, 21:19

ts,
Kindly take a look at nara stuti of MD in the kRti 'vEnkaTESvara yAdava' - rAga mEgharaJjani

pallavi
vEnkaTESvara yAdava bhUpatiM ASrayE(a)haM
viSva vikalpApahaM vidvajjana kalpa bhUruhaM
vadana sarasIruham


samashTi caraNam
kanka Saila madhya sthita kArtikEya -
Siva guru guha karuNA kaTAksha pAtraM
kanja daLAyata nEtraM kankaNa hAra -
kirITAlankRta sundara gAtram
kAncana vRshTi prada mEgha -
ranjita bahu kshEtraM
pankaja bhava mukha sura kRta -
sakala nishkaLa stOtraM
sankalpa vikalpa rahita
saccidAnanda mAtram


Assuming that some of MD's disciples wanted to 'protect' - as you have said - the composer, what kind of changes they would make to this kRti?

It is the same MD who also sang 'hIna mAnavASrayam tyajEham' in 'hiraNmayIM lakshmIm' - rAga lalita.

There are references in Thyagaraja Kritis also about his being dependent on people for his livelihood - which he seems to have regretted later.

Every human being evolves in his own time. Therefore, those musicians who are not nAdOpAsakas like Thyagaraja and MD, attempting to modify their kRti are indeed damaging the image of the personages. These personages (like Thyagaraja and MD) stand on their foot and can defend themselves - they do not need any hollow props.
Last edited by vgvindan on 12 Jun 2008, 21:20, edited 1 time in total.
0 x

ts
Posts: 18
Joined: 06 Feb 2006, 16:00

#131

Post by ts » 12 Jun 2008, 22:09

Dear Sri vgvindan,

I am not talking about MD's disciples but those "torch bearers" of the 20th century. IMHO all they wanted to do was to cover any explicit references. Please dont get me wrong as I am not protecting those who changed them. Unfortunately you and me ended up with krithis that were tampered and mutilated.

Regards
TS
0 x

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10916
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01
x 9
x 37

#132

Post by vasanthakokilam » 13 Jun 2008, 00:17

The krithi Subramanyena has the same reference where the Maharaja is considered the avadharam of Subramanya
This bothers me. Narastuthi was probably practised quite a bit by poets and composers but this will amount to taking it too far, if that is indeed the meaning.
0 x

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

#133

Post by vgvindan » 13 Jun 2008, 01:03

vk,
In the kRti 'subrahmaNyEna' - rAga dhanyASi, all that is contained about the King is - vEnkaTESvara supUjitEna'. This, IMHO, may not even be considered as 'nara stuti' - it is a simple statement of fact of the King worshipping there at kazhugumalai - which, I think, is the family deity of the King's family.
Therefore I am not in agreement with the contention of ts that 'maharaja is considered the avatharam of Subramanya

On the otherhand, the kRti which I have quoted in post No 130, is out-and-out nara stuti However, I may qualify here that, in the book of 'Muthuswami Dikshitar Keertanaigal' (Tamil) by A Sundaram Iyer et al, this kriti is stated to have been sung about Lord Venkatachalapathi at Sathur.
If indeed, this kriti is about the King, then some of the statements are highly exaggerated and - disturbing.
0 x

arasi
Posts: 16082
Joined: 22 Jun 2006, 09:30
x 475
x 264

#134

Post by arasi » 13 Jun 2008, 03:19

In tamizh too: GKB's varugalAmO aiyyA for instance: bUmiyil pulayanAip piRandEnE.
Last edited by arasi on 13 Jun 2008, 04:00, edited 1 time in total.
0 x

vs_manjunath
Posts: 1445
Joined: 29 Sep 2006, 19:37
x 4

#135

Post by vs_manjunath » 13 Jun 2008, 08:43

vgvindan wrote:vk,
In the kRti 'subrahmaNyEna' - rAga dhanyASi
VGV- I think it's Shuddha Dhanyasi ??
0 x

beginner
Posts: 50
Joined: 02 Apr 2008, 14:50

#136

Post by beginner » 13 Jun 2008, 09:04

yes 'SubrahmaNyEna' is SHUDDHA (pure) dhanyAsi !!!
0 x

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

#137

Post by vgvindan » 13 Jun 2008, 09:11

manjunath, beginner,
I am sorry, You both are right - it is Suddha dhanyASi

arasi,
I couldn't get the connection between nara stuti and GKB's mention about 'pulaiyan'.
0 x

supri00
Posts: 3
Joined: 24 Feb 2009, 00:31

#138

Post by supri00 » 10 Apr 2009, 20:03

can anyone pllease help me with word by word meaning for Aanathamrutha karshini,Dikshidar's krithi.
Aso I need the meaning for Shakodari
0 x

rshankar
Posts: 13362
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:26
x 581
x 158

#139

Post by rshankar » 12 Apr 2009, 06:43

supri00 wrote:can anyone pllease help me with word by word meaning for Aanathamrutha karshini,Dikshidar's krithi.
See http://rasikas.org/forums/viewtopic.php? ... of-md.html
supri00 wrote:Aso I need the meaning for Shakodari
I think the word is SATOdari - meaning a woman with a very tiny waist.
0 x

Post Reply