Vidushi Pantula Rama's open letter to all musicians and music lovers on “Sādhinchenē”

kvchellappa · Post by **kvchellappa** » 02 Apr 2018, 20:20

Smt PR's reply to Sri V Govindan:
Sir
At the outset I do not understand how presenting a correct version becomes a heartless act. My connection with Tyagaraja and his kritis is beyond heart or head. It is a soul searching experience for me always.
As for my inspiration for this proposal, I have already established the authority of the source of it.
As for the the usage that you mentioned in Tamizh, a similar idiom in Telugu-
తా పట్టిన కుందేలుకు మూడే కాళ్ళు (Taa pattina kundeluku moode kalalu) is referred to ‘moorkhās’ and not at all in this context. Just because the words taa pattina pattu are similar it is inappropriate to apply it to the present context.

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 02 Apr 2018, 20:40

RSR wrote: ↑02 Apr 2018, 15:01 That is literature.

Sir... May be you can start a separate thread on what is and what is not literature (in different colors) according to you (vaishnavite and MS devotee). I am sure many here can benefit from your judicious decrees.

vgovindan · Post by **vgovindan** » 02 Apr 2018, 20:42

Once she has decided that her version is correct, there can be no further arguments.

Let us be very clear that tyAgarAja belongs to the cultural milieu of kAvEri tIra. I and my ancestors belong to the same cultural milieu. If I have to take the authority of telugu dictionary for a common word like sAdhincenE which is 100% same as sAdittAnE in tamil and the usage and idiom of which is known even to a pAmara of tamil nAdu, then fie on my being born tamil nAdu having telugu as my mother tongue, fie on me for being educated in tamil right from elementary school, fie on my seven decades of age.

What she will say to rAmadAsu who sings 'nuvvu kulukkucu tirigEdi evarabba sommurA' in the padya 'ikshvAku kula tilakA' - I don't know - mUrkha?

All the best, lady.

vgovindan · Post by **vgovindan** » 02 Apr 2018, 20:49

Dear members, I am sighning off - if you think because of defeat, so be it.

RSR · Post by **RSR** » 02 Apr 2018, 21:08

sureshvv wrote: ↑02 Apr 2018, 20:40
RSR wrote: ↑02 Apr 2018, 15:01 That is literature.
Sir... May be you can start a separate thread on what is and what is not literature (in different colors) according to you (vaishnavite and MS devotee). I am sure many here can benefit from your judicious decrees.

---------------
I am just RSR. No 'sir'.
It is already there in my site sites.google.com/site/homage2mssubbulakshmi
Listen to them first.
More to come ( nearly 100 more) in homage2mssubbulakshmi2
porombokku songs are not literature, any way even if rendered in purest carnatic idiom.

RSR · Post by **RSR** » 02 Apr 2018, 21:26

To sureshvv-> You may know that Smt.MS was very active contributor to CM in Thamizh language, along with Smt.D.K.PATTAMMAl and N.C.Vsanthakokilam.
Madurai Mani Iyer also sang quite a few. ( kanthan karunai puriyum , veLLaith thaamaraip poovil)
There were lyrics set to music of Barathy, Papanasam Sivan, Arunachalak kavirayar, Gopalakrishna Barathy, Suddhanandha Barathy, Periyasami Thooran, Namakkal Ramalingam Pillai,Kalki, Oothukkadu Subba Iyer and many more. Most of those songs were written as poems. ( papanasam sivan was poet-composer) .Many of the poems were not devotional but patriotic. They can be read as poetry without music and enjoyed for the literary loveliness. Do you want examples? Listen to Ilango Adikal's masterpiece from Silappathikaram. 'vadavaraiyai matthaakki' .
https://sites.google.com/site/homage2ms ... matthaakki
Nobody can teach literary and music appreciation to another. It comes through lreading and listening with reverence.

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 02 Apr 2018, 21:34

vgovindan wrote: ↑02 Apr 2018, 11:57 Ranganayaki,
I started with preface that sAdhincenE is a nindA stuti. Let us be clear about that first.
Example of nindA stuti rAmadAsu -

https://youtu.be/Ku0x2ANTNKc

Her being misguided about this T kRti does not belittle her vidvat. Casting doubt or aspersion on a particular matter, should not be construed to be casting aspersion on the person.

I will take your word for what you say regarding your conscious intention, Sri Govindan. But your comment was about her as a person. That SHE was not using her head, that SHE was swayed by someone else, that SHE was misguided. These are not arguments about the topic at all. But painting her that way gives you the higher ground. And then you don’t need to say much else. I’m not saying that you have devious intent, but this could be an unconscious way that is so commonly done.

Most people here don’t follow rigor here in arguments, just the simple one of staying on topic. Your point to her does not stay on topic, but talks about her. It is completely uncalled for. This is not about whether she is convincing or not, whether her points are accepted or not. Your comment was personal, talking about her instead of properly refuting her points.

...
Thank you for kindly responding to my request for explanations. I was trying to have a detailed explanation connecting the meaning to samayaniki, but I did not find that in your response. I was not any more clear. But I studied it with a friend and I don’t agree with you. There is no ambiguity in the lyrics at all. Nothing wish washy about which one is appropriate. She has given a very clear and detailed and consistent and coherent explanations why, and she starts with the meaning of the passages. And she is the only person who has gone further than the words to clearly explain the first SS regarding Devaki-Vasudeva, instead of parroting the word “defame” which is utterly devoid of meaning in this context.

She has done a great job which no one on the other side has done, not even you.

She did not use the term nindA stuti, but it doesn’t mean that the term cannot not apply to her explanation.

....

Regarding the use of a “card:” Race and gender and age are significant undercurrents that affect people’s attitude to any issue. If I seem to mention race or gender in a certain context I would expect to be understood also as bringing up a significant bias in taking into account an argument. Some people do use a “card” in supporting an otherwise indefensible stand to inflame passions and engender support from group thinking where there otherwise be none. But there are times when calling out bias is appropriate, and in that case, deriding it as the use of a card is equally insulting (but I don’t care to feel insulted). But it belittles and dismisses the argument.

I have explained to you that your words to her do not express a disagreement on the issue, but attack her personal sense of herself as a mature professional with serious arguments that belong to her even if she did not start this, but has followed the lead of someone else she agrees with. So that is why I feel that if NSG (for example) came and said the same thing, you won’t be quite as dismissive of him. You would express somehow that you had taken due consideration of his views and you would say why you cannot agree. You haven’t said that. And you think it suffices (!!!) to say what you said about her.

I don’t know if it is about gender, or age, or your perception of his experience vs hers, his vidwat vs hers, but it could be any or all of these. But my point in saying what I say to you, is that in your words, there IS a sense of dismissal of her as a person, and a lack of due consideration to her arguments.

I hope your detailed explanation to her will be as detailed as she was and not at the level of explanations that you gave me, because those did not clarify much at all. It frustrates me that her views are being dismissed without an equally coherent viewpoint on the other side.

Regarding all the other discussion that is going on, I must say that I do not understand it. I don’t know what point you are making with the discussion of a robot, I don’t ever understand sankarank’s responses, I find it difficult to read long responses that are not broken up into paragraphs, that are not punctuated at least slightly acceptably. It’s too difficult for me, that too when I’m not using a computer. Anyway it’s not about sadhinchane and the digressions frustrate me. I’m not following that part of the conversation.

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 02 Apr 2018, 21:36

My last post was written in response to #197 and posts before it, without reading anything that came after it.

RSR · Post by **RSR** » 02 Apr 2018, 21:38

Devotional poems need not always be 'laments'. It sings the glory of the Almighty. in bliss. Examples abound in Thyagaraja kruthis themselves. He was not a poet primarily but a devotee and his kruthis were spontaneous musical expressions. He was a devotee-composer.. That may be the reason, why there may not be much 'poetical' value in many of his compositions. but there are some naturally grand compositions jagath aanada kaaraka and intha sowkyamu .
Purandara dasa 's famous Jagathoddhaarana in Piloo is another example. No lament but bliss and marvel.

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 02 Apr 2018, 21:45

If any such artist says something absurd, the remark would continue to be same.

The point is have you clearly shown that it is absurd?

I don’t think it is absurd. You have to prove that it is absurd before you dismiss her.

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 02 Apr 2018, 21:50

The relevance of sAhitya is the main theme of this thread. sAdhincenE and samayAniki debate happened not because of dispute of meaning, but more about elegant rendering

This is quite untrue, and your words surprise me so much! You don’t seem to have understood the point of the debate! This is very much about meaning !!

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 02 Apr 2018, 22:00

It is time to close the debate and call for a vote. RSachi may do the needful

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 02 Apr 2018, 22:06

samayAniki tagu mATalu' refers to evasive and bypassing nature of talk. This is what Lord did in His avatAra ecxepting when He propounded gItA.

1. Is that what it refers to? That is the whole problem. Why are you not giving any consideration to the meaning that is so obvious when the line is taken in consideration with the rest of the charanam? That at different moments the lord “speaks” appropriately?

2. Why do you insist on looking at the line separately?

3. Why do you first look at it with the SS and then decide it’s appropriate with a pre-determined meaning, which was originally proposed just to fit the meaning to the SS?

4. Why don’t you consider the meaning with the whole charanam and then see if THAT meaning fits in to complete the meaning of the SS? After all no one is disputing that the line samayaniki is not the first line of the charanam?

5. Why do you have no response to the beautiful meaning I proposed, which is exactly the same as what PR has offered? How come you disregard this important thing?

6. Is there a single kriti in all of CM where the charanam has been split?

7. Everybody who is on your side of the argument is deferring to your greatness because of your immense contribution in putting up lyrics and meanings out there on the net for all of us to benefit from. No one is using their own head to actually find out, interpret for themselves and develop their own views.

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 02 Apr 2018, 22:13

sureshvv wrote: ↑02 Apr 2018, 22:00 It is time to close the debate and call for a vote. RSachi may do the needful

It is time to stop talking about irrelevant issues and needlessly lengthen this thread. All the side issues should be moved to another thread, as it is becoming increasingly difficult to respond, moving from page to page, back and forth. This thread should only be about saadhinchane.

Please help. This would otherwise be a three-page thread.

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 02 Apr 2018, 22:40

Let us be very clear that tyAgarAja belongs to the cultural milieu of kAvEri tIra. I and my ancestors belong to the same cultural milieu. If I have to take the authority of telugu dictionary for a common word like sAdhincenE which is 100% same as sAdittAnE in tamil and the usage and idiom of which is known even to a pAmara of tamil nAdu, then fie on my being born tamil nAdu having telugu as my mother tongue, fie on me for being educated in tamil right from elementary school, fie on my seven decades of age.

But nothing of this “debate” is about you. Or about PR. It is about meaning. Why would you take this personally? We can all be wrong, and it is not about winning , it is about the song not being butchered any more, or accepting that the current practice is in fact correct. If it can be proven either way, we will all be happy. As for me, in this debate, I will not take it as defeat if you are able to convince me that the current practice is correct. Why should you speak of defeat as you have done in #204?

If you take everything personally, then we can never have an honest debate about anything. I am the kind of person who won’t defer to anybody’s greatness IF I have a doubt, till I am convinced. I’m ready to leave this discussion too, I could see how we were not having a true discussion among open minds. I stayed because I just wanted to try one last time to respond appropriately to PR by considering this with an open mind in the light of PR’s response.

It’s not nice of you to leave in a huff. I had so many questions for you without knowing you had “signed off.” I want you to know that I disagreed respectfully at all times, with a friendly feeling for you in my heart and without any big ego.

I learned quite a bit and was moved by what I learned. So thank you for the opportunity.

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 02 Apr 2018, 23:00

vgovindan wrote: ↑02 Apr 2018, 20:42 Once she has decided that her version is correct, there can be no further arguments.

...

What she will say to rAmadAsu who sings 'nuvvu kulukkucu tirigEdi evarabba sommurA' in the padya 'ikshvAku kula tilakA' - I don't know - mUrkha?

All the best, lady.

How is this a good response to what she has said:

As for the the usage that you mentioned in Tamizh, a similar idiom in Telugu-
తా పట్టిన కుందేలుకు మూడే కాళ్ళు (Taa pattina kundeluku moode kalalu) is referred to ‘moorkhās’ and not at all in this context. Just because the words taa pattina pattu are similar it is inappropriate to apply it to the present context.

She is not calling anybody Moorkha, I’m sure Sri Govindan has misunderstood her.

She is presenting her case. We are the ones who need an open mind to consider it. Not she. If you don’t consider it with an open mind before dismissing it, she can only let it go, at best. If we are able to show why other arguments are valid and not hers then she will have to open her mind to that. Not until then. So far, she has only been dismissed.

MaheshS · Post by **MaheshS** » 02 Apr 2018, 23:20

Few thoughts, first of all as a rasika, I am not going to stand up in the middle of a performance and go "Why did you not sing it in *this* particular manner?". It's all down to the individual artist and how *they* perceive the sahityam, how they were taught it and finally how they choose to deliver it on that occasion. There are occasions when we can nail it down and say, this is *wrong* [for example singing Karambusapasa pichapuram - I have heard this once unfortunately].

For issues like Sadinchane, it's neither here nor there. There is no way on God's green earth that people are going to get together and agree, OK this is how it was, from now on this is how it's going to be. Each side will pick and choose arguments that validates their own stand. As far as I know, there is NO clear indication from the composer as to what is correct [T, Mr T, Sir T, Baron* T of Thiruvaiyaru, Swami, Saint add / delete as per your choice], everything is up in the air and a perfect scenario for debate which as usual will end with no concrete solution but acrimony.

Personally I am going to err on the side of tradition, not because I understand Telugu or the nuances of composing, but simply because of the personalities involved originally. Not that I am saying they cannot be wrong, just saying this seems to juicy an issue for them to have side stepped. It was in the early 1940's that it was decided to have a homage to the composer by goshti singing these 5 krithis. This was proposed by Harikesanallur Muthaiah Bagavathar and Soolamangalam Vaidyanatha Bhagavathar. Then there were people like Tiger Varadachariar, Mysore Vasudevacharya and then the next gen heavy weights such as Maharajapuram Viswanatha Iyer, Ariyakudi Ramanuja Iyengar, Semmangudi Srinivasa Iyer, Dwaram Venkataswamy Naidu etc. No mean list that, each a colossus in their own way. For the whole lot to miss something quite like this is beyond my imagination.

All this my personal thoughts / opinions!

* I was going to say Lord T of Thiruvaiyaru, but fortunately in this instance, there is only one, though He too is called ...

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 02 Apr 2018, 23:30

Ranganayaki wrote: ↑02 Apr 2018, 22:06 7. Everybody who is on your side of the argument is deferring to your greatness because of your immense contribution in putting up lyrics and meanings out there on the net for all of us to benefit from.

Immense, yes! And when one does something that immense, they end up fusing with the subject of their research.

No one is using their own head to actually find out, interpret for themselves and develop their own views.

Really? You positive?

shankarank · Post by **shankarank** » 03 Apr 2018, 00:42

sureshvv wrote: ↑02 Apr 2018, 20:40
RSR wrote: ↑02 Apr 2018, 15:01 That is literature.
Sir... May be you can start a separate thread on what is and what is not literature (in different colors) according to you (vaishnavite and MS devotee). I am sure many here can benefit from your judicious decrees.

I could only recall , a paTTimanram in later 80s or 90s if the tamizh cinema (including that of MGR) was illakkiyam or not - telecast in Chennai TV down to south - and the judge you know how he would have ruled!

Bhakti movement is a sub-altern movement according to them I guess. It cannot be afforded much of any sophistication! That's left's seminal contribution to Indian intelligence or subversion however you look at it.

Also when he says he is a vaishnavite - and then a theist - he is forgetting that it is not just Vishnu - there are the two thaayars, Sankham , chakram etc - and chakratAzhvar has a sannidi of his own. Each divya dESam has a different jyOtiSa - panguni uttiram being in vanamAmalai.

I am a chakravite!

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 03 Apr 2018, 02:26

MaheshS wrote: ↑02 Apr 2018, 23:20 Few thoughts, first of all as a rasika, I am not going to stand up in the middle of a performance and go "Why did you not sing it in *this* particular manner?" .

Did anyone do that in this case? Did anyone stand up in the middle of a performance and point to anyone singing and question it? Is that what PR has done?

There are occasions when we can nail it down and say, this is *wrong* [for example singing Karambusapasa pichapuram - I have heard this once unfortunately]

I dare say this appears to be as unacceptable to some as

Karambusapasa pichapuram

, except that it is not related to pronunciation.

For issues like Sadinchane, it's neither here nor there.

There you are just resetting the debate as if nothing has been said so far. We need to look now at PR's reasoning.

Personally I am going to err on the side of tradition

That means you are suspending your own ability to reason, so you have nothing to say on the question. And regarding all the heavyweights you mentioned, the ones PR quotes are not nitwits. We can't demand or give respect just for some and not for the others. So we have to use our own heads to weigh in and not lazily rely on the vidwat of others. They are equal on both sides. Plus ego is a big thing in these groups and no one may have wanted to ruffle feathers or create waves. I don't think even LGJ changed anything even though it is said he endorsed the view PR represents. So The fact that nothing was said is not proof that there was no differing opinion.
,

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 03 Apr 2018, 02:38

sureshvv wrote: ↑02 Apr 2018, 23:30
Ranganayaki wrote: ↑02 Apr 2018, 22:06 7. Everybody who is on your side of the argument is deferring to your greatness because of your immense contribution in putting up lyrics and meanings out there on the net for all of us to benefit from.
Immense, yes! And when one does something that immense, they end up fusing with the subject of their research.

Which is fine, but when someone has presented a PLEA with a new viewpoint, we owe them an open mind. If that is not possible, Sri Govindan should at least acknowledge his partiality and his inability to have a fresh, new outlook and an open mind. I would completely understand and respect that. I won't have to argue with HIM. But it would be clear that we disagree.

No one is using their own head to actually find out, interpret for themselves and develop their own views.

Really? You positive?

[/quote]

Yes. no one else has given their own personal responses to to PR. Everyone lets VG speak and then they agree.

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 03 Apr 2018, 02:42

kvchellappa wrote: ↑02 Apr 2018, 12:48 Is it true that colloquial meanings will not find their way into dictionary?

It depends on the viewpoint of the compilers of the dictionaries. There are contemporary dictionaries in some languages which include even slang, not to speak of just colloquialisms.

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 03 Apr 2018, 02:46

An open mind does present the risk for both sides that their viewpoint may not prevail. But without it there is no validity to what ends up prevailing. But then those whose viewpoint prevails may not care.

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 03 Apr 2018, 03:00

The question of whether T created literature is so irrelevant.

1. His work can only be classified as poetry.
2. It has rhyme and may be meter.
3. We have praised this particular song and called it a gem not only for its musical quality, but especially because of its spirituality.
4. We need to stop paying lip service to T's status, and now everyone needs to put their money where their mouth is and exhibit an open mind to do JUSTICE to the work. I'm not saying this for the purpose of forcing a conclusion in the direction I lean in.
5. Of course I don't deny that I am confident that a truly open mind will take you in the same direction as PR. But it doesn't have to, I could be convinced by you as well, but not if I don't see that your mind is free.

We need to apply all the rigors of literature to decide on this question even if we don't feel it is literature. This question is not important for concert singing. This is important for the group singing. And for all the importance this song is given as a Ratna. Otherwise it is just hypocrisy.

kvchellappa · Post by **kvchellappa** » 03 Apr 2018, 06:38

More intensity of feelings right from the opening bias that Sri Thyagaraja was a saint and would be infallible. Everyone forgets he is giving an opinion and also that in any long and emotional outpour there are irrelevant points. It will not be of any use to pinpoint them. It will become a discursive talk if it has not already become so. A person giving opinion cannot give his own verdict. There are clearly two sides to it and the jury is out. The explanation of meaning for sadhinchane is not plausible. Ruling out that Thyagaraja would not have referred to god as evasive (samayaniki) in ninda stuti is a presumption and not proved. Such a usage is prolific esp. wrt Krishna and to a lesser extent Rama. The song sung with samayaniki sounds alright, be it by long association. This is not a defining issue that we should settle it once for all. Let us be on two sides with our own pride of being right. I will sit on the wall and just enjoy the music in my own dreamy way.
The issues that are open are:
1. What Thyagaraja intended. That will remain open for ever.
2. What the sishya paramparas version is. I have missed if either side has covered this.
3. The meaning of sadhinchane among Telugu people in Kaveri banks at the time of Thaygaraja
4. Why samayaniki cannot be in a teasing sense, not irreverent.
5. Who sang it in the 'correct' version before 1950?
6. What will happen if people continue to sing as they are doing now? How will it be a disservice to music or Sri Thyagaraja? If Ramayana has so many versions, why not have two versions of Thyagaraja?

Any discussion is at the head level and heart level intrudes liberally. At the soul level, there will be no discussion, only ananda.

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 03 Apr 2018, 08:17

Consideration about the soul level was aDi maTTam (the bottom level) when the akku vERu ANi vERu (take apart, analyze to the nth degree) process took place. In all this, Panthula Rama will stay the same fine artiste she is. I can't imagine a derisive or agitated look on her face. She is not going to go on a protest march on this. Music is her business, and she will continue in the same dignified manner in which she's been conducting herself all these years, I presume...

kvchellappa · Post by **kvchellappa** » 03 Apr 2018, 08:39

I must mention that Smt. PR has made a scholarly, cogent, elegant presentation. Her English is as delectable as her music, measured, to the point, definitive, but not overassertive, as some of us are prone to.

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 03 Apr 2018, 09:50

Hopefully she will change her mind on this

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 03 Apr 2018, 09:56

Ranganayaki wrote: ↑03 Apr 2018, 02:38 Yes. no one else has given their own personal responses to to PR. Everyone lets VG speak and then they agree.

You seem to be focused on writing rather than reading. Almost all have given our personal preference, which is why this debate is past its 10th page. VG speaks for the composer.

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 03 Apr 2018, 10:18

sureshvv wrote: ↑03 Apr 2018, 09:56

You seem to be focused on writing rather than reading. Almost all have given our personal preference, which is why this debate is past its 10th page. VG speaks for the composer.

You haven’t read me with care. I know you all have expressed your preference. That’s how I know which side you are all on!! What I said was that no one has given their personal response to PR . I’m pasting it back from your own post for you to read.

Ranganayaki wrote: ↑03 Apr 2018, 02:38 Yes. no one else has given their own personal responses to to PR. Everyone lets VG speak and then they agree.

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 03 Apr 2018, 10:49

Thank you for that nice post, KVC. I would like take a shot your points 4 and 6.

4. It cannot be in a teasing sense. I guess you mean he is teasing the lord. That cannot be right because he is not addressing the lord. He is addressing his own Manas throughout the song. (“O Manasa”)

Further, samayaniki is part of the charanam which has many other lines. It’s meaning HAS to be in concordance with the sense of the rest of the charanam.

The charanam expresses his love for the lord, who responds aptly to him at various circumstances of life, yet torments (saadhinchane) him by forever staying apart and never showing himself to him. (Thyagarajanutudu centa rakane saadhinchane, O Manasa)

6. The world will not come to an end either way. If we sing it wrong, we will be singing / blabbering something absurd in the context of Thyagaraja aradhana.

I have nothing against two versions of Thyagaraja. But each version should be of good quality, should stand up to scrutiny. If the meaning of a version doesn’t hold up, it should be discarded. The problem is people within groups have to reach a consensus. It can’t happen without open minds. That’s all I have clamored for this whole time, having stated where I stand: truly open minds and a real discussion.

SrinathK · Post by **SrinathK** » 03 Apr 2018, 11:38

Ramasubramanian M.K wrote: ↑20 Mar 2018, 21:25 My take on SADINCHENE based on LGJ's explanation/rationale for not using SAMAYANIKI(he agreed with Pantulu Rama's point):

Acc to LGJ,singing repeatedly Samayaniki Taku Matalaa(implies that Lord Rama is "fickle"(this is too strong a word I admit for want of a better way of expressing!!)- as if Lord Rama is prone to -changing his stance to suit the occasion--which could not have been intended by the Saint--probably he meant to convey a mild form of NINDASTUTHI,but repetition of the phrase would appear to reinforce WHAT he did not intend.

Also I have a question. on one of the lines in this krithi;
According to ALATHUR Bros there was one more swaram/sahitya phrase-SA SA DA PA MA GA RI RI Ma Ga RI RI. SA RI SA SA DA SA RI (Sarasaksshulu Sanakasa Nandana--apologies if I have "butchered" the lyrics portion!!). AT the Thiruvaiyaru festival they used to insist on singing the line in the chorus but the rest of the Senior Vidwans used to refrain from singing the swarm/sahitya. I doubt if any of the current musicians follow this.

RAVI SRI, any comment on this from the Dhanammal School???

I am not familiar with telugu, but melodically, rhythmically, grammatically, and even the meaning of the words, it sounds off - even in context, there's no way that line should belong there, when the charanams before and after it deal with Krishna's activities.

Saadinchane is about Krishna first, before moving on to Rama and Venkateshwara. It's almost like he's comparing their characteristics, with Krishna being the divine cheater.

vgovindan · Post by **vgovindan** » 03 Apr 2018, 13:45

This kRti is all about kRshNAvatAra. Any reference to rAma and veNkaTESa are simply incidental. Such references to other names are available in the kRtis in praise of rAma also.

RaviSri · Post by **RaviSri** » 03 Apr 2018, 18:48

I once heard, in the 1980s a lecdem by SRJ at the MA, on the topic of ragas handled by T and MD. He digressed and expressed the opinion that samayAniki tagu mATalADEnE was not appropriate for a few stanzas that describe Rama and that it was appropriate only for those stanzas in the song that described Krishna. Later, in 2007, when I met him at his house, I asked him about it and he said the same thing. Rama cannot be accused of samyAniki tagu.... but Krishna can be. Witness His machinations and his double talk before, during and after the Mahabharata war. Personally, I tend to agree with SRJ. sAdinchEnE can be used for all the stanzas but samayAniki can be used only for those that speak for Krishna. SRJ knew Telugu very well as he had lived in Tirupati for a long time, serving as professor of music at the University there.

My earlier appeal to musicians such as Pantula Rama remain, i.e., they should restore the original versions of all songs that have been changed and mutilated. And not be selective about it.

bhakthim dehi · Post by **bhakthim dehi** » 03 Apr 2018, 22:02

samayAniki tagu mATalADEnE was not appropriate for a few stanzas that describe Rama

I think same argument was put forward by Smt Pantula Rama in her FB page.
people who have read the krithis of Saint Tyagaraja and understood him properly will never commit such a statement. I will cite few examples to attest this.
When we try to understand meaning of any sahitya, an attempt must be made in two ways : 1- direct word to word translation and 2 - underlying philosophical meaning.
We have no rights to make any comment that the composer would have not mentioned that. Who are we to say that?
@Ranganayaki - You criticized V Govindan that he made some comments against Pantula Rama. But you have missed she has done the same against the composer. She has basically not analysed the krithis of the Saint.

Let me come back to the point. Saint visualized Sri Ramachandra and Sri Krishna as a single Supreme power. He use these names synonymously. There are many examples. I will cite one.

1. Adigi sukhamulu in Madhyamavathi. The meaning given here is taken from the site of Sri Govindan.

O Lord rAma, the primitive cause! O Lord who is like a crore Suns in destroying the darkness of clinging sins! O Sovereign Lord of the Universe! O Lotus Eyed! O Virtuous One! O Slayer of demons! O Lord residing at ayOdhyA praised by this tyAgarAja!

Has anyone ever enjoyed comforts by entreating You?
(a) sItA asked a boon, and she had to go to the forest;
(b) SUrpanakha asked You to fulfill her desire (of being wife); then and there, she lost her nose;
(c) the famous sage nArada asked for a boon (to know the nature of mAyA); he happened to attain the form of a woman;
(d) sage durvAsa asked (the pANDavas) food; then and there he lost appetite;
(e) dEvaki desired to behold the spectacle (of child-hood sports) of her son; but, it was yaSOda who happened to behold His sports;
(f) gOpis asked for union with the Lord; but they had to abandon their respective husbands.
I do not know whether, having mercy on Your own accord, You would protect me or not; but, Your secrets have been exposed.
What kind of Grand illusion is this?

Look at the illustrations given by the Saint. Do we have any incidence of sage Durvasa meeting Sri Rama ? or any stories linking Devaki and Sri Rama? But, to whom this krithi is addressed to ? Sri Rama !!
Pantula Rama or anyone else is going to argue that the Saint does not know who Sri Rama or who Sri Krishna is ?

Rama cannot be accused of samyAniki tagu.... but Krishna can be.

I will cite another krithi as an example.

2. E mani matladithivo in Todi. The meaning given here is taken from the site of Sri Govindan.

O Lord SrI rAma! O Lord well-praised by this tyAgarAja!
I wonder, in what manner You spoke understanding how each one’s mind is!

In order that everyone – (maternal) uncles, sisters-in-law, younger brothers, parents, wife, servants – to be agreeable to Your view-point, I wonder, in what manner You spoke understanding how each one’s mind is!

I wonder, in what manner, knowing how each one’s mind is, You spoke prudently and (some times) instilling fear, but always charmingly so that everyone - kings, sages, celestials, asura, the great Lords of (eight) cardinal points, the brave ones, Lord Siva, and the Sun etc. – would do Your bidding.

Read the bold ones. It can be called as samayaniki tagu maataladane as a ninda sthuthi.
Who is the hero here ? Again Sri Ramachandramurthy.

I am insisting what I have said in my earlier thread : We must understand the intent of any composer.

For him His ishtadevata Sri Rama is same as Sri Krishna or Paramashiva.

bhakthim dehi · Post by **bhakthim dehi** » 03 Apr 2018, 22:06

My earlier appeal to musicians such as Pantula Rama remain, i.e., they should restore the original versions of all songs that have been changed and mutilated.

I have heard Smt Pantula Rama singing only the routine versions. No old phrases or old raagam. If she tries to explore the old ones, I will feel much happy. Etla dorikithivo in Lalitha is a different story.

RSR · Post by **RSR** » 03 Apr 2018, 22:52

Though Rama avatharam and Krushna Avatharam, are dear to all Vaishnavites, I wonder if it is right to mix up the two stories, especially the events. The trouble is with the wording of the composition. I will illustrate , how nicely Periyaazvar deals with Ramayanam in first and fourth stanzas and Bagavatham in second and third stanzas of the pasuram ' mudiyondri moovulakangalum' as rendered by Smt.MS.
https://sites.google.com/site/homage2ms ... lakangalum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ilango AdikaL also deals with the various avatharams in his Aaychiyar Kuravai. as sung by Smt.MS( six stanzas)
https://sites.google.com/site/homage2ms ... matthaakki
----------------------------------------------------- stories from ramayanam, mahabaratham and bagavatham.
But they have handled the theme very carefully. without creating confusion.
That is literature. Lord Krushna is playful and Lord Rama is 'sathya sandhan' in normal understanding.
The kruthi is not upto the standard , poetically. ( musically, it may be good).

RSR · Post by **RSR** » 04 Apr 2018, 23:13

Came across this nice paper in shodhganga .today. . We must approach Thyagaraja as a devotee- who spoke in music idiom. The author here opines that even his Telugu was not pure, mixing sanskrit and even colloquial thamizh ( this is not in disparagement). The author is critical of musicologists and linguists, who concentrate and analyze the words in the krithis rather than the music. A comparison of Dikshithar, Thyagaraja, Shyama Sastry in their choice and usage of the language is given.
Then follows a comparison of Thyagaraja swami's kruthis and those of Papanasam Sivan closely patterned on Thyagaraja. ( famous krithis in ragams like Todi, kalyaNi, kambodhi, mohanam, karaharapriya and a few more are given.
Talam aspect also is covered. ( Sri.sankarank will be delighted)
Scholars in this forum will find a lot of material to their liking and approval, I believe.
shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/35224/10/10_chapter%205.pdf

( we can copy the link and paste in the browser's address bar to get the download )

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 04 Apr 2018, 23:28

bhakthim dehi wrote: ↑03 Apr 2018, 22:02 For him His ishtadevata Sri Rama is same as Sri Krishna or Paramashiva.

Thought he had kept Paramashiva out of the milieu of the Vishnu forms. Can you point to a kriti where Siva is also treated as an alternate form of Rama/Krishna/Venkateswara/Vishnu?

bhakthim dehi · Post by **bhakthim dehi** » 05 Apr 2018, 09:30

Thought he had kept Paramashiva out of the milieu of the Vishnu forms. Can you point to a kriti where Siva is also treated as an alternate form of Rama/Krishna/Venkateswara/Vishnu?

My first example is a rare one, 'deva rama rama' in the ragam Sourastram. Here, he envisions Sri Rama as Paramashiva. Meaning given here is taken from the site of Sri Govindan.

O Lord (dEva)! O Lord rAma! O Lord rAma! O Great (mahA) Lord (dEva)! O Lord rAma! O Lord rAghuvara!
O Lord Embodied (rUpa) as Siva – enemy (ari) of cupid (bhAvaja) (bhAvajAri)! O Divine sport (khEla) natured (bhAva)! O Holy One (pAvana)! Please protect (ava) me (pAvanAva), O mahAdEva!
O Lord rAma! O Lord rAma! O mahAdEva! O Lord rAma! O Lord rAghuvara!
O Auspicious One (SaMkara) (Sankara)! O Merciful Lord (karuNAkara)! O Lord who ever (aniSam) (karuNAkarAniSam) wields (kara dhRta) (literally holding in hand) (bow and) arrows (Sara)!
O Fascinator (vaSaMkara) of devotees (bhakta)! O Destroyer (Ahava) (literally offer in sacrifice) of asuras (danuja) (danujAhava)! O Fear-less One (or Unhesitating) (niHSanka) (niSSanka)! O Lord who delights in music (rasika) of tyAgarAja!
O Lord! O Lord rAma! O Lord rAma! O mahAdeva! O Lord rAma! O Lord rAghuvara!

Second one is a commonly heard krithi, 'evarani' in the ragam Devamrtavarshini. He says Sri Rama is personification of Vishnu and Shiva.

O Munificient Lord, praised by this tyAgarAja!
What did the most Eminent people determine as to who You are, and how did they worship You? – whether Lord Siva or Lord vishNu or brahmA or the Supreme Lord?
For the Siva mantra (OM namaSSivAya), ‘ma’ is the soul; for the vishNu mantra (OM namO nArAyanAya), ‘rA’ is the soul; I salute the great personages who understand this detail.

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 05 Apr 2018, 09:36

Super. Thank you!

RSR · Post by **RSR** » 05 Apr 2018, 12:12

From a high philosophical plane , of Advaitha, All the 'gods' may point to the Almighty, the unknowable, ( that will surely include the Gods of all the religions as well, as Barathy's poem states. But, that is for liberated mystics and not for common people, for whom mythology is the reality. There have been references to Lord Siva in all the epics but as distinct from Vishnu. If we extend the concept too much too literally, it may lead to absurdities. Consider the celestial marriage of Madurai Meenakshi Kalyaanam. Lord Vishnu hands over his sister Meenaakshi to Lord Sundareswara. The pantheon has been clearly delineated for over twenty centuries. and thousands of kruthis and poems have been created on this basis. .. Devi assumes different forms like Durga, Saraswathi and Lakshmi . Does it sound nice to equate Sita prattiyaar with Lakshmi? Characters in each incarnation have distinct personality.
All these inconsistencies vanish if we just ignore the words and imbibe the spirit of the music.
-----------------------------------------------------
a few paras from shadhganga paper.." Though language is common both to literature and music composition, the importance given to it is not the same in all expressions. Even in literature the yardsticks for prose, poetry and drama are different and in a musical composition language is reduced to a status of just a vehicle or medium for expressing a musical thought. It should be remembered that there are great aspects of classical music like Raga alapana, Tanam and Kalpana svara, where it is all music and no language at all. Even in compositions, the language has full significance only in vocal music. Music is itself a language that can create a rapport of its own.
-------------------------------------------------------
It should thus be clear that the calibre of a ‘poet’ and that of a ‘Vaggeyakaraka’ need not be identical. The former will have everything to do with language, euphony, rules of prosody etc., and may even have nothing to do with music. But the latter has to have some poesy in him while his magnificent obsession should be only with music. A minimum felicity with a language is a must for a composer (Vaggeyakara) and any command over music is not a must for a poet.
Looked from this background, a composer for a kriti should automatically be given a lenient treatment when the language used in a kriti is being analysed. Any of the Vaggeyakaras have been adepts in language too, while there have been quite a few whose lack of command over language often betrays. The appeal of music is very wide, often transgressing regional, political and even national boundaries. But the appeal of a sahitya is limited to the linguistic boundaries. If the Telugu compositions of Tyagaraja have been so jealously guarded in Tamilnadu it must have been more because of the great music in them than for the words.

There must have been a time when all that was known about Tyagaraja’s kritis was only the music in them and only latterly, with the spread of the empire of the musicologists, more and more time, energy and ink became to be spent on the sahitya portion. These tribe of commentators whose only claim to dabble in the realm of music is their knowledge of language, - cannot sing a single line of music but can go on pouring out more and more of written matter, often to the extent that would have baffled Tyagaraja himself.

In this context to call Tyagaraja’s kritis as ‘Tyagabrahmopanishad’ would seem to be an exaggeration[/color].

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 05 Apr 2018, 15:07

bhakthim dehi wrote: ↑05 Apr 2018, 09:30 For the Siva mantra (OM namaSSivAya), ‘ma’ is the soul; for the vishNu mantra (OM namO nArAyanAya), ‘rA’ is the soul; I salute the great personages who understand this detail.

I had viewed this verse as just providing an etymology for the word "Rama". But if one looks at it as an assertion that all the Gods are the one and the same, it takes it to yet another level.

vgovindan · Post by **vgovindan** » 05 Apr 2018, 21:58

rAma - combination of Siva pancAkshari and vishNu ashTAkshari - this has also been stated by kAnci mahAperiava also.

bhakthim dehi · Post by **bhakthim dehi** » 06 Apr 2018, 09:56

I had viewed this verse as just providing an etymology for the word "Rama". But if one looks at it as an assertion that all the Gods are the one and the same, it takes it to yet another level.

Very true. It depends much on our understanding and maturity.

I like to share an information related to this krithi. This krithi was considered to be a spurious one during the days of KV Srinivasa Iyengar. Reason is so simple as this praises Lord Shiva. Musicians at that time cannot accept Tyagaraja svami praising Shiva. They quoted this etymology is not seen in Purana-s or Itihasa-s and someone with a very limited knowledge composed this krithi with the mudra of Tyagaraja. This was said by KVS. It gives me an impression that he was also of that opinion.

I dont know how this was then accepted by all .

shankarank · Post by **shankarank** » 06 Apr 2018, 10:29

Isn't the name sankaranarayanan based on sankaran kovil where both deities are in the same deity?

Looks like some disputes were settled early on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sankarankovil

sureshvv · Post by **sureshvv** » 06 Apr 2018, 10:31

Some of these stories need to be interpreted with a pinch of salt. Given that there are a few "spurious" kritis composed by KVS with the Thyagaraja mudhra, I wonder!

shankarank · Post by **shankarank** » 06 Apr 2018, 10:34

vgovindan wrote: ↑05 Apr 2018, 21:58 rAma - combination of Siva pancAkshari and vishNu ashTAkshari - this has also been stated by kAnci mahAperiava also.

Sri V Govindan, it seems saivaites of smArta realm were part of a conspiracy to rob the 5 from "nArAyaNAya" after extending that to 8 to extend their own 3 sivAya to 5. So you got to be careful somewhat. If people want to be different let them be

Ranganayaki · Post by **Ranganayaki** » 06 Apr 2018, 11:15

bhakthim dehi wrote: ↑06 Apr 2018, 09:56
I had viewed this verse as just providing an etymology for the word "Rama". But if one looks at it as an assertion that all the Gods are the one and the same, it takes it to yet another level.
Very true. It depends much on our understanding and maturity.

I like to share an information related to this krithi. This krithi was considered to be a spurious one during the days of KV Srinivasa Iyengar. Reason is so simple as this praises Lord Shiva. Musicians at that time cannot accept Tyagaraja svami praising Shiva. They quoted this etymology is not seen in Purana-s or Itihasa-s and someone with a very limited knowledge composed this krithi with the mudra of Tyagaraja. This was said by KVS. It gives me an impression that he was also of that opinion.

I dont know how this was then accepted by all .

Is there some other justification for these two letters to be isolated as the soul of the mantras? I'm sure any letter taken away would reduce the mantras to meaninglessness. --?

RSR · Post by **RSR** » 06 Apr 2018, 11:51

Just trying to get information......
1) who selected and named these 5 krithis as panccharathan kritis'? what is the tradition?
2) Personally, I find the other four , really wonderful in music as well as theme. Is it possible to choose some other great composition of Thyagaraja to replace sadhinchane and make it the new sampradhayam?
3) Can we avoid group singing by vocalists and instead have group rendering by instrumentalists alone? ,,especially Nagaswaram players?
4) Can we do away with individual performances in the venue during the festival?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------