nidhi cAla sukhamA? Yes sir!

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 20 Jul 2010, 06:03

vk:
You presuppose I am denying the spiritual part. Not at all! When I said T did some "disservice" to modern day musicians, it is meant in a tongue-in-cheek fashion because it puts them in an awkward position. I admit they can deliver the song in an aesthetic fashion without feeling the guilty pangs because they are delivering a song and not scratching their conscience (maybe some do). The awkwardness may come in when the critical rasikas (outraged at the musician for a different reason---recording issue here) can throw some mud at the musician. That was my message. As for the desire to earn money, the modern day musicians are night and day when compared to those of T's time.

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 20 Jul 2010, 06:17

VK,
Exactly!
Even if you hear that one line 'nidhi tsAla (cAla) sukhamA?' when one sings it with awreness (feeling the significance of it in his/her own spiritual self--however small or big one's spiritual being is), then it benefits both the singer and the audience
In the discussions, there are a few who see only black and white. They say, those were spiritual days, now we have a materialistic world. Then, how do they explain the way others lived in those times who had nothing of the spiritual yearnings of the Trinity? Yes, there were lots of materialistic people then--before and after. TheTrinity performed their pUjAs religiously, did daily rituals with care, went to temples to pray, true. Others did too, but they were not spiritual--just religious. .
Let's come back to modern times. There are many folks who do all the above and in some cases, they are spiritual too. Others are not. Not that to be spiritual, you need to be that way, either.
These aspects had and still may have a place in the context of CM, but in what way? The Trinity were that way, true--but I now come to my point. How can we forget 'music' in all this which is one way to divinity? Great composers (think GBL whose way was not the same as the Trinity) found their spirituality in music too and that's what appeals mostly to us rasikAs, however different we are from one another.
Materialism has been there always. In the same way, there is room for spirituality in today's world. Those who find it in music know that things haven't changed that much over time at all in that sense. CM is still cherished (no need to explain that).
So, in my view, those among the performers who make music their true business

find happiness in fine tuning their music over the years, are highly professional in their vocation, take every performance seriously and strive to share their music (pun not intended) with rasikAs when they sing/play can still convey CM's message and make us richer and better in our spiritual longings, if we have any. Even otherwise, it's not a bad thing! The aesthetic expression which again is born out of creativity (spirituality?) appeals to us.
We do not expect them to take up uncca vrutti. We want to see them all make a good living. Still, we also like to see their living with their music--not treating their talents as commodities...

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 20 Jul 2010, 06:45

I think primarily performers sing this song for its superior musical value. It is among the top as far as Kalyani is considered. It is quite possible that many sing it (especially in TN) who even do not know the meaning! If this song were in some other vague ragam no one will even sing it irrespective of the meaning. Finally I have never seen any dhainya bhaavam when many sing this song (for example the expression Nagiah portrays in the clip posted by R-T).

sr_iyer · Post by **sr_iyer** » 20 Jul 2010, 07:34

vasanthakokilam wrote:The focus of the song is on the second part of each line. The first part of each line varies : Wealth, curd,butter&milk, Ganges water and praising humans.
.....

Tangentially speaking, T need not have even stated the second part of each line, the whole song can be

nidhi cAla sukhamA
dadhi navanIta kshIramulu ruciyO
dama Samam(a)nu gangA snAnamu sukhamA
mamata bandhana yuta nara stuti sukhamA

and still it can convey the intended spiritual meaning. The spiritual counterparts can just be left for readers to fill in.

VK: A small clarification here, on the gangA snAnam line. The rhetorical question is: Does a dip in Ganga (analogous to control over senses) impart sukham, or, does a dip in the well or kUpa (analogous to indulgence of senses)?

I point this out since from the above lines of your post quoted, it seems like the gangA snAnam has been interpreted in your post as being on the material/lower-plane.

PS: The composer has inverted the order (material vs spriritual) at this point in the composition. IMHO, one can see a prosodical (and accompanying tALa-placement) related reason for this ordering here, to keep it in line with the prosody and tALa placement used in the remaining parts of the song. The word 'kardama' has what can be seen as an 'antarukti' with respect to the preceding line's word 'dama' to make both the 'dama' syllables line up in tALa placement (though it must be noted that there are many cases where the first line dama s'amamanu is slightly shifted for imparting verve -- 2 or 3 taLLi pADugiRadu).

It is interesting to note that each of the second sections of the song (which you have omited the lyrics in your quoted portion above

) can be seen to start 'ahead' of the first section (which you have mentioned in the lyrics in quoted portion above), even if in a cyclic-sense, with respect to tALa placement.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 20 Jul 2010, 08:26

sr_iyer, thanks very much for the correction. I have fixed my post now. Much appreciated.

And thanks for pointing out the interesting aspects of the song construction. Nice!! I have been looking for good examples of the aesthetics of rhythm inherent in compositions and you have given me something to think about.

ragam-talam · Post by **ragam-talam** » 20 Jul 2010, 19:36

arasi wrote:Materialism has been there always. In the same way, there is room for spirituality in today's world

Very valid point. If you look around, there's growing interest in spirituality - people are beginning to realize that overindulgence in materialistic things cannot lead to happiness.
And if you look at Tyagaraja's own life story, you can find characters like his own brother who were obsessed with mundane things.
The way I read his message is this: do not get obsessed with wealth, sensual objects, etc.- instead look into the spiritual aspect of life to provide us with 'sukham'. This message, as I mentioned earlier, is eternally relevant.

ragam-talam · Post by **ragam-talam** » 20 Jul 2010, 20:22

vs_manjunath wrote:ragam-talam: May I request you to please provide sangeethapriya links of this song sung by stalwarts of CM. I have seen links sung by ARI;SSI;MSS;GNB. KVN & Santhanam.

1. Go to http://www.sangeethapriya.org/
2. Type in the word nidhichala in the search area
3. click on the search button.
This returns quite a long list that includes various artistes: Chembai, Nedunuri, OST, MS, ARI. GNB, KVN, Santhanam and others.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 20 Jul 2010, 23:23

This discussion kindled references to Bhaja Govindam of Shankara in my mind and that led to me reading an online translation of it
and reacquaint myself with that great work.
So, this thread has already done some good for me. The sombre realization of course is I fail miserably on all the 31 counts.

We talked about whether nidhi cAla sukhamA amounts to trashing of material things.
Shankara does not mince words here..
That is a smack down on material and earthly things of all kinds, especially including intellectual pursuits that are devoid of spiritual quests,
external religious appearances etc. It is almost Buddha like.
Anyway, I do not mean to side track this thread towards a discussion on Bhaja Govindam but just mentioning this as a parallel work
with similar themes expressed in much stronger terms.

Of course, as MK points out in his first post on this thread, anyone can sing either song even if they fall short of the ideals that are the main themes
of these songs. But singing it robotically and by rote, even with artificial external bhAvam would be against the very message of Bhaja Govindam
itself but that is up to the artist. We, as rasikas, can not sense or measure the internal state of the singers.

But I think when the artists and rasikas are on the same mental plane, the information loss is much less
and the overall effect is an order of magnitude higher. That is all one can hope for in concerts.

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 20 Jul 2010, 23:46

Today morning I was listening to Neil Diamond- the song "Leave a little room for God" and immediately thought about "nidhi cAla sukhamA" (I mean the discussion here) when I heard these lines...

C'mon now,
Put your money in the bank
And drive around in a big old car
Just leave a little room for God
Or it won't take you very far

I think singing "NCS" is fine... may be the singer can end it by saying -so said Tyagaraja.

rshankar · Post by **rshankar** » 20 Jul 2010, 23:49

I still do not get the 3 pages of discussion here - the saint poses all of these as questions - while his answers to these questions are implicit, why should others (with differing answers) not sing this? Now, if he had said something categorical (like Sri MD does in hiraNmayIm lakshmIm) to the effect that rAma's sannidhi should be sought rather than filthy lucre, it would be different.

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 21 Jul 2010, 01:03

Yes, Ravi. Exactly...

>may be the singer can end it by saying -so said Tyagaraja.

Suji, A good idea..

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 21 Jul 2010, 01:16

Neil Diamond?
It is so like....Yesterday
What does 50 cents or M & M say? That is today material.
PS: Deaf Leopard or Blind Lizard can also pass

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 21 Jul 2010, 02:41

MK,
Isn't it like saying, "Tyagaraja? Why Ttyagaraja? He's passe.
Why not Bharati or Kannadasan?"
They all matter to me. We don't have to reject one for the other. I am not sure what you meant to say. If you meant, why bring in the names of old timers like Diamond, I don't know. I for one find it amazing at times to find wisdom in unexpected quarters.
Gift of a thought, wherever it comes from is worth our while. Suji is a very intelligent and artistic woman. Why would she quote something which has no value at all?
Not profound words perhaps, but I remember a line or two of another song of Neil Diamond which touched me: funny thing, you can sing with a cry in your heart--in Song song blue. No earth-shaking revelations but I loved listening to that song as I went about my work, hearing that little crack in his voice as he sang 'cry in your heart'!

ksrimech · Post by **ksrimech** » 21 Jul 2010, 03:06

mahakavi wrote: M & M say?

Do you mean Eminem? Both are bling bling ($$$$) guys.

They probably would say nidhichAlasukhamE!

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 21 Jul 2010, 03:56

Krishna,
emanem, eminem or M&M--
eppaDi ezhudinAlum,
M stands for money!

VK RAMAN · Post by **VK RAMAN** » 21 Jul 2010, 04:12

In God We Trust - Rest in Cash

ragam-talam · Post by **ragam-talam** » 21 Jul 2010, 04:26

mahakavi wrote:PS: Deaf Leopard or Blind Lizard can also pass

ayyayyo, that should be Deff Leppard please!

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 21 Jul 2010, 04:31

arasi:
Pl don't try to read between the lines in my post.
As for Neil Diamond comment it has nothing to do with who posted it. If I intended to be critical I would have addressed the poster. My general tone was, if you care to ask, if Neil Diamond why not M & M or other such contemporary singers. All rappers or heavy metal singers are not bad (as people make them out to be).
I read in Fortune magazine today that when a 50+ senior executive of IBM involved in Galleon scandal was taken to jail he met a young prisoner who was there for gun possession/use. When this executive asked him to trade places with him the young fellow remarked, "No man, your family is important to you. I have been a repeat offender". Do you expect such wisdom from young prisoners? It is a similar thing.

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 21 Jul 2010, 04:35

ragam-talam wrote: ayyayyo, that should be Deff Leppard please!

r-t:
Should I start explaining in simple terms? Dind't you get the twist I put on there? Did you notice my blind lizard concoction or did you miss it too? Same thing with M & M. These are terminologies parents use to poke fun at their children in the US for their listening preferences. You would miss them if you don't have teenagers at home.

ragam-talam · Post by **ragam-talam** » 21 Jul 2010, 04:37

oops, missed that tongue-in-cheek part...mea culpa.
good one.

Suji Ram · Post by **Suji Ram** » 21 Jul 2010, 04:41

Arasi,
My post on Neil Diamond was just to say that I was thinking of you folks on rasikas at that moment when I was hearing those lines about money and all. A way to say hello to you all...

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 21 Jul 2010, 06:56

Hola Suji!
Now's the time to pick up that fiddle of yours and practise that nidhi of a song

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 21 Jul 2010, 07:16

I want you guys to follow the directions of R-T and visit Sangitapriya and just listen to NidhicAla rendered by the doyens Ari/GNB/Nednuri/MS etc... I wonder whether any of you get a feeling or the bhava of T's rejection of wealth? Kalyani is a bright raga and is unsuitable to deliver this message though musically it iis great. It must have been in a dhainya raga like ToDi or shubhapantuvarali to convey the message or even in Atana if a protest is manifested by T to his brother. I doubt if this was composed as per the anecdote T would have composed it in Kalyani!

Arasi - as a vaggeyakara put yourself in the mood and check what raga will appeal naturally to convey the message? Isn't the raga choice like an oxymoron?

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 21 Jul 2010, 08:20

CML, As I have been harping, the song is not about the rejection of wealth ( even after assuming it is not associated with serfoji incident ).
But my perception of kalyani is that it is NOT a bright raga. Definitely it is not in the rasa category of shubhapantuvarali either. But the way the 'Ni' is played, just that part alone gives me more of a 'pleading/earnestly requesting' kind of emotion. The prathimadyamam provides the necessary grounding, so one does not get too exuberant. But then, different songs in Kalyani evoke different shades. Vasudevayani is more an upbeat song but that upbeat-ness is carried by the rhythm in addition to the melody.

All this to say, kalyani carries the spiritual side of nidhi cAla sukhamA very nicely, aptly and appropriately.

srini_pichumani · Post by **srini_pichumani** » 21 Jul 2010, 11:35

Refrain for this millenium

nidhi cAla sukhamE --
nijamaina dAlaru sukhamE
nis'calamaina pavundulu sukhamE
cancalamaina rupayyalugUDa sukhamE

G R N D M G R

nidhi cAla sukhamE

EE EE E

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 21 Jul 2010, 16:17

Welcome Srini! Missing you for quite a while; maybe you were busy and comfortable (sukhamE) with the accumulation of DAlaru

..and don't leave out Euro!
...but remember tha the currency of the future will be the chinese yuan!

ragam-talam · Post by **ragam-talam** » 21 Jul 2010, 18:29

Perhaps they will also keep singing the swaras Ma-Ni (rhymes with 'money'!)
And then, Ni-Da (nee taa!)

Are there any swara patterns that have these swaras repeating?

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 21 Jul 2010, 19:30

I have heard this one often:
pa-da-ni dA, pa-da-ni dA, pa-da-ni dA
padanI(r) (palm toddy) tA (pl give), when the singer was thirsty and yearning for a little inebriation.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 21 Jul 2010, 19:50

mA mA ma ni nI dA (uncle you give money)
followed by a threatening
pA da ga mA mA ma ni nI dA (you sinful uncle you give money)
with a retort
ma da mA (what an arrogance!)
to be followed by
mA mA ma ni pA (uncle forgive)

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 21 Jul 2010, 20:18

:LOL: quite funny.. In one of MLV's kapanaswarams there is a repeated sequence involving ma ni da and ma na sa...

ma ni da ma na sA ( Oh mind of the man )
pa da mA ma ni dA ( give money the right ful amount )

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 21 Jul 2010, 20:36

Vk

...But my perception of kalyani is that it is NOT a bright raga.

..that is a big surprise for me!

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 22 Jul 2010, 21:55

Here is the full translation of the lyric as posted by Govindan

O My Mind! Tell me truthfully whether wealth is very comforting or the service in the holy presence of Lord zrI rAma?
Are curd, fresh butter and milk etc. tasty or the nectarine juice of meditation and (collective) singing of praises of Lord rAma tasty?
Is a bath in the river gaGga called (practice of) self control and tranquility comforting or is a bath in the water of well called the filthy evil natured objects of senses comforting?
Is extolling humans who are under the yoke of egotism comforting or is singing songs of the Lord praised by this pure minded tyAgarAja comforting?

Historically the highlighted segment may be the reason for this composition. More than likely King Serfoji tried to bribe T into composing a prabhandam in his honour. Out of his commitment to principle T firmly refused which is capsulated in this lyric. So the reason for T's rejection of wealth is contextual. Not that he is intrinsically against wealth itself! Narastuti is abhorrent to him. He did maintain it all along in all his lyrics. Though he has complimented other humans who are bhaktas..

Pratyaksham Bala · Post by **Pratyaksham Bala** » 23 Jul 2010, 11:38

Silver nagaswaram with a gold chain:-

http://www.hindu.com/fr/2008/11/14/stor ... 120100.htm

Pratyaksham Bala · Post by **Pratyaksham Bala** » 23 Jul 2010, 17:16

.
Following is an extract from the book 'The Society of the Ramayana' by Ananda W.P. Guruge:-
"An interesting account of the popular concept of wealth is given in a speech of Lakshmana to Rama, in spite of the fact that one may regard this section as a later elaboration of some casual remark of Lakshmana because of its didactic significance, its antiquity even as an interpolation cannot be disproved for it occurs in all three recensions without much alteration. In this, Lakshmana says,

"All actions issue forth from the prosperous ones, with abundant riches; likewise all actions of the foolish man who is devoid of wealth are cut off. The cause of sin (papa) is lack of wealth. It is the man with riches who has friends and relations; he is the man in the world and the erudite one. He is the most fortunate, the virtuous, and valorous and the most honoured ... Acquire wealth, O Kakutstha, for the cause of this existence is wealth. I do not see a difference between the poor and the dead ... Without doubt all virtue, desire, pride, happiness, exasperation, erudition and restraint emanate from wealth."

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 23 Jul 2010, 17:31

>>.....Without doubt all virtue, desire, pride, happiness, exasperation, erudition and restraint emanate from wealth."<<

It is true but only to a limited extent. You can't do much good to a starving man without feeding him first. That requires wealth (whatever the amount). More so if there are lots of hungry men. You can't wake up a (hungry) sleeping man and tell him there is no food but he should meditate on God.

The corollary of this statement is: wealth also brings power, arrogance, avarice for more wealth, and a license to do anything the person wishes. That part is swept under the rug.

But the obvious message is: Yes, nidhi (wherever it is) is necessary but not sufficient for harmony.

thenpaanan · Post by **thenpaanan** » 23 Jul 2010, 20:52

cmlover wrote:Here is the full translation of the lyric as posted by Govindan

O My Mind! Tell me truthfully whether wealth is very comforting or the service in the holy presence of Lord zrI rAma?
Are curd, fresh butter and milk etc. tasty or the nectarine juice of meditation and (collective) singing of praises of Lord rAma tasty?
Is a bath in the river gaGga called (practice of) self control and tranquility comforting or is a bath in the water of well called the filthy evil natured objects of senses comforting?
Is extolling humans who are under the yoke of egotism comforting or is singing songs of the Lord praised by this pure minded tyAgarAja comforting?

Historically the highlighted segment may be the reason for this composition. More than likely King Serfoji tried to bribe T into composing a prabhandam in his honour. Out of his commitment to principle T firmly refused which is capsulated in this lyric. So the reason for T's rejection of wealth is contextual. Not that he is intrinsically against wealth itself! Narastuti is abhorrent to him. He did maintain it all along in all his lyrics. Though he has complimented other humans who are bhaktas..

Personally I feel (without hard evidence) that this kriti was produced by T when someone (someone in the household -- perhaps a relative or a disciple) mentioned the possibility of getting mAnyam (loosely "appreciation") from someone who is rich and loves music (such as Serfoji). There is no evidence that T was expected to sing explicitly in praise of Serfoji even if he did show up in Serfoji's court. The lyrics are more in line with someone who worries that the (false) encomiums that one may get in a place such as Serfoji's court may lead to egotism and craving of adulation. Thus this is an entirely _internal_ conversation in T's mind that finds expression in the kriti and not any refutation of Serfoji's invitation if there was one.

In contrast, there are stories of T going to his disciples' or others rasikas' homes (and having sung there perhaps?) and in many ways singing at the court would not have been any different except for the adulation that would have been directed at T rather than at the glory of rAmA. One direct example that we do have that sheds light into T's thinking is the famous 'dAsharathI' kriti in tODi -- my feeling is that T is careful to say here that it is not his own greatness but the fact that rAmA is a "paramarasika" (the ultimate connoisseur) that took T's name to faraway lands.

After all, other similarly high-minded composers have composed on the kumAra ettEndra or even Serfoji himself (the tOdi aTa tALa varnam "kanakAngi" if memory serves has some words to that effect).

Thoughts?

-Then Paanan

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 23 Jul 2010, 21:21

>>Thus this is an entirely _internal_ conversation in T's mind that finds expression in the kriti and not any refutation of Serfoji's invitation if there was one.<<

Then paanan:
That is exactly my point too when I said it was "self-remonstration". T was thinking aloud about the affection for material possessions in contrast to devotion to rAma. It was just an agony which poured forth in words. It was not intended to preach others. As I stated in one of my articles on T elsewhere, T was a maverick. He did not like the hypocrisy of his fellow citizens. If Japyesan (his older brother) was bugging him to earn money through his gift of music, that may have weighed on him too. Finally, assuming the SerabhOji episode is true, the king does not lavish gifts in vain to the recipients. There is expectation that the recipient composer would favor him (the king) with one or two songs about his glory. His courtiers would have definitely insisted on that. If T went to the kings's court and sang only on rAmA, he could not refuse if there was pressure to sing about the king. He probably anticipated that situation and agonized over that, I guess.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 23 Jul 2010, 22:05

Consider the Kovur Pacaratnam.
These were composed when T resided for quite some time as the honoured guest of Kovur Sundara Mudaliar in his paltial residence. Apparently Mudaliar is a Siva worshipper of the local temple. T considers Rama to be the supreme deity and regards all other deities to be inferior including Siva. But on this occasion he compromises and sings :
I do not find (kAnarA) anywhere (endu) in this (I) Earth (vasudha) a God (daivamunu) (daivamunendu) like (aNTi) You (nIvu) (nIvaNTi). in the I vasudha sahana piece. Sambamoorthyy goes one step further to claim that T expresses gratitude to the Lord for making him famous in this world ( bhuvanam(a)ndu kIrti kalga jEsE )

Consider this in the following light:: Sundara Mudaliar requested T to sing in his praise which T may have refused. But instead agreed to sing in praise of Sundaresa as a substitute! He goes on to compliment Sundaresa as:

by bestowing (osagi) a lot of (rAsulu) wealth (dhana), long life (Ayuvulu) (rAsulanAyuvulu), devotion (bhaktiyu) towards brAmaNas (bhU-sura)

Is this a subtle reference to material favours received from the Mudaliar?

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 23 Jul 2010, 22:18

CML,
Isn't it a tradition that when you sing the praise God by any name, you call him the best there is? Looking at different composer's comopsitions, we realize that. unnaiyanRi maTROr daivam, nIvaNTi daivamu, iNaiyilA undan etc.

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 23 Jul 2010, 22:24

>>Is this a subtle reference to material favours received from the Mudaliar?<<
Definitely not. By the way it is not Sundara mudaliyAr but SundarEsa mudaliyAr.
It was sung on the deity Sundaresa of Kovur. If he says "AyuLu" (long life) was the Mudaliyar capable of extending one's life beyond one's assigned limit?

MD also sang a similar kriti on the Kuzhikkarai deity (Vishwanatha) which implied that he was doing it on the benefactor. That was the composer's privilege to lead the benefactor into thinking so.

>>T considers Rama to be the supreme deity and regards all other deities to be inferior including Siva.<<

Not so!. How about "ilalO praNadArti..."? Just because he sang "rAma nI samAna mevaru.." does not mean he considered Siva as inferior. If you love one deity more than others that has nothing to do with any superiority/inferiority status.

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 23 Jul 2010, 23:09

T was not an advaitist. His iShTa daivam was Rama who he considered superior to all deity in several lyrics ( e.g., mummurtulu (aTaNa), nijamaramamulu (umabharaNam) etc.,). arasi's point is valid in the case of many vaggeyakarakas who temporarily pay obeisance. But T is a staunch Rama Bhakta! Did he have idols or pictures of other deities in his puja?

ksrimech · Post by **ksrimech** » 23 Jul 2010, 23:29

CML, you are correct. There are so many kritis in which he says your margam is the best (dhArini telusukoNTi), I have never seen a deity like you anywhere else (nI vanTi deivamu SaDAnanA), who else will protect me (evarunnAru nannu brOva), etc. But there are so many kritis in which he shows his liking towards advaita, viSiSTAdvaitA and dvaita. It hard to just say he was an advaitin. See the kriti yEdAri sancharitA in Srutiranjani and dvaitamu sukhamA in rItiigouLa. Of course, one can argue he took sanyAsASramA as an advaitin under the name nAdaprEmAnanda saraswati.

One thing though, I have never come across a kriti in which he says SrIrAman or SrImannArAyANan prayed to SivaperumAn or ambAL or murugan or vinAyakar or did service (kaimkaryam) to them. There are innumerable kritis in which he says they always have Him in their minds/hearts. Eg. anayamuga hari charaNa yugambulu hRdayAmbujamuna nunchi line in SrIgaNapathini from prahlAdha bhakthi vijayam opera. There are many we can list here.

He definitely respected them but never equated them to SrIrAman. Again mahAviSNu in tiruppArkaDal is still inferior to Him as SrIrAman, in SrIvaikuNtam aka ayOdhyA. The same thought was shown by SrI kulaSEkarAzhVAr and SrI parASara bhaTTar. SrI chaitanya mahAprabhu put SrIkRSNan in place of SrIrAman.

I would be happy if someone shows an example to show the inferiority from the other way around to change this thought.

keerthi · Post by **keerthi** » 23 Jul 2010, 23:52

ksrimech wrote: there are so many kritis in which he shows his liking towards advaita, viSiSTAdvaitA and dvaita. It hard to just say he was an advaitin.

In the saraswati song, tyAgayya definitely shows us his leanings towards a deity with form and attributes.. [saguNa-dhyAnamupai.. in anurAgamulEni]

He wasn't a pontiff, and hence wasn't required to delineate a specific doctrine through his lyrics. It is evident from several of his songs that he had studied the AdhyAtma rAmAyaNa, and that he took rAma as the parabrahma, superior even to the trinity [sRSTI-puSTi-naSTi-jEyu panulanu nikRSTamani trimUrtulakosagi in the Ishamanohari song 'manasA srIrAmacandruni'].

tyAgarAja may be taken as a good representative of the bvhakti-bhAgavata cult of his times, where all deities were revered, but one took liberties(so to speak ) with the 'iSTa-daiva'.

UpaniSad brahmEndra yOgi - an advaitin scholar, who was tyAgarAja's father's co-student, wrote advaita-para commentaries on several upanisad-s, but was a great believer in nAma siddhanta, and composed several compositions on rAma, whom he refers to as the celestial rAma - 'traipada rAma' in his songs.

It was at the behest of this yati that tyagarAja visited kancI.

I mention the yOgi, to point out how different philosophical and theological leanings coexisted within the same person(s) apparently without contradiction.

ksrimech · Post by **ksrimech** » 23 Jul 2010, 23:59

keerti, one of my favorite of DKJ renderings, lAvaNya rAma kannulAra jUDavE is also in the same category. Thanks for the explanation with reference to upaniSad brahmayOgin.

mahakavi · Post by **mahakavi** » 24 Jul 2010, 00:50

>>..... how different philosophical and theological leanings coexisted within the same person(s) apparently without contradiction.<<

It is also said of true intellectuals that they can simultaneously hold two contradictory opinions without any conflict. For example, Bharathi advocated cultivating (sensible) anger, "raudram pazhagu" while also declaring "sinam koLvAr thamithAmE tIyARc cuTTuc cettiDuvAr oppAr" (those who get angry are equivalent to those who immolate themselves to death). Likewise he said, "uyir nanRu sAdal inidu" (life is good, death is sweet). So contradiction is just superficial as far as great souls are concerned. Yes, T was addicted to rAma but to say that he considered all other deities inferior is plain ignorance. For that matter there is only one parabrahmam. It is the human folly that apportioned that entitity into "my god, your god". To say Siva worshipped Vishnu, rAma worshipped Siva etc., is all total concoction in the fancy realm of those who wrote such things.

Ksrimech, pl note: rAma worshipped Siva at rAmEswaram after killing rAvaNa. So, does it place Siva at a higher level than rAmA? Was T aware of it? To concoct what suits the individual in terms of religion and god, is risible, to say the least.

arasi · Post by **arasi** » 24 Jul 2010, 01:02

Keerthi,
Very well put.
A slightly different story in reference to a contemporary composer, yet another composer with RAmA as her isTa daivam--Ambujam Krishna.
You would find that she composed songs about other deities like gaNapati, murugan, Sivan and so on, but once she had her bharanyAsam from her guru (TirukkuDandai Srimad ANDavan), her comopsitions were only about vishNu's avatArams.

Mahakavi,
Yes. There is room for contradictions in one's mind, especially if one happens to be as great as BhArati! However, when he said SInam pazhagu, he meant not short temper but righteous indignation as in SiRumai kaNDu ponguvAi

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 Jul 2010, 01:14

Simply put T was a saguNa brahma upAsaka! And that saguNa brahma was Sri Rama in both flesh and blood. He did belive that he has seen Him (nannu pAlimpa for example). He does consider Rama as the superior deity who commands over other deity including the TrimUrti. In that sense he is a polytheist. Even Krishna in Gita admits to other deities who are under him who may grant boons according to their limited powers. But he also states that all glories come to him only ultimately. As per Ksrimech I don't think T refers to Rama worshipping anybody else! Hence my hypothesis that his Kovur kritis are just to satisfy the Mudaliar and not out of any conviction of the unity of all deities (which is Advaita).

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 Jul 2010, 01:19

..similarly Arunagirinathar considers Muruga to be the ultimate deity who apportions responsibilities to other deities including Trimurti.. He by no means was an advaitist. On the other hand Sadasiva Brahmam is an out and out advaitist!

vasanthakokilam · Post by **vasanthakokilam** » 24 Jul 2010, 01:26

>But T is a staunch Rama Bhakta! Did he have idols or pictures of other deities in his puja?

Well, I recall vaguely now reading somewhere that T used to visit the Thyagaraja temple every day. ( possible I am imagining this )

cmlover · Post by **cmlover** » 24 Jul 2010, 01:32

Is there an idol of Rama inside that temple?