Total Pageviews

Thursday, February 13, 2014

Kanchi Chandrasekhara and Sringeri Chandrasekhara

author:....... Raa. Ganapathi 
source:....... 'KaruNaikkadalil Sila AlaigaL, pages 82-106
publisher:.... Divya Vidya Padhippaham (Jun. 2005 Edition)
type:......... book, Tamil 

(An essay published in the Kalki Deepavali Malar, 1992).

Pages 82-85

All though for Sri Kanchi Maha PeriyavargaL a hundred years of age will be completed a year and a half from now, that is, in the Vaisaka (Vaikasi) Anusham day coming in 1994, we matched sRuti 
for his shatAbdi festivities right from the time when he became ninety-nine.

On this occasion, let us become double puNyashAlis by remembering in anjali, another mahA periyavargaL who in vAstavam completed a hundred years on the holy day when the ekAdashI tithi and the magha nakShatra came together in the Ashvina (aippasi) month, four days before the current Deepavali.

It is a surprising similarity that the tuRavaRa tirunAmam (holy name of asceticism) of that Maha PeriyavargaL was also 'Chandrasekhara'. Sri Chandrasekhara Bharathi SwamigaL was that Maha 
Periyavar who performed the same divya paNi (divine work) for forty-two years in the Sringeri Sri Sankara MaTham, during the same time when in Kanchi Sri Sankara MaTham, PeriyavargaL Sri Chandrasekarendra Sarasvati SwamigaL's rule of jnAnam was exercised.

Changing the proverb 'as Surya Chandra' and becoming 'eka kAla dvi chandras', both of them remained as adhipatis of two great Guru PiThams for the forty-two years from 1912 to 1954, and spread jnAnam, bhakti, and shAstra dharmas by giving wonderful upadesha of them.

Since that upadesha with both of them was a lively example of their own life and living besides being their vAimozhi (word of mouth), that vAimozhi remained as one that had mantra shakti. And both of them received the adoration as Maha Purushas, Deiva Purushas.

Committing pApam and getting shApam that resulted in his waning and waxing, Chandra bowed to Paramesha, seeking pardon. The Aiyan in his limitless compassion took him in his hands and wore him on his mudi (hair) and became Chandrasekhara. That tiruppeyar (holy name) 
also became the name for the two Acharya Murtis who took on their head the responsibility of showing guidance towards goodness for the world that was getting more and more immersed in pApam and seeking no pardon for that!

Among the names of the Guru Parampara in the two PiThams, the Chandrasekhara nAmam was the only common name for both. Maha PeriyavAL is the seventh among the Chandrasekharas of the Kanchi PiTham. That another Maha Periyavar was the third--or fourth--among the Chandrasekharas of the Sringeri PiTham. Since in Kanchi for the pIThAdhipatis from the 61st to the 67th, the names  'Mahadeva' and 'Chandrasekhara' alternated, there was no visheSham in Maha PeriyavAL as the 68th pIThAdhipati becoming Chandrasekhara. The visheSham was that, after his ascension to the PiTham, the sage who ascended to the Sringeri PiTham five years later obtained for himself the Chandrasekhara tirunAmam that was earlier taken by the pIThAdhipati seventeen  generations before and four hundred and fifty years ago!

Another similarity too! Of the ten titles for ascetics called dasha nAma in the Sankara tradition, the sages of Kanchi PiTham hold the title (Indra) Sarasvati. In Sringeri they hold many titles that include Bharati, Tirtha and Aranya. Among these, the title Bharati held by that another Maha Periyavar remained as a name for Sarasvati! Chandrasekhara Bharati in what is known as Sharada 
PiTham in Sringeri, and Chandrasekara Sarasvati in what is known as Sharada MaTham in Kanchi had  both risen in their blessing stances.

Like the Chandra that showers as cool and pleasing moonlight changing the heat and eye-scorching  light of Surya, these two Chandras showered for the world making the jnAna advaita jvAla  pleasing to the people! It was their tapo kAnti (radiance of penance) that changed it all to 
the Chandrika that gives tApa shAnti (peace from afflictions), and comforted, consoled and  saved the Adiyars (devotees) from danger.

Both can be termed as 'matchless'. By that very saying doesn't it became that they are parasparam  oppAnavar (mutually comparable for similarities)? Both of them realized in anubhavam the  advaita jnAnam; possessed sharpness of knowledge that made the pundits wonder; at the same  time capable of simplifying the parama tattvas and giving upadesha to the  pAmara (grass roots) in a way that attracted them; were niRai kudams (full vessels) 
that never made noise but remained calm; exercised inner love for the entire uyirkkulam  (family of beings); dhIras who relentlessly followed the rigours of dharma shastras and  swimmed against the tide of kAlam (the time) that took an alankolam (a show of  indiscipline); satya sannyAsa shIlas who endured the jAjvalyam (splendour, radiance)  of jagadgurutvam (the status of being Jagadgurus) as necessary traps, never letting it dim  their own light--thus in many aMsas both of them matched eath other--as anyonya 
 as they say. Subtle humour, in the saulabhyaM (ease) of conversing with anyone  with open heart, subtly making fun of the other and at the same time making fun of the self  too--even in these things both of them have remained similar!

A kind of similarity even in how if Kannadam was the mother tongue of the Kanchi MaTha Thalaivar in  Tamilnadu, Telegu was the mother tongue of the Sringeri MaTha Thalaivar in Kannada Nadu!

Pages 85-88

In sthUlam, the similiarity is in their both taking up renunciation and pIThAdhipatyam 
on just the guru saMkalpam without getting guru mukha upadesham! Although it was not 
so for them personally, they realized that a sthUla guru is a must for the people in the 
world and they remained similar in stressing it in their teachings.

But then in the drama of Parashakti if two mukhya pAtras (chief actors) remained identical in mould, will it be alright for that Rasika sporting many different kinds of rasas? Therefore she played, causing differences between the two in some aMsas. In one sense that difference itself remained as the contrasting background that elevated the similarity and showcased the principle of unity in diversity.

(If we take the 'differences among them' as to mean 'differences of mind between them', there could be no greater apachAram, aparadham than that. We shall come to this subject later on.)

Although they both remained identical in their inner depths, what is visible to the people of the outer world are only their external activities? In this, between the two Chandrasekharas, a large, emphatic difference was visible. What is that? Kanchi Chandrasekhara, though an Atma jnAniwas one who dedicated his life and forumulated different plans, exercising keen attention to the affairs of the external world, in an effort to redirect them in shAstrIya ways. Whereas Sringeri Chandrasekhara, though he was also keen in turning the world into shAstrIya ways, mostly remained in ekAntam, getting immersed in his AtmAnubhavas and the eka anubhUti that was the end of it all.

Another difference that can be termed as an upAngam of this one. Although Bharati SwamigaL was capable of excellence in any field if he applied his mind to it, he not only did not like to direct his knowledge to areas beyond the Atma-samaya-dharma shAstras, but also did not specially encourage his disciples in the research in such other areas of knowledge. Even as related to the religion, he refused to give his support to historical and literary debates that sought to determine things with a finality. If questions such as in what period did Sankara live, if such and such books were really composed by him, if Vidyaranya had two gurus arose, he would at once cut the knot saying, "Is there any sambandham between our getting Atma-abhivRuddhi and finding out what is the truth in these matters?"

Whereas Kanchi PeriyavargaL was one who would dive deep in all the areas of knowledge including modern science and bring up a variety of pearls, corals, conches and oyster-shells and distribute them. Since it is his opinion that if one researches deep in any field with keen involvement to find the Truth, that will sharpen the knowledge, purify it and take the person to AnmIkam that makes one seek the One Truth, he encourages research and discussion in many fields.

The world criticised about these things in different ways. Some said that only Kanchiyaar does the duty of a Jagadguru in all fairness. Some said that if it is a question of anubhUtimAn, jIvanmukta it was only Sringeriyaar. Thinking that it is only Kanchiyaar who gets all the prAbalya as Jagadguru, there were even some who tried to turn Sringeriyaar in that way and lost! There were people who called him Pitthar, during the days when he roamed about, excited with the picchu (bile, madness) of jnAnam and soaked in the picchu of bhakti in states that the world could not understand. Whereas those two people were never bothered by these talks and beautifully acted the role that Parashakti had given them! One of them was like the lotus flower that always sets its sight on the sky and lives--and remained an example for the ArAtha shakti (tireless energy) of the Anma vEtkai (spiritual search) that raises above all the worldly responsibilities. The other one was a proof for the water that stays on the lotusleaf--and gave an example for the anavarata nishkAmya karmayoga shakti (ceaseless power of Nishkamya 
Karma Yoga, in whose practice there is no loss of effort, no harm and no transgression) that a uttama jnAni performs, taking care of the worldly welfare too.

Pages 88-92

Both the Chandrasekharas came up from families that had close connection with their related 

Some of the earlier title holders of Kanchi MaTham are the kula pUrvikas of Maha PeriyavAL. 
His pAttanAr (grandfather) worked as Manager of Kanchi SriMaTham for many years and rendered 
valuable service.

Bharati SwamigaL's pAttanAr, tagappanAr (grandfather, father) were both pundits in the 
Sringeri MaTham. Since the names of the two Acharyas before him were Narasimha Bharathi and 
Sacchidananda Sivabhinava Narasimha Bharathi, his own name was chosen as Narasimha. It may be said 
that he was given in svIkAram to the MaTham the moment he was born. He was the fourteenth 
child of his parents. His parents, suffering from the death of all the earlier thirteen children in 
the infants' bAlya paruvam (childhood) itself, decided that at least this child should be 
left untouched by their misfortune, so they gave the child to Agent Srikanta SastrigaL, who was a 
chief official of that MaTham, for bringing up the child. Therefore, from the ati bAlyam 
(earliest times of childhood) itself, that sage came under the tirukkaN pAlippu (eye of care) 
of the earlier pIThAdhipati Sri Sivabhinava Narasimha SwamigaL.

After Narasimhan studied in the general school of education for a few years where scored as the 
first ranking pupil, on the orders of the pUrvAchArya a full stop was put to his further 
worldly education, and he was admitted to the MaTham's PaThashAla. After he got trained well in our 
mata shAstras (religious scriptures), he learned more elaborately and deeply from the 
pandita simhas of the VidyashAla of the Bangalore MaTham and became a vidvAn. It was 
then in 1912 that he was appointed as the successor of the PiTham. Even when he was twenty years 
old, he was well versed in the shAstra tattvas and samayAnuShTAnas and also had 
maturity in the bhakti, jnAna vairAgya.

The father of bAlan Swaminathan who later became Kanchi Chandrasekhara, was not a 
vaidika, but one who undertook the responsibility of a laukika udyogam. Therefore, 
this sage was not brought up in visheSha shAstrIya (especially religious) circumstances. 
Where he studied in were also laukika schools like everyone of us. Of course, there was a 
time when he was around twelve, he ran away without the knowledge of his householders to the earlier 
Kanchi pIThAdhipati, having received the sage's asAdhAraNa aruL nokku (unusal glance 
of grace) and attracted towards him. It is believed that it was then that the pUrvAchArya 
willed him as his successor. Still, that Acharya attaining Maha Nirvana the very next year, only a 
youth named Lakshmi Narasimhan (he was the son of Swaminathan's mother's elder sister), who was 
involved in kaingaryam (service) in SriMaTham and doing his pUrNa rgveda adhyayanam 
there, received the next pontiff title. In Parashakti's lIlA of surprises, even this new 
successor following his Gurunathar's path (to Nirvana) within a single week, so young and tender 
Swaminathan happened to have the ArohaNam in the AchAryattavisu (ascesion to the seat 
of Acharya). That young and tender who was not acquainted with any Veda or Shastras, quickly passing 
into the pariNAmam as veda pazham, shAstrak kani (the fruit of Vedas and Shastras) is 
pratyakSha uNmai (visible truth) more vinoda (entertaining) than a katha 

Both the Chandrasekharas obtained their Ashrama svIkAram without any sthUla guru 
, without being present near the earlier pIThAdhipati during that sage's antima 
, only coming in the scene later. What to say of how they both attained Atma 
 which is the parama pauruShArtha, and secured all the traditions as 
maThAdhipati, showing wonderful administrative capabilities, and that without the guru's 
kAppu (protection) in sthUlam! Since there was no guru's kAppu in 
SthUlam, they keenly observed themselves and everything else with additional attention and 
regulated their selves. It is doubtful that the pUrNa sharanAgati they did for the sUkShma 
tiru aruL
 (subtle holy grace) to course their selves and give pAlippu (protection), a 
shiShya could do to his sthUla guru!

If Kanchi Chandrasekhara, after he ascended to the PiTham passed into a pariNAmam apt to the 
circumstances that were totally different, there is also an adhisayam (excellence) in the 
case of Sringeri Chandrasekara. Sringeri SriMaTham at that time was powerful with its flags in 
rAjangam. The two earlier Acharyas as gaMbhIra puruShAs had made the kIrti 
(fame) of the MaTham throughout Bharata Desham. Was it not an adhisayam that one who came to 
own the title in the circumstances of a MaTham that ruled with excellence,--a rule that was given 
the very name 'durbar',--reduced that jvalitam adhama pakSham (blazing to the barest minimum) 
and mostly shrank himself into an ekAnta uL vAzhvu (inner life of solitude)! We should notice 
it that though he had apAra upadesha AtRal (excellent teaching power) and administrative 
capabilities, he shrank in size and away from the publicity.

The lIlA of the mElidam (Parashakti) that shaped Kanchi Chandrasekhara as the 
shakti tEkkam (reservoir of power) to do the dharma prachAram for the other sage also, 
is the lIlA!

Both are asAdharaNa vyaktis. But then the shishya jana belonging to both are only 
sAdharaNa vyaktis? That is why as referred to earlier, they criticised in different ways in 
mutual differences of opinions. Still, due to the divya prema shakti of both sages, those who 
differed were much less in the population count. Only those who worshipped both the mahAn
with identical bhakti were more. There were many learned and distinguished people who adored 
them both as the two eyes of Sanatana Dharma and spoke of it to the others. For example, Tediyur 
ShastrigaL, Ananta Krishna ShastrigaL, and A.V.Gopalacharyar who were learned in the scriptures, and 
K.S.Ramaswamy ShastrigaL, K.Balasubramanya Aiyar, and Justice Chandrasekharaiyar who were 
pramukhas (honourables), have advised the world of Astikas to do puja and 
bhUShA to both these mahAns without any sort of partiality.

Pages 95-98

(The narrators told me that) Sringeri PeriyavargaL would give all honours to the Kanchi MaTha 
pratinidhis, send them along with a pratinidhi of his own MaTham to the other MaThams 
under their support, and secure the consent and cooperation of those MaThadhipatis for the schemes 
devised by the Kanchi pIThAdhipati.

When these people come back to Maha PeriyavAL, even as he was himself shining with tejas as 
divya mUrti, he would say, "Such a tejasvi have you seen anywhere? So much tapas, 
, and a lofty pAramparyam--pUrvAshrama pAramparyam, ashrama pAramparyam 
both!" (He had referred to the greatness of Sringeri PeriyavargaL's pUrvAshrama pitA, 
 and the greatness of the preceding Acharyas of the MaTham.)

If the pratinidhis convey Sringeri PeriyavargaL's krutajnatai (gratitude) to Maha 
PeriyavAL, he would immediately say, "Leaving us to the kAryams is he spending his time as a 
vRuddhaH (old man)? He is going on only in niShTa? A jnAni's radiation would on 
its own be doing good to the whole world. Therefore only we should express our krutajnatai to 

There are many examples that right from the beginning both the PeriyavargaL had established a 
unifying approach to their own aNukka bhaktas (close devotees).

In 1914, Maha PeriyavargaL started a publication named Arya Dharmam as the magazine of Kanchi 
SriMaTham. In the same way, the Vani Vilas Press run in Srirangam run by T.K.Balasubramaya Aiyar, 
who was an atyanta adiyAr (staunch devotee) of Sringeri SriMaTham and had obtained the title 
gurubhakta shikhAmaNi from that Acharyar, and the Hindu Message periodical published 
in that press, were both dedicated to the works of that MaTham. That same T.K.B. was also in the 
editorial board of Arya Dharmam. He would immediately carry out through his press whatever 
printing work ordered by Maha PeriyavAL. He had written page after page in the Hindu 
, in adoration of the tATangakah pratiSTA done by Kanchi Periyavar in 1922 to 
Goddess Akhilandeswari--it is remarkable that he did this in spite of the incidents that arose in 
the previous century due to this very subject of tATangakah pratiSTA, which resulted in 
bitterness of mind between the devotees of the two MaThams.

The elders of those days would narrate the éclat with which in 1919, the mahAjana (people) of 
Veppatthur conducted the Navaratri Puja of Kanchi PeriyavAL. But then in the following issue of 
Arya Dharmam, Maha PeriyavAL did not allow any essay to be published about these 
festivities. Instead, he ordered a seven-page essay to be published on the Navaratri festival 
conducted in Sringeri by Bharathi SwamigaL.

"In the essay written by M.N.Subramanya Sastry for the fourth issue of Arya Dharmam in the 
dundubhi year (1922), he had adored how Kanchi PeriyavAL for the last four years had gone to 
villages, giving a new lease of life to Vedic dharma. Without stopping there, indirectly--still in a 
way that the reader's can easily guess--and without mentioning the name, he had also written that 
Sringeri PeriyavargaL did not "seem to work for the world" in this way and certain other things in 
the same rIti (manner). The editor asked PeriyavAL if he could keep the portions about 
PeriyavAL's work, remove the different opinion about the other sage and publish the essay.

PeriyavAL's reply made him stagger. PeriyavAL said that it would be shlAghyam to remove the 
portions relating to his work and publish the different opinion about the other sage!

To the editor who stood dumbfounded wondering if it was PeriyavAL who was talking, our Gurunathar 
continued with a smile: "If this man is the only one who has expressed his abhiprAyam in 
writing, there are many who have the same abhiprAyam in their mind. Therefore, we should 
publish that abhiprAya and also give our reply to it."

Not knowing what the reply could be or how he would include it, the editor submitted the essay for 
the perusal of AcharyaaL himself.

As he ran his eyes over the essay, PeriyavAL chose the passage, "In this manner (the manner 
PeriyavAL was doing it) if every MaThAdhipati set out and started doing work in the field, our 
reformist elders would fly like pieces of cotton, their presence being felt no longer." After this 
indirect criticism, PeriyavAL himself added the lines, "Since there was no such Ishvara 
sammadam, they continue to stay in niShTa."

Two points of excellence are there in this addition. One is pointing out that no one should be 
blamed for what happened due to Ishvara saMkalpam which is beyond human plans and human 
knowledge. The second is emphasizing that the inaction of the one who was criticised was not due to 
laziness or unskillfulness, only due to the niShTa, which is past all actions.

There were devotees who earnestly appealed to Bharathi SwamigaL that he should also like Maha 
PeriyavAL do many saMchAra, clear saMdehas and devise schemes. Listen to the reply he 
gave to those people: "Myself and Kanchi pIThAdhipatigaL are the two pratinidhis of 
Sri Sankara Bhagavadpada in the current time. Rest assured that all the good things he does are also 
done by me together with him. In the same way, know that the kIrti he receives also reaches 

[Reference: The essay, 'maThangaLin otRumai' ('The Unity of the MaThams') authored by 
K.Balasubramanya Aiyar in the Sri Kanchi Kamakoti Pradeepam issue dated 16.11.1965.]

Pages 99-103

Apart from what is done for the country, even for the anugraha to individuals, there are 
heartwarming incidents about which Bharathi SwamigaL has told that either of them doing it is for 
both of them. For example:

In 1927, when Maha PeriyavAL was camping in Pallavur near Palakkadu, T.M.Krishnaswamy Aiyar led a 
Tiruppugazh bhajan concert and pleased everyone. To match his initials T.M., PeriyavAL gave 
him the title 'Tiruppugazh Mani'! Aiyar from there went directly to Kovai (Coimbatore) and sang 
Tiruppugazh in the holy presence of Bharathi SwamigaL's. His companions told the sage about the 
title given by Maha PeriyavAL, seemingly expecting that the Sringeri sage would also give a title. 
But then Bharathi SwamigaL said, "Keep that title as given by both of us together!"

To Tediyur ShastrigaL he had asked on one occasion in a very natural way, "If 'they' do something it 
is like our doing it, isn't it?"

Before going to Palakkadu, Maha PeriyavAL also had visited Kovai. The place he camped there was 
only in the Sringeri MaTham there.

In 1925, in the areas of Ramanathapuram district, both the PeriyavargaL were camping very near each 
other. While Maha PeriyavAL observed his chAturmAsya vratam for two months in Ilayattankudi, 
in Kunrathur, within ten kilometers, Bharathi SwamigaL observed that fast. Without an iota of 
difference, Vidvans would visit both the MaThams and do shAstrArtha vichAram. Both the 
SwamigaL from them would inquire parasparam about the other's vyAkhyAnams and greatly 
appreciate them.

After finishing his camp in Pallatthur when Bharathi SwamigaL started to leave, it came to be known 
that Maha PeriyavAL was to come there immediately after his departure. The 'vIra bhaktAs' 
who keep boundaries talked with the implication as to how can Kanchi pIThAdhipatigaL come on 
pattaNa bhavani in kolAhalam there. Whereas Bharathi SwamigaL sported a 
mandahAsam (smile) and said, "aVALukku nannA mariyAdai paNNi bhavani nadatthungo 
(conduct their procession well with all honours to 'them'). To carry 'them' on the palanquin in the 
procession, we propose to send our own bhoyi (bhogi, palanquin carrier)s", and obliged 
by sending his carriers! With the Sringeri kiMkaras (servants) carrying it, Kamakoti 
pIThAdhipatigaL coming on the sivigai (palanquin) is an incident pouring sweetness 
like honey, right?

Saying, "I have on no other occasion seen PeriyavAL in such distress groaning hAng, hAng", 
Kanchi MaTha Manager Visvanathaiyar would recollect an incident. He said it was one of the occasions 
when Bharathi SwamigaL as an avadhUta remained in atIta avasthas (extreme states) of 
dancing, singing, crying and laughing out. An adiyAr referred about it to Maha SwamigaL 
saying, "It is said that he was suffering from paitthiyam (madness)!" That was all! As if a 
nArAsam (an iron probe) entered his ear, PeriyavAL cried, "Shiva ShivA! Shiva ShivA!", 
almost screaming the words, and as never before expressed his distress in strong words! "ENDA, 
paitthiyam enna, sariyAyirukkiRatu ennannu nItAn sakalamum kaNDuTTiyo? ennamADA solluve, andha 
 (Hey, you know everything as to what is being mad and what is being normal? How can 
you utter that word!)". After verbally expressing his distress for a long time, he finally told the 
devotee, "Go to the Sannidhi and seek the pardon of Lord ChandraMauleesvara!"

Maha PeriyavAL in 1935, gave his blessing stance to Calcutta and conducted the Navaratri worship. 
In the administrative committee of that festival was a parama bhakta of Sringeri PiTham, 
named Madireshvara Sarma. He did his seva in the pujas for the first four days--until the day 
of Chaturti--but beyond that it did not suit him. As the thought, 'Whatever it is, will this be like 
the puja our Sringeri AcharyaaL does in our Sringeri pattati?' occurred to him, he felt 
restless and returned to Sringeri, travelling a distance of a thousand kAvatam.

But then Bharathi SwamigaL looked at him with an unusual sternness. "It is a mahA thappu 
(great mistake)--your leaving the puja in the middle and coming over here, entertaining an opinion 
of discord that we both are different. kShaNamkUda inge niRkAteyum! pOm angeye! (Don't stand 
here even for a moment! Go there forthwith!)", he said with nirtatkShaNyam (sternness).

Since Sarma was a pakvi he learned his lesson; and obtained bhAvanA shuddhi.

In those days when today's travel facilities were not available, somehow Sarma managed to reach 
Calcutta on the day of Vijaya Dashami and fell at Maha PeriyavAL's feet. He told the sage about 
what Bharathi SwamigaL told him, and informed that his bheda eNNam (thoughts of difference) 
was broken. Laughing in Ananda, Maha PeriyavAL gave him the Navaratri prasAdams.

1966 February. Maha PeriyavAL was in camp in Mylai (Mylapore). K.Chandrasekharan was talking to 
PeriyavAL expressing his sadness about some book or essay or letter written by R.Krishnaswamy Aiyar 
in AkShepam about SriMaTham.

Whereas PeriyavAL appreciated the clarity of that report of criticism on SriMaTham, saying, 
"enna clarity pArtthiyo? (what a clarity, you saw it?)"! I wondered at the display of the 
samadharshanam of a jnAni.

Looking at me PeriyavAL asked, "Do you follow these--displaying an abhinayam of one engaged 
in kusti (wrestling)--samAcharams?"

"I don't do it taking interest to follow up such things. By reading what Polagam SastrigaL is 
writing in the Pradeepam, I come to know something of the details. It is really sad", I said.

"Is it only sad? You get kO(pa)m (anger) on Krishnaswamy Aiyar--is it not so?", PeriyavAL 
'probed' me.

It became nidarshanam to me by his uttering the word kOpam as kOm in the 
lisping of a child, how chidlike all these fights and debates are!

In vAstavam (reality) I had anger on that man--why make the bhedams (differences) 
among the Astikas (faithfuls) grow by directing their attention on matters that do not offer 
even an iota of help towards Atmikam. The same abhiprAyamadiyEn had about the 
'vIra's on the side of Kanchi MaTham.

Feeling shy to tell that Satva Murti, 'Yes, I get only anger', I kept silent.

PeriyavAL himself talked, the child and the deity becoming one: "To my Ayus paryantam these 
fights are not going to be over; it does not seem to me that I can mediate and pacify them. 
Therefore there is no prayojana for you to agitate your mind on this subject. What I need now 
is that the anger you have towards Krishnaswamy Aiyar should be exhausted. Will you do a 
kAryam? He has written a book, The Saint of Sringeri. As the first thing, you buy and 
read it. What, will you read it?"

After such a direction that cannot be defied, can I remain without obeying it?

Thus under the puNyam of K.Chandrasekharan, Kanchi Chandrasekhara involved me in that another 
Chandrasekhara who is the Saint of Sringeri.

After reading that wonderfully written book, my kOm towards that author was gone completely! 
I got the clarity that if a Periyavar with such guru bhakti, shAstrabhimAnam, vidvat and 
 is indulging himself in controversial subjects, it is only the kaivarisai 
(sleight of hand) of that Maha Amma Maha Maya.

Pages 103-106 (concluding part)

With that on one side, bhakti grew in me towards the author of the book. Also an amazement in 
many places that I was reading only about Kanchi PeriyavAL.

Later when I had darshan of PeriyavAL, I told him that my 'kOm' was gone. I ventured to say 
in addition, "It seemed to me that I was reading only about PeriyavAL."

To think of what that 'child-God' spoke then, the heart melts even now. He asked me:

அப்படியா தோணித்து? ஒங்கிட்ட அந்தப் புஸ்தகம் படிக்கச் சொல்லிவிட்டு நான் பயந்-துண்டு இருந்தேன். படிச்சுட்டு, ’ப்ரத்யாகாத்மாவிலேயே ஸதாவும் த்ருஶ்டியாயிருக்கிற இவரும் ஸ்வாமிகள்., under the sun 
ஒரு விஶயம் பாக்கியில்லாம எல்லாத்தையும் ஒழக்கால் அளந்துண்டிருக்கிற அந்தப் பராக்குச் சாமியாரும் ஸ்வாமிகளா’-ன்னு நெனச்சுடப் போறயேன்னு பயந்-துண்டு இருந்தேன். என்னப் பத்திப் படிக்கிறாப்பலயா ஒனக்குத் தோணித்து?"

appaDiyA tONittu? o~gkiTTa a~ndap puStakam paDikkach cholliviTTu ~nAn bhaya~n-duNDu iru~ntEn. 
paDichchuTTu, 'pratyAgAtmAvilEyE SadAvum dhrushTiyAyirukkiRa ivarum SwAmigaL. ... oru vishayam 
bAkkiyillAma ellAttaiyum ozhakkAl aLa~nduNDirukkiRa a~ndap parAkkuch chAmiyArum SwAmigaLA'-nnu 
~nenachchuDap pORayEnnu bhaya~n-duNDu iru~ntEn. ennap pattip paDikkiRAppalayA onakkut tONittu?"

"Did that seem so? I remained apprehensive after asking you to read that book. I was apprehensive 
that reading it you might be thinking, 'this man who always has his sight on the Universal Self is 
indeed the Saint; whereas the other who keeps measuring with a measure everything under the sun 
without exception,--that heedless sage is also a Saint'*. Did it seem to you that it was like 
reading about me?"

'aDi kAmAkShI! enna vEsham kATTi viLaiyADukiRAyaDi? (Hey Kamakshi! What appearances you 
display in your play of sport?)'--only this thought, accompanied by filling up of tears in the eyes 
rose in me.

Thoughts spread out on the subject of pratyangmukha swAmigaL and parAkkuch chAmiyAr
He is Bharathi. This man is Sarasvati. Bharathi is that Goddess who takes delight in light. That 
light of knowledge won't waver, won't move. It is the delight of staying merged in AtmA. That 
was how Bharathi SwamigaL remained focussed inward in concentration. Saras-vati is that Goddess who 
takes water bodies for her permanent residence. A water body is after all there to spread out and 
course in all the four directions and nourish the payir crops and uyir (life)? In the 
same way, Sarasvati SwamigaL does his pravesha (enter) in many fields of knowledge, brings 
out his pravAham (flow) in them and feeds knowledge to people in different areas of life.

Since I felt shy to say this to PeriyavAL, I sent it to him in the form of a letter.

The bext time on a morning when I sent to have PeriyavAL's darshan, I was filled with the thought 
of what he would say to my letter.

PeriyavAL was not in the camp. I came to know that he had gone to the surrounding areas on his 
vijayam (visit). I waited eagerly for his return.

Time was running. Midday came up. I had the constraint to return to my office, with no possibility 
of staying any longer.

PeriyavAL came back at the right time. Perhaps he had to suffer vizhuppu (ceremonial 
impurity) where he went, so he went straight to the basement of the well.

The kiMkara (assistant) knotted the water pot with a rope and lowered it in the well.

"See if the midday sun is visible in the well!", PeriyavAL told him.


PeriyavAL looked at me. "You get anything?"

In Advaita Shastra there are two principles. One of them is that like a single sun reflecting in 
many drops of water, the same eka chaitanyam (single Consciousness) reflects in the 
antaHkaraNa of countless Jivas--known as prati-bimba vAdham. People who consider the 
other principle say that to refer to what is immanent in all the Jivas as reflection is not correct. 
They would give an analogy for that too. As only the infinite AkAsha (space) remains inside 
all the empty water pots; when the water pot is lowered into the well, only that same water fills it 
up. This principle is known as avachcheda vAdham.

Here the sun's prati-bimbam (reflected image) in the well; the kiMkara lowers the pot 
into the well.

Getting a spark I said, "I see the dRSTAnta (example) here for both the prati-bimba 
 and avachcheda vAdham."

PeriyavAL nodded his head in the negative. He looked at the well. He looked at the sun. Looking at 
me keenly, "saraslE pAr (Look in the water)!" he said. And went straight to have his 
snAnam (bath).

I was thrilled. I felt that inside the karuNa-saras called Maha PeriyavAL, displaying his 
prati-bimbam and shining as the jnAna-bhAnu (sun of knowledge) is Bharathi SwamigaL.

The other half--that within that jnAna jyoti is there this saras (flow) of 
compassion--automatically came up in mind.

Yes, both the Chandrasekharas are as Poigaiyar sang on SankaraNarayana mUrtam:

இருவரங் கத்தால் திரிவரே லும்‍ஒருவன் 
ஒருவன்‍அங் கத்தென்றும் உளன்!

iruvara~g kattAl tirivarE lum^oruvan
oruvan^a~g kattenRum uLan!

Although he wanders in two forms, within each is the other!

No comments:

Post a Comment