Author: Vidwan Sri Undaru Srinivasa Murthy
Translation: Hariprasad Nellitheertha
pujyAya rAghavEndrAya satya dharma ratAya cha |
bhajatAM kalpavrukshAya namatAM kAmadhEnavE ||
This is a famous shlOka that eulogizes sri rAghavEndra tIrtha. A shlOka that is taught first even to a two year old toddler. An easy, simple and meaningful shlOka. It is a protective mantra as well. There have been innumerable people who have obtained the siddhi of this shlOka through purascharaNa and other methods.
Some insincere folks, however, have raised an objection. They claim that this shlOka is not proper. They say that this shlOka does not conform to the norms of shAstra. What is their objection?
They say that the shlOka does not have any verb. They insist that the shlOka should have had a word such as namaH (doing namaskAra) or another similar verb. “If a shlOka employs only adjectives, and describes sri rAghavEndra tIrtha with such adjectives, and ends without ‘performing’ a salutation to him with a verb, isn’t it wrong?” ask these deceivers. Is it really a mistake if a shlOka contains only adjectives, but no verbs? Such questions have been taunting us since a while now. The following is an attempt to answer such critics within the parameters of shAstra itself. This objection is clearly insincere. The answer to this has emerged in the ‘tattvOdyOta TIka’.
sri madhwAchArya has performed the mangalAcharaNa of his tattvOdyOta in the following way:
sarvatrAkhilasacchaktiH svatantraH ashEshadarshanaH |
nityAtAdrushachicchEtyayantEShTO nO ramApatiH ||
There is no association of an activity (verb) in this. A verb-less sentence is non-prescriptive. It does not stand as a valid sentence. Can we say so?
No! Can we say that if we ourselves supplement it with a verb, then it becomes prescriptive? We cannot say so. Because we will then have to supplement words such as janayati, prINAti, avyAt and so on. Since there are numerous verbs, a doubt will arise as to which word should be used. No decision can then be made (this is the conclusion of sri vijayEndra tIrtha in the gUDabhAva prakAsha). After raising so many of these objections, sri jayatIrtha, the champion critic, has resolved the stalemate with excellent logic. He says:
‘dEvatAstutimAtraparatvAdasya shlOkasya kriyAsambandhAbhAvO na dOShAya’
sri madhwa, while praising the Lord, has just used the word ‘sarvatrAkhila’ without using any action-indicating word. This however will not lead to any defect and is appropriate. So says sri jayatIrtha.
The rule is that an action verb is not needed in a sentence when a devata is being praised. A sentence is fully valid, when praising devatas, even if no verb is part of the same. Such is the decision of sri jayatIrtha.
sri vijayEndra tIrtha highlights another factor in his gUDabhAvaprakAshikA tattvOdyOtaTIka TippaNi as follows:
We have seen shlOkas such as ‘vishwam vishNurvashaTkArO….” in which paramatma is praised without the use of any verbs. The sahasranAma does not say ‘vishwAya namaH, bhUtAtmaNe namaH…’ We, however, find it appropriate to supplement each word with a ‘namaH’ and pray through it.
It is established by experience that the words such as ‘vishwa, vishNu, etc’ are instructive even without a verb.
The author of dvaitadyumaNi says the following:
‘drushyatE hi vishwaM vishnuH ityAdEH kriyAvAchakapadasamabhivyAhArAbhAvE api bOdhakatvamiti bhAvaH’
‘nyUnatA dOShAya nEtyartha’ – it (lack of a verb) does not lead to the defect of deficiency. The explanation to this sentence, given by the famous commentator sri vEdEsha tIrtha of the uttarAdi matha, also supports this explanation.
‘stutimAtratvasya tu vishwam vishNurvashaTkAraH ityAdAviva kriyAsambandhA bhAvEpyupapannatvAditi hrudayaM’ – so says sri vijayEndra tIrtha. ‘stutyAdiparasyApi natu abOdhakatvaM’ – a sentence that praises does not suffer from the defect of being non-instructive when there is no verb.
Coming to the present topic, there arises no problem if we interpret the rAyara shlOka as ‘One who is highly esteemed; one who is always engaged in satya and dharma; one who is like a kalpavruksha to those who chant his name; one who is like the kAmadhEnu to those who pray to him; we offer our salutations to sri rAghavEndra’. The word ‘pUjyAya’ is indicative of praise to a devata. Who is this devata?
‘shankhukarNAkhyadEvastu brahmashApAccha bhUti’ – It is a devata named shankhukarNa who is residing at mantrAlaya as sri rAghavEndra tIrtha. This makes it clear that sri rAghavEndra is a devata. Therefore, when praising him, a devata, the absence of a kriyAada, a verb, does not bring about any defect in the shlOka. ‘kriyAsambandhAbhAvO na dOShAya’. This rule firmly establishes the lack of any defect in the universally well known ‘pUjyAya….’ shlOka. It also proves that the shlOka is not against shAstra.
sri appaNAchArya has composed this well-known shlOka out of an outpouring of devotion. Such a composition cannot be defective. If one insists on having a verb, a word such as ‘namaH’ or any other suitable word can be used and the meaning can be understood while chanting. Such a liberty cannot be considered a violation of rules.
No matter what the doubters say, truth can never be hidden. Come join hands – let us all chant the ‘pUjyAya …..dhEnavE’ shlOka. Let us remember our Guru who is full of great miracles and is an amsha of vAyu. Let us extol him who has seen Lord Hari. Let us join the path of mukti.
|| ಓಂ ಗುರು ರಾಘವೇಂದ್ರಾಯ ನಮಃ ||