About Perumal and THayar

1. srI:
srImathE rAmAnujAya nama:
Copyright © 2007-2008
All Rights Reserved
Oru Mithuname Uththesyam
Written by
Sri U Ve Prathivadi Bhayankaram Annangarachariar Swami
Abridged Translation by madhurakavi dAsan TCA Venkatesan
First Edition: 2007

2. srI: Oru Mithuname Uththesyam
srImathE rAmAnujAya nama: Ed.1
AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam
http://www.acharya.org
2
Oru Mithuname Uththesyam
1. The Divya Dampathis are called a 'mithunam' (a pair). In the many religions of this
world, it is unique to Srivaishnava Sampradhayam that we take refuge in the divine pair
of the Lord Narayana and His pirAtti Sridevi Nachchiyar.
The tattva trayam is chit, achit and Ishvara. In this, the chit refers to the chetanas. The
chetanas are set into three groups - baddhar, muktar and nityar. Those stuck in the ocean
of samsara are known as baddhas (samsaris) - that is, those who are unable to free
themselves from the timeless achit. Those who free themselves from the samsara are
called muktas. Those who never set foot in this samsaric world and are always with Him
in His divine abode (nitya vibhUti) and performing eternal service to Him are called
nityas or nityasUris.
2. In the chetana tattva made of baddhas, muktas and nityas, a group called mumukshus is
also acknowledged. Those who have the interest to be freed from the attachments of this
world are called mumukshus. Even though they are samsaris, their greatness is their
desire to be freed from samsara. Hence their special name called mumukshus. This
designation is shown in Upanishad statements such as "mumukshurvai sharanamaham
prapadhye".
Mumukshus have to know three Rahasyas - Thirumantram, Dvayam and Charama
Shlokam. Thiruvashtakshara mantram is known as Thirumantram. Dvaya mantram is
designated as Mantra Ratnam. It is also known as the rahasya that has to be constantly
remembered/repeated - anusandhana rahasyam. This name has been mentioned in
Acharya Hrudhayam, Third Prakaranam - "ivaRRukku manthra vidhyanusandhAnamAna
rahasyangaLOdE sErththi".
3. The Dvaya mantra is very special when compared with the other two rahasyas. There
are two important reasons for this. 1. In Thirumantra and Charama Shloka, there is no
talk about Piratti. In his Mumukshuppadi, when explaining the meaning of akAram, Pillai
Lokachariar says "rakshikkum pOdhu pirAtti sannidhi vENdugaiyAlE idhilE srI
sambandham anusandhEyam". Thus, it is gathered that there is no explicit reference to
Sridevi in Thirumantram. In Charama Shloka too, there is no mention of Thayar. In
Dvayam, there are two parts called Purva Kandam and Uththara Kandam. At the
beginning of both, the term that stands for Piratti "Sri" is present, which is special. 2. Just
as the mother's breast amongst all other body parts is most important to an infant, so too
are the divine feet of the Lord most important to prapannas. The mention of the Lord's
divine feet is present only in the Dvaya rahasya. This too is special about it. Thus, these
two specialities show the greatness of Dvaya mantra.
4. It was mentioned that at the beginning of both Purva Kanda and Uththara Kanda, the
term that stands for Piratti, Sri, is present. Why is it present at both these places? Does it
mean the same at both places or does it mean different things? Such questions naturally
may arise here.

3. srI: Oru Mithuname Uththesyam
srImathE rAmAnujAya nama: Ed.1
AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam
http://www.acharya.org
3
At both places, the term Sri does not occur independently. It joins with 'matup' and stands
as an adjective for Narayana. In the Purva Kanda, it occurs as 'Sriman Narayana' and in
the Uththara Kanda it occurs as 'Srimate Narayanaya'. The meaning of the Purva Kanda is
that 'I surrender at the divine feet of Lord Sriman Narayana who is always with Periya
Pirattiyar, who never leaves His divine chest ("agalakillEn iRaiyum enRu alarmEl
mangai uRai mArbA - Nammazhvar's Thiruvaymozhi)'. The meaning of the Uththara
Kanda is that 'I seek to gain all kinds of service to Sriman Narayana who is always with
Periya Pirattiyar. And that I should gain no connection to the happiness obtained in that
service.'
5. Let us fully analyse the meaning of the first kanda; then the meaning of the second
kanda; and then both together.
The meaning of Sri could be wealth etc, but here it is taken to be the name of Periya
Pirattiyar. "srIriti prathamam nAma lakshmyA:" is the pramANa for this. Amarakosam
states "lakshmI: padmAlayA padmA kamalA srIr haripriyA". Alavandar too said
"srIrityeva cha nAma te". There are six vyutpattis stated for the word 'Sri' giving rise to
six meanings. Of these, two vyutpattis and their two meanings are considered important.
"srIyate iti srI: ; srayate iti srI:" - the first one states that She is seeked by all; and the
second one states that She in turn seeks the Lord. The Lord is completely independent
and therefore He may get very angry with the chetanas seeing their sins. To prevent that
She has to mediate with Him on their behalf and make them join Him. This is how She is
seeked by the chetanas. In order to fulfill the chetanas pleas, She in turn seeks Him and
pleases Him. These are the meanings that are obtained from these two vyutpattis.
Therefore She is seeked first for Her role as a mediator. Even though "Sriman Narayana
charanau" is one phrase, our pUrvAchAryas separated that as the divine feet of Sri and
the divine feet of Narayana.
6. As pramANa for this, we will consider the Sri Suktis of Ramanuja, Bhattar and
Vedanta Desikan. Vedanta Desikan comments that Ramanuja's Sharanagati Gadyam is
the explanation for the Dvaya mantra. In the beginning of the Sharanagati Gadyam, a
surrender to Sri is given as a separate statement - "bhagavan nArAyaNabhimatAnurUpa
... asharaNayasharaNyAm ananya sharaNa: sharaNamaham prapadye". In the fifth
statement, the surrender to Narayana is given separately - "akhila heya pratyanIka ...
shrImannArAyaNa! tvatpAdAravinda yugaLam ... sharaNamaham prapadye". Here, the
first prapatti made to Sri is purushakAra prapatti and the second prapatti made to
Narayana is done as the means. This is not only clear in the source text, but is also made
openly clear by Vedanta Desikan in his Gadya Bashya.
7. Bhattar wrote Ashta Shloki as an explanation for the Rahasya Traya. In that work, in
the 5th and 6th shlokas - "netrutvam nitya yogam:" and "IshAnAm jagatAm" - it is
clearly shown that seeking Sri is for Her role as a mediator. In shloka 5, netrutvam is the
same as purushakAratvam. Here, Bhattar shows the meaning of the first part of Dvaya
mantra through "netrutvam nitya yogam samuchita guNajAtam tanukhyApanam

4. srI: Oru Mithuname Uththesyam
srImathE rAmAnujAya nama: Ed.1
AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam
http://www.acharya.org
4
chopAyam kartavya bhAgam" and the meaning of the second part of Dvayam starting
with "atha mithuna param prApyam". In the sixth shloka, through "IshAnAm
jagatAmadhIshadayitAm nityAnapetAm shriyam samshriyatya", he shows purushakAra
prapatti separately; through "anghrI harerAshraye" he shows the means separately; and
starting with "shriyA cha sahitAyAtmeshvarAyArthaye", he shows the prayer for service
to the divine couple together which is the meaning of the second part of Dvaya.
8. Therefore, surrendering to Piratti for mediation, surrendering to the Lord as the means
and seeking to perform service to them both are the three meanings that form the two
parts of the Dvaya mantra. Desikan too has shown these meanings only, in his Gadya
Bashya. Thus, the meanings seen by pUrvAchAryas for Dvaya is shown to be - in the
first part, seeking Her for mediation alone and in the second part service to Her and the
Lord together. Mediation is an irrefutable nature for Sri. Purvacharyas have shown the
statement "lakshmI: puruShakAratve nirdiShTA paramarShibhi:, mamApi cha matam
hyetat nAnyathA lakshaNam bhavet" for this. Desikan also shows that Her nature of
mediation has been explained by Bhattar in his Sri Guna Ratna Kosha shlokas such as
"piteva tvatpreyAn janani".
9. It is not right that purushakAratvam and upAyatvam are present together in the same
entity. PurushakAratvam is mediating on someone's behalf. Upayatvam is the power to
give something on their own. If a person is able to give something on their own, it is
inappropriate that they plead with someone else to make that happen. For example, a
person asks for and collects funds for good deeds such as building a temple or digging a
water tank or building a home for the poor. If a person has enough money, he gives all
the funds needed for that by himself. If he is not able to do that, then he recommends to
someone who can do that, to support the good causes. There are those who give some and
also recommend to others for the same. However, it is not right for someone to
recommend to another to give exactly what he is already giving. If Piratti has the power
to give moksha by Herself, then that power would be complete with Her. If that is the
case, why would She plead with the Lord who is capable of giving out punishment, when
She Herself is incapable of that? She is full of kindness only - what would stop Her from
just giving out moksha? Seeing that all Sastras soundly say that She mediates on behalf
of the chetanas, it is clear that She cannot be associated with being the means. Vedanta
Desikan was the leader amongst acharyas who asserted this. Let us see what he has said
in both Tamil and Sanskrit works.
10. The fourth statement in his thirteenth rahasya grantha called Rahasya Ratnavali:
"sarva svAminiyAy sarvEsvaranukku sEshamAy sahadharmachAriNiyAna periya
pirAttiyAr iththalaiyil vAthsalya adhisayaththAlum aththalaiyil vAllapya
adhisayaththAlum purushakAramAyk koNdu ijjIvargaLukkuth thanjcham AgiRAL". He
wrote a commentary for this rahasya himself which is called Rahasya Ratnavali
Hrudhayam, where he explains this sentence in detail. He concludes there with "pirAtti
sAparAdharAnavargaL ellArukkum sAsithAvAna sarvEsvaran abimatham koLLa
mAttAdhE thayangkAdhapadi avanudaiya pithruthva prayukthamAna UshmaLI
bAvaththai 'uchitai rUpAyairvismArya' ennumpadiyAkki ivargaLai avan thiruvadigaLilE
sErththu 'thannadiyAr thiRaththagaththuth thAmaraiyALAgilum sidhaguraikkumEl

5. srI: Oru Mithuname Uththesyam
srImathE rAmAnujAya nama: Ed.1
AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam
http://www.acharya.org
5
ennadiyAradhu seyyAr' ennumpadi paNNik koNdu 'bhaveyam sharaNam hi va:' enRu
aruLich seydhapadiyE ivargaLukku rakshA hEthu AgiRAL enRapadi". Here it is
important to note the use of the phrase "rakshA hEthu AgiRAL". From this it is shown
that the Lord is the one giving the protection (raksha) and She only becomes the cause of
that (hetu) through Her mediation.
11. There are many statements similar to this in Desikan's Tamil works. But we will stop
with this. Now, let us look at his Sanskrit works. In his Chatushloki, Alavandar says
"shreyo na hyaravinda lochanamana: kAntA prasAdAdrute samsrutyakshara vaiShNava
advasu nruNAm sambhAvyate karhichit". With this, it is said that without Sri
Mahalakshmi's favor, no good will come out of any path including that leading to
moksha. To show how Piratti's favor leads to good, Vedanta Desikan gives an
explanation in his Bashya. With the statement "moksha prade bhagavati mumukshUNAm
ghaTakatayA eSHA tiShTatIti sarvasammatam", he says that everyone agrees to the fact
that the Lord alone gives moksha and Piratti provides only the mediation.
12. Desikan has also said more. "paripUrNAnubhavapradAna samkalpastu bhagavata:
svasyaiva vA, sapatnIkasya veti yathApramANam bhavatu:, sarvathA vaiShNava
adhvashreya: pradatvamasyA ihochyamAnam na viruddham" - with this, he says, His
being the means is His decision to give the complete experience to the mumukshu; let the
pramANa show whether He makes that decision by Himself or along with Piratti; but
there is no way it does not fit that She helps with the means to moksha. Through this, it is
clear that Desikan will not even tolerate the question whether the decision to give moksha
is His alone or whether Piratti can do it also. The use of "yathApramANam bhavatu"
shows that he does not have any adverse opinion here.
13. In this prakaraNa, he also says "asti karmArhaphalate patyau krutya dvayam shriya:,
nigrahAvAraNam kAle samdhukshaNamanugrahe". The meaning of this is - the Lord is
the one who gives the fruits of the karmas; Piratti has two things to do: if He is going to
punish, then She prevents that through appropriate means; if He is going to show
kindness, then She makes that grow even further.
14. Even though Vedanta Desika, who is Kavitarkika Kesari, has made this so clear, there
are some who either are confused that Piratti too can be the means or even when their
confusion is removed, due to old habits, keep writing "mithunamE upAyam". Not
stopping at that, they also said that it is this idea that made an acharya write "upAya
vELaiyOdu bhOga vELaiyOdu vAsiyaRa oru mithunamE uththEsyam".
15. It becomes our duty to explain the truth to those who don't understand it. The divya
sUkti "AshrayaNa vELaiyOdu bhOga vELaiyOdu vAsiyaRa oru mithunamE uththEsyam
ennumidam solliRRAyiRRu" is present in Idu 36000padi Mahapravesham. The phrase
used here is 'AshrayaNa vELai' and not 'upAya vELai'. It has already been made clear in
the passages above, how the divine couple are seeked during the time of surrender and
how they are seeked during the time of service. Vedanta Desikan's divine words have
shown these very clearly. During the time of surrender, it is appropriate that She is
seeked - not as the means but as the one who will mediate - where is the confusion here?

6. srI: Oru Mithuname Uththesyam
srImathE rAmAnujAya nama: Ed.1
AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam
http://www.acharya.org
6
16. Just as the divine couple are the target for service as said in the second part of
Dvayam, where is the issue in saying that they are the target when being seeked as well,
as said in the first part. However, there is a difference. Seeking the Lord is done with Him
as the means. Seeking Sri is done with Her as the mediator. This difference has been
shown clearly by all acharyas including Desikan. To evade all that and to incorrectly use
the Sri Sukti of Idu is unfair.
The rest of the book has some additional comments and points out errors in certain works
of his time.
Azhvar Emberumanar Jeeyar Thiruvadigale Sharanam