Once Sri Sri Chandrasekara Bharathi talked about the avatArAs.
The devas and the asurAs were born to different mothers from the same father. Knowing that their nature and mental make up were different. It was decided that they will stay far away from each other as possible
2/ the devAs in the devalokAs and the asurAs in asuraloka. Except when an odd asura coveted and occupied devaloka - in the beginning of the kalpa this separation was the norm. In the treta yuga when the avatArA of sri rAmacandra mUrthy happened the devAs lived in Ayodhya and
3/ kiSkinda and the asurAs in Lanka and daNdakAraNya. That is instead of two different worlds they existed in earth in different places. Even here unless the asurAs I haughtiness tried to conquer the world or if devAs entered their domain such as daNdakAraNya to perform penance
4/ strife was rare. In dwApara during kRuSNa avatAra the asurAs or devatAs were found in the same family. kRuSNas own maternal uncle was an asura. One aunt's (cousin sister from the paternal side) son SiSupAla was an asura whe another's children the Pandavas were devas. The
5/ pAndavAs paternal cousins were asurAs. In this case there was strife among them from birth. There was constant conflict with very little times of peace because of their nature. This ultimately led to the mahAbharata war and the destruction of the clan. In kali the devAs and
6/ asurAs are not content in being in different worlds or different places or even within the same family. Both parties now prefer to live in the same body. In these days it is difficult to say if a person is deivic or asuraic. He appears like a devA sometime and the next moment
7/ turns into an asura. If in some aspects he behaves like a devA in others he behaves like an asurA. Because of the admixture of these guNas his life is one of constant conflict. There is some evil in the good he does and some good in the evil he does.
When the devAs and asurA
8/ s were in different worlds the Lord took it upon himself to protect the devAs alone. When separated in the same world he fought the asurAs along with the vAnarAs (devas incarnate). When they appeared in the same family he listened to what each wanted and based on their wishes
9/ stayed with the pAndavAs and advised them but he only remained a witness to the war. In these when devAs and asurAs reside in the same person no one thinks of God. He therefore remains a witness. But it is his authority that determines the outcome of war and confers the
10/10 the fruit of the action He therefore stays inside of us observing passively without interfering in the conflicts inside of us.
One day an old man approached Sri Sri Chandrashekara Bharathi. He enquired from the visitor which village from which he had come and learning that he said you are lucky to have been born in the village of the ganapATi who correct Sri vidyAraNya. (the name of the village and the
are lost) Why would the AcArya remember a ganapAti from an obscure village? And he corrected vidyAraNya? When asked SSCB replied: It is well known that Sri vidyAranya was an expert in the vedAs and SastrAs. Even then when he wrote a book, before he released it for propogation he
he would call mahAvidwans to review them. Only after their approval he would allow the books to be released. He wrote a treatise on the sri rudra and read it out to the experts assembled. His explanation for harikeSAya namah: was hari + ka + eeSa hari - viSNu ka - brahma and eeSa
The Sringeri AcArya sri abhinava vidyAtiurtha was on a Vijaya yAtra. The village of madanandapuram was hopeful. The last time a Sringeri AcArya had visited was 50 years ago. Representatives from the village went several times and requested the AcArya. They were told it will
happen. Also in that village a yati who in his pUrvASrama was the teacher of the AcArya Sri Bashyam Swamigal. The AcArya came. He was received with pUrNa kumbha veda ghoSa and carried golden palanquin. It was summer and not a cloud in the sky. As they neared the tirtha vinAyaga
temple it poured. The palanquin was set down and the AcArya was escorted inside Sri bASyam swAmigaLs Ashrama. To the bewildered BS who was standing there with a pUrNa kumbha the sringeri jagadguru said Lets go inside. There he removed the crown and paraphernalia adorning him and
Shri Chandrasekara Bharati was sojourning in a town.one morning he was giving teertha Prasada. There was a commotion. A woman with a child was shouting that the chain around her infants neck is missing. Others consoled her and asked her to calm down and receive the
the teertha. When her turn came the Acharya signalled her to step aside next to him. Even more distraught she stood bewildered next to him. As the line progressed an old lady came and extended her hand. The Acharya said in a low voice to her "Give it back". She asked "what?" SCB
"What you took".She : I didn't take anything SCB: You don't want more pApa Other women there moved her aside and retrieved the infants chain from her and placed it in front of the AcArcya. He called the distraught woman with the child gave her the chain and teertha and said
I m always intrigued with the word happiness. Happiness is used in pop psychology as an easily achievable state of mind. Is it? Do we confuse a transient sense of pleasure that comes when we gain something wordly with something more permanent that comes from discipline and effort
Interestingly the english happiness and other European words etymologically mean luck! Again the link to material gain. Tamizh has two equivalent words மகிழ்ச்சி of the rajnikAnth fame which again sounds transient and உவகை which seems to be closer to bliss. The other ancient
language संस्कृतम् has a close word सुखं। the Vedic use seems to be pleasure. The Mahabharata which personifies these traits calls it the offspring of dharma and siddhi. Clearly happiness as our morning messages tell us is a transient joy (from the Latin gaudere). Bliss a
In the evening Sri Chandrasekara Bharati would go to the kAlabhairava temple. There vidyArthis would participate in an andhAdi Sloka recital (an antAkSari with Slokas). One evening during his turn to start with la said the following:
लोको नापुत्रस्यातीति शृत्या त्वभाषि लोका।
मुक्ति संसरणं वा तद्नय लोकोऽथवा नाद्य॥
from the prabodha sudhakara. He then quoted the next couple of verses and asked for their meaning.
What is the meaning of the Sruti vAkya when it says nA putrasya lokosti? Will a person who does not have a son not achieve any world? What
world does world imply? If it is mukti is the world spoken of - will those who have children all attain mukti? Will this not be against the concept of samsAra? In the maitreya brAhmaNa there is testimony that mukti referred to as a amrutatvam and states that आत्मावा वा अरे
A sense of literature and history is so important for a poet. Kannadasan is the epitome. There are many instances where he would take a line or two from kamba rAmAyaNam expand and flaunt and searching for the origin of that usage is a great past time because he would introduce
You to the classics. But this one stumped me for long. This is from a movie called savAle samALi. Walk these words. In the movie Shivaji sings this after his newly wed tells him not to touch.
புதியதல்லவே தீண்டாமை என்பது
புதுமை அல்லவே அதை நீயும் சொன்னது
Untouchability is not and
..new it's not novel that you said it
(This is when the genius of the poet comes in..)
சொன்ன வார்த்தையும் இரவல் தான் அது
The words that you used are also borrowed
(And wait for this)
திரு நீலகண்டரின் மனைவி சொன்னது
These were said by Thiru neelakantars wife.
I have either just