Biographies of Indian saints

Auvaiyar

In the first century AD, there lived a man called Bhagavan. (Auvaiyar was the contempary to an another great Tamil poet, Thiruvallur. His thirukural is one of the oldest texts in Tamil literature, nevertheless, one of the best). Appropriate to the name, he led a life of devotion and faith. Though a brahmin by birth, he married an outcaste named Adi. It was unheard of in those days. In devotion, caste, religion, creed, race or gender do not matter. What matters is only devotion.

Shortly after Adi became pregnant, Bhagavan left her and became a sanyas. Adi, unable to bear the taunts of the villagers, took a vow before Lord Ganesha that she would abandon her child and follow in her husband's footsteps. Adi, in the course of time, gave birth to a beautiful girl. When she saw the newborn, she could not think of leaving her and satisfying the vow. She was in a dilemma, should she took after her child or satisfy the vow. She was such a person that she did not care about herself but only about her child and the vow.

When dharmic people are in trouble, there is always God to help. The child spoke in her dream, 'My dear mother, who brought me forth in this world ? Can He ever forsake me ? The Lord has brought me forth and He will take care of me. Don't think you are the doer. Go, mother, go, and be without fear. The Lord protects us all.' Man is bitten by the snake of ignorance and thinks himself as limited, ignorant, and suffers from the notion of 'I am the doer.' By surrendering the notion of an individuality due to wise words by sages, he concludes that all happenings are due to the Divine Will and he is a mere actor in the script written by the Divine.

After Adi left, a poet saw the baby lying on the roadside. The poet was a great bhakta of Lord Ganesha (coincidence ? I think not.) and being childless, had frequently prayed to Lord Ganesha for a child. A poet discovers a child who is destined to become the poet among poets. No home in Tamilnadu (India) forgets the child, Auvaiyar. Every child in Tamilnadu is the poem of alphabet, aattichuDi, written by her, as their first lesson.

We do not know what name the poet gave her. At the age of four, while frolicking with other children, she heard a poet tell her father that he was looking for two more lines in his song. Though a child, she sat down and saw the poets discuss various options. The first two lines were 'If you do a good deed, when will it give the result ?' but the poets, try as they may, could not come up with appropriate two more lines. After a lot of struggle, they decided to give up. Then the child spoke, 'Uncle, it is very simple.' Angered the poets mockingly said 'What does a four year old know ?'

We should not disrespect persons because of their age or any other criteria. Every one knows a little and every idea is an insight. All inventions in this world has arose from a single thought in someone's mind. We are all capable of greatness. The child quickly said, 'Don't doubt whether it will give result. It is bound to result like the water that you offer at the foot of a cocunut tree gives you the result through the head.' The poem is

nanRi oruvarukku cheythakkaal annanRi
enRu tharungkol enavENdaa - ninRu
thaLaraa vaLar thengu thaaLuNda niirai
thalaiyaalE thaan tharuthalaal
The poets gathered around were astonished. No, not just because the verse is beautiful and rhymed, but because the verse had several deep inner spiritual meanings. The verse elucidates the law of karma. What you sow, so shall you reap. When you offer water at the foot of a cocunut tree, it takes some time, but eventually, at the head of the tree, you will get the coconut. If you do a good deed, you will enjoy the consequences, whether it sooner or later. Similarly, one has to suffer for all bad deeds.

Even from a young age of three, she used to meditate on the mantra 'AUM vinaayaka siddhi vinaakaya.' Since her father was a big poet, she aspired to become a great poet too. Daily, early in the morning, she used to worship Lord Ganesha with four things: milk, honey, rice pudding (pasayam) and nuts. She used to pray 'I give you four things, please give me three (poetry, music and drama).' Devotion always starts on a bargaining system. I will give you this, if you give me that. Thus we bargain with the God. This is like a child saying to the mother, I will eat the vegetables, if you will allow me to play with MY toy. Actually, the mother knows she owns the toy, not the child but to please the child, she agrees. Such is the case of people. Everything is owned by God. Man possesses nothing, yet he bargains. Total surrender always starts from the simple bargaining. Any true devotee will eventually say, 'It is all divine will.' Until then, duality will persist and misery will follow.

Auvaiyar grew up to be a beautiful woman. Due to her devotion, she was extremely intelligent too. Naturally, lot of suitors asked her father for her hand in marriage. But auvaiyar had already surrendered her body and mind to the Lotus feet of vinayaka. How can lustful thoughts even enter her mind ? But, it is difficult to stand up to one's parents and say this.

Auvaiyar figured that her youth was the criteria which attracted people to her. Therefore, daily she used to sit before Ganesha and pray that she become an old woman. But her prayers were not answered. One day, in frustration, she decided to run away from home and kill herself. She prayed fervently and suddendly, there was a shower of flowers and she became an old woman with wrinkled skin and fading features. In the age which youth is given so much importance and the beauty of the body is considered of prime importance, here was a woman who threw all that away. One can ask why God did not answer her prayers instantly. When one prays and when there is pure devotion, the willingness to be with God should be great. A man who is held under water for a long times thinks of only air and gasps for it. One should gasp and long for God as much as the person under water.

After this incident, her foster father understood that she was no ordinary child. Thus, the young woman who looked old became to called auvaiyar. She began wandering the temples of South India and met several saints including the King Cheraman and the famous nayanmar Sundaramurthi (Please see the section on periya puranam below for information on nayanmars). One a king asked her where was she from and who her parents are. She replied, 'I have wandered so many places, and my legs are paining. But where I am from ? I am from God and no one else.' Someone gave a special gooseberry fruit to king atiyaman so that he can live long by eating it. But the king gave it to his dear friend 'Auvaiyar' so that she could live long and thereby serve Tamil language for a long period. There are many such incidents in her life. However, her many poems touch on the simple people she met in small houses, on the streets.

During her visit to a Shiva temple, she lay down due to tiredness. In her haste, she did not see that her legs were pointing to the shiva linga. The priest saw this and became angry. He asked Auvaiyar to remove her legs. Avviyar replied, 'Please show me a direction in which Shiva does not exist and I will point my legs in that direction.' By foolishness, man fails to look within and discover divinity. He thinks God resides only in churches, temples, and mosques. All he needs is to dive within his heart and rediscover the spirit he has forgotten. Then, he will not only see God in himself but in every atom that exists in this universe. Nothing, not even a blade of grass, moves without the will of the Divine. (Please see the incident of Namadeva below for a more clearer picture).

A few years passed, the reputation of Auvaiyar grew. She was known all over for her songs, her wisdom and her devotion. A person should avoid fame at all costs, and if there is fame, one should recognize that all this is God-given and not take credit for it. But it is difficult not to be involved in the ego-game. Auvaiyar became proud of her accomplishments. That had to be corrected. So, the birthless one who took care of her from the day she was born enacted a lila.

While travelling through an orchard, she noticed a jambu fruit tree. As everyone knows, Ganapati's favorite fruit is jambu. Thinking of this, Auvaiyar had an inkling to eat the fruit. She noticed a young boy perched on the tree. She asked him to give her some fruits. The young boy asked 'Do you want hot jambu fruits or cold jambu fruits ?' Auvaiyar was stuck, she did not that there were two kinds of jambu fruits. She prayed to Lord Ganesha for help, but the all intelligent one, the one who clears all obstacles refused to answer. When one does not know the answer, one should say so and not pretend that we know the answer. But, auvaiyar did not want to admit defeat to a young boy. So, she pretended to know the answer and said, asked for "suDAda paZaM" (cold fruit) and when the boy shook off some fruits she picked up one ripe fruit and began to blow air over it to shake off the sand; it was then, the boy confronted her : " You asked for cold fruit . Why are you taking hot fruit and blowing air over it to make it cool?( By 'sutta pazam the boy meant 'ripe fruit and by 'suDada pazam' unripe fruit). There are no hot or cold jambu fruits. There are only ripe and unripe jambu fruits. Auvaiyar immediately recognized that this was no ordinary boy who had come to teach her a lesson in humility. When she sang a song in the honor of the boy, the boy revealed himself to be kartikeya.

Kartikeya, in his sweet voice, said 'Grandmother, I was just pulling your leg. I wanted to hear your voice and wisdom. I have four questions for you. Please answer them for the benefit of the world. What is hard ? What is sweet ? What is big ? What is rare ?'

Auvaiyar replies to each of this in a long song. In short, 'poverty is hard, harder still is poverty in young age, harder is a faithless spouse, and the hardest is to take food from a person who does not love you. Solitude is sweet, sweeter is worship of Lord, sweeter than that is the company of the Guru and still more sweet is the abiding in the Self day and night. The world is big, but the world is creation of Brahma, but Brahma is from the navel of Vishnu and Vishnu resides in the heart of the devotee, the devotee is the biggest. Rare is the human birth, rarer still is the human birth interested in wisdom, still rarer is one who is interested in wisdom and possessed of charity and penance.'

Anyway, one day she saw her dear friends, the king Cheraman and the nayanmar sundaramurthi of the periyapurana, ascending to Kailas. Auvaiyar was performing puja on Ganesha and started reciting mantras hurriedly. Ganesha appeared before Her and asked her why she was performing the puja hurriedly. She said that her friends were ascending to Kailas and she wanted to be with them. Ganesha smiled and said 'Don't worry, do your puja slowly, and I promise you will reach Kailas faster than they do.' So, she sang the vinaayaka ahaval, a beautiful poem and her last song in the mortal frame. It ends with

'Make me experience in my heart the innermost meaning of the five letters.
Restore me to my real state and rule this unreality now, O Master of Wisdom.
Vinaayaka : Your feet alone, your feet alone are my sole refuge.'
After she finished the song, Lord Ganesha lifted her up and kept in Kailas and She reached it faster than Sundaramurthi and Cheraman.

But this incident also has an inner significance. Auvaiyar, sundaramurthi, cheraman never left south India. How did they go to Kailas ? Vinakya is the lord of the muulaadhaara chakra. Since our consciousness usually is in the mulaadhaara chakra, Ganesha is invoked before any puja or any event. Only if the Kundalini in that chakra is awakened, then Kundalini can "travel" to the other chakras. When one meditates on Him with fervor, he will raise you to Kailas (on the sahasra chakra) in no time. There is no need to hurry. All we need is the earnestness and fervor. If we surrender our body, mind, ego to the Divine feet and do our dharma with dedication, devotion and discrimination, there is no chance of rebirth. The life of Auvaiyar and other saints in this page makes that extremely clear.

 

Bharata

This is the story of the prince Bharata, in honor of whom the country India is named Bharat. What is narrated below is pure advaita philosophy and is from the Vishnu purana. The following was taken from a translation of Vishnu purana by HH Wilson which was posted on soc.religion.hindu by Kartik.

The illustrious monarch, Maitreya, resided for sometime at Salagrama, his thoughts wholly dedicated to God, and [Salagrama is a holy place of pilgrimage for Vishnu. Somehow, people have forgotten the place. Saligram is a holy stone and is an ammonite which is found near the Gandhak river in Nepal. Thus, Salagrama would be either that place or the place where the Gandhak river joins with the Ganges.] distinguished by kindness and every virtue...and gained entire control over his mind. The Raja was ever repeating the names Achyuta, Govinda, Madhava...nothing else did he utter even in his dreams; nor upon anything but those names and their import did he ever meditate. He accepted fuel, flowers and holy grass for the worship of the deity, but performed no other religious rites, being engrossed by disinterested, abstract devotion. [Then he relinquished the kingdom, family, became a sanyas and set up a small hermitage].

On one occasion, he went to the Mahanadi for the purpose of ablution... there came to the place a doe big with young to drink of the stream...Whilst quenching her thirst, there was heard on a sudden the roaring of a lion... on which the doe, alarmed, jumped out of the water onto the bank. In consequence of this great leap, her fawn was suddenly brought forth and fell into the river; and the king, seeing it carried away by the current, caught hold of the young animal and saved it from being drowned. The injury received by the deer proved fatal and she lay down and died; which being observed by the royal ascetic, he took the fawn in his arms and returned with it to his hermitage. There , he fed it and tended it everyday...it frolicked about the cell and grazed upon the grass in the vicinity...every morning it sallied forth from home, and every evening returned to the thatched shelter of Bharata.

The mind of the king was ever anxious about the animal...and he was unable to think of anything else. He had relinquished his kingdom, his friends, his children, and now indulged in affection for a fawn...."The earth is embrowned by the impressions of its hoofs. What has become of the deer, that was born for my delight? How happy I should be if he had returned from the thicket, and I felt his antlers rubbing against my arm. These tufts of sacred grass, of which the heads have been nibbled by his new teeth, look like pious lads chanting the Sama-Veda."

Thus the Muni meditated whenever the deer was long absent from him...The firmness of the his mind became unsteady, and wandered with the wandering of the deer... In course of time, the king became subject to its influence...He died, watched by the deer, with tears in his eyes, like a son mourning for his father; and he himself, as he expired, cast his eyes upon the animal, and thought of nothing else...

In consequence, he was born again...in the Jambumarga forest as a deer, with the faculty of recalling his former life...which recollection brought in him a distaste for the world, and he left them and went to Salagrama... Subsisting upon dry grass and leaves, he atoned for his acts which had led to his being born as in such a condition; and upon his death, was born as a Brahmin, still retaining memory of his previous existence...

He was born to an illustrious family of ascetics, who were rigid observers of devotional rites ...possessed of true wisdom, he beheld the soul as contradistinguished from matter(Prakriti). Imbued with the knowledge of the self, he beheld the gods and all other beings in reality the same... It did not happen to him to undergo investiture with the Brahminical thread, nor to read the Vedas with a spiritual preceptor, nor to perform ceremonies, nor to study the scriptures...

When spoken to, he would reply incoherently and in ungrammatical and unpolished speech...his person was unclean and saliva dribbled from his mouth... [Ramana Maharshi often quoted this to show that even persons looking like madmen may be jnanis and thus we should treat everyone with respect] and he was treated with contempt by all...Regard for the consideration of the world is fatal to the success of devotion. The ascetic who is despised of men attains the end of abstractions. Let therefore a holy man pursue the path of the righteous, without association with mankind. This, the counsel of Hiranyagarbha did the Brahmin call to mind, and hence assumed the appearance of a crazy idiot in the eyes of the world. His food was raw pulse, potherbs, wild fruit and grains of corn. Whatever came in his way, he ate, as part of a necessary, but temporary infliction(as a Kala Sanyama, a state of suffering or mortification lasting only for a season; or, in other words, bodily existence; the body being contemplated as a sore, for which the food is the unguent; drink the lotion; and dress, the bandage)...

Upon his father's death, he was set to work on the fields by his brothers and nephews, and fed by them with vile food...he was a slave of those that chose to employ him...

The head servant of king Sauvira, looking upon him as an indolent, untaught Brahmin, thought him a fit person to work without pay (and took him into his master's service to assist in carrying the palanquin)...

The king, on one occasion, was proceeding to the hermitage of Kapila on the banks of the Ikshumati river...to consult the sage, to whom the virtues leading to liberation were known, what was most desirable in a world abiding with care and sorrow.

Among those that carried the palanquin was the Brahmin...who, endowed with the only universal knowledge, and remembering his former existence, bore the burden as the faults for which he was desirous to atone... ...he went tardily along and the king, feeling the litter carried unevenly, exclaimed how irregularly he was going," Are you weary? You have carried your burden but a little way; are you unable to bear the fatigue? And yet you look robust."

The Brahmin answered," It is not I who am robust, nor is it by me that your palanquin is carried. I am not wearied, prince, nor am I capable of fatigue."

The king said," I clearly see that you are stout and that the palanquin is carried by you; and the carriage of a burden is wearisome to all persons."

The Brahmin replied," First tell me, what it is of me that you have clearly seen, and then you may distinguish my properties as strong or weak. The assertion that you behold the palanquin borne by me or placed by me, is untrue. Listen, O prince, to what I have to remark. The place of both the feet is on the ground; the legs are supported by the feet and the thighs rest upon the legs; the belly reposes on the thighs and the chest is supported by the belly and the arms and shoulders propped up by the chest. the palanquin is borne on my shoulders and how can it be considered to be my burden? This body which is seated in the palanquin is called Thou; thence what is elsewhere is called This, is here distinguished as I and Thou. I and Thou and others are constructed of the elements; and the elements, following the stream of qualities, assume a bodily shape; but qualities, such as goodness and the rest, are dependant upon acts; and acts, accumulated in ignorance, influence the condition of all beings.

The pure imperishable soul, tranquil, void of qualities, pre-eminent over nature(Prakriti) is One, without increase or diminution, in all bodies. But if it be equally exempt from increase or diminution, then with what propriety can you say to me, "thou art robust"? If the palanquin rests on the body, the body on the feet, the feet on the earth, then the palanquin is borne as much by you as by me. When the nature of men is different, either in its essence or its cause, then it may be said that fatigue is said to be undergone by me. That which is the substance of the palanquin is the substance of you and me and all others, being an aggregate of elements, aggregated by individuality."

Having thus spoken the Brahmin was silent, and went on bearing the palanquin. But the king leaped out of it, hastened to prostrate himself at the Brahmin's feet,saying," Have compassion on me, Brahman, and cast aside the palanquin. Tell me who Thou art, thus disguised under the appearance of a fool." The Brahmin answered," Hear me, Raja. Who I am is not possible to say : arrival at any place is for the sake of fruition; and enjoyment of pleasure, or endurance of pain, is the cause of the production of the body. A living being assumes a corporeal form to reap the results of virtue or vice. The universal cause of all living creatures is virtue or vice: why therefore inquire the cause(of my being the person I appear)." The king said," Undoubtedly virtue and vice are the causes of all existent effects, and migration into several bodies is for the purpose of receiving their consequences; but with respect to what you have asserted, that it is not possible for you to tell me who you are, that is a matter which I am desirous to hear explained. How can it be impossible, Brahman, for anyone to declare himself to be that which he is? There can be no detriment to one's self by the application to it of the characteristic word 'I'."

The Brahman said,"It is true that no wrong is done to that which is one's-self by the application of the word 'I'; but it characteristic of error, of conceiving that to be the self (or soul) which is not self or soul. The tongue articulates the word 'I', aided by the lips, the teeth and the palate; and they are the causes of the production of speech. If, by these instruments speech is able to utter the word 'I', it is nevertheless improper to assert that speech itself is 'I'. The body of a man, characterised by hands, feet and the like, is made up of various parts; to which of these can I properly apply the denomination 'I'? If another being is different specifically from me, most excellent monarch, then it may be said, "this" is I, "that" is the other: but when only one soul is dispersed in all bodies, it is then idle to say, "Who are you?", "Who am I?". Thou art a king; this is a palanquin; these are the bearers; these are the running footmen; this is thy retinue; yet it is untrue that all these are said to be thine. The palanquin on which thou sittest is made of timber derived from a tree. What then? Is it denominate either timber or tree? People do not say that the king is perched upon a tree, nor that he is seated upon a piece of wood, when you have mounted your palanquin. The vehicle is an assemblage of pieces of timber, artificially joined together: judge for yourself in what the palanquin differs really from the wood. Again, contemplate the sticks of an umbrella in their separate state. Where then is the umbrella? Apply this reasoning to a thee and me.

A man, a woman, a cow, a goat, a horse, an elephant, a bird, a tree, are names assigned to various bodies, which are consequences of acts. Man( the term in this and the preceding clause is Puman; here used generically, there specifically ) is neither a god nor a man, nor a brute, nor a tree; these are mere varieties of shape, the effects of acts. The thing which in the world is called a king, the servant of a king, or by any other appellation, is not a reality; it is the creature of our imaginations: for what is there in the world that is subject to vicissitude, that does not in the course of time go by different names. Thou art called the monarch of the world; the son of thy father; the enemy of thy foes; the husband of thy wife; the father of thy children. What shall I denominate thee? How art thou situated? Art thou the head or the belly? Or are they thine? Art thou the feet? Or do they belong to thee? Thou art, O king, distinct in thy nature from all members! Now then, rightly understanding the question, think who I am; and how it is possible for me, after the truth is ascertained(of the identity of all), to recognise any distinction, or to speak of my individuality by the expression 'I'."

Having heard these remarks, full of profound truth, the king was highly pleased with the Brahman, and respectfully thus addressed him: " What you have said is no doubt the truth; but in listening to it, my mind is much disturbed. You have shown 'that' to be discriminative wisdom which exists in all creatures, and which is the great principle that is distinct from plastic nature; but the assertions-"I do not bear the palanquin- the palanquin does not rest upon me-the body, by which the vehicle is conveyed, is different from me- the conditions of elementary beings are influenced by acts, through the influence of the qualities, and the qualities are the principles of action"- what sort of positions are these? Upon these doctrines entering into my ears, my mind, which is anxious to investigate truth is lost in perplexity. It was my purpose, illustrious sage, to have gone to Sage Kapila Rishi to inquire of him what in this life was the most desirable object: but now that I have heard from you such words, my mind turns to you, to become acquainted with the great goal of life. The rishi Kapila is a portion of the universal Vishnu, who has come down upon the world to dissipate delusion; and surely it is he who, in kindness to me, has thus manifested himself to me in all that you have said. To me, thus suppliant, then, explain what is the best of all things; for thou art an ocean overflowing with the waters of divine wisdom."

The Brahman replied to the king, " You, again, ask me what is the best(Sreyas) of all things, not what is the great goal(Paramartha) of life; but there are many things which are considered best, as well as those which are the great ends (or truths) of life. To him who, by the worship of the gods, seeks for wealth, prosperity,children or dominion, each of these is respectively the best. Best is rite or sacrifice, that is rewarded with heavenly pleasures. Best is that which yields the best recompense, although it be not solicited. Self-contemplation, ever practised by devout ascetics, is to them the best. But the best of all is the identification of soul with the Supreme spirit. Hundreds and thousands of conditions may be called the best; but these are not the great and true ends of life. Hear what those are. Wealth cannot be the true end of life, for it may be relinquished through virtue, and its characteristic property is expenditure for the gratification of desire. If a son were the final truth, that would be equally applicable to a different source; for the son that is to one the great end of life, becomes the father of another. Final or supreme truth, therefore, would not exist in this world, as in all these cases those objects which so denominated are the effects of causes, and consequently are not finite. If the acquisition of sovereignty were designated by the character of being the great end of all, then finite ends would sometimes be, sometimes cease to be. If you suppose that the objects to be effected by sacrificial rites, performed according to the rules of the Rik, Yajur, and Sama Vedas, be the great end of life, attend to what I have to say.

Any effect which is produced through the causality of earth partakes itself of clay; so any act performed by perishable agents, such as fuel, clarified butter, and the Kusa grass, must itself be transitory. The great end of life (or truth) is considered by the wise, to be eternal; but it would be transitory if it were accomplished through transitory things. If you imagine that this great truth is the performance of religious acts from which no recompense is sought, it is not so; for such acts are the means of obtaining liberation, and the truth is the end, not the means. Meditation on the self, again, is said to be for the sake of supreme truth; but the object of this is to establish distinctions (between soul and body), and the great truth of all is without distinctions. Union of self with the supreme spirit is said to be the great end of all, but this is false; for one substance cannot become substantially another. Objects, then, which are considered most desirable, are infinite.

What the great end is, you shall, monarch, briefly learn from me. It is soul : one ( in all bodies ), pervading, uniform, perfect, pre-eminent over nature(Prakriti), exempt from birth, growth and decay, omnipresent, made up of true knowledge, independent, and unconnected with unrealities, with name, species and the rest, in time present, past or to come. The knowledge that this spirit, which is essentially one, is in one's own and in all other bodies, is the great end, or true wisdom, of one who knows the unity and the true principles of things. As one diffusive air, passing through the perforations of a flute, is distinguished as the notes of the scale(Sharga and the rest), so the nature of the great spirit is single, though its forms be manifold, arising from the consequences of acts. When the difference of the investing form as that of god or the rest, is destroyed, then there is no distinction."

 

Bhartrihari

Bhartrihari is the author of vairagya satakam (hundred verses on renunciation). In the verses, he reflects the inner struggles an aspirant faces in his sadhana. He was a king of Ujjaini and was said to be an extremely powerful and rich king. However, he renounced everything and became one of the great yogis. The reason can be traced to one of the verses (verse 31) in his vairagya satakam

With enjoyment, comes fear of disease
With social position, fear of disfavor
With riches, fear of hostile people (kings)
With honor, fear of humiliation
With power, fear of enemies
With beauty, fear of old age
With scholarship, fear of challengers
With virtue, fear of traducers
With the identification with body, fear of death
Everything in this world is done with fear
Renunciation alone makes one fearless.

In a later verse (35), he brings out the beauty of self-surrender

Life trembles, like a drop of water on the edge of a lotus leaf
then it is swallowed by the wind
The wise fix their mind in Truth, which comes to all in the 
calm of self-surrender achieved by renunciation

His other works, niti-satakam and sringara-satakam are hundred verses on worldly wisdom and love, respectively

 

Dattatreya

The story of Dattatreya is told in many Purana-s, and this is from the Markandeya purana (chapter 15). A brahmin named kaushika was enchanted by a courtesan and lost his wealth, health etc. However, his wife, Shandili was faithful to him. She even carried him on her shoulders to the courtesan's place. Once, by mistake, she stepped on Sage Mandavya and the sage cursed both of them to die by sunrise. Shandili prayed and appealed that the sun may never rise so that her husband would live. Her prayer was answered and the devas were in an uproar seeing the world order of time destroyed. They asked for the help of Anusuya, the wife of sage atri, to convince shandili. Anusuya was able to convince shandili on the condition that kaushika would live on sunrise. In appreciation of Anusuya's intervention, the gods granted her three boons. She asked for her liberation, her husband's liberation and that the three gods Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva be born as sons to her. The wishes being granted, from Sage Atri's eyes issued a light and served as the seed for the divine sons - Soma, Durvasa, and Datta - partial incarnations of Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu, respectively.

Other purana-s give different narratives but all involve the attribution of the name Dattatreya to mean 'Son of sage Atri.' For example, there is a story is that the gods decided to test the chastity of anasuya, the wife of the rishi Atri. So, brahma, vishNu and Siva went to her posing as handsome men. However, Atri was not fooled and transformed all three of them into a single child with three heads. This child is known as Dattatreya and is considered to be an incarnation of the trinity Gods.

He is said to have lived a rather unconventional life, first being a warrior, then renouncing the world and practicising yoga and then drinking wine and living with a maiden etc to show his disciples that he could be unattached to such mundane pleasures even if he indulges in them. Dattatreya is said to have met Shankara near Kedarnath before Shankara's mahasamadhi. There is a still a cave in Kedarnath signifying this event.

Regarding the works by him, probably the most controversial is that it is mentioned in the Markandeya purana that he taught the asthanga yoga to Patanjali, who then wrote the yoga suutras. He is also attributed to the composition of the jivanmukta -gita which is a short compendium of 23 verses which talks about the jnani (jivan mukta). Dattatreya is also attributed with avadhuta gita, a text of eight chapters. Swami Vivekananda once said of this book, 'Men like the one who wrote this song keep religion alive. They have actually self-realized; they care for nothing, feel nothing done to the body, care not for heat, cold, danger, or anything. They sit still enjoying the bliss of Brahman.' Dattatreya is the narrator of the Jnana Kanda of tripura rahasya to Parasurama to dispel the latter's doubts on liberation. (The story of Samvrata found in tripura rahasya has been cited by shankara in his brahma suutra bhashya). Further, Dattatreya is attributed with a couple of Tantric works.

Dattatreya is also mentioned in the Mahabharata. I also believe that certain vaishnavites hold him in high esteem since he is mentioned as a incarnation of vishnu.

Dattatreya is usually depicted with four dogs by his side, representing the four vedas, a cow behind him (a la vishNu), a trident in his hand (a la Siva) and three heads (a la brahma). He is widely worshipped as a diety throughout India and you can find stotra-s (hymns) dedicated to him.

The lineage of the Nav Nath sampradaya which traces its origin to dattatreya is extant. The modern jnani Nisargadatta Maharaj is well known. Though he lived in the slums of Bombay, India, he spread the fragrance of advaita vedanta to one and all. His disciple, Ramesh Balsekar, educated in the west, continues the tradition.

 

Eknath

Eknath was a major saint of the varakari sampradaya founded by Jnanadeva. Born in 1533 at Paithan, Eknath lost his parents at an early age and was brought up by his grandfather. Eknath's great-grandfather was Shri Bhanudas (1448-1513), a major figure in the Vitthala sect at Pandharpur.

Eknath was initiated by his guru, Janardana, a devotee of Dattatreya. Eknath was unique since he combined a blend of Vedanta and Sufism. Eknath was a devout gurubhakta and wrote under the name of Eka-janardana meaning eka of janardana.

A profilic writer, he wrote bhavartha ramayana, numerous abhangas (unbroken verses and a prolongation of the famous ovi meter) and bharudas (short poems with two meanings, one secular and the other spiritual). However, his major work was Eknath Bhagavata, a marathi commentary on the 11th skanda of the bhagavata purana. Started in 1570, it has over eighteen thousand ovis and was completed in 1573. In the work, Eknath stresses on the uplifting value of kirtana (singing God's names), rememberance of God's name (namasmarana) and meditation (dhyana) of the name. He explains beautifully the nine traditional limbs of the bhakti marga (navangani) with examples from saints.

Eknath distinguished two forms of bhakti to Saguna Brahman (God with form) : as an end in itself and as a means. Generally, the advaitic tradition identifies with the latter, considering that meditation of God with form does not lead to moksha (liberation) but only to krama-mukti (gradual liberation). However, a person who attains krama-mukti is freed from samsara (the cycle of births, deaths, and rebirths).

Eknath's Bhagavata popularized the vedanta philosophy to a great extent. Shri Ranade, a modern day historian, notes that `With Jnanadeva, philosophy reigned in the clouds; with Eknatha, it came down upon earth and dwelt among men.'

 

Jnanadeva

If you ask a person from Maharashtra (a state in India) what the greatest philosophical work of his state is, he would most likely reply 'Jnanaveshvari written by Jnanashvar (also known as Jnanadeva).'

The dates proposed for Jnanadeva are 1271-1293 (or 1275-1297). He voluntarily abandoned his body at the age of 22. He is quite famous for the excellent commentary on Bhagvad-gita called Jnaneshvari. He received hatha yoga teachings from his brother, Nivritti-natha and tries to combine this yoga with the gita. As he correctly notes, hatha yoga practiconers (most of them anyway) measure the wind with upstretched arms day and night and lack the slightest devotion. They should expect only sorrow in their path.

Jnanadeva's father was Vitthalpant, who tradition identifies as belonging to the Nath sampradaya (lineage). However, at a young age, Vitthalpant was disinterested in life, and decided to take sanyas. He took permission from his wife (though she actually did not want to give him permission) and went to Benares, and beacme a renowned disciple of the famous Swami Ramanand. Vitthalpant's wife, Rukhamabhai, hearing the news decided her married life was over and practiced chanting and other devotional austerities under a tree and many people in the village of Alandi considered her pious.

Once, when Swami Ramanand visited Alandi, Rukhamabhai prostrated towards him in reverence. Seeing the spirituality in her face, Ramanand blessed her with good spiritual children. Rukhamabhai smiled wryly and told him that her husband was an ascetic and was actually his disciple. Ramanand went back to Benares and told Vitthalpant to go back to Alandi and resume the married life and have progeny.

Vitthalpant went back and shocked the whole community by resuming his married life (In India, once a person takes sanyas, one can not resume the material life under any circumstances). They had four children in quick succession. Jnaneshvar (hereafter refered as Jnanadeva) was the second child. The eldest was nivritti and Sopana was the third male child. The last child was his sister, Mukti. One may appreciate the names: nivritti, and jnana are sopana (ladder) for attaining mukti.

Because the four children was born to a person who was once a sanyas, all of them were ostracized from the community and lived in a small hut. At the age of seven/eight, Nivritti had to be invested with the sacred thread to become a Brahmin. However, no one in Alandi was even willing to look at the children, let alone perform ceremonies for them. Therefore, Vitthalpant moved his family to Nasik, and the whole family used to circumbulate the hill from which the holy river Godavari originates (this is a beautiful sight, even to this day. One finds the river originates drop by drop, and passes thro' a linga at the bottom of the hill before becoming a full fledged river). They circumbulated the hill to expiate their sins. However, one day, as fate would have it, a tiger attacked the family. When the family ran away, Nivrtti got separated from the family. He took refuge in a cave where he met Gahininatha, the fourth in the Natha lineage who initiated him. However, the problem of the scared thread ceremony remained and the family returned to Alandi.

The brahmins at Alandi were stubborn and would not perform ceremonies for the child of a sanyas. Finally, they said the only expiation from the sin was death of the parents. Therefore, Vitthalpant and his wife went to Prayag and drowned themselves in the river Ganga (While it is true that Hinduism prohibits suicide, it is not completely forbidden. In fact, scriptures give four different methods of dying in Prayag by which one can attain liberation. However, it does prohibit suicide as an escape from material life). Even after the self-immolation, the brahmins could only advise them to visit Paithan, the center of learning and obtain a testimonial from the pundits.

The pundits at Paithan took pity on the four small children, but still could not decide since there was no precedence in the scriptures. Finally, an interesting episode happened here. A brahmin decided to make fun of the children and asked the meaning of their names. Jnaneshvar replied that his name signified Jnana, to which the brahmin retorted that the buffalo on the road was also named Jnana. Jnaneshvar replied that the essence of the buffalo and himself were not different. Irritated by this, the brahmin took a whip and flung it at the buffalo. When the whip hit the buffalo, it left scars on Jnaneshvar, a young child of seven. The crowd of pundits were astonished at this. Jnaneshvar went to the buffalo and asked it to recite a verse from the Vedas to prove that the essence of the buffalo and himself were not different. Lo and Behold, the buffalo spoke ! All the Brahmins and pundits prostrated at the feet of Jnaneshvar. On their return to Alandi, the news of the miracles had already reached them and they gladly performed the ceremonies for the boys.

Jnanadeva wrote his exposition on Bhagvad gita at Nevase and called it the Bhavartha-dipika (the lamp of simple explanation) which later became known as Jnaneshvari. He met Namadeva, the well known bhagavata of pandharpur and toured various pilgrimage spots in North India.

Jnanadeva attained eternal samadhi in Alandi, near Poona in 1296 at the age of 22 (25 by some other scholars). That he not only produced the exposition but also other works at such an age stands testimonial to the greatness of a person. He himself remarks in the sixth chapter that knowledge can be brought over from the previous birth but does not mention him as an example. That's a mark of humbleness, considering that he produced Jnaneshvari at the age of 15 (or 19). Though the brahmins had made fun of him as an outcaste, he never ridiculed them in retaliation. Maybe he considered them to be God's children also, or rather the same as himself.

Jnanadeva brought together the advaitic tradition, the saiva outlook and yoga of the Nath sampradaya and the bhakti of the bhagavatas and is not unlike the work of Madhusudana Sarasvati. Jnanadeva founded the vaarakarii sampradaya.

Among his four works are Amritanubhava, Cangadeeva-pasasti, gatha and, of course, Jnaneshvari itself. The gatha-s are a collection of beautiful devotional poems. Amritanubhava (the nectar of divine experience) is well known among Advaitins, especially those in the Nath sampradaya. This beautiful book talks in detail about the unity of Shiva-Shakti, consciousness at rest and at motion i.e noumenon and phenomenon. The Jnaneshwari contains nearly 9000 verses written in the ovi meter of old marathi. The Jnaneshwari is highly poetical and differs in style from bhagvad gita commentaries by Shankara. Jnanadeva's intention was not to write an explanation of gita for upholding a philosophy but born out of pure love. For example, his 42 verse explanation for 9.32 brings out that he treated everyone equally with Love and no one was barred from singing the glory of God. In the same chapter, he describes the miseries of the world, and says we should pray to God all the time just like one should escape while being surrounded by fire. It teaches that the path of devotion (bhakti) is supreme and a devotee finally attains unity with the Lord. Jnanadeva's bhakti for Krishna, his reverence for his guru are supreme. No wonder that Saint Eknath, who established the text, says that Jnanadeva is the mother and father of all Sadhakas. Namadev, the famous saint, has written a brief biography of Jnanadeva's life.

 

Namadeva

I thank Swami Vishvarupananda-ji for kindly sending me the text for Namadeva and Ramadas and, more importantly, for spiritually inspiring me.

The time of Saint Jnaneshwar was a time of great saints in Maharashtra, many of them his contemporaries and friends in Pandharpur. Among these great souls there was a great bhakta named Namadeva, to whom the Lord used to appear in person and talk to him. Namadeva thus became deeply attached to his Lord and the temple, where he spent most of his time serving and singing God's praises.

One day Saint Jnaneshwar and other realised saints teased Namadeva for his attachment to the temple and made great fun of him. Hurt and dejected Namadeva ran to his Lord and weeping bitterly took refuge in His arms. It was beyond his comprehension, how such great souls could object to his one-pointed love for God. Lord Panduranga consoled his beloved devotee, but requested him to go to Amvadya and meet Vishobakesha, a great jnani of that village. Unwillingly and tearfully but obeying his Lord's wishes, Namadeva tore himself away from the temple. After three days, he reached Amvadya and was guided by the villagers to a Shivatemple on the outskirts of the village, where Vishobakesha resided.

Namadeva entered the temple, but saw no one. When he went further and looked into the inner shrine, he was shocked to see an old man sleeping in the sanctum with his feet resting on the Shivalinga. Namadeva was aghast: Was this the great saint to seek whom he had walked three days from Pandarpur. The Lord himself had sent him here! Namadeva understood less and less. In anger he rushed to the old man, waking him rudely and ordering him to take his feet off the Lord. But Vishobakesha remained unperturbed. "I am an old and fragile man", he said, "please lift my feet and put them where the Lord is not."

Namadeva took the old man's feet and hastily moved them away from the Lingam. But when he wanted to put them down on the ground, lo, a second Shivalinga sprang up from under the earth as a footrest for the saint. Namadeva could move those sacred feet anywhere he liked, every time another Lingam sprang up from the ground to meet them. In the end the entire room was filled with Shivalingams there was no place to put them. So Namadeva placed them on his own head, where he was sure, no Shivalingam would grow. The moment that great jnani's feet touched his head, Namadeva was enlightened. In a flash he understood the all-pervading nature of the Supreme Self. Greatly ashamed of his ignorance Namadeva fell to the old man's feet and asked for wisdom. The sage smiled and said: "You have realised what you came to learn. Go back to Pandarpur." Namadeva returned in a different consciousness. In everything he perceived the vibrant presence of the Lord, the Self of all beings. After reaching Pandarpur, he did not visit the temple, but stayed at home. Four days went by, when not seeing Namadeva at the temple, Lord Panduranga Himself walked to his devotees house and knocked at the door. "Namadeva, my dear" He called "Please open the door. Where have you been so long, I'm missing you!" Namadeva did not open. From inside he called back to Panduranga: "My dear Lord, I have looked through your game. You won't fool me again. You made me believe the temple was the only place to meet you. But now I know that all is You and there is nothing but Yourself!" Panduranga laughed and returned to the temple, blessing Namadeva.

There lived in Pandharpur, near Namadeva's house a brahmin who came to be called Parissa Bhagavat. He had as a boon from goddess Rakhumai (Rukmini) obtained from her a parissa (a magic stone that transforms iron into gold by touch). The brahmin was very a ttached to his possession and warned his wife, Kamalaja, to keep the stone carefully hidden, and not to spread the news no anyone. But Kamalaja was a great friend of Namadeva's wife Rajai, and when the later complained about the poverty of her home, Kamalaja invited her to her home, showed her the parissa, with which she used to transform iron vessels into gold to sell them and get money for her livelihood, and even loaned it to her. When Namadeva came home and found a sumptuous meal waiting, he refused to eat and demanded an explanation. When Rajai confessed, Namadeva went straight to the Brahmin's house, asked to see the parissa and promptly flung it into the river. The brahmin came to Namadeva's house fuming with rage and demanded his stone back. He accused Namadeva of stealing it. Hearing the noise, all the neighbors collected. Parissa Bhagavat openly defamed Namadeva, calling him an impostor acting as a saint. Namadeva remained calm and said: "If this parissa means so much to you, I shall dive into the river and bring it back to you." Namadeva went under water and returned with handfuls of stones. He gave them to Parissa Bhagavat, to look for his magic piece among them. But when the people started trying them out, all the stones proofed to be parissas. The brahmin finally realised, how foolishly he had hankered for the fleeting riches of this world instead of seeking the everlasting bliss of God. He threw all the parissas back into the river and fell to Namadeva's feet. Parissa Bhagavat became a saintly devotee whose abhangas are still remembered.

 

Nandanar

The Periyapurana, a Saiva Siddhanta scripture, extols the lives of sixty-three devotees of Lord Shiva. Among them, the real life story of Nandanar explains the grace of Lord Shiva and the Love He confers upon His devotees irrespective of gender, caste or other worldly considerations.

In a village, engaged in the trade of selling the carcasses of cows and tending his landlord�s farm was an unusual person called Nandanar (his original name is not known). He had great love for Lord Shiva and was desperate to visit the temple of Thiruppunkoor. This place is situated a mile from the famous Vaidheeswaran temple, around an hour�s journey from Chidambaram (Thillai) [Lord Shiva has kindly permitted me to visit this temple many times].

However, his landlord would not grant him leave and allow him to go, despite frequent requests. Finally, one day in frustration the landlord said, �If you can till all the 40 acres of my land in a single day, you may go.� The devotee, who knew no one else to help, prayed to Lord Shiva and pleaded with Him to fulfil his wish of visiting His temple by removing this worldly obstacle. Overnight, while Nandanar was soundly sleeping at home, Lord Shiva tilled the land for His devotee. This is ample proof that Lord Shiva will even undergo discomforts to please His true devotee.

Amazed at this miracle, the landlord fell at the feet of Nandanar and recognized him to be a great person. He immediately gave Nandanar the necessary things for the journey and bade him farewell. Nandanar, who arrived at the temple with great expectations was disappointed to know that he could not enter the temple since he belonged to the lowest caste by birth. Therefore, he stood outside the temple and tried to see the idol of Lord Shiva. But his vision was blocked by the idol of Lord Shiva�s vahana, the bull Nandi.

Nandanar prayed to Lord Shiva that he should be granted a vision of His image in the temple. It is, however, said that Lord Shiva was even more anxious to see the bliss of His devotee and, therefore, requested Nandi to move to the side. The Nandi moved several feet and has remained there even to this day. With the movement of Nandi, Nandanar could see Lord Shiva despite standing outside the temple. Since he made the Nandi move, the devotee became to be called Nandanar. Elated with the vision, he wanted to do something for the temple. But what can a poor devotee do? Seeing that the temple lacked a water tank, he built a tank in honour of Lord Shiva.

After Nandanar returned to his village, he wanted to go to Thillai but he was caught up in his work. He expressed his desire to everyone, and slowly people started asking him every day, �When are you leaving for Thillai?� He used to say �Tomorrow I will go.� It is said that everyone started calling him �Naalai� because he used to say �tomorrow� every time. Finally, one day he decided to leave.

In Thillai, because of his low caste (parrayan), he stopped at the top of every street and shouted �Varuhalamo� (May I come in?) The high caste people would close their doors and stay inside till he crossed the street. Nandanar was very afraid to enter the temple and stayed in the city.

The song �Varuhalaamo (May I come)� is very beautiful. The second stanza goes:

�You are the treasure of compassion, are you not?
This parrayan, is he fit to pay you compliments?
To see your blissful dance, May I come in?
O Thillai Varadaa One who can extinguish
my feverish longing (of seeing you)
May I come in?�

Shiva taking pity on him appeared in the dreams of many brahmins and told them there was a superior bhakta, and that the brahmins were to construct a fire and Nandanar would enter it and come out unscathed.

Therefore the Brahmins built a huge fire and called Nandanar to cross the fire. The story goes that he crossed the fire without any burns and entered the temple, but did not come out of the temple, because he merged into the Lord Nataraja there.

This story has not been told in Periyapuranam in detail but Bharatiyar brings the cruel situation of casteism/racism between people and shows how the Lord does not look at the jati (caste) but only prema (love). Such is the Lila of the three-eyed one, who dances eternally to please His devotees and whose Love has no equal.

 

 

 

 

1 1 1