You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : December 1999

rules of interpretation

From: sampath kumar (
Date: Thu Dec 30 1999 - 02:21:50 PST

Dear friends,

These days although adiyen avoids reflecting upon the
"tiruppAvai" on the bhakti-list, adiyen can't help
continuing to do so silently within the safe confines
of his heart and the outer limit of his living-room.

Out of one such silent musing-session, adiyen comes up
with a small question. Hopefully, scholars on the
list, and those steeped in the "vyAkhyAna-grantha-s",
might perhaps be able to clarify and educate adiyen
about it.

adiyen notices that in the 'tiruppAvai' some of the
things which 'pirAtti' says in an earlier 'pAsuram'
she says it differently in a later 'pAsuram'.
Sometimes what is said in a later 'pasuram' appears
almost as a retraction of what was hinted in an
earlier 'pasuram'. 

Pundits and "achAryA-s", however, interpret the
message and content of latter 'pasurams' as overriding
those of earlier ones.

adiyen wonders if the rule of interpretation being
followed here is the same as what in the
"meemAmsa-sAstra" is known as the rule of
"apacchEda-nyAya" according to which, if and when
there is a variance between two different portions of
a scriptural text, that which is the latter would
prevail over the former. In very technical terms, they
say that which is "para" (latter) is always more
powerful than that which is "purva" (the former).

Applying the above rule of interpretation, may we
perhaps say that messages of truth we glean out of the
final 2 or 3 'pasurams', will simply override or
nullify related ones of all previous 'pAsuram-s'?  

Please comment.
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.