Esp. Tamil Sri Vaishnavas

Adiyen know my Acharyan
Sri Rangaramanuja Mahadesika Swamy being Tamil teacher in poorvAshraman has quoted குறள் in uttaraashramam as well.

Many other AchAryAs also quoted.

The rigid SriVaishnava community which conflicts itself philosophically between Swamy Desikan & Manavaala Maanunigal has accepted வள்ளுவ பெருந்தகை how?

Dasanudasan

Swamy,

Namaskaaram.
Possible reason: Thiruvalluvar wrote those aspects that comes under Samanya Dharmam – like importance of speaking truth, not being jealousy, not getting into gossips, asceticism – which are kind of eternal truth or principles, leading to his writings being hailed as Podhu Marai and being quoted.

Adiyen
Ramanujadasan.

In a lighter vein.

Other acharyas could have quoted probably because both deals with   அறம், பொருள், மற்றும் இன்பம். Thiruvallur is not considered an acharya, since திருக்குறள் is not detailing with வீடு as in the case of Vaishnavism.    

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha,

Winsome conversations by all BhagavatAs by exposing certain Kural verses that reflects the core SriVaishnava objectives of Moksha, Kankaryam etc….To strengthen it more, the first verse of Kural
அகர முதல எழுத்தெல்லாம் ஆதி
பகவன் முதற்றே உலகு,

அகர –> அ first letter “ஆகாரமாக” – விஷ்ணுவைக் குறிப்பதாகும், which is the ஆதி பகவன் (Aadhi BhagavAn), SriKrishna the Supreme Almighty GOD.

So only a SriVaishnavaite can start their first verse praising the Almighty GOD, which makes it evident that Thiruvalluvar is a SriVaishnavaite, and the other verses following the trend.
************

However to concrete the base question
“Why Tiruvalluvar being quoted by SriVaishnavas?….”

1) Periyazhvar Shishya is Thiruvalluvar,
2) Thiruvalluvar, original name is “Selva Nambhi”, who was the minister-chief scholar of King Pandya.
3) King Pandya has one time doubt “Who is Paradevatha (Almighty GOD)”?. So he discussed with his minister guru Selva Nambhi about answer, but Selva Nambhi though know the answer from His AcharyA Periyazhvar, recommended King Pandya to hold a scholarly debate session by a inviting all scholars around the world to get answer by hanging a porkizhi (bag of gold), which will automatically fall down with Divine grace, ONLY if the Absolute True Answer as per Shastras will be told. Selva Nambhi wanted to actually honor His AcharyA in the Sabha, though Periyazhvar interest is to do only Pushpa Kankaryam and Not debate, that’s the reason He made this plan.
The rest of the story, we have heard in Swami’s upanyasams how Perumal appeared in PeriyaAzhvars dream in madurai and told Axhvar to talk HIM as the Paradevatha, then Axhvar got the Porkizhi and while retiring, Perumal appeared in Garuda Vahana Infront of Axhvar. That’s when Periyazhvar sings பல்லாண்டு பல்லாண்டு………
3) Now, in the Pallandu pasuram, Periyazhvar also says……அபி மானதுங்கன் செல்வனைப் போலத் திருமா லேநானும் உனக்குப் பழவடியேன்…..

Means, like for YOU Perumal the favorite “Abhimaana Selvan” (Selva Nambhi), I also wanted to be a Dasan to YOU.

In SriVaishnavism,
Selva also said by Thiru (Sri),
Nambhi also said as Vallabha (Gyana Poornar).
So Selva Nambhi is Sri Vallabha or Thiru Vallabha and with respect people started adding suffix as “R” as Thiru VallabhaR as Thiru ValluvAr down the periods.

உத்தம ஸ்ரீவைஷ்ணவரான ” திருவள்ளுவர்” காட்டிய சரணாகதி நெறியின்படி நாமும் வாழ்ந்து உயரலாம்.

Adiyen (ElayaAlwar) Srinivasa (DhoddayacharyAr) Dasan

Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha
Super discussion . Thanks to all swamies.
Dasanudasan

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha,

@ SriVaishnava Dasan BhagavatA,

Regarding

“………Thiruvalluvar and proving Selva Nambi to be Thiruvalluvar is not apt.

I believe Selva Nambi, sishya of Periyazhwar, is different from Thiruvalluvar……..”

I would recommend you to ask or have a vidhva sadhas debate with APN Swami to provide references for proof.…. Also Velukkudi Swami has delivered upanyasams about Thiruvalluvar as SriVaishnava as in above link by BadriNarayan Swami.

Guruparamparai book is a collection of stories of Alwars, Acharyas written by different Acharyas or shishyar of different times, gathered by different persons and made as a garland of stories by past Acharyas for future to Cherish.

So, with our limited knowledge, we can say it is not in Guruparamparai, but it is not necessary it is intentionally missed, it could be in other SriVaishnava shishyar Grantham’s or books. You can ask APN Swami, He can give you, since HE is a revered Ubaya Vedantha Swami and they speak things based on Pramaanams. Are you trying to say that APN Swami is lying?

Adiyen (ElayaAlwar) Srinivasa (DhoddayacharyAr) Dasan.

@ElayaAlwar Bhagavata,

It was devareer who brought in first how Selva nambi is turned Thiru valluvar down the period. While expressing on my non acceptance of this point how the name is turned as mentioned by you, I have additionally provided the write up link of Sri APN swamy. Hence having brought in point first, you are obliged to provide detail in this regard and not me to have debate with anyone.

My response only indicated that I differed with the point mentioned. How it can be termed that I have mentioned him to be lying.  I request you to indicate where I have used the word “lying”.

I have my own judgemental analysis to accept a point and will not accept as it is. If I can not take discussion further I will mention (as l indicated in this thread) or keep silent and will not redirect suggesting to have debate with third party who is not participating in the discussion.

With conflicting information available in internet, I feel it will be very difficult to take it further for me.From SriVaishnava dasan

True. I am not knowledgeable to have vidhva sadhas debate. (I hope by ‘vidhva sadhas debate’ it is meant vedantic debate amongst the learned). I have confidence in myself, If I were a U Ve (in such case, I would not be member in this forum), I can take it and would have asked concerned person to initiate. People are proficient in their area of work. Unfortunately, I did not take up spirituality as my field.

There is no necessity that one should accept and fall in line, as mentioned by any learned. It is a process and after discussion one can accept / not accept. Having a difference of opinion have been prevalent for centuries. Even in this forum few differed with the views / speeches of revered U. Ves. One can check in this regard. Can one ask them to have debate with those U. Ves. Consider this one which was quoted in other thread ::

So Acharyas and Upanyasakars pick the elements of Bhakthi Yoga maargham like detachments, viragyma words just to frighten us in-order to keep us away from Lowkikas, though it has nothing to do with Moksham, since we are reaching Moksham due to Swami RamanujAr NirHedhukai Krupai and not even our Sharnagathy.From ElayaAlwar

This amounts to saying that Acharyas and Upanyasakars are lying about detachment etc., No one has asked the member to have debate with Acharyas and Upanyasakars. I have requested to provide only any reference, but the response is yet to be received.

அடியேன் நமஸ்காரம்
திருவள்ளுவரை ஆச்சாரியர்கள் மேற் கோள் காட்ட காரணம் அவரது தமிழ் பான்டித்யம்,சொல்ல வருவதை குட்டையாக(குறள்) கூறுதல்,வாமன அவதாரத்தை குறள் உருவு என்று ஆழ்வார்கள் கூறுவர்
திருக்குறள் வார்த்தைகள் திருவாய் மொழியில் பார்க்க கிடைக்கும் ( அந்தம் இல் ஆதி அம் பகவன்)

பிணக்கற அறுவகைச் சமயமும் நெறியுள்ளி யுரைத்த,

கணக்கறு நலத்தனன் அந்தமி லாதியம் பகவன்,

வணக்குடைத் தவநெறி வழிநின்று புறநெறி களைகட்டு,

உணக்குமின் பசையற அவனுடை, யுணர்வுகொண் டுணர்ந்தே. 1.3.5

மேலும் திருவள்ளுவர் பெருமாளை தாமரை கண்ணன் என்கிறார் அவரது காமத்துபால் குறளில்

குறள் எண் : 1103
தாம்வீழ்வார் மென்றோள் துயிலின் இனிதுகொல்
தாமரைக் கண்ணான் உலகு.