Pasuram 7.5.1

Tamil text and transliteration:

கற்பார் இராம பிரானை அல்லால் மற்றும் கற்பரோ?,
புல்பா முதலா புல்எறும்புஆதி ஒன்றுஇன்றியே,
நல்பால் அயோத்தியில் வாழும் சராசரம் முற்றவும்,
நல்பாலுக்கு உய்த்தனன் நான்முக னார்பெற்ற நாட்டுளே? (2)

kaṟpār irāma pirāṉai allāl maṟṟum kaṟparō?,
pulpā mutalā puleṟumpuāti oṉṟuiṉṟiyē,
nalpāl ayōttiyil vāḻum carācaram muṟṟavum,
nalpālukku uyttaṉaṉ nāṉmuka ṉārpeṟṟa nāṭṭuḷē? (2)

English translation of verse 7.5.1:

Will those in quest of Knowledge seek to Know any but Irāmapirāṉ,
Who did instil love great for Him even in the smallest ant
And tiny grass in Ayōtti, the blessed city (with God-love rampant),
Things still and mobile, with no effort on their part,
Of all the places in this world, created by Nāṉmukaṉ?

Notes:

(i) When Irāmapirāṉ (Śrī Rāma) went into exile, even inanimate things got choked with grief, the trees withered away, the tanks and rivers boiled up to such an extent that none could go near them. And when He returned to Ayodhyā at the end of His exile, the trees started yielding fruits out of season, the orchards were all in full blossom, betokening the exuberance of their joy over the Lord’s home-coming. Such was the great spell of love cast upon all things, still and mobile, and all creatures in the blessed Kingdom of Ayodhā, by Lord Rāma! It has to be noted that this God-love of amazing magnitude was generated in them by the Lord’s spontaneous grace, without any effort on their part such as pursuing the paths of discipline laid down by the Śastras for cultivationg it. This aspect has been dwelt upon in aphorism 105 of ‘Ācārya Hṛdayam’ with the Author’s characteristic profundity. Even trees and animals were spell-bound, when the Lord, during His next Avatāra as Kṛṣṇa, produced sweet strains from His magic flute.

(ii) In his ‘Dramiḍopaniṣad tātparya Ratnāvali’ Śrī Vedānta Deśika, however, interprets this song, as referring to final emancipation of all things and beings in Ayodhya, due solely to Śrī Rāma’s voluntary grace. “Śākethe muktidhānāt”. All the other glossators, except the author of the twelve thousand grantha commentary, hold that this song highlights Lord Rāma’s extraordinary grace in investing the creatures in Ayodhyā with an abundance of God-love, matching with that of the denizens in the High Heaven. Nāṉmukaṉ (Brahmā) is the demi-urge nominated by the Supreme Lord for carrying out the function of creation. Even so, in the worlds created by him there was just one place known as Ayodhyā where all creatures, including the tiniest of beings and things like the ants and grass, were soaked exclusively in love for Lord Rāma, instead of being dependent on Brahmā, the ostensible Creator. Among the living creatures, the ant is the smallest and the grass is the tiniest among things, still and immobile. Mention of these two in this song, goes to emphasise that it is not one’s spiritual learning and deep erudition that secure the final goal of ‘Mokṣa’ but the Lord’s sweet to spontaneous grace and ‘apratiṣedha’ or non-resistance the influx of His grace, on the part of the beneficiaries. Of all places within the ambit of creation of that functionary, known as Brahmā, there is just one, called Ayodhyā where all things and beings from the highest to the lowest, subsist on God-love a passionate love for Śrī Rāma, in total replacement of the normal source of sustenance, namely, food. And, therefore, can one long to know of any but Lord Rāma who instilled such love out of His sweet, spontaneous grace?

(iii) Among our Pūrvācāryas (Great Preceptors), Kūrattāḻvāṉ felt that the perfections and graces of Godship were complete in His incarnation as Rāma, eclipsing the glories of all the other Avatāras of the Lord. Bhaṭṭārya, the illustrious son of the illustrious father, had also a distinct predilection for Rāmāvatāra, before whom all the other Avatāras paled into insignificance, according to him. One day, he reacted sharply to the observation made by one Ciriāttāṉ that Lord Rāma did not display the virtue of condescension (Saulabhya) to the remarkable extent displayed by Lord Kṛṣṇa by running an errand, on behalf of the Pāṇḍavas like unto a carrier-pigeon. Bhaṭṭārya stoutly defended his own position, saying: “It is not so; Rāma would have certainly been prepared to go as a messenger but there was none to bid him to carry any message”.