Arunagirinathar

(pronunciation = 'aruna-giri-naa-thar')

Full text (Tamil & English) of "muthai-tharu pathi thiru-Nagai"

Listen to "muthai-tharu pathi thiru-Nagai"
(courtesy of Kaumaram.org)

For the complete collection of Thiruppugal songs, click here

*** Most prominent among them being the late Sri T.A. Gopinatha Rao who has published a lengthy article in the "Indian Antiquary" of 1918.

[NOTE: The in-dented information that follows hereon after is a collection of references used by the author to give the internal evidence account of Arunagirinathar's life — either supporting or disproving facts about the Saint's life.]

The internal evidence account of Saint Arunagirinathar's life is based on Rao Bahadur V.S. Chengalvaraya Pillai's Tamil work, "Arunagirinathar: Varalaarum Noolaaraychiyum (Arunagirinathar: Life and research on his works)," published in the year 1947. Our revered and scholarly Pillai Avl, has done a tremendous work, a novel and original thought of his, in codifying the "Murugavel Panniru Thirumurai" corresponding to the "Saiva Panniru Thirumurai," for which we are indebted to him. According to his research based on internal evidences of the Thiruppugal and other works of Arunagirinathar, the life of the saint, in his above work, is thus:

It is worthwhile to record that our revered and late Sri V.S. Chengalvaraya Pillai has quoted authorities for each and every one of the facts mentioned above from the nook and corner of Arunagirinathar's works and also from other sources, which all reveal Arunagirinathar's high scholarship, deep knowledge and devotion to God. However, it is astonishing to note that Pillai has knowingly omitted certain facts, which of course, he has admitted in the very preface itself. He says:

As we cannot with any certainty say that the printed Thiruppugal songs are Arunagirinathar's own words; and as it was the wont with the Tamil saints to depict themselves as being caught up in Maya, though really unaffected by it, for the sake of teaching to the world, I have consciously omitted even certain internal evidences afraid of quoting them as referring to Arunagirinathar's life, as for instance:

1. In Thiruppugal verses***** 392, 752, 1301, though Arunagirinathar's words are clear to prove that he led a life (of Grihasta) with wife, children, sister-in-law and other relatives, yet hesitating to boldly state as such I have omitted the same.

2. (a) As regards Arunagirinathar's caste, he condemns himself in T. No. 26***** as a "low one who avowedly consumes meat." From this, can one say he belongs to a meat-eating caste? And again, in verse 31 of the Kanthar Anthaathi, Arunagirinathar himself says, "O Brahmins, who mercilessly kill goats and do Yagas or sacrifices!" Is he, who thus condemns Brahmins (of their acts of killing of animals), one belonging to the meat-eating caste?

(b) Further, in his work, "Sasanat Tamizhkavi Charitam," Rao Saheb M. Raghava Iyengar refers to Arunagirinathar as "Sarva-Bhauma Dindima Kavi," "Ashta-Bhasha Paramesvara," etc. Now, if we propose to claim Arunagirinathar to be a Brahmin because there is a lot of the usage of Sanskrit language in his Tamil works, (it cannot be; since) we are led to think that one who had obtained "countless powers" due to the special grace of Lord Murugan, should the use of Sanskrit language present any difficulty?

*****T. No. refer to the Thiruppugal numbers in the author's work, "Murugavel Panniru Thirumurai."

To avoid these confusions, I have stated that Arunagirinathar's caste is unknown, being satisfied that he is a great Tapasvin and a Knower of Truth, concludes Sri V.S.C. Pillai.***

***As I had no occasion to study the Thiruppugal songs earlier, when I read this preface of his, I was eager to have a first-hand knowledge of what Arunagirinathar says in the songs referred to in the preface as well as in all the other Thiruppugal songs. I, therefore, felt it was necessary to glance through them, at least, and in doing so many facts were revealed.

Now, let us consider the above points.

1. A free rendering of T. No. 392 would be:

Wife ridiculing, all townsmen ridiculing, all women-fold ridiculing; father and relatives;

Dejected in mind, I also dejected in heart, all people thoughtlessly using condemning words and speaking low of me;

Darkness enveloping my pondering mind, I thought "Is this the happiness of my having taken birth?";

And reflecting thus daily, when I decided to cast the soul off from this body - those feet that you granted then, O Lord grant me again;

The song begins with the words, "wife-ridiculing." While the ridicule of his wife, father, relatives, etc. is the cause of Arunagirinathar's taking a decision to put an end to his life, Sri Pillai has taken the effect as an authentic information but ignored the very cause itself. In a song of this type, to take some facts as relevant and cast away some others as irrelevant, and that too, to ignore the cause-factor and accept the effect, neither seems to be rational nor brings soundness to one's research.

Moreover, the facts that Arunagirinathar decided to end his life, that he knew the different earlier Tamil works, etc. are supported by a few authorities only. While these facts can be taken as relevant to Arunagirinathar's life, why not also take that Arunagirinathar was married, had a wife, children, mother, father, and relatives - a fact that Arunagirinathar says in unambiguous terms in not less than 30 places, i.e., in his Thiruppugal poems as well as in his other works.

Further, it is said that it was the wont of great Tamil saints and poets to take upon themselves the shortcomings of the masses, repent for such low acts and invoke the grace of God to condone their evils and shower His blessings; and this method they adopted as an effective means of transforming people, as the poems are given in first person, capable of touching the hearts of people when they recite them. It is, therefore, held by many that the shortcomings depicted by Arunagirinathar in Thirupugal songs need not necessarily refer to him and should not be taken literally. Sri V.S.C. Pillai also contributes to this view, and there is some truth in it. But he seems to have forgotten the important point that this view is advanced primarily to relieve Arunagirinathar of such evils as debauchery, etc., and not so much to deny that he was a householder; because while prostitution is an evil and sin, Grihasthasrama (state of householder) is not an evil, crime, or shortcoming. On the other hand, Grihasthasrama is a praise-worthy stage of life, more so according to the Tamil scriptures. It is, therefore, really ununderstandable that, while contributing to the above view, Sri Pillai should accept that Arunagirinathar indulged in prostitution but not be prepared to accede that he led a householder's life. When remote and vague internal evidences are given due authenticity to support even minor facts, what is the harm in accepting that Arunagirinathar led a family life when there are umpteen evidences for the same? Will it diminish Arunagirinathar's greatness? Or can we add an inch to his greatness in ignoring this fact? Perhaps to accept that he had wife and children might lend support to the acceptance of that fact that Arunagirinathar's son has referred about Arunagirinathar in one of his Sanskrit works and that a descendant of Arunagirinathar has donated for the construction of an altar for him at his native village Mullandiram, - facts which are proved by historians based on inscriptions, etc. (as seen earlier)! Is it not strange that he who, setting aside the traditional and historical accounts, has set forth to write the life of Arunagirinathar based mainly on internal evidences should ignore certain vital facts of life so conspicuously disclosed in his works!

Here we can have a useful and pertinent diversion to see how far this view is right - the view that what Arunagirinathar has portrayed of himself in the Thiruppugal songs do not refer to him, that he never led an evil or sensuous life (including a family life), and that his early life was pure and unblemished.

It is true that great men take upon themselves the evils of the general masses, and Arunagirinathar, too, has done so in some Thiruppugal songs with the intention of educating and reforming the evil-doers. This can be evident from such songs as T. No. 121: "Seeralasadan"; T. No. 180: "Thitamili"; T. No. 183 "Pancha Paadagan"; T. No. 576: "Pulaiyanaana"; T. No. 611: "Avaguna Viraganai"; T. No. 291: "Thaakkamarukkoru"; T. No. 363: "Maalaasai Kopa"; etc., wherein he condemns himself in general terms - as a sinner, an egotistic person, a fool, a good-for-nothing person, an uncultured, an unlettered, etc. , etc., - and prays to the Lord for His grace. Such poems are depictions, no doubt, because the evils mentioned in these are of a general nature. Also, there are poems which can prove that he was well-versed in the earlier works of the Tamil and Sanskrit languages, that he was cultured, that he had practised Tapas in his earlier births, etc., all which will be contradicted if the above verses are to be taken literally. Since the condemnation in these Thiruppugal songs is of a general nature, we can easily take these poems as depictions and not literally as referring to himself.

Full text (Tamil & English) of "Avaguna Viraganai"

Listen to "Avaguna Viraganai"
(courtesy of Kaumaram.org)

For the complete collection of Thiruppugal songs, click here

But, all Thiruppugal poems are not of this type only and Arunagirinathar cannot be said to merely take upon himself the evils, shortcomings and misdeeds of others, because there are also poems of a quite different type wherein he does not condemn in general terms as a low man, a fool, etc., but says something worse and of a different nature altogether, i.e., something of a personal nature.

In many of his Thiruppugal songs, which are rather more in number than the depiction-poems, he vividly describes his different experiences with the prostitute women - how they lure men, what they talk in privacy, how they offer measured (i.e. less or liberal) enjoyment in commensurate with the wealth offered by men, what modifications their different limbs undergo before, at the time of, and following the sexual act, what sounds they produce, what experiences the lover himself undergoes, etc., etc. One can clearly see that there is an element of one's personal experience in these poems. While the evils and wrong deeds of others, which are of a general nature, can be portrayed in oneself, experiences cannot be so done unless one has had them for oneself. Such poems as T. No. 46: "Angai Menkuzhal Aaivaar"; T. No. 287: "Koonthal Avizhthu"; T. No. 329: "Angai Neettiya"; T. No. 336: "Kumutha Vaaikkani"; T. No. 364: "Megamenum Kuzhal"; T. No. 785: "Paadagach Chilambodu"; etc., can give ample testimony to the fact that these are Arunagirinathar's personal experiences.

Not only this. In certain Thiruppugal songs, Arunagirinathar vehemently criticizes and abuses public women with such piercing, forceful and dirty words that they cannot be mere depictions. He must have undergone such suffering and torture at their hands that he scolds, abuses, criticizes, and curses them to his heart's content, as though to avenge for the harm they have done to him. He does not seem to be satisfied with attacking them in a few poems; he takes recourse to it again and again. Such must have been the immensity of his suffering at the hands of the fallen women that he could not rest satisfied with merely praising the Lord for having saved him from their clutches, but also vehemently attacks them as though in a revengeful attitude. This can be evident from T. No. 267: "Thodaththulakkigal"; T. No. 269: "Thiruttu Naarigal"; T. No. 677: "Kanavaalan Koorvizhi"; T. No. 698: "Kadiya Vega Maaraatha"; T. No. 884: "Kuritha Nenjaasai"; etc., etc.

Further, a scrutiny of such songs as T. No. 392: "Manaiyaval Nagaikka"; T. No. 509: "Kumara Gurupara"; T. No. 513: "Makara Merikadal"; T. No. 916: "Thiruvuroopa Neraaga"; etc., will leave no room to doubt that Arunagirinathar not merely led a family life but that his indulgence in debauchery was real and not a mere depiction, because the special favors conferred by the Lord, as acknowledged by the Saint in these poems, are of a purely personal nature and were granted to Arunagirinathar and not to somebody else, and as these divine favors saved him from indulgence in prostitution, ridicule of his wife, etc., these facts cannot be as much real and pertaining to Arunagirinathar as the favors obtained by him. It cannot be that the blessings mentioned were received by him and the evils which those blessings cured or removed are of someone else, i.e., these songs cannot be depictions.

Above all, Arunagirinathar himself says in unambiguous terms that his entanglement in the meshes of public women was due to his past deeds and as ordained by Brahma (T. No. 584: "Vidhiyathaagave"; T. No. 842: "Thodutha Naal Mudhal").

Thus, we can see that the Thiruppugal songs are of various types: there are poems of self-condemnation by way of depiction of others' evils upon himself, to educate the masses and help turn the minds of men towards God; there are poems of confession and repentance over his past evil life with the courtesans, to be freed fro which he seeks God's grace; there are gratitude-showing poems wherein he acknowledges the special favors conferred on him, which saved him from the clutches of prostitute women; there are poems of severe attack and criticism of public women, to avenge the harm done to him. There are also poems which do not come under any of the above classifications. There are poems which reveal the different kinds of spiritual experience obtained by Arunagirinathar purely out of the Lord's infinite grace; there are poems which are only praises of God (T. No. 100: "Naatha Vindhu"; T. No. 270: "Araka Sivanari"; T. No. 366: "Saravana Jaataa"; T. No. 101: "Bothkantharu"; T. No. 654: "Paramagurunaatha"; T. No. 730: "Seethala Vaarija"); there are poems which contain information on different subjects such as diseases (T. No. 228: "Vaadamodu"; T. No. 260: "Irumaluroga"; T. No. 582: "Valivaada"); Yoga (T. No. 190: "Moolankilarodu"; T. No. 647: "Naalu Sathuratha"; T. No. 652: "Mathiya Manguna"; T. No. 896: "Pancha Pulanum"; T. No. 1114: "Neerunila Mandaatha"); music (Tala); etc., etc. Hence, we cannot bring all Thiruppugal songs under a single category of depiction, etc., nor can we relegate one category of poems to another. They have to be carefully sifted and Arunagirinathar understood in his true perspective, which is, of course, not an easy task.

Full text (Tamil & English) of "naatha vinthu"

Listen to "naatha vinthu"

Adobe Acrobat file

Full text (Tamil & English) of "pOthakan tharu"

Listen to "pOthakan tharu"

Adobe Acrobat file

Full text (Tamil & English) of "irumalu rOka"

Listen to "irumalu rOka"

Adobe Acrobat file

Full text (Tamil & English) of "pakkuva kaachaara"

Listen to "pakkuva kaachaara"
(courtesy of Kaumaram.org)

For the complete collection of Thiruppugal songs, click here

Though the Thiruppugal songs are, in general, variegated in their nature and purpose in their first halves, their second halves are almost of a uniform nature in that they extol the Lord of Six Faces in diverse ways. Hence, the name Thiruppugal - songs of praise (Pugal), of God or the Glorious One (Thiru).

The dexterity of Arunagirinathar in dealing with the theme dealt with each Thiruppugal is such that he infuses life into it. His ability is par excellence and he is a past master in the art of revealing facts and his experiences - whether temporal or spiritual, sensory or divine - in touching and lively expressions. This has so much endeared Arunagirinathar to Saint Thayumanavar that the latter exclaims:

Aiyaa Arunagiri Appaa Unnaippol
Maiyaaga Oru Sol Vilambinar Yaar?

"O Arunagirinathar, my (spiritual) father! Who has, like you, uttered a word of truth?"

(a) As regards Sri Pillai's views on T. No. 26 and Kanthar Anthaathi verse 31, I may quote from Sri Sadhu Anuvanandaji's article, "Life of Sri Arunagirinathar," published in the Sri Vallimalai Thiruppugal Sacchidananda Swami Centenary Jayanti Souvenir (1970) as follows:

"These are not formidable objections, for Arunagirinathar as a Gowda Brahmin may be permitted to partake of certain animal-food by the rules of his caste, but even then Arunagirinathar deplores his indulgence in it. Even a Brahmin could condemn animal-sacrifices in Yajnas as they have become scarce at the time, being disapproved by the better class of Brahmins."

Thus, the statements that Arunagirinathar ate meat and yet condemned Brahmins eating meat are neither irreconcilable nor do they nullify our claim to Arunagirinathar being a Brahmin.

Apart from the above reply, we may offer one from another point of view, which would appear to be more appropriate and convincing:

Arunagirinathar's confession of "eating meat with eagerness" only hints at the fact that he did belong by birth, to a non-meat-eating caste (a Brahmin) and that his eating meat was only accidental, i.e., in and due to the company of courtesans (who are meat-eaters), T. No. 391: "Soodu Kolai"; who are dirty ones that give stimulating and intoxicating food-stuffs as diet, T. No. 677: "Kanavaalang Koorvizhi"; who commit murders, who spoil the high and noble births of people, who have no regard for the caste-distinctions, T. No. 817: "Vangaara Maarpilani") and whose association is the cause for the five great sins (Pancha-Mahapatakas) and many other vices, from which meat-eating cannot be excluded. And, Arunagirinathar's condemnation of the Brahmins' merciless acts of himsa or cruelty of killing goats in Yajnas, only, again, hints that though he belonged to the Brahmin caste, yet, he condemned it because it is an act of cruelty which deserves condemnation whether done by Brahmins or others. In both these statements, Arunagirinathar has stated bare facts - facts as they are, for which act he is outstanding. A Brahmin openly confessing that he ate meat, and at the same time condemning the Brahmins' merciless act of killing animals in sacrifice enhance his greatness, for who but Arunagirinathar would venture to state facts so frankly? He is an exceptional type of person to whom disclosing facts thread-bare is simple and spontaneous. While Arunagirinathar, thus, condemns the cruel acts of Brahmins, he, on the other hand, also praises them for the observance of their pious and prescribed religious deeds in T. No. 625: "Thaathu Maamalar": "O Lord who is worshpped daily, as prescribed in the Vedas, without any flaw, and very ceremoniously by the 3000 glorious Brahmins (at Chidambaram)"; T. No. 432: "Vilaikku Meniyil": "O Lord who is enshrined at Thirukkonamalai, where reside eminent Brahmins who are versed in the four Vedas which are eternal"; T. No. 504: "Kuruthi Pulaal"; T. No. 577: "Bhoga Karpakkadavul"; etc., etc.

(b) If Arunagirinathar's use of Sanskrit words is attributable to the "countless powers" he attained due to the Lord's grace, can we not, with the same breath, say that his knowledge of the different earlier Tamil works referred to in Thiruppugal, etc., is also due to the very same "countless powers" conferred by God? Why should we, then, attribute them to Arunagirinathar? One would do justice in attributing all that is of any worth in Arunagirinathar to the Lord's grace, rather than attribute certain aspects to the Lord and certain others to Arunagirinathar, which Arunagirinathar himself would feel shy to claim.

Arunagirinathar says in T. No. 432: "Vilaikku Meniyil": "O Lord Muruga, whose form is of the essence of the songs composed by Vasishtha, Kasyapa, Yogis well up in Tapas, Agastya Muni, Idaikkaadar, and Nakkirar!" While the songs composed by the latter ones are in Tamil, those of Vasishtha and others are in Sanskrit. It is, therefore, quite evident that Arunagirinathar was well conversant not only with the Tamil works of Idaikkaadar and others, but also with the Sanskrit works of Vasishtha and others.

Also, Arunagirinathar's mention of "Munis offering Tarpana, uttering 'Aadityaaya' (to the Sun-God), doing the Gayathri Japa and Archana in the early morning, after a clean bath, facing the east" (T. No. 508: "Velaippol") can be taken as sufficient proof of not only his knowledge of the Sanskrit language but also his belonging to a caste to which these rituals are obligatory and with which he was naturally well conversant; for, otherwise, he could never give such a meticulous detail.

A critical study of his Thiruppugal songs will, on the other hand, reveal to our own surprise that Arunagirinathar's knowledge of the Tamil language was conferred on him by Lord Skanda, whom he extols as the Tamil-God.

"O Lord, who gave me the glorious Tamil language that I could daily sing the praises of your radiant divine feet," says Arunagirinathar in T. No. 214: "Sarana Kamalaalayattai."

Full text (Tamil & English) of "saraNagama laala yathai"

Listen to "saraNagama laala yathai"

For the complete collection of Thiruppugal songs, click here

We do not find Arunagirinathar acknowledging anywhere to this effect in regard t the use of Sanskrit in his works. It appears that Lord Murugan ordained Arunagirinathar to sing in the Tamil language, though he knew both the languages, giving him a special power to compose poems in that language when He gave the first line to start with. Perhaps, but for this special conference and ordainment to sing His glories in the Tamil language, Arunagirinathar would have, in all probability, done it in the Sanskrit language itself in which he seems to have had a greater mastery even from his early life. Yet his proficiency in, his knowledge of, and his love for Sanskrit is so much that he could not resist the spontaneous overflow and lavish use of Sanskrit phrases and words, and even full stanzas, in many a Thiruppugal, as well as in his other works. Such exuberant use of Sanskrit in Tamil works is also a special feature of Arunagirinathar's works and is rarely seen in the Tamil works of other saints. Hence, we can conclude, with all emphasis, that Arunagirinathar's knowledge of the Sanskrit language was not due to the "countless powers" conferred on him by the Lord, but that he was well-versed in both the Sanskrit and Tamil languages even from his early life, having born in a Brahmin family.

And, if we are to accept that Arunagirinathar knew the Thirukkural, etc., merely because there is direct or indirect mention of them in a few places in his works, we should also be charitable enough to accept that he knew the Vedas, the Upanishads, etc., to which also he makes reference in innumerable places. But, surprisingly, Sri Pillai has failed to record all these facts, i.e., that Arunagirinathar was well-versed in Sanskrit and that he knew the Vedas, Upanishads, etc. His research does not seem to be impartial, certain facts being intentionally omitted.

It cannot be argued that the use of Sanskrit words, etc., was due to the "countless powers" conferred on Arunagirinathar by the Lord, for the same argument will hold good in respect of item (b) above. Hence, if we are to take internal evidences as authentic in respect of item (b), we cannot help accepting item (c) as true.

Items (b) and (c) suggest that Arunagirinathar must have hailed form a highly religious and cultural family whose tradition it is to educate their children in both the Tamil and Sanskrit languages, i.e., he belonged to a Brahmin family.

[NOTE: The in-dented information that follows hereon after is a collection of references used by the author to give the internal evidence account of Arunagirinathar's life — either supporting or disproving facts about the Saint's life.]

There are, of course, different versions with a lot of variations regarding the above incidence. Some hold that when Sambandandan prayed to Kali, she appeared before him and said to him that she could be seen by him alone and not by the king and others. Another version, in this context, is that the Devi was bound by Her promise to give Darshana only for a period of twelve years, which period was over just the day prior to the contest and so she did not appear at all. Sambandandan, however, requested Devi not to allow Murugan to manifest Himself, at least, to which she agreed. And so when Arunagirinthar sang the "Athala Sedanarada" song, the Lord did not appear. He, therefore, sensed some mischief somewhere and through his yogic vision found out that the Devi was holding Murugan as a small baby on her laps and entertaining Him with Her conversations, thus, preventing Murugan's appearance in the assembly. Arunagirinathar, it is said, sang the Devandra Sanga Vaguppu and then the Mayil Virutham to which latter's tune a peacock danced before Kali, and She, being enamoured of the melody of the music and the dance of peacock, unconsciously loosened Her hold on Murugan when He jumped over to the peacock, hastened to the assembly and gave Darshana. However, the view that the Lord gave immediate Darshana seems to be more correct, reasonable, and even supported by the Saint's own words.

The Lord cannot be bound or held in check by anything except the true love of His devotee, which can attract the Lord from any realm and manifest Him in no time on the physical plane. Moreover, to Arunagirinathar, Lord Murugan was not merely the personal God (Ishta Devata), He was also the Supreme Being. This is evident even from the above Thiruppugal. Though the Lord is addressed as the son-in-law of Lord Vishnu, etc., which all points to the theological aspects of Him, He is asked to come dancing in such a way that when He dances, everything, everywhere, dances, including Brahma, Vishnu, and Siva, which reveals that He (Murugan) is the Supreme reality that is behind even the trinity. This is amply made clear in another poem also (T. No. 433: "Agaramumaagi"):

O Lord who is (the beginning of all things) like the Akara or the letter 'A' which stands first among alphabets, who is the Lord of all things, who is beyond everything, who is the essence of all things, who is Brahma, who is Vishnu, who is Siva, who is beyond this trinity; who is all things here, who is whatever thing anywhere is, and who comes as the sweetness (of all things)."

Full text (Tamil & English) of "agaramum aagi"

Listen to "agaramum aagi"

For the complete collection of Thiruppugal songs, click here

The Murugan that Arunagirinathar manifested was not so much the theological God but the Supreme Reality that is behind the different manifestations. Hence, there should be no question of the Devi holding Skanda somewhere in Kailasa. It does not, whoever, mean that one God is inferior or superior to another. Every manifestation of God has different aspects; at least two - the Absolute and the relative. Lord Krishna was not merely the friend and charioteer of Arjuna but also the Bhagavan or Supreme God who gave Gita-Upadesa as also showed Arjuna the visvarupa. Similar is the case with all Gods - Lord Skanda, Devi, etc. The Lord is all aspects at once and it is the attitude of the devotee with which the Lord is invoked, viz. Sattvika, Rajasika or Tamasika, that determines matters.

Under such circumstances to say that the Devi was holding fast to Murugan preventing Him from coming to the assembly would at best disclose one's inadequate understanding of Arunagirinathar's love for Murugan as also his concept of God, which was one of the spiritual Reality behind everything. That is why Arunagirinthar says in the above Thiruppugal, "O Lord! Come dancing so that when You dance, Siva, Vishnu, Brahma, Kali, etc., - everything dances!" When such is the prayer, if Kali were really to hold fast to Murugan, Arunagirinathar's prayer would have manifested not only Murugan alone but would have brought Kali, too, with Him.

There seems to be no authentic internal evidence either for the king's losing eye-sight on having the Darshana of the Lord, or for the rest of the story, which is all mostly based on hearsay.

It is indeed strange and unbelievable that:

(i) When the Lord is made to appear for the purpose of giving Darshana to the king, that he should lose his eye-sight by that vision of God; and that in that huge assembly only the king should lose his eye-sight and no-one else. In fact, if someone's eye-sight were to be affected, it should have been that of the evil-intentioned Sambandandan and not the pious, devoted king.

(ii) Arunagirinathar should physically (as a parrot) go to heaven to fetch the Paarijaatha flowers; for the Saint who could manifest the Lord Himself in an open assembly by a mere prayer, to fetch a few Paarijaatha flowers by another prayer should have been no difficult job.

(iii) The king should order, without proper investigation, for the cremation of the body of Arunagirinathar who had gone for the king's benefit and service, and that too at the king's request.

In support of Arunagirinathar becoming a parrot, one of his Thiruppugal songs (T. No. 425: "Sariyaiyaalarkkum") is quoted wherein Arunagirinathar prays to the Lord to grant him the faultless state of Sayujya, which is also the endless state of fame and supreme joy itself (Sukha-Svarupa). In Tamil, the word for "Bless" or "Ananda" as well as for "parrot" is written in the same way, as Suka. And so when Arunagirinathar says, "Sukha-Svarupa," it is interpreted as the Svarupa (or form of a parrot). But, in the above interpretation, one important factor is forgotten, viz., that the "Suka-Svarupa" prayed for by Arunagirinathar is almost like an explanation of the earlier and essential part of the prayer, i.e., "the faultless state of Sayujya."

Sayujya is the state of oneness with the Lord. It is the fourth and final state of liberation - the first three being: Salokya, Samipya, and Sarupya - and the form of the parrot cannot be equated with Sayujya. Even if the parrot perches on the arms of the Lord forever, it cannot be called the state of Sayujya. The sate of being a parrot can at best be Samipya, not even Sarupya; what to say of Sayujya? Hence, 'Ska' should be taken to mean only the state of Ananda and not of a parrot. It is the state of Satchidananda that is really the state of endless glory and Supreme Bliss.

Moreover, there is a subtle difference between "Svarupa" and "Rupa." While the latter refers to the "external form," the former denotes a "state" or "essential nature" and has reference to the inner attainment, a state of consciousness. Sukha-Svarupa is a Sanskrit term and clearly indicates the "state of happiness" or "final beatitude" attained on liberation, though the term can be given a distorted Tamil meaning of "the parrot's form." Above all, this prayer is only for the final attainment, not for going to heaven to fetch Paarijaatha; nor did the Lord grant Arunagirinathar the body of a parrot in fulfillment of his prayer. It was Arunagirinathar, himself, who entered the dead body of a parrot. It seems to be a travesty of affairs to try to justify this act of Arunagirinathar by investing it with a divine will, as though the Lord ordained him to enter the parrot's body. When the Arunagirinathar-parrot did not find his body, he could have entered into some other human being's body, if Arunagirinathar wanted it. If it be argued that Arunagirinathar was contented with being in the parrot's body because "anything that has a beginning has an end," and so his human body had to disappear, the same law holds equally good in the case of the body of the (dead) parrot, which was not granted to Arunagirinathar in a divine way but into which he entered of his own accord. To say that the Lord chose to grant Arunagirinathar the state of parrot (Suka-Svarupa), from amongst Arunagirinathar's innumerable prayers, to justify which he is said to have gone to heaven as a parrot to fetch Paarijaatha flowers, creating a need for it on account of the king alone losing his eye-sight in that huge assembly on having a vision of the Lord - all these appear to be stories for entertainment and far-fetched from truth.

Neither can the king alone be said to have deserved the losing of eye-sight, nor is it necessary for Arunagirinathar to go to heaven to fetch Paarijaatha flowers (for he could have obtained them by a mere prayer), nor would the king have ordered the cremation of Arunagirinathar's body thoughtlessly (as he was obliged to protect it till his return), nor also would the Omniscient Lord interpret Arunagirinathar's prayer for the Sayujya state of Sukha-Svarupa as one of a parrot-state.

Indeed the whole story seems to be a conjured up on, for there is a shrine dedicated to Arunagirinathar in the western part of the Arunachaleshwarar temple in Thiruvannamalai, which is said to be the Samadhisthana of Saint Arunagirinathar, where his body was interred on his attaining liberation.