In the Vaishnava Sampradaya, the sannyasis are referred to as jeeyar. Although I was familiar with the title, I never fully understood its meaning. This morning, Dr. Anandapadbanaban (Podigi, Ramanuja Vaibhavam, 15-9-15, 6.45 to 7.00 am) explained the origin and significance of the term.
According to him, jeeyar is a corrupt form of the Tamil word seeyam, meaning “lion.” He went on to explain the background of this term. In the forests of Ahobilam, a famous Vaishnavite pilgrimage center where Lord Narasimha is the presiding deity, it is said that lions, when going to worship Narasimha, would kill elephants and present their tusks to the Lord. Similarly, Sri Ramanuja, like a lion, was known for his fierce defense of Vishishtadvaita, particularly against those who promoted opposing doctrines (like Advaita). Just as a lion crushes the tusks of an elephant, Sri Ramanuja is said to have defeated his opponents in debate and presented the “truth” to the Lord. Dr. Anandapadbanaban, however, was quick to clarify that this imagery should not be taken literally—it symbolizes Ramanuja’s intellectual victories, not physical violence.
All followers of Ramanuja in the Sri Vaishnava tradition are referred to as seeyam, for they, like lions, are seen as formidable to their opponents. Over time, the title seeyam for sannyasis became corrupted into jeeyar.
Vedanta Desikar, another prominent acharya, was also called the “Lion” who roared against his adversaries. In general, the title prativadi bhayankaram, meaning “terror to opponents,” is given to renowned Vaishnava acharyas who were believed to have triumphed in debates against rival doctrines.
However, I find it curious—and somewhat troubling—that such a violent title should be bestowed upon a sannyasi, someone who is supposed to embody peace and tranquility. While it is true that many sannyasis fall short of this ideal, it raises the question of why we glorify aggression, even in a metaphorical sense, in spiritual contexts. Though these acharyas are celebrated for their supposed victories in debates, true dialogue rarely involves the kind of intellectual “terror” that this title suggests. In the past, violence, both intellectual and physical, was sometimes a part of religious discourse, but that is now largely relegated to history.
It is also interesting to note the contrast with terms like jihad, which originally meant an inner struggle for self-control but has acquired a violent connotation in modern times. Meanwhile, the title jeeyar, which has a violent origin, is still celebrated with pride, even though its followers may not be aware of its full meaning. Perhaps it is time for the Sri Vaishnava community to reconsider whether such a title accurately reflects the true nature of a sannyasi. Of course, some traditions are deeply ingrained and difficult to change. In that case, perhaps it is better for laypeople to remain unaware of the violent connotations behind such titles.
Dayanand Bharati
15-9-2015
Leave a Reply