Guest guest Report post Posted June 18, 2001 This topic (Lord's grace on Fortunates) is going in my mind for a quite long time. But I really could not discuss with anybody. In my opinion, His gracious glances are pre-determined one and fortunate are those who receive it. If we see the birth of our Acharyas ( RamAnujar, Desikan and also Adi Shankarar) and Alwars, theirs are avatars of one of nitya sooris (Adi seshan) and/or God's closely related things ( like sangam, chakram, Ghanta Mani) etc. Adi seshan took birth as Lakshmana as well as RamAnujar. Also Ajaya, Vijaya took as Sisupalan, Hiranyakasipu etc. (Ajaya & Vijay were cursed to take birth in Bhoolokam and their demand for thinking about God always during their tenure in Bhholokam was granted in a negative way by thinking of God out of fear for their life and claim of their supremacy. And their death was pre-determined one by God). Also Mandana Mischrar and his wife were avatars of Brahma and Saraswati during Adi Shankarar's (an avatar of Lord Shiva) time. Similarly so many births took place and all our PurAnas, Itihasas and Bhagavatam give ample references for this. So during difficult times and as part of His Leela, He sends the same set of (super) souls who is nearer and dearer to Him in different forms. They come and go again and again with some specific assignments. And also Acharya and their leadership position are also pre-determined by God for a specifc task and people of their times identify and follow them (unlike we choose and elevate a person based on their knowledge,faith etc). Since He showers His Grace only to few select Super Souls, many times I doubt whether we are all really destined to reach His Abode and do kaimkaryams. Also we do not really know what for we are and who we are. Also, in my opinion, nornally ordinary souls do not have any such specific task other than praise Him and follow the path provided to us by Acharyas. The only Grace could be we take birth as human form to think of Him. In this He simply watches out our actions and we get results based on our actions According to karma theory we are the determinants of our own karma. God normally do not interfere in our karma phalan and also will not wipe out our karma. As a Creator at the most out of compassion He may reduce our sufferings arise out of karma and provides more and more chances to reduce our sins arsing out of karma by allowing more births till we become eligible to receive His grace. That is why scriptures also advice us to do good and have detachment from worldly life otherwise it would lead to more karmic actions. So the question whether merciful Lord wantonly choose one individual to be the recipient of his grace and allow the "unfortunate" rest to suffer as usual seems to be true due to karma theory. At the maximum we can praise the Lord, life of our Acharyas & Alwars and enjoy their works. Because ours are departed souls from His Abode. So we have to just wait for his Grace to reach back Him and we do not know really when it would happen. Since the topic came for discussion I simply mentioned things that came on my mind and seek pardon if anyone get hurt by my words in whatever way. Adiyen request BhagvatAs to correct me of wrong understanding of the subject if any and enlighten me. Adiyen Balaji K - "Mani Varadarajan" <mani <s.vinjamuri Cc: <bhakti-list> Friday, June 15, 2001 1:11 AM Re: Why Partha's Sarathy? > Srimahavishnu Vinjamuri writes: > > Now the question comes as to why Lord krishna chose Yasoda as > > His mother. why not vasishta's wife arundhatI or Goddess > > saraswatI? the answer is nirhEtuka krupA. fotunate ar the ones > > on whom the gracious glances f divya dampatis fall. rest > > everybody is unforutnate. > > Dear Vishnu, > > Can you clarify this point? Are you saying that the merciful Lord > is so capricious and partial that he would wantonly choose one > individual to be the recipient of his grace and allow the > "unfortunate" rest to suffer as usual? > > Mani > > > > > > ----------------------------- > - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH - > To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list > Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/ > > > Your use of is subject to > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 18, 2001 > >In my opinion, His gracious glances are pre-determined one and fortunate are >those who receive it. I have a big problem in appreciating this concept, if it is said that it is predetermined by Him then, He becomes partial - while he declares - samoham sarva bhuuteshu name dveshosti na priyaH| If it is predermined by me, then it is the result of my past actions or prarabda karam-s. But I was the author of those karma-s and I can do better in future to earn that grace. Thus grace in a way I can earn by acting properly now. 'His grace' is a graceful way of saying that it is result of my own actions of the past and present - prarabda and purushaartha. This means I can make myself fortunate by acting properly now. He is ready to shower as long as I make myself qualified by my own efforts. Responsibility for grace rests on me now. > He sends the same >set of (super) souls who is nearer and dearer to Him in different forms. >They come and go again >and again with some specific assignments. And also Acharya and their >leadership >position are also pre-determined by God for a specifc task and people of >their times identify and follow them (unlike we choose and elevate a person >based on their knowledge,faith etc). Since He showers His Grace only to few >select Super Souls, many times I doubt whether we are all really destined to >reach His Abode and do kaimkaryams. Also we do not really know what for we >are >and who we are. I have another problem in grading the souls in vaikunTa in terms of superiority and inferiority of the souls. If it is based on one's karma then we are back to limitations even in VaikunTa and it becomes in no way different from the Leela Vibhuuti. If the superiority is based on the intrinsic differences in the souls then the question arises on what basis these differences exist, particularly if all are sat chit ananda swaruupa-s. Principally are there swaruupa lakshana-s that makes one superior to the other! On what basis these swaruupa lakshaNa-s established and why??? Open to learning. Hari Om >Sadananda -- K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 19, 2001 K. Sadananda writes: > I have a big problem in appreciating this concept, if it is said that > it is predetermined by Him then, He becomes partial - while he > declares - samoham sarva bhuuteshu name dveshosti na priyaH| I agree that the doctrine as described by our previous correspondents is problematic. I should point out, however, that no one said that anything is predetermined (this is a position of the Sri Ananda Tirtha [Dvaita] not Sri Ramanuja) -- Sri Malolan and Sri Vishnu have only said that the Lord's choosing of Yashoda or Arjuna is pure leela. The conclusion drawn is that this is arbitrary and no further investigation can or need be done. God's impartiality and lack of cruelty is agreed to by all, as we must, since we would have no hope if God were a capricious tyrant bestowing favors arbitrarily on whomsoever He chose without any regard to individual circumstance. As the venerable Badarayana says, partiality and cruelty cannot be attributed to the supreme Brahman because the Veda and allied scriptures are emphatic about it (brahma-sUtra 2.1.35). Which is where Malolan's and Vishnu's citation of the choice of Arjuna being merely the Lord's "leela" becomes problematic. God is declared to be impartial precisely in the same breath as the declaration that this world is merely His leela. These two are mentioned together because to be God's 'leela' means that God Himself has no *personal* need to be fulfilled by creation. Ordinarily, we perform something with the idea of fulfilling a desire, because we lack something. God, on the other hand, is not in want of anything, i.e., He would not left unfulfilled if He had not done this. His essential nature, as Sri Ramanuja writes at once in commenting on this topic, is that He is already perfect in Himself (avApta-samasta-kAma, paripUrNa). It does not mean arbitrary or capricious. Which means that if the Lord has chosen Arjuna, or Yashoda, it must have been due to some reason -- even if the Lord himself has concocted some pretext out of His own grace unbeknownst to the individual upon whom He is bestowing His favor (cf. Sri Vachana Bhushana s.386 and Daya Satakam v.74). If, on the other hand, God is gracing a jIva randomly, it should strike one that such a God *must* be partial as well as cruel -- for why did He not pick me; and further, why did He leave me toiling in samsAra yet take that other individual to eternal bliss? I'd rather avoid technical and emotinally charged terms such as 'upAya', 'nirhEtuka', 'sahEtuka', 'prapatti', etc., and merely examine the issue using everyday reason. There is no disagreement that we should never think of anything that we do as a *purchase* of God's good station. This is the principle of sAttvika tyAga or enlightened renunciation enunciated by the Lord Himself in the Gita. For nothing we do can be considered equal payment to the gifts that God gives us. And certainly one who has realized that God alone is the Means and the Goal should be even more steadfast in this belief. However, to imply that God acts randomly, and that such action is at the same time impartial from an objective standpoint, does not stand the test of reason, nor does it stand up to the careful writing of our pUrvAchAryas. Sri Sadananda writes, on an another note: > I have another problem in grading the souls in vaikunTa in terms of > superiority and inferiority of the souls. Such a gradation does not exist in Visishtadvaita Vedanta. All souls which have attained the Lord are fundamentally equal and enjoy the same infinite bliss in Vaikuntha. Once again, you may be thinking of the Dvaita school where intrinsic differences are proposed -- and you are right, this makes it better than samsAra only in name. aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan, Mani Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 19, 2001 Dear Sri Mani and Sri Sadanandagaru, The Daya Aspect of Bhagavan is exemplified in the Daya Shatakam of Swami Vedanta Desikan. Following is an English Commentary on Daya Shatakam by Sri Muralidhar Rangaswamy mama. http://members.tripodasia.com.sg/krishna/ >Sri Malolan > and Sri Vishnu have only said that the Lord's choosing of Yashoda > or Arjuna is pure leela I should have been bit more explicit in my mail. Daya is a Kalyana Gunam of bhagavan. Daya is not leelai. (Refer: the commentary available above.) At this point, I would reccomend members taking part in this thread as well as others to study the Daya Shatakam of Swami Desikan. I strongly feel that all our doubts will be cleared. The Kalyana Gunam of bhagavan is very well established as Daya Devi in Daya Shatakam. On the other hand, Sri Sadananda garu has pointed out: > > I have a big problem in appreciating this concept, if it is said that > > it is predetermined by Him then, He becomes partial - while he > > declares - samoham sarva bhuuteshu name dveshosti na priyaH| When Suprabatha Seva begins everyday for the Brahman in Thirumala(Refer Sri Bhasyam "Shruti Shirasi VidIpthE BrahmaNi SrinivasE"), the bhattars chant; "NiranjanAya vidhmahE nirAbadhA ya dimahi, tannas srInivAsa prajOdayat.h" NiranjanA means free of all imperfections The Shruthi prastana is best understood by following bhaasyas. Sri Mani pointed out the brahma sutrams as well as Vachana Bhooshanam and Daya Shatakam. Before we go ahead, we must take a note that this is a very delicate topic. Regards, Adiyen Ramanuja Daasan, Malolan Cadambi "Un Adikkeezh amarnthu PuhuzhndEne" - Swami Nammalwar _______ Get your free @ address at Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 19, 2001 Manni Varadarajan wrote: > >It does not mean arbitrary or capricious. Which means >that if the Lord has chosen Arjuna, or Yashoda, it must >have been due to some reason -- even if the Lord himself >has concocted some pretext out of His own grace unbeknownst >to the individual upon whom He is bestowing His favor (cf. Sri Vachana Bhushana s.386 and Daya Satakam v.74). ..x snipx ........................ >Sri Sadananda writes, on an another note: >> I have another problem in grading the souls in vaikunTa in terms of >> superiority and inferiority of the souls. > >Such a gradation does not exist in Visishtadvaita Vedanta. >All souls which have attained the Lord are fundamentally equal >and enjoy the same infinite bliss in Vaikuntha. You may be >thinking of the Dvaita school where intrinsic differences are >proposed -- and you are right, this makes it better than samsAra >only in name. > >aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan, >Mani Thanks Mani for educating me. Once we accept (a) God by definition cannot be partial and (2) Lord has chosen or chooses an individual soul not randomly but for some reason and © there is no intrinsic differences between soul to soul in VaikunTa -and (d) He has no self-motivating (or desire prompted) cause to do anything including the Leela, then, as I see it, we are faced with problems to justify the basis of the selection of X over Y etc. The possible alternatives are: 1. Souls are selected not from VaikunTa but from the ones who have not reached moksha yet - which means that they still have not reached the final goal, hence distinctions due to upaadhi-s based on karma samskaara remain with them. Hence some are suitable and some are not suitable for a given task - The selection then depends on the samskaara of the individual souls rather than the Lord's choice per sec. In other words Lord provides an environment for evolution of that soul by giving him an opportunity to serve in the upliftment of the society. Thus Grace is earned rather than given randomly. 2. His reasons are incomprehensible for our limited intellect - This is alternate way of saying either it is anirvachaniiyam ( sounds like an advaitin!) but only means it is inexplainable by intellect, which is limited by definition; or it is his Leela and who are we to question that - but that sounds authoritative. Both are only a sugar-coated explanations without explaining anything but asking us to accept as it stands. In terms of distinction between the souls in the moksha - Yes the jiiva-jiiva bhinnatvam is accepted in Madhva tradition. That leaves tara tama bheda-s between the jiiva-s - and as I understand they do not provide a justification or basis for the intrinsic differences between jiiva-s - other than it is so. I am not sure if there are any scriptural pamaaNa for that. Since bahujiivatvam is accepted in vishishhTa advaita tradition, if jiiva-jiiva bhinnatvam is not there intrinsically, yet each one is anu pramaanaat - I am facing some difficulties (1) The implication is one jiiva cannot distinguish another jiiva in moksha since sajaati, vijaati and swagata bedha-s are not there. (2) Can jiiva-s distinguish paramaatma? - I understand the anantatvam of the Lord in all aspects and parimita aspect of jiiva - the question is more in terms of through what instruments jiiva distinguishes paramaatma without the upaadhi-s needed to distinguish. (3) Upaadhi-s are not there - (am I right?) - since if upaadhi-s are there we run into problem of accounting on what basis a particular type of upaadhi is given - since in moksha all the karma janita samskaara-s are dissolved (if they are not then we are back to the same limitations as in this leela vibhuuti - since there is tara tama bheda-s in karma and hence karam phala). (4) - anupramaanat - does that imply a boundary in some form - where one jiiva ends and another jiiva starts - if upaadhi-s are not there to provide a distinguishinig boudaries between jiiva and jiiva. how the boundaries are recognized Does jiiva knows he is anupramaanaat - if he does on what basis? (5)- Enjoyment of infinite bliss by finite anu pramaana jiiva - I am not sure what infinity means here- eternal sound right at least time wise. Can jiiva enjoy the bliss without having instruments or upaadhi-s for enjoying? - Is bliss swaruupa lakshaNa of jiiva or Brahman or neither. Question enjoyment of bliss itself is a problem for me - is bliss an object of enjoyment or bliss comes from an enjoyment of an object - Infinite enjoyment from a finite object cannot be there - Infinite enjoyment from an infinite object can be there - One can say that Lord himself is an infinite bliss since He is infinite. But being anu pramaanaat how am I going to enjoy infinite bliss being tiny. Am I getting mixed up here? Or my concepts are all wrong? For some reason having upaadhi-s does not sound logical to my mind since it takes us back for some kaaraNa justifying a particular upaadhi different from other. On the other hand not having upaadhi-s would result indistinguishable features as well as the lack of instruments of knowledge. I need to resolve these in my own mind in self-consistent manner to have a clear understanding of the concepts involved - I also understand that some of these questions arise because of my prior conditioning - as I have it, I do not consider it as a burdon! Too many questions - If you are guessing right, I am focusing my ignorance to prepare myself when Shreeman Dr. S.M.S. Chari's visit here. If you are going to be in Washington area around that time (July 16-21) give us a call. We will find you a place for you to enjoy the Sat Sangh. - He will be in N.J. too after that week and one can take advantage of his presence there. Hari Om! Sadananda -- K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 19, 2001 In my opinion regarding the significance of avatars... I have a few points. a) first of all the Chaarvaakas and the atheists would have a free hand in going around propagating that there is no supernatural force in the world at all. At a time when science is so advanced and can explain the cause and effect of so many things they would say that law has taken its own course and that there was no SuperNatural hand or anything in this at all. It is the preachings of some saints and Gurus that natural disasters are a good learning point and eye opener for humanity. They go to prove how insignificant human life is and how whatever life we lead is only what is allowed by the supernatural forces and not everything is under our control. So my first point is that God might have liked to establish the point that there is a force beyond human cognition and he would like to prove it from time to time to put down Adharma and humble Asuras who think they are everything. b) Say some big CEO/President/Boss wants to make an important announcement ...they prefer to make a public appearance and give a speech while at other times the entire organisation functions without seeing the CEO or President etc. They could very well send an email or circulate a memo but they prefer making a public appearance. When Clinton made an appearance on National t.v. to make a statement on a mere scandal, to clarify things, why not God make a Avataram to clarify to people that he is the only one in the whole world that is sustaining everyone, everything and to uphold Dharma and Vedas and protect the Sadhus ? c) Thirdly, the Avataras or Leelas should not be considered as confined to the avataras as Rama or Krishna. Each and every Saint, Bhakta, Jnaani's life has a purpose and it is a avatara of the Lord and no one else. This is clear from the lives of great saints like Chaitanya, Ramanuja, Sankara who's works are not possible by merely ordinary people. It is the Lord himself who comes down to earth in simple forms and does all these great things. It is mentioned in the Bhagavatam also that in KaliYuga, there will be a great number of saints in the Dakshina Bharata near Tamaraparani river (...no partiality meant here) to carry forward the message of Bhagavatha Dharma and to establish Bhakti in the hearts of people. By merely recounting the lives of these saints, it is said that it fosters Bhakti in our minds. There is a very nice stanza from a song of a great Jnaani of our recent times... "Bhakthi illai endru thallal aagumo Nin Arul Indri Bhakthi Edhu Ayya ? Jnanadevar Jnaaneshwarar Varisaiyil Naan illai Avargal Vaibhavathai Smarikkum Jnaanam Undu Adhu Dhaane Un Arulai Petru tharum Endra Nambikkaiyum enakku undu ... Vittalaa Nee Ennai Kai Vidal Aagumo ? " It says...please dont reject me because I dont have enough Bhakthi...for without your grace where is Bhakti possible ? I am not of the order of the great saints like Jnaaneshwar or NaamaDeva...but I have the sense to appreciate and recount the lives of them (Smaranai) I have heard that this fosters Bhakthi and begets your grace...so please Vittala ... how can you desert me ? So may be one of the reasons is to foster bhakthi, and the lives of the saints itself is an example for people. d) Finally ...take the incident of the Vaikuntha's Dwaarapaalakas getting cursed to be born as Asuras in 3 births (Hiranyaksha and Hiranyakasipu, Ravana and Kumbakarana, and again in Krishna avatara). I have heard in one of Sri Krishna Premi's discourses that the Lord told them not to be afraid and that he wanted to do Avataras and do Leelais and he was getting bored and hence this incident of the curse was also pre-determined by him. Please take this in a lighter-sense as God does not wish anyone to get separated from him. But he is a "Leela-Rasikan" and likes doing so many "Adhbuta-Leelais" and dumbfound people. Even in the case of thse Asuras they were in constant thought of the lord though in hatred and fear and finally attained to his lotus-feet and died at his own hands. This has also been referred to as "Dwesha-Bhakthi" So God would come from time to time in various forms to prove to people and Asuras everyone that everthing and everyone in all the worlds is sustained by Him alone and he alone is all pervading and all powerful...and there's no better way to prove this than to make a presence and do a Avatar/Leelai. Imagine...how difficult it would be for us to do Bhakthi to Lord in a Nirguna way and how easy it is to recollect Krishna's leelas which fosters Bhakthi in our minds. These are some of my views why God might have decided to come down from time to time ...more suggestions/thoughts/feedback are welcome and would make interesting reading. -- Pradeep Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 21, 2001 Mani Varadarajan wrote: > I'd rather avoid technical and emotinally charged terms > such as 'upAya', 'nirhEtuka', 'sahEtuka', 'prapatti', etc., > and merely examine the issue using everyday reason. > > There is no disagreement that we should never think > of anything that we do as a *purchase* of God's good > station. This is the principle of sAttvika tyAga > or enlightened renunciation enunciated by the Lord > Himself in the Gita. For nothing we do can be > considered equal payment to the gifts that God gives > us. And certainly one who has realized that God alone is > the Means and the Goal should be even more steadfast in > this belief. However, to imply that God acts randomly, > and that such action is at the same time impartial > from an objective standpoint, does not stand the test > of reason, nor does it stand up to the careful writing > of our pUrvAchAryas. My compliments to Sri Mani on his insightful observations. I think part of the problem is that we tend to look upon "kripa" merely in terms of mOksham. When taken into a more wholistic concept, and perhaps more in line with those who see God as the Means and Goal for everything, God's Grace is something that is there with us all the time, whether or not we aware of it, or whether or not we choose to accept it. Works like Sri Vachana Bhushanam speak of this wondrous nature of our Lord who, despite being in His Eternally Joyful Abode, is restlessly and impatiently struggling to find ways to bring Himself to the scores of souls that are suffering in the endless cycle of birth and re-birth, trapped in the struggles of their own self-interested actions. Such a restless mood drives Him to be there with us in every moment, to guide us in the right path, share in our our joys and sorrows, and make Himself visible and accessible to us as the archAvAtharan, all in the hopes that one day our heart will simply turn to Him. His ever-present and compassionate natrure is an unceasing and boundless act of His own volition, requiring nothing on our parts other than to become humble receptacles to it. Our AchAryans have used the example of the sun in describing this all-encompassing and boundless nature to Sriman Narayana's Mercy to illustrate its impartial nature and the ways in which we conditioned souls respond to it. As we know, the sun is there with us all the time, providing us with the life-giving energy that we need for our very existence and sustenance. The sun showers its rays on each and every thing in this world, constantly, unceasingly, day or night, 24 X 7. It rays go in every direcion and every part of this solar system without condition. But, based on their natures, human beings respond to the sun's rays in different ways. Those of us who go from our climate controlled homes to our air conditioned cars to our climate controlled offices hardly take note of the sun. Then are those people such as postal workers and construction workers whose arduous jobs put them in direct contact with sun. These people often are averse to the sun, and often are found complaining about the heat that is interfering with their work. Then are those farmers who depend on the the sun's rays to provide them with healthy crops. They need the sun at times when it is necessary, at times that it will be profitable for them. Finally, there are those rare souls who can simply enjoy the beauty and majesty of a sunny day for what it is, revelling in its warmth and the tapestry of light and shadows that it creates. The sun is the same, its rays are the same, so what is it that is changing? People's responses that are products of their own lifestyle and experience. Analogous to the rays of the sun, the Lord's Boundless Grace is there for everyone, everywhere, all the time, and with no other cause or motive other than His Unconditional Love which seeks to Protect and Save us. What changes is how choose to respond to it, with apathy, with aversion, with selfish material interest, or with unconditional acceptance. What is interesting is that even if we simply take note of it for just a moment, our lives become blessed. But this does not answer the original question of why Arjuna was chosen over everyone else to receive the message of the Gita directly from Sri Krishna Himself. I would like to share my crude understanding of what was taught to me. But, as this is somewhat involved, I would like to reserve this for another posting. adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan Mohan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 21, 2001 Sri. Mohan wrote: Analogous to the rays of the sun, the Lord's Boundless Grace is there > for > everyone, everywhere, all the time, and with no other cause or motive > other > than His Unconditional Love which seeks to Protect and Save us. What > changes > is how choose to respond to it, with apathy, with aversion, with selfish > material interest, or with unconditional acceptance. What is > interesting is > that even if we simply take note of it for just a moment, our lives > become > blessed. > > But this does not answer the original question of why Arjuna was chosen > over > everyone else to receive the message of the Gita directly from Sri > Krishna > Himself. Dear Sri.Mohan: Pranams! Thanks very much for a lucid posting written with sound logic in drawing analogy. I have few thoughts in my mind regarding why Arjuna was chosen as the one to listen to Gita from my understanding. It was the act of refusal of Arjuna to fight with the Kauravas that lead to this Gita. If we can see the first chapter, all Arjuna does is , he laments. He was not made up mentally to fight against his Acharyas. That was when Krishna started with his teachings. There is one Avatara Rahasya too in this Gita. This was told long back by Krishna, as he reiterates this point in fourth chapter. Again this information is revealed by Krishna when Arjua asks to Krishna: Oh! Lord Krishna you say that you told about this long back, so you also assume Body like me everytime you come to earth, I thought you are Paramathma. Lord Krishna says that He comes with Body, but the major differnece he says is, Arjuna: Your body is just made up of Pancha Butha, but my body, rather Thrumeni is made up of vedas. This point again is seen in the Anubavam of Tirumangai Alwar in TiruNedunthandagam about the Tirumanthiram, inthiraRkum piramaRkum mudhalvan Rannai irun^ilamkaal theen^eerviN bootham ainthaay, senthiRattha thamizOsai vadasol laagith thisain^aan_gu maaytthingaL NYaayi Raagi, andharatthil dhEvarkkum aRiya laagaa andhaNanai andhaNarmaat tanthi vaittha mandhiratthai, mandhiratthaal maRavaa thenRum vaazhuthiyEl vaazhalaam madan^eNY sammE If we could see the last 3 lines in this pasuram, Alwar gives a round-about explanation: Andanar's property is nothing but Vedas. Those vedas are nothing but the elements which whenput together form the Tirumandiram Sriman.Narayana. I hope to correct my mistakes if there are any. Please point them out. I still have lot of thoughts on this topic. Thanks, Sri Ramanuja Dasan, Ramanan Rajagopalan ------------------------------- iruppidam vaikundham vEnkatam * mAlirunchOlaiyennum poruppidam mAyanuk enbar nallOr * avai thannodum van thiruppidam mAyan irAmAnusan manathinRavan van thiruppidam * enRan idhayaththuLLE thanakkinpuRavE. ------------------------------- ______________ Get your own "800" number Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
