Guest guest Report post Posted April 19, 2003 Dear Srivaishnavas, Nirhetuka Kripa seems to be like Grace in Christianity. Many Srivaishnavas have difficulty in accepting the concept, though hallowed by Purvacharyas.If our conduct has no role in attracting His grace, why take the trouble of observing rigid rules of ethics in one's personal life? Sri Parasara Bhattar says, "Nimnottam c'a karun'am c'a jagat vic'itram Karma vyapekshya srijatas tava Ranga s'eshin Vaishamya nirghrinatayor na khalu prasktih Tat Brahma Su'tra sac'iva' s'rutayor ghushanti" [The world is strange with the high and low and sufferings.Sri Ranganata has cereated it by looking into Karma. There is so scope for discrimination by Him or lack of compassion. This is the declaration by Brahma Sutra and Vedas.] Why should He, Karma vyapekshya [seeing Karma], when no ground to bless or curse is needed? Adiyen, TCASrinivasaramanujan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 22, 2003 Sri: Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama: Dear bhAgavatas, I am not sure about whether we can say that "our conduct has no role in attracting His grace". To me it appears more that our conduct has no guarantee that it will attract His grace - since He is sarva svantantran and therefore is not answerable to any one for His actions. That is, there is nothing we can do that we can say is a sure thing to attain moksha. Then, does this include saranagati to an acharya? On the surface, it would appear to be so. But it also seems that He has taken a vrata to accept this as a special thing for those who have Ramanuja sambandham. It also appears that while He is independent in general, He listens to Thayar in allowing His grace to flow and give salvation to those whom She recommends. Being this the case, our conduct should be such that Thayar will plead to Him on our behalf. In either case, it appears that one cannot simply sit around and do nothing saying that there is nothing to do. Is adiyEn's understanding as stated above correct? adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan --- Srinivasaramanujan TCA <tcasr wrote: > Dear Srivaishnavas, > Nirhetuka Kripa seems to be like Grace in > Christianity. Many Srivaishnavas have difficulty in > accepting the concept, though hallowed by > Purvacharyas.If our conduct has no role in attracting > His grace, why take the trouble of observing rigid > rules of ethics in one's personal life? The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo http://search. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 22, 2003 Sri: Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama: Dear bhAgavatas, I am not sure about whether we can say that "our conduct has no role in attracting His grace". To me it appears more that our conduct has no guarantee that it will attract His grace - since He is sarva svantantran and therefore is not answerable to any one for His actions. That is, there is nothing we can do that we can say is a sure thing to attain moksha. Then, does this include saranagati to an acharya? On the surface, it would appear to be so. But it also seems that He has taken a vrata to accept this as a special thing for those who have Ramanuja sambandham. It also appears that while He is independent in general, He listens to Thayar in allowing His grace to flow and give salvation to those whom She recommends. Being this the case, our conduct should be such that Thayar will plead to Him on our behalf. In either case, it appears that one cannot simply sit around and do nothing saying that there is nothing to do. Is adiyEn's understanding as stated above correct? adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan --- Srinivasaramanujan TCA <tcasr wrote: > Dear Srivaishnavas, > Nirhetuka Kripa seems to be like Grace in > Christianity. Many Srivaishnavas have difficulty in > accepting the concept, though hallowed by > Purvacharyas.If our conduct has no role in attracting > His grace, why take the trouble of observing rigid > rules of ethics in one's personal life? The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo http://search. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 22, 2003 Sri: Srimathe Ramanujaya nama: Dear TCA Venkatesh, What Sri TCA Srinivasa Ramanujan says is correct according to SVB 148 and 149. This, of course, is based on my understanding of SVB. SVB 148: krpaiyAlE varum pArathanthriyaththiR kAttil, swAthanthryath- thAlE varum pArathanthryam prabalam. SVB 149: ivvarththaththai vEdhapuruShan apEkshiththAn. SVB 148: Although one of Lord's traits is unlimited independence,He longs to serve His devotees and loves to be ruled by them. His dependence(pArathanthryam)on devotees,can arise out of two causes namely,His "compassion" for those who surrender to Him or His own free will(swAthanthryam),whereby He showers His unconditional grace on the subjects of His choice,whether "deserving or not". According to Sri PiLLai lOkAcAryAr,the latter is superior to the former. Because when "swAthanthryam" predominates the former "krpa" can get nullified! The Lord's dependence of the second variety(stems from swAthanthryam) however,goes on uniterruptedly with no counteracting influence. SVB 149: This is said in MuNdakOpaniShad and kaTOpaniShad: The paramAtmA is not attainable by the AtmA(individual soul) through mere meditation and deep learning;on the other hand He reveals Himself,in all His splendour,to the subjects of His choice. Did not SriRama court,on His own,guha without caring about the latter's solicitude? > It also appears that while He is independent in > general, He listens to Thayar in allowing His > grace to flow and give salvation to those whom She > recommends. Being this the case, our conduct should > be such that Thayar will plead to Him on our behalf. With respect to conduct I doubt your statements. Why? KAkAsuran/ Jayantha,gave physical pain to thAyAr,and when PerumAL used brahmAsthram,kAkAsuran went to everybody and finally got tired(I don't think kAkAsuran did prapatti!)of flying and fell,that too wrongly. KAkAsuran's head was facing thAyAr and feet was facing PerumAL. She,as the "daya" aspect of perumAL,considering that "fall as prapatti", changes the direction of kAkAsuran thereby telling Him,that the subject has surrendered to Him and this is the best time for the Lord to show His kalyANa guNAs. In both the variety of dependence there is a mediation of Sri but our conduct does not play any role here. Conduct in thAyAr's and PerumAL's defn is different from that of ours. This is my understanding and please correct if I'm wrong. > In either case, it appears that one cannot simply > sit around and do nothing saying that there is > nothing to do. ??? SVB 80.81.82 talks about Sita/pirAtti,draupadi and thirukkaNNa- mangai ANdAn. SVB 82: pirAtti svasakthiyai vittAL;dhraupadhi lajjaiyai vittAL; thirukkaNNamangai ANdAn svavyApAraththai vittAn. ThirukkaNNamangai ANdAn gave up all his personal activities,reduced himself to the abject position of the dog crouching in a kennel. This was after thirukkaNNamangai ANdAn witnessed the dog owner(a frail human being) giving up his own life for the sake of his pet dog and thirukkaNNamangai ANdAn realised how much the omni-potent Lord would do to save the jIvAtmA. He placed himslf in the position of the dog,and substituted the omni-potent Lord for the owner of the dog. AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam NC Nappinnai Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 22, 2003 Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha Dear Smt Nappinnai: My humble pranams! A small information on pArathanthryam. Instead of dependence, they usually mention it as doing something based on other's will. That is "avargal itta vazhakkaga". It is not that he is dependent, but HE wants to do what "they" want out of HIS will. So, HIS pArathanthryam too comes out of HIS swAthanthryam, unlike a jeevatma's pArathanthryam that does not come out of its swAthanthryam, because pArathanthryam is the swaroopam of the jeevatma. >With respect to conduct I doubt your statements. Why? KAkAsuran/ >Jayantha,gave physical pain to thAyAr,and when PerumAL used >brahmAsthram,kAkAsuran went to everybody and finally got tired(I >don't think kAkAsuran did prapatti!)of flying and fell,that too >wrongly. KAkAsuran's head was facing thAyAr and feet was facing >PerumAL "Sitthira Koodatthiruppa Siru Kakkai Mulai Theenda Atthirame Konderiya Anaitthulagum Thirindhu Oodi Vitthagane Iramaavo NIN ABHAYAM endrazhaikka Atthirame Adhan Kannai Arutthadhum Oor Adayalam" - Periyazhwar Thirumozhi(3-10-6) [ In chitrakoodam, when a crow(jayanthan, the Indra's(?) son) disturbed Sita Piratti, at that very moment, Shri Rama used the Astiram(brahmastram) and, the crow, to escape from this, ran around all the worlds(saptha lokas) and then finally(no one was able to protect it from the lord's astram) came back to him and did Prapatthi and at that point, so as to respect the astiram(indirectly brahma), just took away the eye of the crow using it.] > > In either case, it appears that one cannot simply > > sit around and do nothing saying that there is > > nothing to do. > > ....... > > ThirukkaNNamangai ANdAn gave up all his personal activities,reduced > himself to the abject position of the dog crouching in a kennel. > This was after thirukkaNNamangai ANdAn witnessed the dog owner(a > frail human being) giving up his own life for the sake of his pet > dog and thirukkaNNamangai ANdAn realised how much the omni-potent > Lord would do to save the jIvAtmA. He placed himslf in the > position of the dog,and substituted the omni-potent Lord for the > owner of the dog. Swami Manavala Maamunigal Vyakyanam for this suthram: "Adhavadhu sva- rakshana hethuvana sva-vyaparangalai vittanengirapadi" [That is, he dropped his materialistic life that is a basic reason for survival and self protection.] This does not mean that he just started sitting in a place idly assuming lord will save him. He went to Thirukkannamangai, leaving all his businesses etc and started living for the Divyathampathis of the kovil and started serving them by cleaning the temple corridors. Kindly refer to the story on Thirukkannamangai Andan in this link: http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/jan2002/0094.html My apologies in case of mistakes. Yatheendra Pravanam Vandhe RAMYA Jamataram Munim Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan, Lakshmi Narasimhan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 23, 2003 Sri: Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama: Dear Nappinnai, I think I may have put out a muddled post - not surprising considering that this a very difficult concept to grasp. Here are certain thoughts on this subject. In the case of Kakasuran too, note that Thayar's mediation on behalf of Kakasuran happened only after he fell down helpless. She could have mediated very early on, but She waited for him to reach that state first. The state of abject surrender here is not the obvious one where we feel that way in His presence by understanding our true nature and our relationship to Him. Instead, Kaksuran's was one of sheer inability to do anything and nothing more. A very interesting subject of study! The case of Thirukkannamangai Andan is an important one though. Did he really stop doing anything? Or did he stop doing anything for himself? I request bhAgavatas with knowledge of his story to clarify. Even if he ended up doing absolutely nothing, there are two things to note. One is this state has to be one of doing absolutely nothing - that is not even trying to eat, sleep or anything. That is, leave "everything" up to Him. This is a very difficult state to achieve. Second, this is a unique case. None of our other acharyas went to this state. All our acharyas did many things appropriate to the quality of being a Srivaishnava. They studied, taught, sang His namas, did service at the temple. So, while they said His grace was nirhetuka, that did not preclude them from following certain principles. Notice too that all these are actions are Srivaishnavic in nature. This is where my objection comes to interpreting the nirhetuka krpa as that one has to do nothing. I think one has to follow the paths laid down by the acharyas - otherwise you will have people killing each other, breaking down temples etc., stating that our actions do not matter. Notice also that His grace never seems to go to those who do bhAgavata apacharam, although it does appear to go to those who may even do bhagavat apachAram. Finally, I have heard some scholars (PBA Swami?) say the following: in gaining moksha, the step of sharanAgati is one small step compared to the zillion more steps that one has to take. He lifts us up those steps out of His krpa. This is why we cannot say that moksha was given due to the act of sharanAgati. That is, it is incorrect to equate the two as they are not comparable - hence, sharanAgati is not the upEyam. However, this does not mean that one does not have to perform sharanAgati at all. Note that all of our acharyas have performed the act of surrender through their acharyas. I realize that I have thrown out a bunch of thoughts without clear direction. I think this is one subject that should be addressed by learned scholars and not novices such as myself. So, I will stop showing my ignorance. Hopefully some of our elders and scholars will clarify our doubts in this forum. Azhvar Emperumanar Jeeyar Thiruvadigale Sharanam adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan --- nappinnai_nc <nappinnai_nc wrote: > Sri: > Srimathe Ramanujaya nama: > Dear TCA Venkatesh, > What Sri TCA Srinivasa Ramanujan says is > correct according > to SVB 148 and 149. This, of course, is based on my > understanding of > SVB. > > SVB 148: krpaiyAlE varum pArathanthriyaththiR kAttil, > swAthanthryath- > thAlE varum pArathanthryam prabalam. > > SVB 149: ivvarththaththai vEdhapuruShan apEkshiththAn. > > ... The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo http://search. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 23, 2003 Sri: Srimathe Ramanujaya nama: Dear TCA Venkatesan, I'm also sharing my thoughts. > In the case of Kakasuran too, note that Thayar's > mediation on behalf of Kakasuran happened only after > he fell down helpless. She could have mediated very > early on, but She waited for him to reach that state > first. The state of abject surrender here is not > the obvious one where we feel that way in His > presence by understanding our true nature and our > relationship to Him. Instead, Kaksuran's was one of > sheer inability to do anything and nothing more. A > very interesting subject of study! I listened to Ramayanam upanyasam(that too not from SV perspective) when I was young and so hardly remember the actual incidences! As you said,thAyAr could have mediated earlier itself if she had wanted. But she did not do. Here I would go by SVB 148. I feel that PerumAL being the swAthanthrian,even thAyAr has to wait for the "right" time to act as the mediator. This aspect is explained by Swami Azhagiya MaNaVALa PerumAL nAyanAr in AH,2nd prakaraNam "iRaivanin vishESha katAksham". I don't think thAyAr can act(independently) as and when she pleases to mediate on behalf of us. She only accompanies Him in all His duties without displeasing Him. My understanding is that it is the Lord who chooses the "right" time. On a different note,I have heard that there is a minute/hair line" difference between even "prapatti" and "sharaNAgathi". My guess is SharaNAgathi goes out and out by "nirhEthuka krpa" and the "utter collapse" of the jIvAtmA's efforts while a "tinch" of sahEthukam (human effort) enters prapatti. This is again my guess only. > The case of Thirukkannamangai Andan is an important > one though. Did he really stop doing anything? Or > did he stop doing anything for himself? I request > bhAgavatas with knowledge of his story to clarify. He stopped all his nithya-naimittika obligations(like sanDhyA- vandhanam etc)and material activities(worrying about his livelihood etc). To develop that state,it requires tremendous faith in PerumAL that He will take care of everything. Even in the temple,he served not with the intent of doing kaimkaryam(?) > This is where my objection comes to interpreting > the nirhetuka krpa as that one has to do nothing. > I think one has to follow the paths laid down by > the acharyas - otherwise you will have people > killing each other, breaking down temples etc., > stating that our actions do not matter. Swami Azhagiya MaNavALa PerumAL NAyanAr says that NammAzhvAr declares that he has not done anything good that deserves the merit of His grace. The cause for NammAzhvAr's anubhavam is the "puNya/good deed" called "Lord Himself". NammAzhvAr declares that not only in this birth but in all his previous births too he has not performed any sADhanAs. AH 102: idagilEn nOnbu aRivilEn engaiyAlum sADhana thrayajam alla" sADhana thraya-karma,jnAna,bhakti "idagilEn onRu attagillEn aimpulan vellagillEn kadavanAgik kAlam thORum pUppaRiththu EththagillEn" - TVM 4.7.9 idagilEn-i haven't fed even a handful to those who were hungry attagillEn-i havn't given a glass of water to the thirsty aimpulan vellagillEn-haven't controlled the indhriyAs pUppaRiththu EththagillEn-i haven't done puShpa kaimkaryam "nORRa nOnbu ilEn nuNNaRivilEn" - TVM 5.7.1 nORRa nOnbu ilEn-karma yOga nuNNaRivilEn-jnAna yOga AH is also amazing. I feel if we can have AH and SVB(the two brothers are amazing and awesome that i'm obsessed with them) in tips,we understand SV. As you said I do agree that these are subtle topics and we should listen to experts. > of sharanAgati. That is, it is incorrect to equate > the two as they are not comparable - hence, sharanAgati > is not the upEyam. However, this does not mean that > one does not have to perform sharanAgati at all. Note > that all of our acharyas have performed the act of > surrender through their acharyas. SharaNAgathi is not even upAyam,how can it become the end/upEyam? What about sisupAla(who got mksha)? Did he do sharaNAgathi? DOes any devotee know if sisupAla did sharaNAgathi? Thanks to dear Lakshmi Narasimhan for clearly stating about kAkAsuran:-) AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam NC Nappinnai Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted April 23, 2003 Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha > I feel that PerumAL being the swAthanthrian,even thAyAr has to wait > for the "right" time to act as the mediator. This aspect is > explained by Swami Azhagiya MaNaVALa PerumAL nAyanAr in AH,2nd > prakaraNam "iRaivanin vishESha katAksham". > I don't think thAyAr can act(independently) as and when she pleases > to mediate on behalf of us. She only accompanies Him in all His > duties without displeasing Him. My understanding is that it is the > Lord who chooses the "right" time. This is an interesting subject and I am fortunate to have heard kalakshepam on this. Before we discuss about swAthanthryam of the Lord:-), let us understand the following: The swa-roopam and the swa- bhavam. swa-roopam means the nature, the in-built capability i.e basically what one CAN. swa-bhavam is more interesting. It is basically what one WILL do. I assume we all know the difference between these two words CAN and WILL where the former is to be used in the context of ABILITY to perform something, while the latter is to be used in the context where one is WILLING to perform something. Jeeva-atma-swaroopam is that it is the seshi i.e the body of the Parama-atma and is a dependent entity on him i.e he is the inner controller. Does the Jeeva-atma realize it? Many of them do not. Why so? It is due the swa-bhavam. When this swa-bhavam leads to the realizing act i.e realizing(as opposed to knowing) the atma- swaroopam, the jeeva-atma attains salvation(whether it is still attached to a body or not, "Adhuve Veedu Veedaame"). Now on the other side, what is Parama-atma swaroopam? HE is the omni-potent, omni- present and what not. HE is "anoranian" smaller than what we know as the smallest, "mahato maheeyan" bigger than what we know as the biggest - in valor, krupai, dayai, kshamai, size everything. All right. All said, so, why does HE wait indefinitely for every jeevatma to realize HIM? This question gives a wonderful answer. This is when one gets to understand HIS swabhavam. Though HE is "anoranian" and "mahatomahian", HIS swabhavam is such that, HE cares for every jeevatma. HE eagerly awaits their change of swabhavam to realize HIM and make HIM feel happy. Now back to the subject, >PerumAL being the swAthanthrian,even thAyAr has to wait for >the "right" time to act as the mediator. I don't think thAyAr can act > (independently) as and when she pleases to mediate on behalf of us. > She only accompanies Him in all His duties without displeasing Him. Perumal though being a swAthanthrian which is HIS swaroopam, has a swABhavam exactly opposite to it. HE is willing to do what other's say, for most of the time. "Shriyathe, shrayathe" gives a clear cut meaning of Piratti's duty. She is to protect and she is the "Karyunya, Kshama, Daya" roopam of the Lord. And she will recommend that for ANYONE and EVERYONE at any time. > My understanding is that it is the Lord who chooses the "right" > time. Any time that the Lord chooses, is the right time for HIM as well as the prajai (the subject). The moment we say he chooses, we are talking about his swa-bhavam and svAthantryam is out of it. I mean, svAthantryam is the base capability of the Lord to have any swa- bhavam, but these kind of acts have to be attributed to his swa- bhavam i.e his willingness to do, rather than his capability to do. > On a different note,I have heard that there is a minute/hair line" > difference between even "prapatti" and "sharaNAgathi". My guess is > SharaNAgathi goes out and out by "nirhEthuka krpa" and the "utter > collapse" of the jIvAtmA's efforts while a "tinch" of sahEthukam > (human effort) enters prapatti. This is again my guess only. SharaNAgathi is the very first act of falling under the feet of one (LORD in this context) after the performer realizes his/her inability to do anything. The RETENTION of this mindset is called the PRAPATTI. Shriman Narayana Charanou SHARANAM -> PRAPATHYE Srimathe Narayanaya Namaha. [i prostrate(Sharanagathi) unto the lotus feet of Lord Shriman Narayana(includes Thayar too as she is never separate from HIM) and will continue to hold(Prapatthi) those feet and stick to HIM, and I realize I don't have svAthanthryam(na-ma) and I am a servant/dependent of HIM] Yatheendra Pravanam Vandhe RAMYA Jamataram Munim Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan, Lakshmi Narasimhan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
