--- In ramanuja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Lakshmi Narasimhan" <nrusimhan@xxxx> wrote: > Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha > > Dear Shri Vishnu, > > > Now, where is the question of Lord's expectation from the Jeeva to > > turn toward Him? > If he does not want us to turn towards him, why would he say "Maam > ekam Saranam Vraja" in His charama slokham? Dear Sriman Narasimhan, I did not mean God does not want us to turn toward Him. But it He Who makes us turn. Alwars say "it is His field, He will sow seeds" and many such things. Even SisupAla mOksha, according to Alwars, is only out of nirhEtuka krupA. Nowhere they say that u have given Him moskha for soemthing. One pAsuram I heard says You have given him mOksha despite His hatred for You (those knowing may please quote it). What He says in charama Sloka is take me as upAya. Bhattar replies that he is not even able to do that (prapattum analam..) in his explanation for charama SlokI. Is does not mean he is able to perform other upAyas. Actually he presents utmost helplessness. At the same time, he is happy that God is there to get him rid of all his aparAdhas. > > There are pre and post realization processes. Only when we realize > Him, then we will realize His Nirhetuka krupa and that it was He who > had been doing everything and we are just the toys. For those who > haven't realized, if you tell them "Accept Him and that acceptance > (if happens) is only out of His krupA" it would drive them away from > our sampradayam, because for an analytical mind, it does not sound > practical, but is hypothetical. For those who have not realized, as > they do something as a upayam(like bhakthi, karma, gyana etc) the > realization is at the end for them. For prapannas, the moment they > realize He is the Upayam, then the realization is accomplished and > atmaujjeevanam is over. >They live the rest of their samsaric life > just to support the jagath vyaparam and to get rid of the karmas that > would support the deha-vyoham. I am not saying leave all karmAs. All those karmAs again are due to Bhagavat sankalpam. However, since we cannot keep quiet, Alwars prescribe vAzhvinai (Bhagavat guNa kIrtanam) and adimai (serving His devotees) as anushtAnams not for mOksha but to live a life true to our nature. >And after the realization, they > understand that even their realization was only because of His >krupai. Then where is the question of sahEtukam from Lord's perspective? > > As you yourself said, "Thinking that He is the only way":) means some > effort has to be put in(this is one of the initial steps to make one > understand the sampradayam i.e pre-realization). But, after one > starts "thinking", he/she will realize(due to His Grace) that he/she > was able to realize Him only out of His will i.e post-realization. > >Please remember > all Azhwars sang the prabandhams only after the realization. My point > is that we have to understand their works only from that >perspective. But why they have given this literature? Not for our anushtAnam? (practice that He is the only upAya and making no efforts) > If we have really attained realization then we would auto matically > talk only about His Nirhetuka krupa. For those who have not, we must > share our bhagavadh anubhavams and make them do something "for" Him > ("including the sharanagathi"). >But, once they do the sharanagathi, > they would understand that it was His krupai that even made them > perform the sharanagathi. Lord is indeed instrumental in everything > as an antharyami. But, this understanding comes only after the > realization doesn't it? Azhwar has realized it. How about others >who > haven't? How do we make them understand this? Alwars are not speaking from a high platform but are very practcial. If we say you need to perfrom Sharanagati, that will also drive away people from the sampradAyam. How can one perform something which is a state of realization that He is the upAya and upEya? Once we convey them that He is the upAya and upEya and they are convinced about it, are they not SaraNAgatas? >For them, if the lord > is instrumental and the jeevatmas do "nothing" then aren't we > advocating one of the aspects of the "Advaitam" i.e brahmam is only > one that does everything and anything else that we perceive are >ust > the maya? That is why I insist that Acharya Hrudhayam has to be felt > from the position of Azhwar. It should not be discussed from our >day > to day samsaric perspective. It is purely from a prappana > perspective. It is very much different from advaitam because thinking I am God (by realization) will generate ego and superiority over nature. Our position is, even thinking that i have made some effort for mOksha will lead to ego and we are not supposed to have any sort of ego even to the smallest extent. As I said earlier,we need not keep quite but go ahead with anushtAnams (vAzhvinai and adimai). >s Shri NC Narasimhan mentioned, these are Rahasya > Granthams and need to be understood only from the right acharyan. >We > may read these and try to get familiarity with the information > available in it and ask questions. But, this is different from the > intent and the perspective of the author Swamy Azhagiya Manalavala > Perumal Nayanar. >From a Sri Vaishnava Acharya, I understood that this is the simplest sampradAya and there is no scope for misunderstanding. However, one problem is there. If it is too simple, people may not accept it as people want to "earn" everything including mOksha. > > > ALawandAr, in his stotra ratna, who first offers himself to Him > > saying "ahamadyaiva mayA samapritah" corrects himself in the next > > Sloka by saying "athavA kinnu samarpayAmi tE?" ((when evrything is > > Urs, what can I offer you?) > > This is a perfect example of the pre and post realization process. Another view point is, AlawandAr is conveying to us we need not even submit ourselves to Him since we are already His. Having faith in Him is enough. Our belief (as taught by Alwars) is that such faith is also his blessing. > > > > In our definition, SaraNAgati is nothing but accepting Him as upAya > > and upEya. > "accepting" him, itself is an effort isn't it(from a normal > perspective). But for the person who realized his "incapability", > this realization itself is due to the Lord's grace. That is what I have been trying to say. According to Alwars, that acceptance or realization takes place only out of His grace. > > Morever if we expect everyone to accept the lord as the > upayam at the initial stage itself, this would get rid of many of the > people. Since SaraNatagti by our definition is the realization that He is the upAya and upEya, what should we ask them to do in the initial stage? Will we not be contradticting ourselves at a later stage, when they are prapannas? > > I have heard in many kalakshepams that He indefinitely waits for >us. > For what? If he uses his Nirhetuka krupa, we would not be here. Since He wants this lIlA vibhUti to be there, we are here. When He uses His krupA, we will be in nitya vibhUti. > Everyone should have been in moksham. All I am trying to say is that, > we must not restrict the view of our sampradayam only to those people > who are born and brought up in it and who could easily understand >it. > It is open to all and hence we must provide appropriate views > depending on the audience. To me, we must not even let anyone have a > doubt that the lord may be Partial because "HE IS NOT". I am also of the same opinion. God is not partial and our sampradAyam must be open to everybody. Yatheendra Pravanam Vandhe RAMYA Jamataram Munim Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan, Vishnu
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |