You are here: SriPedia - Ramanuja - Archives - May 2003

Ramanuja List Archive: Message 00092 May 2003

 
May 2003 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


Sri:

Sri Nappinnai,


" when you say that "one can perform even sinful actions" you are under 
the delusion that "you are the body". Refer to BG 3:27. 

prakrthE: kriyamANAni guNai: karmANi sarvasha: |
ahankAra vimUDAthmA karthA(a)ham ithi manyathE ||
"

So, who exactly is the sinner?? Can we blame Ishvara for the sins that we 
perform??



" What happens to the jIvAtma in a "state of coma"? What happens to its 
consciousness??? Think over it in connection with freewill and write 
in your next post."

When the atma gets into coma, he is not conscious of anything. He is 
practically a vegetable. Whereas a normal Jeevatma is really conscious of 
everything around him. What is the analogy here?? My question (I believe) is 
fairly simple. If a person does a sinful act, who is to be blamed, himself or 
Ishvara?? If you say Ishvara is ultimately the doer of everything, then why are 
you and I discussing in this forum, we could rather get drunk in get involved 
in all kinds of vices and sinful reactions, and then easily blame Sriman 
NArAyaNA ascribing to the fact that he is the MoolakarthA of everything??



"But I have heard(and read)that one ISKCON devotee 
went into coma and those days she couldn't think of the Lord KrShNA. 
Why?" 

I don't know, ask that devotee. Anyway, on what context are you citing ISKCON 
here, I don't know. If a person is in a coma, he does not escape. In the 2nd 
chapter of BG, Krishna says,

"VasAmsi JeernAni Yata Vihaya navAni grhnAti narOparAni |

tata sarIrAni vihAya jeernAny anyAni samyAti navAni dehi ||"

the soul still has karma and the karmic reactions will follow in the next 
lifebirth, but thats an aside.

" KrShNA's AcArya was Sandipini,who knowing that KrShNA is the Lord 
sought the Lord for alpa/cheap puruShArTham(he asked the Lord to 
revive his dead son!). There is a AcAryA-sishya lakshaNam and 
something is lacking here. The Lord was disappointed by the AcAryA.
Just like He chose Sandipini as His AcArya,He chose Arjuna to impart 
the knowledge to all. "

Do you have any quotations or evidence in which Krishna reasons his choosing 
Arjuna, like the above mentioned?? Krishna did not impart any knowledge to 
Sandipani Muni. Whereas, he revealed the RAja Guhya to Arjuna. Big difference. 
In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna says he chose Arjuna because he is dear friend. 
Again, I can dispute Nirhetuka Kripai there, because if you see Arjuna had 
always been a close friend and devotee of Krishna. 

" Our relation/bond with the Lord can operate in two ways(two-way 
traffic)based on His "modus operandi" throwing us back again into 
samsAra based on karmas or granting us mOksha which is based on His 
voluntary grace. On the other hand,our link with the AcArya is a one-
way traffic leading us to the final goal, salvation. AcArya is full 
of grace ONLY! That is why repayment to AcArya is IMPOSSIBLE because 
there are NO two Ishvaras and Four vibhUthis! So,seeking refuge at 
AcAryA's(means) feet is the ONLY remedy and the exclusive service to 
the AcArya is the goal(carama parva niShTa)"

Dangerous point there Sri Nappinnai!! U mean to say that Perumaal grants us 
moksha based on his "voluntary" grace, whereas surrender to AcAryan leads to 
salvation for sure. Well, surrender to Acaryan then becomes an act, as a result 
of which we get perumaal's grace (moksham), SAhEtukam, right?? 

With respect to the state of prapatti being perfect or non-perfect, I still 
didn't get a clear answer, but I did see a very convincing point when somebody 
quoted Sri Thirumazhisai Azhwar who says that Sriman NArAyaNa can make the 
AzhwAr forget about him and send him back to materialistic ways, if He decides 
so. 

On that note, it appeals that Bhakti is a better practice than Prapatti, 
wherein you think for the lord, eat for the lord, whatever you do, you do it 
for the lord and his pleasure. To quote the 9th chapter, 27th shloka from the 
Gita:

"yat karosi yad asnasi yaj juhosi dadasi yad

yat tapasyasi kaunteya tad kurusva mad arpanam"

"whatever you do, whatever you eat, whatever you give or whatever austerities 
you perform, do it as an offering to me".

The question that arises that, what happens to a prapanna after he surrenders?? 
Arjuna didn't completely surrender. Gajendra surrendered. In Arjuna's case it 
was Nirhetuka Kripa (according to you), but still he failed. In Gajendra's 
case, he made the effort of calling the Lord's Names. Or so did Draupadi. It 
appears SAhetukam. 

BTW, do Bhakti and SAhEtukam have similarities??

Kindly pardon me for anything written wrong or hurtful.

AzhwAr emperumANAr jeeyar thiruvadigaLE Saranam.

Dasan,

Kidambi Soundararajan.


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list