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

Ramanuja List Archive: Message 00136 May 2003

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


Srimate Ramanujaya nama:

Dear Friend,

Your points are logical.

The commandments in SAstra will be meaningless if the Lord werely 
solely responsible for jIva-s actions.

The following submission of adiyen's might be of interest to you in 
this context:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bhakti-list/message/15905

adiyen, Ramkumar

--- In ramanuja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, vimalkumar ranganathan 
<panardasan@xxxx> wrote:
> 
> Sri:
> 
> Srimate Ramanujaya Nama:
> 
> Respected Adiyaars, 
> 
> As the person who started this topic 
of discussion, I would like to add a few points.
> 
> * According to Smt. Sumithra, it is the will of the person who 
gives food or alms to the beggar. Well, but still the beggar still 
has to beg for food, right?? Only since the beggar made calls for 
alms, did the owner decides or does't not decide to give alms. So, 
the act of the beggar becomes the main cause of food. Considering 
this example alone, Moksha then becomes Sahetukam (Beggar first makes 
call for alms, which means Jeevatma surrenders first)
> 
> * Lets talk about free will for a second. I had submited this point 
in a private mail to one of the active members of this forum. Let me 
repost the same point here:
> 
> If person A is God and person B is the jeeva. A controls B totally. 
B is totally dependent on A. B cannot do any activites on his own 
(meaning no free will). This is the scenario. Suppose if B performs 
something sinful, it is understand that actually it is person A who 
is actually the doer. Given this, how can person A tell person 
B, "hey, you have done this and not done that, so you go to hell for 
that, or undergo karmic reactions for this". Sounds totally 
illogical, right?? In other words, if A is the ultimate doer of 
things, how can he ask B to do things like "Ask questions" or "Don't 
do this" or even "Surrender"?? I mean, isn't it totally illogical if 
person A even asks B to do anything at all, given that A is actually 
the doer??
> 
> * With respect to Nirhetukam which means, "Causeless Mercy". Well, 
the same Bhagavad Gita, which speaks about Karma Yoga, Jnana Yoga, 
Bhakti Yoga and finally Prapatti, somehow fails to talk about 
the "Causeless Mercy" of the lord. Perumal only says, "surrender, do 
this, do that". Not in a single verse has he said, "Just surrender 
unto me mentally and remain a vegetable physically". No. 
> 
> Can I surrender to an Acarya, have Samashrayanam done and 
mentally pray to Perumal, "I am yours. I have surrendered unto You. 
Whatver I do, You are the Karta", and then end up watching a nice 
episode of Seinfeld?? Meaning, does it reflect the traits of a 
prapanna??
> 
> * Based on what has appealed to my logic (which is totally inferior 
and flawed), I am of the opinion that we do have a bare minimum of 
free will. Based on that free will, we exercise options, we choose. 
We choose to surrender or not surrender. If we don't surrender, then 
again we get lost in this cycle of samsara.
> 
> If we do surrender, then Perumal grants us Moksha. Like Sri 
Lakshmi Narayanan pointed out, perumal grants moksha to people are 
perceived to be undeserving too, like Sisupala, etc. That is his 
causeless mercy, or Nirhetuka Kripai. Or in other words, Nirhetuka 
Kripai cannot be perceived to be the ONLY means of Moksham. 
> 
> * The third idea that is suggested is this: We surrender, but still 
perumal chooses to grant moksha or not, based on his will. I think it 
is a very dangerous, demotivating point. Historically, there has 
never been a case in which Perumal had failed to offer Moksha to 
somebody who had surrendered. He might have tested them, like Sri 
Thondaradippodi AzhwAr, but had never failed to offer to them Moksha.
> 
> * The same Carama Shloka ends with the phrase, "Ma Sucah", 
means "do not fear". How many times has Perumal used words 
like "Asamsayah" which means, "do not doubt", or even words 
like "Satyam", which means "Promise"!! The same perumal who has used 
very powerful, assuring words like the above, cannot fail to offer 
Moksha to a fully surrendered person.
> 
> * So, the crux of the matter is this: Instead of just relying on 
the "Nirhetuka Kripa" of perumal, it is a good idea for us to follow 
His instructions. Accept an AcAryan. Surrender unto Him. And follow 
the spiritual practices as laid down by him. Why?? Because Perumal 
says so.
> 
> * Well, stickers to the idea of "ONLY-NIRHETUKA KRIPA" can raise 
this wonderful point: They can say that it is the same Perumal who 
makes a person surrender unto him. Meaning, if one is even remotely 
interested in Bhagavath Vishayam, it is just because of the mercy of 
Perumal alone, or in other words, Perumal chooses his surrenderers. 
We don't have any free-will, and anybody who even "chooses" to 
surrender does so because of Perumal's Nirhetuka Kripa. But then the 
counter-point is that, then Bhagavad Gita is just a stage-show for 
Perumal. Since, he chooses his prapannas, he is just joking when he 
says things like "Surrender unto me.." etc.
> 
> I really hope and pray that my views are not perceived to be 
offensive to anyone. Illogical, unintelligent and immature, ofcourse!!
> 
> 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