Sri: Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama: Sri Nappinnai, The TV analogy is very apt. But still I feel you have safely avoided addressing the issue: If you created the same TV. Why would you instruct the TV to do things?? That has always been the issue right from the beginning. If the Lord created all of us for his own enjoyment, leela Vibhuti.. etc, why should the Lord give us tonnes and tonnes of instructions?? Again, why should he use words like, "Sathyamte", or "Ma sucah", "asamsayah", etc. Well, these are plain simple samskrit words. Logically, how can the doer blame the instrument for what is being done?? If this issue is answered, I am sure my mind will be free. I think this question is the summum-bonum of all the issues with respect to the position of the Jeeva, be it free will, Nirhetuka Kripa etc. With respect to being a TK and all, it is His will that I am born in a Thennacharya sampradaya family. Lets try not to look at it as a TK vs VK dispute, it is a healthy argument on the philosophical differences between Nirhetukam and Sahetukam. It is dangerous to accept that since we are TKs, our philosophy is the most superior. It fails to satiate our logical and analytical minds. AzhwAr emperumAnAr Jeeyar thiruvadigLE saranam Kidambi Soundararajan. --- nappinnai_nc <nappinnai_nc@xxxx> wrote: > Sri: > Srimathe Ramanujaya nama: > Srimad Vara Vara Munaye nama: > Dear Soundar, > > > 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) > > By the above analogy,it is the Will of the Lord that > matters in > granting or not granting mOskha to His subjects. > So,it is "IMMATERIAL > and IRRELEVANT" whether or not the Subjects/jIvATmA > begs/surrenders! > > jIvATmA seeks alms/refuge;the Lord grants or denies. > jIvAtmA doesn't seek;the Lord grants or denies. > > The only commonality is the Lord granting or > denying. So jIvATmA's > role/action is disregarded. BTW,you haven't seen the > Lord in person > and do not know His mind/actions! But w/o all the > tips provided by > our AcAryAs,we have the audacity to shake the beauty > of His kalyANa > guNAs(questioning the nirhEthuka krpa),to judge Him > and if possible > even overthrow Him:-) > > > 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 > > For example I(jIvAtmA/sentient) invent/discover > TV(acit/non-sentient). > TV exists "solely" for "my enjoyment" and not for > its own! TV does > not jump and scream "Hey,I'm working great and enjoy > myself,and > infact I entertain you. Hence I deserve the > doership. What have you > gotta say, Man?". Imagine,when you reach home this > evening,your TV > questions "where the hell have you been? why are you > so late?" I can > bet the expression on your face would not be a > "happy one". Or is it > going to say "hey soundar I felt lonely while you > were away and I'm > so excited that you're back home!". When > non-sentient starts > speaking/acting,that is the end of the world for > jIvAtmA!!! > > Due to my own discovery,once I switch "on" the > button,TV starts > performing a set of operations. Otherwise it's going > to remain > idle,dumb and an idiot box. It it doesn't work,it's > entirely > upto "me" to repair or not to repair it. Out of "my > nirhEthuka > krpa",I repair it(TV doesn't say: "will you work on > me?")and make it > work again. If I need to replace some faulty parts,I > may do so or may > not. If it's not worth repairing it(if the repairing > costs exceed the > original cost of the TV!),I may break it into pieces > with "my own > hands" and give it "vimOcanam/mOksha". WHatever be > the situation,the > TV is under " my mercy". Without "my > intervention",the TV is not > going to do "ANYTHING". It is not going to and > capable of repairing > itself. TV is my property,my baby,my invention and > what I do with it > is "entirely and solely" depends on me ALONE. TV has > no business or > rights to have any claims over it. Apply this > analogy to paramAtmA > and jIvAtmA. Replace jIvAtmA by paramAtmA and acit > by jIvAtmA! > Yes,this may spur the ego of the jIvAtmA and it > hardly takes > nanoseconds to rub the ego of a person. But this is > the truth and > truth is "ALWAYS" bitter. > > > 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. > > There are hundreds of books on relativity but every > boook is not a > bible. Similarly there are thousands of books on BG > by various > authors but not all of them are "CLASSIC". In many > places in BG,the > Lord says "EXPLICITLY" that it is "ONLY" out of His > grace > (BG 11:47) that the puppet Arjuna is receiving "such > such a thing". > Be it knowledge or vishvarUpa dharshanam. I'm dead > sure that whatever > explanation you give for the BG slokas is not your > own and surely > must have referred to some book. It matters "a lot" > whose and which > book you refer to! > > > > 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?? > > SamAshrayaNam is not the criterion/means for > attaining mOskham. > Whether or not you realize that you're His,you're > already His > property and you belong to Him only(read Tirumantra > prakaraNam,Mumukshuppadi by TCA Venkatesan). If you > realize it,it's > well and great and if you don't it is well and great > again! You > write "dasan" sometimes and at other times the full > signature. If you > are crazy about your own "freewill" and > "sahEthukam",the word "dAsan" > loses its beauty. That's why elders normally advise > that one should > not write that without undergoing the samAshrayaNam. > AcAryan will > explain all those things at the time of > samAshrayaNam. I do know the > meaning but I have taken an oath and have drawn a > LakshmaNa > line/kOdu/rEkhA for myself that I should put that > stamp/signature > ONLY after I undergo the samAshrayaNam because > nothing like receiving > the knowledge from the right AcAryan! It's an > unparalleled moment > that I'm patiently waiting for it! > > Most of us would forfeit to claim ourselves as > prapanna in "strict > sense" because we are living in the 21st century and > the society is > corrupted by science and technology. Do whatever you > want,but give up > the doership! Here comes the tricky part!!! You had > already asked "I > can committ crimes,robbery etc" and still say that > it is the Lord who > did that. But when the mental realization > happens,surely the person > would stop committing negative acts of all kinds. In > today's world > you can'say that watching Seinfeld is a crime. It's > just an > entertainment. But the question is "are you going to > sit in front of > that idiot box all the 24 hrs" after realizing that > "I'm Yours". I > === message truncated === __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |