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

Ramanuja List Archive: Message 00143 Apr 2003

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


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@xxxx> 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.
> 
> ...

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com




[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