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

Ramanuja List Archive: Message 00149 Apr 2003

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


Sri:
Srimathe Ramanujaya nama:
Dear TCA Venkatesan,
I'm also sharing my thoughts.

> 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! 

I listened to Ramayanam upanyasam(that too not from SV perspective) 
when I was young and so hardly remember the actual incidences! As you 
said,thAyAr could have mediated earlier itself if she had wanted. But 
she did not do. Here I would go by SVB 148. I feel that PerumAL being 
the swAthanthrian,even thAyAr has to wait for the "right" time to act 
as the mediator. This aspect is explained by Swami Azhagiya MaNaVALa 
PerumAL nAyanAr in AH,2nd prakaraNam "iRaivanin vishESha katAksham". 
I don't think thAyAr can act(independently) as and when she pleases 
to mediate on behalf of us. She only accompanies Him in all His 
duties without displeasing Him. My understanding is that it is the 
Lord who chooses the "right" time. 

On a different note,I have heard that there is a minute/hair line" 
difference between even "prapatti" and "sharaNAgathi". My guess is 
SharaNAgathi goes out and out by "nirhEthuka krpa" and the "utter 
collapse" of the jIvAtmA's efforts while a "tinch" of sahEthukam
(human effort) enters prapatti. This is again my guess only. 

> 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.

He stopped all his nithya-naimittika obligations(like sanDhyA-
vandhanam etc)and material activities(worrying about his livelihood 
etc). To develop that state,it requires tremendous faith in PerumAL 
that He will take care of everything. Even in the temple,he served 
not with the intent of doing kaimkaryam(?)

> 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.

Swami Azhagiya MaNavALa PerumAL NAyanAr says that NammAzhvAr declares 
that he has not done anything good that deserves the merit of His 
grace. The cause for NammAzhvAr's anubhavam is the "puNya/good deed" 
called "Lord Himself". NammAzhvAr declares that not only in this 
birth but in all his previous births too he has not performed any 
sADhanAs.

AH 102: idagilEn nOnbu aRivilEn engaiyAlum sADhana thrayajam alla"
sADhana thraya-karma,jnAna,bhakti

"idagilEn onRu attagillEn aimpulan vellagillEn kadavanAgik
kAlam thORum pUppaRiththu EththagillEn" - TVM 4.7.9

idagilEn-i haven't fed even a handful to those who were hungry
attagillEn-i havn't given a glass of water to the thirsty
aimpulan vellagillEn-haven't controlled the indhriyAs
pUppaRiththu EththagillEn-i haven't done puShpa kaimkaryam

"nORRa nOnbu ilEn nuNNaRivilEn" - TVM 5.7.1

nORRa nOnbu ilEn-karma yOga
nuNNaRivilEn-jnAna yOga

AH is also amazing. I feel if we can have AH and SVB(the two brothers 
are amazing and awesome that i'm obsessed with them) in tips,we 
understand SV. As you said I do agree that these are subtle topics 
and we should listen to experts.

> 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.

SharaNAgathi is not even upAyam,how can it become the end/upEyam?
What about sisupAla(who got mksha)? Did he do sharaNAgathi? DOes any 
devotee know if sisupAla did sharaNAgathi? Thanks to dear Lakshmi 
Narasimhan for clearly stating about kAkAsuran:-)

AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam
NC Nappinnai






[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