Sri: Srimathe Ramanujaya nama: Dear Lakshmi narasimhan, Your post was very interesting indeed(this time Sri Pillai lOkAcArya was saved by you but his brother is caught!). I am just reflecting my thoughts on your post. > [While this is so, in my earlier post, I had made a mistake of not > clearly explaining what I meant as "adopting bhakthi". Adopting > bhakthi may be due to two reasons: a) Because the jeevatma has > realized its swaroopam and makes performing bhakthi as a swabhavam > with no intent of grabbing lord's grace - an unconditional act > (Bhakthi is not an upayam, because the lord is the upayam and the > upeyam). b) Performing bhakthi to attain moksham(upayam) i.e > a conditional act. Azhwars and great souls fall in category > (a) while others fall in (b). I do not know what exactly you mean by statement (a). But if I understand it 'rightly' I would like to point out that this knowledge of swarUpam also happens due to "only" Lord's grace. This is well explained in AcArya hrdhayam and also EmperumAnAr's explanation in gita bhAShyam[cf 7.14-20]. Your statements sound as if NammAzhvAr "realized" his swarUpam and performed bhakthi without the intention of grabbing His grace. According to swami Azhagiya MaNavALa PerumAL NAyanAr,nammAzhvAr had even this realization due to God's grace ONLY. NammAzhvAr skipped para-bhakthi,para-jnAna and directly reached the state "parama-bhakthi" which again is due to God's grace and NammAzhvAr himself declares that he hasn't done "anything" to attain this parama-bhakthi in TVM 4.7.9! AzhvArs' love is neither a sADhana bhakthi(bhakthi as the "means/upAyam" to reach the end/upEyam/mOksha) nor sADhya bhakthi(bhakthi itself as the end/upEyam/mOksha). ubhayamum anRikkE - AH 101 [ubhayam-sADhana and sADhya] In the terminology of Swami Azhagiya MaNavALa PerumAl NAyanAr,this bhakthi of AzhvArs is called "swayamprayOjana bhakthi(non-stop,and eternal bhakthi/love done to please Him)" > This difference in mindset makes the major difference between > prapannas and others. A prapannan(a) attributes everything to the > lord's Nirhetuka krupai and hence to him, the Lord > was the means(Upayam) and the end(Upeyam) too. For others(b), the > bhakthi is the Upayam(Sahetukam) and the Lord is the Upeyam. I think here you need to be cautious in defining. In (a) nirhetukam,the stress is given to the "greatness of the Lord" while in (b)sahetukam the stress is given to the "human efforts". Whatever be the perspective, prapatti is there for both the sects with TK giving importance to (a)[when one compares the greatness of the Lord with the efforts of the jivatma,the latter is insignificant and hence dropped/neglected only as far as comparison is concerned] and VK to (b). Neither of the two deny (a) or (b). For TKs, the Lord is "sidDhOpAyam" and I doubt if this is the same view held by VKs. Sri MA Venkatakrishnan's talk on doctrinal differences was very clear and it will be really great if Swami MAV can post an article where Swami Desikan differs from/agrees with Sri PiLLai lOkAcArya. All our obstacles are removed by the Lord Himself. So, the "realization of the swarUpam" also comes only after Lord sheds His grace on us thereby removing the obstacle of ahankAram/mamakAram (jivatma thinking that it belongs to so and so instead of Sriman Narayana). Forgive all my blabberings. I'm trying to swim through SVB and AH and hence all credits go to the brothers and discredits to me. Azhvr emperumAnar jIya thiruvadigaLE sharaNam NC Nappinnai
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |