srImathE rAmAnujAya namaha srImath vara vara munayE namaha srI annan thiruvadigalE saranam Dear bhAgavathAs, kaivalyam is not a bad decision that is being made by a jIva. We all know that bhagavAn is the show runner and he provides the result of every act performed by us. Those who ask for swargam are given the same based on their punyams that they accumulate. Same with paapis. They are given hell as they deserve the same. In case of kaivalyam, the TK position is that, the jIva is performing upAsanai of itself. Well, the point is, jIva is a nithya vasthu. So, if the jIva demands an eternal self worship (nithya jIva upAsanai), it cannot be given a place in the lIla vibhuthi. So, bhagavAn gives these jIvas a place in the eternal abode i.e the nithya vibhuthi. But, due to the very nature of this worship(self worship), the place becomes devoid of bhagavadh / bhAgavadha - kadAksham, ArAdhanam etc. That is why this place is compared to a cemetry (yedu nilam in tamil). This cemetry exists in the nithy vibhuthi and is worse than the hell, for, a jIva could recover from hell and could be given a chance to attain moksham whereas kaivalyarthis never get a chance to perform bhagavadh ArAdhanam again. The only hope for kaivalyarthis would be, the sankalpam of bhagavAn, that could bring them out of that place. Reg: Both sampradAyas accept kaivalyam as an inferior position to the bhagavad-sAyujyam/parama padam Yes. Kailvalyam is inferior from the perspective of both the sampradayams, but, per, vedAnta desikar, one could recover from that place. Also, per vedAnta desikar, there is no concept of the various types of mokshams sAyujyam(no swapravrutti, prapatthi is not an upAyam, bhagavadh mukha ullAsame purushArtham-defectless), sArupyam (no swapravrutti, but the defect is using prapatthi as upAyam), sAmeepyam(defect is swapravrutti - bhagavadh upaasakaas) or sAlokyam (kaivalyam) - there is just one and only one moksham. adiyen would like to stand corrected if I had made any mistakes. All of the above information are based on adiyen's weak understandings from upanyasams. Kindly pardon my mistakes if any. Adiyen, Ramanuja Dasan Azhwar Emperumaanaar Jeeyar Thiruvadigale Saranam PS: Post has nothing to do with blaming or mentioning the the TK or the VK sampradayam is wrong. Intent is just to share the information grasped in upanyasams. Corrections are most welcome. --- In ramanuja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Vishnu" <vsmvishnu@xxxx> wrote: > Dear Sriman Kasturi Rangan, > > It may not seem to be dangerous to all! The issue of Kaivalya mOskha > and the ThennAchArya position is likely to be addressed in the coming > updates of our yatirajadasa website. At this moment, I do not have > much idea. Learend bhAgavatas may answer your question. > > Regards > Vishnu > > --- In ramanuja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "amshuman_k" <amshuman_k@xxxx> wrote: > > Dear bhAgavatas, > > > > One of the difference between the two kalais is the nature of > > kaivalyam. Both sampradAyas accept kaivalyam is inferior to > bhagavad- > > sAyujyam/parama padam. However, the thenkalai position is that - it > > is permanent; (from the explanation of a TK Acharya), the jIvan > made > > a bad decision; it asked for it, aspired for it and got it. So, it > is > > stuck with it. > > Isn't this dangerously similar to a christian claim that "accept > > Jesus or you will goto eternal hell?" (You make a bad decision of > not > > accepting christ; you asked for it and got it). I request > > clarifications from learned bhAgavatas. > > > > Regards, > > KK
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |