You are here: SriPedia - Ramanuja - Archives - Sep 2004

Ramanuja List Archive: Message 00033 Sep 2004

 
Sep 2004 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

Respected Sri Venkatesan  and Sri Vishnu,

Request your pardon for interfering in your scholarly
discussion on seshatwam, pArathanthiryam, saatvika
ahamkaaram etc. The following is the understanding to
my little knowledge which may be full of flaws. I
request the bhagavathas to pardon me and correct me.

Let me first give two interpretations to understand
the relationship (if any) between seshatwam and
parathanthiryam.
(1) It is said ?avanandri vor aNuvum asaiyaadu?.
(nothing moves in this universe without His will).
Supposing the aNu (this is only as an example and not
to get into details of chit or achit) gets the potency
to move on its own, it must refrain itself from doing
it. If not, its ?parathanthiryam azhiyum? and
?swathanthiryam vandu, swaroopam azhiyum? (quotes are 
mine). The aNu starts thinking itself as swathanthran
because it is able to move on its own. From verse 56 &
57 of Mumukshppadi it is deduced that if the aNu
starts thinking itself as swathanthran, pArathanthiyam
is lost, so also seshatwam. But seshatwam is something
which should not be lost even in Bhoga dasai (92). If
seshatwam is lost, bhoga dasai praapthi can not
happen. This is because it is in bhoga dasai, Ishwaran
gets into the process of destroying seshatwam of the
aNu. Since that process is enjoyed by Ishwaran, the
aNu is expected to show naichiam that it still is
under seshatwam! It is therefore concluded that
seshatwam is and continues to be the swarupam for the
aNu, (even in bhogadasai). Since the aNu exhibits
seshatwam, it is also a pArathanthiryan.

(2) This is about a father and his son and let us
imagine that the son resembles his father in all
aspects. It is almost that he is identical to his
father in all respects. Yet he can not be his father
and this makes him secondary to his father
(seshatwam), though he is capable of behaving like his
father in each and every way. In his capacity of
having been endowed with all the qualities of his
father, can he seek  a relationship (I request the
bhagavathas to read this only as an example to
understand the concept better) with his father?s wife,
i.e., his own mother for procreation? He can not. He
is not at liberty to do this and if he does, he loses
his pArathanthiryam. This means he tries to usurp his
father?s position and if he really does so, he will
lose his swarupam. (stature as the son, in this case).
When sage Vishwamithra started creating the universe
for the sake of Thrishanku, (inspite of the injunction
that creation is forbidden for the one who is in
Brahmanhood), it is tantamount to taking up the role
of Brahman (father in this case). If not in other
aspects, it is in the matter of creation, the chetana,
even after attaining Brahman-hood can not behave  like
a swathanthran. Seshatwam indicates that though he
(chetana) is like Him, he is not Him as he is only
secondary to Him. Parathanthiryam indicates that he
can not behave like Him, though he is quite capable of
behaving like Him  because he in only subservient to
Him.

On two occasions in her life, Sita piratti came close
to losing pArathanthiryam, one in Ashoka vanam and the
other when left abandoned as a pregnant woman. Sri
vachana bhooshanam treats the 2nd occasion as an
exemplary example of pArathanthiryam. (naduvil
pirindadu, parathanthirayatthai veLiyidugaikkaaga). On
both the occasions she moots the idea of taking up
swathanthiryam, (1) by destroying Ravana with her
pathi viradaagni and (2) by terminating her life since
she has been abandoned by her husband. She refrains
from doing both because destroying of Ravana rests
with Rama and she has not been commanded by Rama to
destroy him. And in the latter case she has been
commanded by Rama to live, not die upon abandonment.
This latter occasion, not the former one in Ashoka
vana has been extolled by Acharyas as the supreme act
of pArathanthiryam, probably because she almost went
to the extent of leaving out her praaNan in the former
case (a case of shedding pAratahnthiryam) but for the
timely interference of Hanuman.

Seshatwam has been treated at 3 levels in general,
anya seshatwam, bhagavatha seshatwam and ananyaarha
seshatwam. Anya seshatwam must be given up at all
costs (61) (marandum puram thozhaa maandhar). 
Bhagavatha seshatwam is superior to anya seshatwam
(89) because of the break down of mama kaaram in
bhagavatha seshatwam. (uttradum vunadu adiaarku
adimai). Seshatwam to Peria piratti is not taken up
here (90 &60) as that comes under a related discussion
on akaara, ukaara, makaara thathwas. Ananyaarha
seshatwam is what piratti did when she entered the
Bhoomi claiming that she has NEVER been secondary to
anyone other than Him. This shows that seshatwam is
the permanent guna that the chetana must have.

This idea is strengthened by the verse 92 that it is
for His enjoyment that the chetana continues to feign
seshatwam though it has been destroyed by Him in Bhoga
dasai. The chetana clings to naichiam as though he is
still in a state of seshatwam so that He would
continue to enjoy. (Sarvam Narayana preethyartham).

When this takes place he becomes a ?kruthakruthyan?
(94) by realising that He has taken up his body for
enjoyment and for doing whatever He likes to do.
(thanakkEyaaga enai-k-koLLa vENum). The chetana in
this state is  not a swathanthran, nor even a
pArathanthryan in the truest sense of the term because
he can do whatever He wishes him to do. The qualifying
difference is that this ?doing? is not as he has
wished (which otherwise would destroy Parathanthiryam)
but as He has wished. This is known as ?Parathanthirya
?prathipatthi? which is supposed to yield the chetana
?sakala-sUkhrutham?. He need not do yajyas, nor
actions for praayaschittham etc, for none of them are
going to be of any ?prayOjanam? to him. Whatever he
does are done by Him for His pleasure. This is
comparable to the state in which king Janaka was, as
extolled by Gitacharyan. The ?kruthakruthyan? wields
?sama dhrushti? and nothing but enjoying the enjoyment
of Him is filled in him.

The 20 ?Ini? from Thiruvai mozhi(TVM), quoted by PBA
Swamy as vyakhyanam for verse 230 of Acharya Hrudhayam
describes the state of aarthi, which looks like the
preceding state to bhoga dasai. Here is quoted 4
verses from the last 10 of 1000 (TVM) which, to my
chittrarivu appears like azhwar clinging to seshatwam
in the face of losing it by  Bhagavan?s krupa.
(1) ?emparam saadhikkaluttrEn, ennai-ip-pOra
vittittAyE? (10-10-4)
(2) ?enathenbadu en? YAn enbadu en?? (10-10-5)
(3) ?manakkaaraamai manni uNdittaai, ini undozhiyaai?
(10-10-6)
(4) ?unnai-p-petru ini-p-pOkkuvanO?? (10-10-7).

The comparison is as follows:-
# Dilution of Seshatwa in Bhoga dasai by Him gives
rise to pArathanthirya ?prathipatthi.

# In bhoga dasai, seshatwam is destroyed (by Him). In
Parathanthirya-prathipatthi, pArathanthiryam is not
destroyed. Instead his paapam is destroyed and his
?balam? is increased. The chetana can do anything but
only as a vehicle (deham)  for Him. It is He  who
actually does ? something realised by the chetana.
(Even though it is He who has done earlier and always,
the dawning of such realisation in the chetana gives
rise to Parathanthirya prathipatthi.)

# The inference therefore is that pArathanthiryam is
never to be lost. Bringing in the analogy of father
and son, the son is like his father, because it is his
father who has begotten him. If you say that he is his
father, that means he has to begotten himself, which
is not possible. This is where pArathanthiryam reaches
its limits! (quote from Thiruchanda viruttham- yanum
nee adandri en piraanum nee ramanE ?This can be said
from the point of view of the chetana (son). The
reverse can not be said by the father (God) about his
son (chetana). It is always that He is the Piraan
having swatahnthram. The chetana can never come to
embody swathanthiryam.)

Coming to the question of satvika-ahankaram, Ramanuja
establishes in his Sribhashya to the 1st sutra of
Badarayana that the self whose essential nature is
knowledge can not be said to have ahankara by being
the knower. ?Knowership which is of this aforesaid
nature, belongs only to the self whose essential
character is intelligence and consequently, this
knowership can not possibly belong, at any time, to
the non-intelligent principle of egoity (i.e.,
ahankara). Ramanuja draws input from Yamunacharya?s
works to substantiate this proposition. The Lord says
umpteen times that He knows everything, He is all
Knowledge and He is superior to all. The verses
expressed to this effect are many in Gita but do we
call this as arising out of ahankara? The answer is no
because it is in His nature to be all knowledgeable.
So too with the self, reasons out Ramanuja. It is
perhaps with this realisation minus ahankara and for
the sake of posterity, he, with  insightful sama
dhrushti, allowed the making of 2 two idols in his
image and even did the aalinganam to them to make them
himself. It is perhaps for the same reason, he allowed
Thiruvarangaththamudanaar to compose a Nootrandaathi
in his name while he was alive. Similarly with Swami
Desika in the verses under discussion. (I am unable to
elaborate as I am not conversant with them. But it is
clear that what holds for Bhagavath  Ramanuja, holds
good for Swami Desika too.)

If we go to rural Karnataka or rural Andhra we still
find people introducing themselves as so and so, the
son of so and so. The identification is all the more
important and necessary with maha purushas, as we are
required to remember them and pass on their message to
future generations. It is a kind of documentation,
complete with all particulars about the honors and
works they are associated with. Without such
documentation, we may not have been in a position to
pay obeisance to seers as we do during upakarma!

Regards, 
Jayasree saranathan



                
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/.itolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ramanuja/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    ramanuja-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


[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