mantra and adhikara

[Guest guest]

SrimathE Sri LakshmiNrsumha ParabrahmanE Namaha

Sri Vedanta Desika GuravE Namaha.

 

In my few postings on the above subject of discourse and debate in the weeks

that have passed by, we have seen the position -- "mantras" are not to be

trifled with in quotidian life by 'prapanna-s'and non-'prapannas' or lay

SriVaishnava-aspirants --- we have seen this position being supported by:

 

a) the fact that in several non-esoteric works, our achaaryaas (we quoted

the 'Vishnu Sahasranamam' and the 'Amalanadipiran' as illustrations) have

embedded (seamlessly tailored, as it were) the esoteric "mantras'.The

inference that can be drawn from here, "mAhans" point out, is that the

achaaryaas were principally motivated (inspired, is the better expression)

in this by their anxiety that casual "mantrOtcharaNam" by lay spiritual

aspirants should not impair their genuine spiritual efforts. At the same

time, the achaaryaas also enabled us to utter "rahasya mantras" in a very

indirect, innocuous but equally effective way by urging us to instead recite

or otherwise experience their non-esoteric works that discreetly couched

those very sacrosanct "mantras" under a camouflage of devotional and

literary excellence.

 

b) we also put forward the argument that "mantras" have an inherent

constitution of "swara"/'srutis'/'mAtra' and other rules of phonetic

grammmar that are ever in danger of violation, in the natural course of

day-to-day living, by the untutored and casual aspirant.The consequence of

such constitutional violation is considered as "sastra-virOdham" i.e.

practice inimical to prescribed scripture.

 

c) we also took up the argument of contra-distinction between

"mantra-svarUpa" and "mantrArtha" and saw how it does not perfectly tally

with some of the "sastra"-ic experiences of "mantra-dhristi"(direct

perception) and "mantra-shakthi" (phenomenon-inducing force) that is

elaborately dealt with in "srmriti,purana and itihAsa" literature.

 

d) we also argued about the untenability of the opposite view (that takes a

"soft" line on less-than-meticulous articulation and practice of "rahasya

mantras")from the standpoint of the "prAyaschitta" sastras.

 

With the permission of "bhAgavatOttamas" I propose to put forth one more

last argument before finally bringing the curtain down on my participation

in this debate.(do I hear polite but loud sighs of relief?)

 

The various injunctions to be observed by a "prapanna" have been eloquently

commented upon by several 'mahAns' in SriVaishnava literature. According to

this literature, our great "bhAshyakAr-ar" has himself laid down the

"post-prappathi" lifestyle of a "prapanna".It is usually summarised as follows :

 

1) The first duty of the "prapanna" is to study Sri Bhashya and propagate

its truths to others.

2) If a prapanna is not qualified to study and understand SriBhashya, he

should study the Divya Prabhandham and propagate its truths to others.

3) If a 'prapanna' is incompetent to perform 1 and 2 above, he should

perform service in holy temples (bhagavath-kainkaryam).

4)If a "prapanna" is incompetent to perform even 3 above, then he should

continuously meditate on the 'dvaya' mantra.

5) If a 'prapanna' is unable to do any of the above he should attach himself

as a 'sevaka' or 'dAsan' of a learned and holy Sri Vaishnava and serve him

to the best of his abilities and cheerfully.

 

Now one will notice from the above, Sri BhashyakArar has laid out a

hierarchic scale of duties for various "personality-types" of "prapannas".It

is clear that he was appreciative of the wide variances in capacities and

'core-competencies'(to use a modern buzzword in management theory) that

prevail amongst individual 'prapannas'. Implicit here therefore is the idea

of "adhikara" and qualification for each plane in the hierarcy.

 

It must be stressed here that although the "competencies" of 'prapannas' may

vary, in the application in the practice of "prappathi", they are all

equally eligible for the ends of 'prapatti'. This is, of course, subject to

the proviso, the 'prapanna' faithfully and scrupulously adhere to the scale

of duties listed after having chosen one most appropriate to the station in

life to which he belongs.

 

The prescribed duties of a 'prapanna' are given deliberately within the

framework of a "hierarchic scale" i.e. duties listed nearer the top of the

scale are superior to those further below.This I believe is to stress an

order of "adhikAra". This is not however suggestive of a hierarchic order of

superiority based on birth, background, scholastic accomplishment and other

such mundane criteria (like the "tax-bracket" to which the 'prapanna' may

belong or the type of US-visa he holds, for instance!).Although they fall

into different planes or levels within the hierarchy there is no difference

in the intrinsic worth of each listed duty. Our achaaryaas say, indeed, they

are all equal in all respects to each other except in one respect i.e. their

position on a hierarchy of 'core-competencies' or "adhikAra".

 

Some learned commentaries in this regard, lead one to believe that a

"prapanna" is expected to make his choice from the menu of duties by

traversing "top-down' rather than 'bottom-up'. A Vaishnava is supposed to

make his choice of the level to which he would like to belong by travelling

from the higher orders to the lower orders and not vice versa. (One always

tends to find out to what order of skills or "competency" one belongs by

first trying to see if one can fit into or qualify at the top of any league,

isn't it?)

 

If that may be accepted, then the choice of the level involving "continuous

meditating on the dvaya mantra" appears four levels below the top.

 

Now when one utters or otherwise experiences the 'dvaya' mantra one must

realise that one is virtually applying level-4 'core-competency' laid down

for a 'prapanna' in performing his 'post-prappati' duties. One must also

realise that at this level of 'adhikAra' 'prapannas' are unable to fulfill

the higher orders of duty viz. the realization of the truths and propagation

of 'sribhashyA' or the 'divya-prabhandhas' or 'bhagavath-kainkaryam'. But,

verily by virtue of the 'prapatti' faith, the fourth level of competency is

no less worthy than those of higher order in the hierarchy.

 

The thrust of all this reasoning adds up to the truth that mere utterance by

a 'prapanna' of "dvaya-mantra" is tantamount to propagating the 'SriBhashya'

or of the 'Divya Prabhandha-s' or performing 'bhagavath-kainkaryam'. A

purely physical act of chanting and meditating on a mere "mantra' is thus

sought by SriVaishnava 'sampradaya' to be invested with a spiritual

significance equivalent-- in force, scope and yield -- to that of realizing

the whole truth of the 'SriBhashya' or of the 'prabhandhams' or of

'bhagavath-kainkaryam' ! In uttering the "dvaya' mantra, further, a

'prapanna' is also implicitly bowing in deep obeisance to those of his

fellow-'prapanna-s', past and present, belonging to a superior order of

'core-competency' or 'adhikara' at the top of the hierarchy!

 

How very appropriate and reasonable therefore that our 'sampradayam' sternly

prohibits the casual and indiscriminate use of esoteric 'prappati' mantras!

 

In logic the worst and most ineffective instrument to use to drive home a

point is employing analogies. Never mind, I now offer this analogy, at the

end of this last posting, in the hope that it will serve as a concluding sum-up.

 

Imagine, for a moment, how carefully we would handle, or how much fuss we

would normally make over, a leaf out of a cheque-book filled in for,say, a

$1 million.

 

We wouldn't let even our beloved children within 3 feet of it, lest they

man-handle it, though we'd know that the cheque-leaf itself is worth nothing

more than a piece of expensive stationery carrying the hologram of your own

signature on it!

 

I now ask :

 

Wouldn't we bestow on the cheque-leaf the same care and affection we would

most certainly shower on the hundreds of wads of crisp 'green-backs' that it

represents?

 

Would we dare mutilate,disfigure or otherwise stain the instrument?

 

Would the leaf have an identity other than its MICR encoded number?

 

Would we able to transact business at a bank without correctly quoting the

exact (no room for slightest error) MICR number of the cheque-leaf ?

 

Would we not try and commit to memory the MICR code number just for the odd

chance that we might lose the leaf ?

 

Would we freely share the wherabouts of the cheque-leaf in the study-room

locker with the next-door neighbour ?

 

Would we dare to carelessly leave the cheque-leaf "lying around in our

bathrooms" (remember the "bhAgavatOttama" said about 'rahasya mantras' and

bathrooms in his posting!) and then joke about the lapse with our friends on

the net?

 

Would we dare to send details of the cheque(its number,pin,drawing bank

etc.) on an un-protected e-mail channel?

 

"BhAgavatOttamas" must play a little game with themselves and try answering

the above questions with the following ground-rules in mind:

 

1) The cheque-leaf is to be treated as "prapatti".

2) The MICR code number of the leaf is to be treated as the "dvaya" mantra.

3) The bank : Sri Vaikuntam itself !

4) The $1 million : Sriman Narayana Himself !

 

I now thank all "bhAgavatOttamas" for provoking me into reflecting at length

on the significance of 'rahasya mantras' these past few weeks. I have never

hitherto reflected very seriously this matter in the context of our

"sampradayam". But today the debate here in this group has kindled in me in

some measure to delve even more deeply into a study of this matter.

 

If one thinks about it deeply, this debate was essentially not at all about

Vadagalai/Thengalai schisms or the validity of what this achaaryaa or that

achaaryaa has said in this work of his or that. I think it has been, more

than anything else, all along, a process of sharing faith among

'bhAgavatOttamas'; of sharing how each has experienced and felt about one of

the principal doctrines of SriVaishnava-ism i.e. Prapatti.

 

As you Americans would say, "Hey, man, that's what this i-net group is all

about, isn't it?"

 

SrimathE Srivan SatagOpa Sri Narayana YathIndra MahadEsikAya Namaha

 

 

Most Humbly,

 

sudarshan.

[Guest guest]

Sri M.K. Sudarshan wrote:

> d) we also argued about the untenability of the opposite view (that takes a

> "soft" line on less-than-meticulous articulation and practice of "rahasya

> mantras")from the standpoint of the "prAyaschitta" sastras.

 

Just a note on this issue:

 

There is a paasuram of nammaazhvaar's that Desikan and others

quote with approval, wherein aazhvaar says that saying "naaraNa"

instead of the more correct "naaraayaNa" will yield the same

fruit! In other words, the power of perumaaL's name is such

that even improper pronounciation is extremely powerful.

 

Mani