Vedanta Desika and Manavalamamuni

[Guest guest]

I thank Mr. Kalale for his brief presentation on the similarities between

the two learned Acharyas. Although this does not seem to be prevalent in

this group, there are many followers from the respective lineages of both

teachers who sometimes seem to forget that these two branches of the

SriVaishnava "tree of tradition" have grown from the same roots. I think

the discussion of similarities should be furthered, in an effort to better

understand and appreciate SriVaishnava philosophy as a whole.

 

I do have one small clarification to make on Mr. Kalale's posting:

>Sri Manavala Maamuni doctrinally states that one should not "ask" for

>surrender because it violates the very nature of jiva - ie. his complete

>dependence on God; Like a piece of wealth will not ask it's owner to

>protect it, similarly, it is in God's hands and one need not ask for one's

>deliverance. So the upaya is only to "know" that Srimannarayana is the

>protector.

 

In the views of Manavalamamuni, asking for something in prayer is not

something that should be discarded in Prapatti. For it is part of the

soul's nature to ask the Lord for the opportunity to serve Him, and perhaps,

even to be saved. However, this asking should not be construed as an upaya,

i.e., required to propitiate the Lord's grace, for then it would imply that

something other than the Lord Himself has the ability to save us.

Consequently, asking should be viewed as being part of the Upeya of serving

Him, as it is in accordance with our true nature as faithful devotees and

also pleases the Lord. The analogy is used that even though a mother is

ready to feed a child, it feels a certain sense of joy in knowing that the

child recognizes her and asks to be fed. However, prapatti in and of

itself, as aptly stated above, lies in simply and wholeheartedly knowing

that Sriman Narayana is our Savior and Protector, leaving all to His

Unbounded and Spontaneous Grace.

 

Daasanu Daasan,

 

Mohan