Guest guest Posted May 8, 1997 Report Share Posted May 8, 1997 > > >Sri Mohan Sagar writes: > > >Dear Bhagavathas, > > >I spent part of my work day today exchanging some poignant E-mails > >with a member of this forum who stated that I was overstepping my > >bounds in discussing the issue of karma and prapatti with Mr. > >Dileepan. While I was somewhat pained at first with what this > >individual had to say, I now realize that this person's views of me > >are very correct. Based on this, I present the following: > > let me make a few statuotory disclaimers at the outset, lest my mail > box be inundated with poignant hate mail: whatever follows are > opinions (which I hope we all have the rights to express) and not > designed to denigrate anybody. All umbrage taken is the > responsibility of the person doing so. That said, > > The exchanges visavis karma and prapatti over the last few days, bring > to fore, an unpleasant yet real aspect of the bhakti digest that one > has to come to grips with. Often, view points expressed in terms > contrary to a certain position taken by some of our learned (and often > strident) friends (to name a couple in this case, Sri Dileepan and > Sri Kalale) engenders significant public (and even more, private) > censure. I believe such an attitude is counter productive to healthy > dialog to foster learning more about our sampradayam. The idea is, is > it quite correct to assume ignorance on part of one person and > correctness on part of another implicitly by identity or publicly > expressed views? Sometimes the ones who are silent are so because > they are evolved enough to realize that these are not things one > learns by "poignant" exchanges. > > Both Sri Kalale and Sri Dileepan clearly have little inkling (at least > going by their publicly expressed views and in my opinion, not their > fault) about two fundamental aspects of Sri VaishNava siddhantham as > laid down in Acharya hrudayam and Sri vachana bhushaNam: > > 1. Nirankusha swAnthryam of SrimannArAyaNA > 2. Nirhethuka kripa of the lord > > the first states that our good lord is not bound by anything, > including our karmas, to do anything. he is beyond all kArmic > and every other causal notion. The second and an extremely > profound notion, (one that has to be learnt at the feet of a learned > Acharya, not merely hobnobbing with them, to use a wodehousian phrase) > is that of who is it that allows us to have things happen to us? Can > we take credit for our karmas? if we do (given the uncountable doshAs > that we possess) can we ever (and will we ever qualify) go the next > step, that of going beyond karma, gnyAna and bhakti? It is his > infinite krupa that lets us go wherever; it is our infinite doshAs > that allows us to wallow in our ignorance and ahankAra, taking credit > for things that are not ours and not taking credit for the doshAs that > we posess > > This aspect is the first thing taught by your Acharya, > NaichyAnumsandhAnam, that one is inferior by nature and action, in > comparison to the Anantha kalyANA guNangaL that the lord possess and > the anantha doshAngaL that we do. What is the pramANa for this? > Sri Azhagiya maNavaaLa perumaaL nAyanAr beautifully exposes the > nature of things in his Acharya hrudayam as, > > samsaara mokshatthukku hethu gnyAthavya panchaka gnyana agnyaanangaL > > samsaaram - anantha klesham > Moksham - nirathishaya Aanandam > > What are the artha panchaka gnyanam that form the basis for moksham? > > jeevathma paramAthma virOdhi upAya purushArtha swaroopangal > > sathvam comes from artha panchaka gnyAnam > asathvam comes from artha panchaka agnyAnam > > sathvam asathvangaLukku nidhAnam janma jAyamAna kAla kaTAkshangaL > > from > > jAyamAnam cha purusham yam pashyeth madhusudhanaha > sAthvikaha thad vigneyaha sa vai mOkshArtha chinthithaha > vadanthe sakalAvedAha sEthihAsa puraNakAha > munayaha cha mahAthmAnaha > > The important part here is yam pashyeth madhusudhanaha, one who is > blessed by the lord - then he becomes a sAthvika - where does this > blessing come from - nirhethuka krupa. When seen by the lord, the > purusha wakes up, becomes a sAthvika and becomes a gnyAni (artha > panchakam is the context here) and becomes mOkshartha chinthithaha. > > Examining this further, Sri NAyanAr says > > sathvam asathvangaLukku nidhAnam janma jAyamAna kAla kaTAkshangaL > > kaTAkshathAle sathvaguNam piRakkum (jAyamAna kAla kaTakshangaL) > ****idarku hethu karmamum krupaiyum**** > > janmam is the source of agnyAnam (bondage of samsAra). Source of > janmam is karma. It is our karma that keeps up bound in samsAra. It > is because of Lord's krupa that we become saathvikAs and wake up to > reality, that he is the path and the goal. > > so, what is the basis or kAraNa for karma/krupa? > > for karma, it is avidyA, for krupa, it is the Lord's sauhArdam > > where does the avidyA come from - achit sambandham > sauhArdam - ayana sambandham > > In sequence, Sri NAyanAr lays down the steps as > > Anantha klesha bhAjanam -- agnyAnam - asathvam (rAjasa/thAmasa > guNangal) - janmam - karmam - avidyA - achit sambandham > > In the other direction, the sequence is > > Nirathishaya Aanandam - artha panchaka gnyAnam - sathvam - jAyamAna > kAla kaTAksham - krupa - sauhardam - ayana sambandham > > Lord krishna in Bhagavadgeetha says he sarvabhootha suhruth. > > The important idea is that when sathva raises its head in us, it is > foolhardy to think that it is US who are responsible for it. It is > his kripa, uninstigated (for he is the lord) and unbound (for he is > nirankusha swathanthran), by saamsaarik notions of karma. In fact, > when krishNa says > > thraiguNya vishayO vedaaha nisthraiguNyo bhavArjuna > > he is exhorting Arjuna to seek the lord as the upAya and the upEya, > the path and purushartha. To think efforts laden with swAbhimAnam and > ahankaram (the I in us) will lead to anything saathvik is contrary to > both shastric wisdom and Sri VaishNava siddhAntha pramANangaL. > > Since I am writing this from work, and reproducing statements from > memory, there might be many errors. I beg forgiveness of those > whose sensibilities are offended by my incorrect reproductions of > important concepts. > > The notion of nirhethuka kripa is an important and profound idea, one > not easily absorbed if ego is prevalent in one's conceptions. > However, if we think about how lowly we are by thought and deed, and > realize the infinite kripA of the lord in giving opportunities to step > out of this miasma to something as exalted as mOksham, it will become > manifest that every aspect what we become (in a positive sense) is > because of him. > > Now, coming to the recent tone of exchanges, I wish to make a couple > of points. Reproducing isolated stanzas from Bhagavadgita to make a > point without the appropriate context (and a clear exposition of > karma, gnyana, bhakthi) is irrelevant. I can simply say that the lord > has sanctioned devathAnthara aAradhanam by quoting > > yEpyanya devathA bhakthA bhajanthE shraddhayAnvitha > thEpi mAmeva kaunthEya bhajanthi > > and saying that it does not matter whom you seek, it reaches our good > lord any way. Because this statement does not provide the supporting > context. Anyone familiar with Bharavadgita will know that our good > lord talks about karma, gnyAna, bhakthi, karma phala thyAgam and then > says > > SaRva dharmAn parithyajya........ > > that he is the upAya and upeya. that he is the path and he is the > purushArtham. that give up every other dharma and seek him as the > ultimate dharma. > > The other aspect, one that I have often seen, is the not too subtle > bullying just because our preset notions allow us to think that we are > knowledgeable. As it is said in Sri vachana bhushaNam, > > prapathikku desha kAla adhikkari niyamangaL kidaiyAdhu > vishaya niyamame unDu > > Sri Dileepan writes: > > >Sri Mohan Sagar: > > >I am afraid your explanation is seriously flawed. Please read the > >RTS excerpt I had attached to my previous post and address the phrase > >"stream of karma". Why is Swami Sri Desikan stating doubt after > >doubt about the need for our effort and then destroying these doubts > >with logic and pramana, if he considers karma to be irrelevant for > >prapatti? > ...................................................... > >first understand this basic distinction. Thus your task of showing > >that Sri Krishna's statement was a misunderstanding of Swami Sri > >Desikan still remains in tact. > > It would be equally foolhardy of me to demand of Mr. Kalale that he > explain nirhethuka krupa as laid down in Acharya hridayam and > mumukshuppadi. Because, without this awareness, Sri Kalale should not > be talking about nirhethuka (and sahethuka ) krupa. As a matter of > fact, Swami Desikan's dayA shatakam is an eloquent reinforcement of > the lord's infinite, uninstigated kripa for us. If this is not > pramANa for nirhethuka krupa, i would not know what is. > > So, what is the role nithya karmas in this context? I will, in my > extensive ignorance, attempt to address this issue in later posts. > Again, please understand that I would like to promote harmonious > exchanges of view points, and if I have erred in any manner in > presenting these thoughts, I beg the > kind forgiveness of the learned prapannas in this forum. > > Aazhvaar Emberumaanaar Jeeyar thiruvadigaLe sharaNam > > sridhar > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.