Re:Prappatti

[Guest guest]

Sri Anand Wrote:

>All other processes like nAma

>sankeertanam, recitation of divya prabandham etc

>should culminate into either of these (ofcourse, in

>the current age, only prapatti is possible).

 

 

How is it possible to make a blanket statement on

other processes like this ? Can this be

substantiated ?

 

In a different thread, Sriman Sadagopan wrote:

>Thyaga Brahmam recited 15,000 Raama Naamms

>per day and by the age 38 completed 96 crores of

>Sri Raama naama Japam and had the Darsanam

>of Sri raamA and Sri LakshmaNA in the Yaaga-

>SamrakshaNa pose in front of his door .

 

Doesnt this show reciting the names of the lord gives us

his darsanam. Is something more required than this ? An

average devotee doing nama sankirtanam chants

16 X 108 beads X 16 names =27,648 names of the lord.

I would tend to believe this process keeps him

in touch with the lord the whole day than any other

means. Anything else will be more difficult than this.

 

If somebody cannot do this simple process regularly

where is he/her going to do nitya kaimkaryam in

Sri Vaikuntam eternally?. Practically speaking

most of us do not have enough time to complete

thier office work or education and/or attend social

functions.Theory is onething and its application

is another. Anyway adiyen just expressed his

humble opinion in a practical stand point.Any

offences may please be excused.

 

adiyen

 

Sriram,Balaraman

 

 

 

 

 

_____________

Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Sri Lakshminrusimha ParabrahmaNE namaha

Sri Lakshminrusimha divya pAAdukA sEvaka SrivaNN-

SatakOpa Sri nArAyaNa yateendra mahAdESikAya namaha

 

namO nArAyaNA.

 

Dear Sri Mani and Sri MuraLi,

 

Probably Sri krishna kalale is busy. adiyEn just thought

of posting this in the meantime.

 

--------------------------------

summary :

Bhakti yOga ie. upAsana doesn't end in prapatti (done

for moksham). UpAsana is a separate route , prapatti

(for moksham) is a separate route. Both are valid routes

to be adopted by a mumukshu according to his/her

qualification/taste etc.

------------------------------

>

> Thank you for that detailed analysis. However, I think

> his question still remains unanswered. In the end,

> only the Lord can achieve moksha for the jIva. Only the

> Lord is the siddhopAya. The jIva must not only realize

> that the Lord is helpful in bhakti-yoga, but that his

> efforts will be of no avail without the Lord's sankalpa

> to take him to moksha. Recall Swami Desika's statement

> in Srimad Ashtabhujashtakam: tvayi pravRtte mama kim

> prayAsai:, tvayyapravRtte mama kim prayAsai:.

 

There is no doubt that PerumAL is the siddhOpAya etc.

But that same PerumAL has putforth in the sAstrAs that

"upAsana" as a sAdhyOpAya _needs_ to be performed and

completed for Him to grant moksham. Here it is a

sAstric injunction to take up upAsana, if one is

interested in moksham. Thats why, one has to perform

upAsana. If PerumAL would have told that, daily, one has

to run 10 miles for 30 days chanting "namO nArAyaNA",

and then He will grant mOksham, then one has to do that,

if he/she aspires for moksham ( :-) ). The bottomline is

that "Do upAsana for moksham" is a sAstric injunction

to be obeyed by a mumukshu if he needs kainkaryam at

SrivaikuNTham.

 

Please go through the beginning portion of the

previous posting as well.

 

> Now, if the bhakti-yogi must also realize that the Lord

> alone can accomplish the burden of taking him to moksha,

> how is this different from prapatti? Does this not make

> prapatti alone the true sAdhyopAya?

>

 

What is meant by "Lord alone can accomplish the burden

of taking him to moksha" ?

 

This only means that PerumAL is the siddhOpAyam ie.

just because one is performing bhakti yOgA doesn't

mean that it automatically gives him moksham; it is

the PerumAL who being satisfied with the completion

of that upAsana grants the moksham.

 

If you meant that a bhakti yOgi _should_ realize that

PerumAL _alone_ can stand in the place of bhakti yOgA

(ie. take the burden), then it is not correct.

 

SAstrAs never say that one should quit upAsanA; rather

one should take it up and complete it. Only if one

is incompetent, then as an akinchanA, with great

kArpanyam one should perform prapatti

(bhara samarpanam etc).

 

There is a huge difference between these two statements :

 

a. "Realize that upAsana as the sAdhyOpAyam can't be

done by you(all jIvAtmAs) and thus put the burden

on PerumAL (to stand in place of upAsana) and perform

prapatti "

 

b. " If you feel unqualified for performing upAsana

as the sAdhyOpAyam, put the burden on PerumAL

and perform prapatti ".

 

Statement "a" is not supported by sAstrAs.

Upanishads never say that upAsana has to be

quit and nyAsa vidya has to be adopted instead.

PerumAL leaves the choice to the individual (based

on his/her qualification).

 

We can't say that a bhakti yOgi should take

up prapatti only as a sAdhyOpAyam. Its upto the

mumukshu. vyAsar, sukar, bheeshmar,

thirukkurugaik kAvalappan (nAthamunigaL's sishyar)

and others have adopted it. But, they will have immmense

bhagavad anubhavam and almost no problems are

caused by their material bodies (perfect control);

thus, they don't feel the pressure of time and thus

continued to perform upAsana.

 

Its perfectly within the capacity of a baddha

jIvAtma to perform upAsana and many have done

in the past to adopt it and obtain moksham.

If it is not within the capacity of a jIvAtmA

to perform upAsana, then sAstrAs wouldn't

have given that injunction (if so, those

injunctions would become meaningless ;

whole brahma sUtram, SribAshyam becomes

meaningless etc -> clear absurdity).

 

So, its not a rule that a bhakti yogi should

feel as if he can't do upAsana, when he

actually can (ofcourse with the blessings

of PerumAL).

> I believe this is the heart of his question. I do

> not have an answer to it, which is why I have not followed

> up myself.

>

> In other words, does bhakti-yoga not only begin with

> prapatti, but also end with prapatti, because the jIva

> realizes his or her complete inability to achieve moksha

> without the Lord's grace? And in throwing himself at the

> Lord's feet out of this recognition of the inability, how

> is he or she any different from the prapanna?

 

 

already answered. If at some point of time a yOgi feels

that he can't pursue upAsana, he can pursue nyAsa

vidya (prapatti) instead. The bhagavad anubhavam

one obtains through upAsana makes that yOgi forget

everything else; he is absorbed in it ; he willingly

does it; PerumAL reciprocates; time is almost forgotten

by them ......etc; only when one reaches such stage can

one understand why bhakti yOgins continue to perform

upAsana. Ofcourse, karma is anAdi and freewill is

also there => no one can say that a mumukshu will

follow this upAsanA out of the 32 prescribed ones /

a mumukshu will follow prapatti only etc. Its

entirely left to the mumukshu who according to the

karma/sukrudams etc factors, performs some

sAdhyOpAya.

 

Bhakti and prapatti are separate sAdhyOpAyams

and it is not that bhakti leads to prapatti.

 

One can only say "bhakti" ie. devotion in the sense

of sravanam, keertanam will lead to prapatti.

----------

Sri Mani: This is just for clarification ; You anyway already

know that these two sAdhyOpAyams are separate.

 

adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan

ananthapadmanAbha dAsan

krishNArpaNam