A Day in the Life of our Acharyas - 44

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama:

 

One day Bhattar's eldest daughter came to Nanjeeyar's

mutt and asked him if he had any dry twigs for fire.

Nanjeeyar looked around and said that he did not have

any. Later he found that he did have some twigs in

another area in the mutt. Immediately he gathered

them and took them to Bhattar's home.

 

Seeing this, Bhattar asked Nanjeeyar "Did you have to

come yourself? Could you not have sent this with

someone else?"

 

Nanjeeyar replied "Since I sinned by first saying that

I did not have these with me, I should get rid of that

sin myself".

 

Azhvar Emberumanar Jeeyar Thiruvadigale Sharanam

 

A Day in the Life of Our Acharyas:

http://www.acharya.org/articles/aditlooa/index.html

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri TCA svAmin,

 

This is a very interesting anecdote. I wonder if there is more to it

than meets the eye.

 

I would take it that the real moral of this story is:

 

One may gather sin ("pApam") through agency of another e.g. the

son sharing in the responsibilty of a father's misdeeds, the

husband's share of a wife's tresspass etc.

 

One however cannot delegate atoning for one's sins.

The "prasyaschitta" for one's sins ought to be done by oneself and

not through agency or proxy. A father cannot merrily gather sins by

the dozen and then hope his son will somehow atone for it all some

day.

 

Responsibility for one's actions can sometimes redound to another

but remedy and expatiation is always one's very own burden.

 

This is what adiyane can draw from Bhattar's response in the

narrative. Would you say I am right or way off target?

 

Thanks and regards,

 

dAsan,

Sudarshan

 

 

 

 

Oppiliappan, "vtca" <vtca> wrote:

> Sri:

> Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama:

>

> One day Bhattar's eldest daughter came to Nanjeeyar's

> mutt and asked him if he had any dry twigs for fire.

> Nanjeeyar looked around and said that he did not have

> any. Later he found that he did have some twigs in

> another area in the mutt. Immediately he gathered

> them and took them to Bhattar's home.

>

> Seeing this, Bhattar asked Nanjeeyar "Did you have to

> come yourself? Could you not have sent this with

> someone else?"

>

> Nanjeeyar replied "Since I sinned by first saying that

> I did not have these with me, I should get rid of that

> sin myself".

>

> Azhvar Emberumanar Jeeyar Thiruvadigale Sharanam

>

> A Day in the Life of Our Acharyas:

> http://www.acharya.org/articles/aditlooa/index.html

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Sudarshan Swamin,

 

adiyEn agrees with you Swamin. I think what Nanjeeyar

was pointing out was - the person who sinned must

atone himself and he must atone where he committed

the sin.

 

There can be no proxy in seeking pardon nor can one

go to someone else, not even the Lord (as seen in the

Ambarisha episode), for the pardon.

 

dAsan

 

--- mksudarshan2002 <mksudarshan2002 wrote:

>

> Dear Sri TCA svAmin,

>

> This is a very interesting anecdote. I wonder if there is

> more to it

> than meets the eye.

>

> I would take it that the real moral of this story is:

>

> One may gather sin ("pApam") through agency of

> another e.g. the

> son sharing in the responsibilty of a father's misdeeds,

> the

> husband's share of a wife's tresspass etc.

>

> One however cannot delegate atoning for one's sins.

> The "prasyaschitta" for one's sins ought to be done by

> oneself and

> not through agency or proxy. A father cannot merrily

> gather sins by

> the dozen and then hope his son will somehow atone for it

> all some

> day.

>

> Responsibility for one's actions can sometimes redound

> to another

> but remedy and expatiation is always one's very own

> burden.

>

> This is what adiyane can draw from Bhattar's response in

> the

> narrative. Would you say I am right or way off target?

>

> Thanks and regards,

>

> dAsan,

> Sudarshan

>

>

 

 

 

 

Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes

http://hotjobs.sweepstakes./signingbonus