Guest guest Posted September 8, 2002 Report Share Posted September 8, 2002 srImathE rAmAnujAya namaha srImadh varavara munayE namaha Dear Smt Sumitra, Let me try and answer your queries to the extent of my knowledge and I request learned scholars to correct me if I am wrong. ----------------Quote 1--------- According to what adiyen has heard anyone born in all three varnas(brahmana, kshtriya and vaishya) are supposed to do their nitya karmas regularly. But there are two types of dharmas. One is sadarana/sAmAnya dharmam and vishesha dharmam. There is one legend in our guru paramparai. Sri Parasara bhattar had a practice to go at the back of Sri Namperumal during perumal's purappadu. Once the purappadu was going on and it was time for the sAyam sandhya. When nanjeeyar asked bhattar about it bhattar replied, "edhai chitra guptan kanakkile ezhudamattan"(this will not be calculated as a sin). So according to our acharyas namperumal purappadu and kainkaryam to perumal and bhagavatas was considered as vishesha dharmam and other nithya karmas to be sAmAnya dharmam. Whenever there was a clash between the sAmAnya dharmam and vishEsha dharmam they gave more preference to vishesha dharmam and never felt for leaving the sAmAnya dharmam. But never did they say leave the sAmAnya dharmam just because you are a prapannan. Remember Sri Ramanujar even in his last days when he was very old never forgot to go to kaveri to do his nithya karmas. -------------------Unquote 1---------------------- The case of sAmAnya dharma and visEsha dharma are very true and so is the incident involving Sri Bhattar as quoted by you. But why sAmAnya dharma is required first of all. What good it is? You may say, it will please Sriman Narayanan and hence one need to do it. Agreed if it is pleasing Him and if we do it only for His pleasure. But in periya thiruvandhAdhi, Sri nammAzhwAr says 'neRi kAtti neekkudhiO'. What does the word 'neRi'refers here. It refers to the same sAstrAs as prescribed by emberumAn. If the sAstrAs were laid down by emberumAn, why Sri nammAzhwAr needs to say 'neRi kAtti neekudhiO'(Are you pushing me away from you by asking me to follow these sAstrAs). It is because, though emberumAn has laid down all these sAstrAs, it is very clear from our poorvAchAryAs that the sAstrAs are for a particular kind of people, who follow sAdhanAnushTAnams and believe the these sAdhanAs will earn mOksha for them. Yes, those sAdhanAs will earn mOksha for them. But the thennAchAryAs side is that this mOksham 'earned'by the chEtana is a shade inferior to the mOksha conferred by emberumAn out of His apAra kAruNyam, by Himself as siddhOpAyam. Look at this slOkam, 'asAram alpasAram cha sAram sAratharam tyajEth, bajEth sArathamam sAstrE ratnAkara ivAmrutham'(One should renounce the asAra,alpasAra, sAra, sArathara portions of the vEdAs only follow the sArathama portion, just like renouncing all the other available things in an ocean and take only the ratnAs). For this slOkam, there are different interpretations for the sabdhAs between the vadakalai AchAryAs and thennAchAryAs. They are as follows: asAram: VK EThis refers to the Buddhist and other anti-vEdic religions code. TK EThis cannot be the Buddhist and other anti-vEdic codes as for them, the sAstratvam cannot be attributed as they are not a part of the vEdAs. It is a well know fact that the sAstrAs are nothing but the subsect of the vEdAs. So if this is the case, then what does this word 'asAram'refers to? It refers to those portions in the karma kAnda of the vEdAs, which will help a person to kill his enemy and other such dastardly acts. One such yAga is ‘AbhichArika yAgamE For this Sri maNavALa mAmunigaL thiruvuLLam is, a prapanna should certainly renounce this as his objective is only mOksha. alpa sAram: VK EThe position taken by the TKs in 'asAraEsabdhA is taken by the VKs here. TK EThis refers to those yAgams and other things in vEdas, which when performed will give the chEtana, swargam. This is slightly better than the first one as atleast nobody is killed or destroyed. This should also be renounced, however, by the prapanna for his pursuit of mOksha sAram: VK EThe position taken by the TKs in 'alpa sAraEsabdha is taken by the VKs here. TK EThis is the portion which helps the chEtana to come above the materialistic pleasures and find out the nature of the soul. However, if this is followed, this will lead to only kaivalya mOksha, which if attained will be eternal and there will be no chance to attain mOksha at all. sAratharam: VK EThe position taken by the TKs in sAra sabdha is taken by the VKs here. TK EThis refers to those portions which when followed will ofcourse earn mOksha. These are the sAdhyOpAyams of Bhakti and Prapatthi, when performed as sAdhyOpAya. This is a shade inferior when compared to the siddOpAya mOksham. sArathamam: VK EThey take the position of TKs in sAratharam, but do not accept that this mOksha is inferior. TK EThis is the siddhOpAya mOksham which is better than all. Sri Velukkudi Krishnan swamy once gave me a good analogy in this regard when I asked him, how can the mOksham be inferior or superior. A father has a son. In the first case, when the father has become old, the son takes care of him without any problems. He feeds him, he gives whatever he wants, but the control is with the son. Though the father is happy, he has to expect the hands of his son everytime for everything. In the second case, though the son is grown up earning etc, the father still has control over everything and the son still obeys his father in everything. Which is the best desired one for the father? Surely it is the second. The first is the sAdhyOpAyam mOksham and the second is the siddhOpAya mOksham. Now why I wrote all these, which looks like getting away from the topic taken for discussion. It is because, when one says that the nitya karmas have to be performed otherwise it is a fault on the part of the chEtana, it means to say that by doing so he can earn something, which actually is not the case. Also if you read through my message clearly, I did not say one should not at all do any nitya karma. It can also be done, but only as a kainkaryam (which you also agree) and a spiritual time pass. I also quoted the relevant verse from Sri Thirumazhisai AzhwAr's nAnmugan thiruvandhAdhi in which the AzhwAr says, 'theritthezhudhi, vAsitthum, kEttum, vaNangi vazhipattum, poositthum pOkkinEn pOdhuE The nitya karma has to be done in this vein only. I wrote this because Sri AV Krishna in his mail had written as if, if the nitya karmas are not performed, it is not possible to attain mOksham. ----------------------Quote 2---------------------- Even after doing saranagathi(gathya trayam) in front of the divine couples he continued his karmas till his final breath. If we are always involved in Bhagavat kainkaryam then it is ok but then do we do it today. Ofcourse none of our acharyas did the nithya karmas as a way to attain moksha they did it as a kainkaryam too. As bhagavan says, "sruthi smrithi mamai agjya....agjna chEbhi mama drOhi". So if a prappannan leaves the karmas specified by bhagavan in the shastras he becomes drOhi(cheat to bhagavan). So prapannas do the nithya karmas for following bhagavan's words as a kainkaryam to him and not as a upayam to attain moksha. Here we have to remember both what lakshmana and bharatha did were kainkaryam to Sri Rama. Lakshmana was near perumal but bharatha did kainkaryam by acting according to perumal's words. So listening to what he says and doing things accordingly(parathantriyam) is considered to be a great kainkaryam. Both sesashatvam and parathanthriyam are regarded equally important by our poorvAcharyas. ------------------Unquote 2------------------------ After having clarified my words as above, I think, you will appreciate that what I wrote is in no way different from what you have written here. However, I would only say that doing nitya karmas is not mandatory to achieve anything. It has to be done only to lead a purposeful life while on the earth. ----------------------Quote 3-------------------- Krishna in bhagavat geetha also says that each one has to do their duty "karmamyEva dekA rasthE mA pAlEchu kadAchana". If we really do bhakthi non stop then it is ok if we miss nitya karma. Once koorathazhvan was involved in some bhagavat vishayam that he even forgot to do thiruvArAdhanam to bhagavan. Such should be the concentration. Do we all possess the same? Then where comes the question of leaving our nitya karmas? --------------------Unquote 3----------------------- Nice question. The answer is, I do not know about others, but atleast I am sure I do not possess such high virtues. But true to our poorvAchAryA's words, if we are to believe that we are just slaves of emberumAn and all our actions are controlled by him, I would say even the non-performance of these nitya karmas by the chEtanAs is also driven by Him. Just take this case, I am not in temple doing any service, neither am I learning divya prabhandhams at my house, at a particular time, instead I just sit watching a cricket match and miss my sandhyavandhanam. Everyone will, for sure, say that I am not doing the right thing, just in the same vein as you have asked. But let me ask a question here, when all my actions are controlled by Him, how is it that I be blamed for not doing my sandhyavandhanam. Am I sounding weird here? I don't think so. This though requires, a complete understanding of the relationship of the jeevAthmA with that of emberumAn. Please do not mistake me. I do not claim that I know all and everything and I am the Mr Perfect. I am only saying that I believe that I have no independent thoughts as I live like an achit at the mercy of its master. This only reminds of a Tamizh movie song. I do not remember who wrote this song, but it is from the movie, 'marupadiyum' The verses goes like this 'nAyakam mElirundhu noolinai aattuginRAn, naamellAm bommai enRu nAdagam kAttuginRanEEand then goes further. What a beautiful verse is this. The essence of the Sri Vaishnavism as thought beautifully by our AzhwArs and AchAryAs are clearly stated in this. Yes we are just the bommais in the bommalaattam and Sriman Naryanan is the master who activates these bommais. But with out the activation of these Bommais by the master, these bommais cannot move even an inch. In AzhwAr's words, the same thought is conveyed as 'en uNarvinuLLE irutthinEn, adhuvum avanadhu innaruLE'. A beautiful pAsuram by Sri Thirumangai AzhwAr in his Periya thirumozhi. He says, he took emberumAn in his feelings and thoughts, but immediately says, that too was because of His grace, as, as a slave I do not have any independence to do anything. So where is the freedom. We ourselves, out of our ignorance think that we have to do something. But we may still say that this will not earn moksha. I would say first of all, even to think that WE have to do something, is against what our AzhwArs and AchAryAs have told. -------------------Quote 4------------------------------ True. A true prapannan should be like that only. It is a idealistic case. Even our acharyas did not leave all the nitya karamas and live like that. --------------------Unquote 4---------------------------- I think while writing this, you forgot the incident involving Sri ThirukkaNNamangai AndAn. He lived exactly like that leaving everything. Sri Ramanuja or other poorvAchAryas may have done their nitya karmas, but it is only that they did them as a spiritual time pass as indicated by Sri Thirumazhisai AzhwAr. So while doing nitya karmas for just spiritual time pass (naRpOdhu pOkku) cannot be said as wrong, the non performance of them cannot be called wrong too. I know will address your worry of misleading the people. Yes, you are right, unless this point is clearly explained, this will mislead people to stop doing everything by just saying that it is okay not to do anything. The only explanation that needed to be given is that, to come to this state, one should have the same vairAgyam that Sri ThirukkaNNamangaiANdan had, same faith on emberumAn that he had. There should be no fear of anything as you have now believed emberumAn completely. But I tell you it is very difficult to be like that. I know that this is the worry of Smt Sumitra that the words may mislead the people. I can only say that I have told the truth and it is upto emberumAn's grace to make the chEtana do what he is doing. -------------------------Quote 5----------------------------- I accept that we should not do anything to earn anything but then we should do all the karmas as kainkaryam to bhagavan. Sure nothing we do can earn us moksha only his nirheduka krupai can but then why did the alwars sing paasurams and cry since once we are involved in bhakthi we cannot just sit. We do everything for his sake and enjoy seeing him smile at what we do(padiyai kidandhu vun pavala vAi kAnbhEnE) -------------------Unquote 5------------------------------- I agree with you fully. What you have written above is nothing different from what I mean to say, except that the performance of nitya karmas should NOT be insisted upon. ----------------------Quote 6------------------------------ True the acharya didnt do anything to earn moksham but did he leave his nithya karmas and kainkaryams. Sri Venkatesh adiyen understands what you are trying to convey but then your words may highly mislead others. ---------------------Unquote 6----------------------------- Yes, he did leave his nitya karmas, that is what his charitram says. ------------------------Quote 7--------------------------- When we act according to the words of bhagavan in the sastras and in the bhagavat gita it surely pleases him. -----------------------Unquote 7------------------------ We should only act according to His words. Whether to get pleased or not is His decision. I agree that if we act according to His words, He will be pleased, but we can only hope so and remain with that hope. He may get pleased. But we do know. He does not come before us and say that He is pleased. Practical. ----------------------Quote 8------------------------ I strongly abjuct to this. Do you think perumal doesnt have the capacity to guide us when we consider him as our driving force? A prapannan acts according to the orders of perumal and do you think perumal cannot point out our mistakes when we look at him for clarification. When we consider emperuman as everything, surely emperuman answers our queries and guides us in the right path. Sri Parthasarathi in gita declares that he does so. "Ananyath chintayanthOmam yE jana par yupAsathE thEsham nithyAbhiyukthAnAm yOgashEmam vahamyaham" So whatever kainkaryam we do is only to please him. -----------------------Unquote 8---------------- Sorry, you have misunderstood my intentions. I agree that He will correct us and in fact if He doesn’t, He is the loser, like in that watch-owner analogy. But what I meant to ask was, in this present day, does He appear before us and correct us. The answer is a definite NO. But how does He do it? That is through a ‘gnyAnam anuTTAnam ivan nanRAga udayaEAchAryan. Which is why the AchAryAs are considered even more prominent than emberumAn Himself. -----------------------Quote 9--------------- Kainkaryam is for his happiness and not for ours. So whatever we do should be aimed to please him only. We are not impossing anything on him and we can never do so. We do it for the sake of pleasing him and by his apara karunyam he gets pleased that is it. He is a svathantran getting pleased or not is left to him but he also has karunyam which makes him accept our even small bit of kainkaryam and get pleased with the same. As you have said acharyas do show us the right path but even they are given to us only by the emperuman. True in our sampradayam acharyas are considered as par or even more than bhagavan himself but whatever the acharya preaches is also only to please the bhagavan nothing against it. Again we prapannas do not thing pleasing perumal to be a upaya to attain moksham it is just the gratefulness we show for what all he has done for us to the extent we can or rather we should call it to be our svabhavam to do kainkaryam to bhagavan and please him rather than for anything else. Like our acharyas say that nammazhvar's bhakthi was not sadhya bhakthi or sadhana bhakthi it was sahaja bhakthi. It was his svabhavam to do bhakthi. --------------------------Unquote 9------------------ I don’t have any objections at all for all the above. I only say that the performance of nitya karma should not be insited upon. ---------------------------Quote 10------------------ Sri Venkatesh adiyen totally know what you feel and what you wanted to convey. But then in some places adiyen felt that your words may mislead others so just to clarify, this mail. ------------------------Unquote 10------------------ Smt Sumitra, do not worry. As we know each other well right from childhood (sorry for the personal remark) I do know, what you are trying to say. But I hope I have clarified the position taken by me regarding this issue in a more clearer way. Please correct me if I am wrong. Also this is not just a position taken by me. I have only reproduced the words of our poorvAchAryas in this matter. I know it is diffcult to accept this. But the fact is, it should be. Any mistakes may be please pardoned and corrected by the learned bhagavatas. AzhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyar thiruvadigaLE saraNam adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan Thirumalai Vinjamoor Venkatesh Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 9, 2002 Report Share Posted September 9, 2002 Sri Parthasarathi thunai Srimathe ramanujaya namaha Dear Vaidhehi ji and Sri Venkatesh, It has been made clear in Sri Venkatesh’s reply that we both do not have any difference of opinion, afterall we have studied under the same teachers(our acharyas). But just for the clarification of the others let me summarize some key points. 1. Nithya karmas have been specified in the sastras for the jeevatmas born in the first three varnas. Sastras specify nithya karmas as upayas to attain perumal. But since prapannas consider only the lotus feet of emperuman as a upaya to attain moksha nothing else will become upayas to them. But then can they leave the nithya karmas? 2. According to our acharyas they can be left if a prapannan is involved in bhagavat/bhAgavata kainkaryam. 3. It is actually an if-then-else loop. If a prapannan is involved in bhagavat/bhagavata kainkaryam at a time of the nithya karmanushtanam or if he has vairakhyam like Thirukannamangai aandan to leave everything and look for the grace of emperuman alone(this level is not attained by all, remember) then a prappanan can leave his nithya karmas(there is no doubt about it. It is not a sin for him) else others have to do their karmAnushtanams not as a means or upaya to reach emperuman but as a kainkaryam by itself. Hope this clarifies in a better way. About the reply by Vaidhehiji, adiyen feels that she hasn’t gone through my reply properly or probably overlooked some points. Adiyen has clearly stated that nitya karmAnushtanam can be left for bhagavat kainkaryam as it is more important for prapannas. Adiyen has also quoted the incident in Srirangam where Sri Parasara bhattar has insisted this point. Adiyen has also explained even when the karmAnushtanams are done it should be done only as kainkaryam and not as upayam. Adiyen feels this is by all ways the thiruvullam of Srirangam acharyas. Adiyen has no where mixed the two schools of thoughts. Adiyen do accept that Sri ramanuja did nithya karmas as kainkaryams not as upaya, for lokasangrahArtham. We are supposed to follow him(“mElayAr seivanagal” says andal). Once one person approached one lady shisya of Sri Ramanuja(I think it is ammangi ammal) and asked her why she doesn’t go to the temple of other devatas for which she replied, I donot know and I am not bothered about the reason. If our acharya ramanuja asks us to go then we follow him and go into the temple. All ramanuja adiyars should do the same. As Srivaishnavas we are supposed to be role models to the others. As Krishna in Bhagavat geetha says, “karmanaiva hi samsidhdhi AshthithA jayakAjayaha: ! lOkasangraha mEvApi sampashyan karthu marhasi”!! (Even though janakan was a great jnani he still didn’t leave his karmas for the sake of the rest of the world. But these jnani’s do karma as orders of bhagavan, kainkaryam.) Moreover Krishna says, “na mE pArthAsthi karthavyam thrishu lOkEshu kinchana! NAnavAptha mavApthavyam vartha Eva cha karmani!! (Hey arjuna! Though I am sarvalOkEshvaran and need not do anything by myself still I do these karmas like washing your horse and being your charioteer for the sake of others.) So Krishna adviced arjuna to do his karmas since if he left them he will become a bad example to the society. So people who are in a position to influence others should be careful. Though a prapanna is eligible to leave his nithya karmas if he considers, emperuman as everything and is involved in bhagavat/bhagavata kainkaryams still should not give misleadings by doing the same. So we have to follow our acharyas and do the same karmas as kainkaryam to bhagavan and not as upayas. But when there is a clash between nithya karmas and bhagavat kainkaryam then without any doubt a prapanna can leave his nithya karmas as per sri Parasara bhattars words. Hope this clarifies everything. I beg the pardon of all the learned scholars for any mistakes committed due to my lack of knowledge and ignorance. AzhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyar thiruvadigaLE saraNam Adiyen Ramanuja Dasyai Sumithra Varadarajan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 9, 2002 Report Share Posted September 9, 2002 Sri: Srimathe Ramanujaya nama: Dear Venkatesh, You have put forth the views of TennAchAryas very succinctly. If any reader grasps the points of your post,he/she has understood the TK philosophy. But even for that HE has to give a green signal. > Nice question. The answer is, I do not know about > others, but atleast I am sure I do not possess such > high virtues. But true to our poorvAchAryA's words, if > we are to believe that we are just slaves of emberumAn > and all our actions are controlled by him, I would say > even the non-performance of these nitya karmas by the > chEtanAs is also driven by Him. Just take this case, I > am not in temple doing any service, neither am I > learning divya prabhandhams at my house, at a Very true. People who are thorough with mahAbhArata,can correct me(I read it in my teens and now being more than a decade,my memory power could have deteriorated for sure). When the Lord goes to duryOdhanA to resolve the issues between kauravAs and pANdavAs(to avoid the battle),duryOdhanA tells KrSNA that it's HE,who is residing in duryOdhana's heart,who prompts duryOdhanA to do such acts. When everything belongs to Him,where is the question of saying I have to do something as even kainkaryam. I'm writing this post because HE is the driving force. DO I have any autonomy? If HE says that HE is the manas in BG,where is the question of the individual doing/not doing anything without His approval/permission. Somewhere in Chapter 11 of BG(visvarUpa darsanam),KrSNA tells arjunA that the latter has no agency of action independently willed by himself and he is just an instrument of the Divine. > I would say first of all, even to think that WE have to do > something, is against what our AzhwArs and AchAryAs > have told. > I can only say that I have told the truth and > it is upto emberumAn's grace to make the chEtana do > what he is doing. > He does not come before us and say that He is pleased. Practical. > I have only reproduced the words of our poorvAchAryas in > this matter. I know it is diffcult to accept this. But > the fact is, it should be. Very beautifully you have expressed pUrvAchAryAs works in layman words. This is a very delicate and subtle point to be understood. solbavan kaNNan,seibavan kaNNan;"what did you bring,what are you going to take and what's yours that you grieve over,arjunA?" says the Lord. AzhvAr EmperumAnAr Jeeyar TiruvadigaLE saraNam nappinnai 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.