A Question about Ramanuja

[Guest guest]

sri:

 

Dear Devotees: Please accept adiyEN's humble pranams.

 

Sri Vikram, these days normally, adiyen stays away from discussions as

there is so much to learn and experience by HIS grace, your mail

got me going on my thought process.

 

You Wrote:

:> Lipner, also upholds the view that sudras will have to wait

:> additional lifetimes to get moksham. Vedic knowledge is an ABSOLUTE

 

THIS IS NOT TRUE, As PER SRI RAMANUJA and his works, please read

Sri Saranagathy Gadya by Sri Ramanuja (with exaplnations)

 

ALL LIVING BEINGS (NOT JUST HUMANS) are allowed moksha regardless their

caste, creed or specie.

 

:> Also, prapatti was a concept developed fully by later Vaishnavas--not

:> Acarya Ramanuja himself. His Gita exegesis states nowhere that sudras

:> can get moksham in this lifetime. The way out of it is (perhaps) to

 

No No You got that wrong,

Yes Acharya Ramanuja had the concept of Saranagahty foully documented

and showed us how to, by HIS grace and sambhandam(relationship) only

we are all able to go to moksha today.

 

You are confusing, Bharanyasam as a seperate procedure, (apart from

surrender, Samashreyanam)

has not been detailed by ramanuja or practiced by his immediate disciples

 

(This is not the same as surrender), Surrender (saranagathy)

(is open to all beings, at any time that the being is ready, through a

qualified acharyan)

 

Sri Bhashya was written for the VEDIC educated elite, (are any of us in

that category today to understand this fully as intended)

 

=======================================================

All the above is my personal opinion only, learned scholars may want to

add their points and correct adiyen where appropriate,

 

adiyEN Ramanuja Dasan

Mukundan V. Pattangi

 

www.radioramanuja.com

[Guest guest]

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

 

Dear All,

I have something to share in this context. I don't understand who

ever floated the idea that "prapatti was a concept developed fully by

later Vaishnavas--not Acarya Ramanuja himself"... I have heard about

this from many people. I am wondering how could this kind of mis-

conception even araise. And I also found out the answer for that. The

reason why people are still floating these type of misconceptions is

because, not many have really tried to understand the fundamentals of

the Vaishnava sampradayam.

Here is something that explains Shri Ramanujar DID follow prapatti

(forget, Shri Ramanujar, this was followed by every acharya who

existed before him).

Fundamentals First....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thirumanthram - "Om Namo Narayanaya" - Explains Athma Swaroopam

 

Dwayam - "Shriman Narayana Charanou Sharanam PRAPATHYE Shrimathe

Narayanaya Namaha" - Explains the concept of Prapatti and more.

 

The above two were maintained as a rahasyam across the Shri Vaishnava

acharya paramparais.

 

Shri Ramanujar walked from ShriRangam to Thirukkoshtiyur 18 TIMES to

learn these manthrams from Thirukkoshtiyur Nambi. At the last time,

Swami Thirukkoshtiyur Nambi felt happy about Shri Ramanujar's

dedication and did a manthra upadesam(advice/explanation) on the

above mentioned rahasyams and their arthams(meaning). Shri Ramanujar

was so happy to hear this concept of prapatti and immediately

realised that this was not just for brahmins(the then aryas), but for

everyone. He immediately went up to the Kovil gopuram and shouted

towards EVERYONE(caste/creed no bar) to come and hear the same. This

is well depicted in Shri Manavala Maamunigal's Upadesa Rattinamaalai:

"aasayudayorkkellaam aariyargaal kooorum endru

pesi varambarutthar pin" - meaning "he told the aaryas(the then

brahmins) to tell about these rahasyams to ALL THOSE who wanted to

know and thus he broke the border/fence there by letting this concept

reach EVERYONE.

 

Points to note from the above:

1) Prapatti existed from time immemorial(Dwayam was initially told by

Lord Shriman Narayana to Periya Prattiyar) and hence there is no

doubt that Shri Ramanujar was aware and was following PRAPATTI

2) Just because Shri Ramanujar did not do a separate work on

Prapatthi it never meant that he did not follow prapatthi. He

followed so many things, but didn't have to write. He wrote nothing

on any of the 4000 Divya Prabandhams, but it never means he didn't

respect them. Shribhashyam was more to encounter the advaitic and

other notions because of the misinterpretations, the latter ones had

published, on Vedas. Shri Ramanujar's works were to make the brahmins

understand well about the Vedas/Gitas etc while what he actually

deviced and practiced was the concept of Shri Vaishnavam and Prapatti

(the pancha samaskaram, the thiruman, prabandha, veda goshti etc)

that was for everyone.

3) We must first try to learn the very FUNDAMENTALS of our

sampradayam before even trying to float/ask a question on something

that may or may not be true(I am sorry to be aggressive via this

statement, but this is a bitter truth. Not many of us ask questions

after knowing the fundamentals. Sometimes we ask questions based on

some misinterpretations or misinformation provided by others. If we

are interested in the sampradayam, the first thing we need to do is

find out an appropriate acharya and try to get to know the basics and

once we are done with this, trust me, we would start understanding

everything)

 

No offense intended by this mail to anyone, and in case I have hurt

anyone, my sincere apologies.

 

Thanks to Shri Pattangi swami for giving me an opportunity to post

this mail in addition to what he has written in reply to someone's

mail.

 

All,

Kindly feel free to correct me if you feel I were wrong.

 

Yatheendra Pravanam Vandhe RAMYA Jaamaataram Munim

 

Adiyen Ramanuja DAsan,

Lakshmi Narasimhan

 

ramanuja, Pattangi <danp@u...> wrote:

> sri:

>

> Dear Devotees: Please accept adiyEN's humble pranams.

>

> Sri Vikram, these days normally, adiyen stays away from discussions

as

> there is so much to learn and experience by HIS grace, your mail

> got me going on my thought process.

>

> You Wrote:

> :> Lipner, also upholds the view that sudras will have to wait

> :> additional lifetimes to get moksham. Vedic knowledge is an

ABSOLUTE

>

> THIS IS NOT TRUE, As PER SRI RAMANUJA and his works, please read

> Sri Saranagathy Gadya by Sri Ramanuja (with exaplnations)

>

> ALL LIVING BEINGS (NOT JUST HUMANS) are allowed moksha regardless

their

> caste, creed or specie.

>

> :> Also, prapatti was a concept developed fully by later Vaishnavas-

-not

> :> Acarya Ramanuja himself. His Gita exegesis states nowhere that

sudras

> :> can get moksham in this lifetime. The way out of it is (perhaps)

to

>

> No No You got that wrong,

> Yes Acharya Ramanuja had the concept of Saranagahty foully

documented

> and showed us how to, by HIS grace and sambhandam(relationship) only

> we are all able to go to moksha today.

>

> You are confusing, Bharanyasam as a seperate procedure, (apart from

> surrender, Samashreyanam)

> has not been detailed by ramanuja or practiced by his immediate

disciples

>

> (This is not the same as surrender), Surrender (saranagathy)

> (is open to all beings, at any time that the being is ready,

through a

> qualified acharyan)

>

> Sri Bhashya was written for the VEDIC educated elite, (are any of

us in

> that category today to understand this fully as intended)

>

> =======================================================

> All the above is my personal opinion only, learned scholars may

want to

> add their points and correct adiyen where appropriate,

>

> adiyEN Ramanuja Dasan

> Mukundan V. Pattangi

>

> www.radioramanuja.com

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya nama:

Dear bhAgavathas,

Accept my pranams. I like to share my thoughts in response to

Sri Vikram's posting.

 

(i)First of all we do not need a foreigner to tell us "what our

sampradAyam/religion actually is" when there are many learned AcAryAs

in our sampradAyam. It is tantamount to asking/enquiring a

stranger/third person about "the nature/conduct/personality of one's

own mother". BTW,I have come across the book by Lipner and I have

read and I don't consider Lipner's words as gospel of truth. Please

take it in the right context: Lipner is not a disciple of the

disciple of...of the disciple of Sri Ramanuja to make an affirmative

statement that "this is what" Sri Ramanuja says. We have to go to an

AcArya who comes in the line of Sri Ramanuja to understand the mind

of Sri Ramanuja. Lipner's is similar to the word Hindu coined by some

moghuls and many of us proudly use that word hindu which

appears "nowhere" in our scriptures.

 

(ii)Sri Ramanuja neither invented SriVaiShNavism nor Prapatti. He

only "fostered" it. There were AcAryAs,prior to Sri Ramanuja,who were

SriVaiShNavas and also Prapannas(following prapatti). In short

SriRamanuja "re-visited/re-searched" some of the "concepts" which was

already there(vedas) eternally and misinterpreted by Advaitins and

Heretics who failed to do a "proper" enquiry into the "nature of

Brahman". Keeping aside Sri Ramanuja,we observe that the samskrt

word "prapdhyE(prapatti)" sitting in many places in Bhagavad Gita

Chapter 7 and Bhagavad Gita was spoken by Lord Himself and hence can

not have been a "concept" developed/invented by Sri Ramanuja. Hence

Sri Ramanuja's concern(as per Sri YAmunAcAryA's wish)was to write

commentaries on samskrt works, to refute Advaitic philosophy and

other philosphies which were in vogue during that time,to set things

in the right perspective. Hence it was catered to a "specific" set of

audience. So one has to see Sri Ramanuja not only from pure academic

aspect of Sri VisiShtAdvaitham but also from psychological aspect

(what kind of audience did Sri Ramanuja keep in his mind when he

wrote the commentaries on samskrt works).

 

(iii) Simple analogy can be taken from academic circle. An author,who

specialises and does research in the field of Fluid Dynamics(or you

name any subject)writes a text book keeping in mind a "specific" set

of people. Not everyone can understand and comprehend that book. So a

book can cater to people who are beginners,...or advanced.

 

(iv) Some foreigners doubt the authorship of gadya trayam(whether it

was really Sri Ramanuja who composed it as it differs in thought from

the other 6 samskrt works). Here psychology enters. Even if we take

scientists as examples,not every paper of Albert Einstein reflects

the same "mood" of Einstein expressing the "impressions of his

thoughts(that is, this is how Einstein thinks)". But then people are

affected by the limitation of senses(perception). How do one believe

that Sri Ramanuja preached and followed Prapatti(which he didn't say

explicitly(although it was implicit) in his 6 samskrt works) just as

his predecessors of Sri VishiShtAdvaitham? It is like this(a crude

example): I may cook something(say some onion based) to suit the

needs of the visitors. A guy who has only seen me cooking(but not

eating) such food is highly and surely likely to conclude that I eat

onion. Assume that I do not consume onion. The other guy's inference

is totally wrong(due to improper observation and enquiry and this is

applicable in Lipner's case too). That's why Sri Ramanuja had devoted

100 plus pages for the first aphorism(sUtra)alone in his commentary

on BrahmasUtra, namely SriBhAShya.

 

(v) So SharaNAgathi is for "ALL" without any doubt. The AshtAkshari

(Tirumanthram) says that Sriman Narayana is the "protector" of all.

Just as a husband vouchsafes protection to his wife,while tying the

sacred knot,so does the Lord wrt sentient/non-sentient(whoever chants

this manthra). When a mortal mother can not bear to see differences

among her own kids(who is better than who),how can the Lord, whose

child is this Universe(and the jivas like us),see distinction among

His own creations(The Lord says in Bhagavad Gita that He created the

four classifications/varNas)? This being the case,does it make any

sense to say that "sUdrAs have to wait for some more births" to

attain mOksha?

 

(vi) Regarding the "means" for attaining mOksha,many have been laid

down in shruthi(vedas) and smrthi(Bhagavad Gita prescribing

karma,jnAna,bhakti,prapatti as a means for salvation) texts.

Bhakti is the longest route and sharaNAgathi/prapatti is the shortest

route. Some people think that there is a "subtle" difference between

sharaNAgathi and prapatti which is a different issue altogether.

People according to their varNas can follow bhakti or prapatti. Why

should the Lord prescribe both the routes instead of one method for

all? From this it is clear that HE alone is the means and also the

end.

 

(vii)I would like to quote Bertrand Russell who declares himself

as "agnostic" in the eyes of philosophic audience and as an "atheist"

in the eyes of laymen. Why does he have to declare like this instead

of one single and simple statement? Because Russell has done a

research(mathematically/scientifically)and is of the opinion that it

is difficult to prove either way,the existence or the non-existence

of God. So he is neutral to the idea of God(science goes by evidence).

A layman does not know what "logic(a branch of natural philosophy)"

is and hence Russell,without wasting time,declares himself as an

atheist. To those who have background in logic(atleast some),he

declares himself as agnostic.

 

(viii)Last but not the least I would like to quote Sri PiLLai

LOkAchArya's Mumukshuppadi:Carama shlOkam(BG 18.66: sarva

DharmAn...mA shuca:)explanation: CUrnikai 182

 

"karmam(karma yOga) kaimkaryaththilE pugum,jnAnam(jnAna yOga) svarUpa

prakAshaththilE pugum; bhakti(bhakti yOga) prApya ruciyilE pugum;

prapatti(total surrender) svarUpayAthAthmya jnAnaththilE pugum"

 

Meaning:The daily(nithya) and occasional(naimiththika) rituals

(karmas),appropriate to their castes(varNas) and stages of life

(Ashramas) will be practised by the individual not as means for

attaining mOksha but as loving service unto the Lord. Comprehension

of Lord's transcendental glory(jnAna/knowledge) shall illumine his

own essential nature. Bhakti(devotion to Lord) will be practised not

as means for attaining mOksha but as an intense longing for the Lord

(just as hunger is a pre-requisite for relishing the food).

Prapatti/SharaNAgathi,the loving surrender to the Lord, leads to the

acquisition of a "correct" perspective of the "true" or essential

nature of the individual soul, namely,"absolute and exclusive

dependence on the Lord and complete self-abnegation".

 

So sharaNAgathi(Lord as the sole means as indicated in BG

18.66),alongwith other two rahasyas,namely, Tirumanthram and

dhvayam,is ideal for all and since this has come from the Lord Himself

(as an upadhEsha to Arjuna),it is as old as the vedas and hence not

developed by any "later" SriVaiShNava scholars for fun but has been

preserved(the teaching that started from the Lord) and

observed/practised by all Sri VaiShNava AcAryAs.

 

Please forgive for any wrong informations and if I have hurt others'

feelings(and also for the lengthy and boring mail). All credits go to

Sri Ramanuja's grace and AcAryAs. Thanks to Sri Mukunda and Sri

Lakshmi Narasimhan for having already expressed some of the things I

wanted to add.

 

AzhvAr EmperumAnAr JIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam

NC Nappinnai