on nirhethuka krupa

[Guest guest]

Dear Srivaishnavas,

Nirhetuka Kripa seems to be like Grace in

Christianity. Many Srivaishnavas have difficulty in

accepting the concept, though hallowed by

Purvacharyas.If our conduct has no role in attracting

His grace, why take the trouble of observing rigid

rules of ethics in one's personal life?

Sri Parasara Bhattar says,

"Nimnottam c'a karun'am c'a jagat vic'itram

Karma vyapekshya srijatas tava Ranga s'eshin

Vaishamya nirghrinatayor na khalu prasktih

Tat Brahma Su'tra sac'iva' s'rutayor ghushanti"

[The world is strange with the high and low and

sufferings.Sri Ranganata has cereated it by looking

into Karma. There is so scope for discrimination by

Him or lack of compassion. This is the declaration by

Brahma Sutra and Vedas.]

Why should He, Karma vyapekshya [seeing Karma], when

no ground to bless or curse is needed?

Adiyen, TCASrinivasaramanujan

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama:

 

Dear bhAgavatas,

 

I am not sure about whether we can say that "our

conduct has no role in attracting His grace". To

me it appears more that our conduct has no guarantee

that it will attract His grace - since He is sarva

svantantran and therefore is not answerable to any

one for His actions. That is, there is nothing we

can do that we can say is a sure thing to attain

moksha. Then, does this include saranagati to an

acharya? On the surface, it would appear to be so.

But it also seems that He has taken a vrata to

accept this as a special thing for those who have

Ramanuja sambandham.

 

It also appears that while He is independent in

general, He listens to Thayar in allowing His

grace to flow and give salvation to those whom She

recommends. Being this the case, our conduct should

be such that Thayar will plead to Him on our behalf.

 

In either case, it appears that one cannot simply

sit around and do nothing saying that there is

nothing to do.

 

Is adiyEn's understanding as stated above correct?

 

adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan

 

--- Srinivasaramanujan TCA <tcasr wrote:

> Dear Srivaishnavas,

> Nirhetuka Kripa seems to be like Grace in

> Christianity. Many Srivaishnavas have difficulty in

> accepting the concept, though hallowed by

> Purvacharyas.If our conduct has no role in attracting

> His grace, why take the trouble of observing rigid

> rules of ethics in one's personal life?

 

 

 

 

The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo

http://search.

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama:

 

Dear bhAgavatas,

 

I am not sure about whether we can say that "our

conduct has no role in attracting His grace". To

me it appears more that our conduct has no guarantee

that it will attract His grace - since He is sarva

svantantran and therefore is not answerable to any

one for His actions. That is, there is nothing we

can do that we can say is a sure thing to attain

moksha. Then, does this include saranagati to an

acharya? On the surface, it would appear to be so.

But it also seems that He has taken a vrata to

accept this as a special thing for those who have

Ramanuja sambandham.

 

It also appears that while He is independent in

general, He listens to Thayar in allowing His

grace to flow and give salvation to those whom She

recommends. Being this the case, our conduct should

be such that Thayar will plead to Him on our behalf.

 

In either case, it appears that one cannot simply

sit around and do nothing saying that there is

nothing to do.

 

Is adiyEn's understanding as stated above correct?

 

adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan

 

--- Srinivasaramanujan TCA <tcasr wrote:

> Dear Srivaishnavas,

> Nirhetuka Kripa seems to be like Grace in

> Christianity. Many Srivaishnavas have difficulty in

> accepting the concept, though hallowed by

> Purvacharyas.If our conduct has no role in attracting

> His grace, why take the trouble of observing rigid

> rules of ethics in one's personal life?

 

 

 

 

The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo

http://search.

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya nama:

Dear TCA Venkatesh,

What Sri TCA Srinivasa Ramanujan says is correct according

to SVB 148 and 149. This, of course, is based on my understanding of

SVB.

 

SVB 148: krpaiyAlE varum pArathanthriyaththiR kAttil, swAthanthryath-

thAlE varum pArathanthryam prabalam.

 

SVB 149: ivvarththaththai vEdhapuruShan apEkshiththAn.

 

SVB 148: Although one of Lord's traits is unlimited independence,He

longs to serve His devotees and loves to be ruled by them. His

dependence(pArathanthryam)on devotees,can arise out of two causes

namely,His "compassion" for those who surrender to Him or His own

free will(swAthanthryam),whereby He showers His unconditional grace

on the subjects of His choice,whether "deserving or not". According

to Sri PiLLai lOkAcAryAr,the latter is superior to the former.

Because when "swAthanthryam" predominates the former "krpa" can get

nullified! The Lord's dependence of the second variety(stems from

swAthanthryam) however,goes on uniterruptedly with no counteracting

influence.

 

SVB 149: This is said in MuNdakOpaniShad and kaTOpaniShad: The

paramAtmA is not attainable by the AtmA(individual soul) through

mere meditation and deep learning;on the other hand He reveals

Himself,in all His splendour,to the subjects of His choice. Did not

SriRama court,on His own,guha without caring about the latter's

solicitude?

 

> It also appears that while He is independent in

> general, He listens to Thayar in allowing His

> grace to flow and give salvation to those whom She

> recommends. Being this the case, our conduct should

> be such that Thayar will plead to Him on our behalf.

 

With respect to conduct I doubt your statements. Why? KAkAsuran/

Jayantha,gave physical pain to thAyAr,and when PerumAL used

brahmAsthram,kAkAsuran went to everybody and finally got tired(I

don't think kAkAsuran did prapatti!)of flying and fell,that too

wrongly. KAkAsuran's head was facing thAyAr and feet was facing

PerumAL. She,as the "daya" aspect of perumAL,considering that "fall

as prapatti", changes the direction of kAkAsuran thereby telling

Him,that the subject has surrendered to Him and this is the best time

for the Lord to show His kalyANa guNAs. In both the variety of

dependence there is a mediation of Sri but our conduct does not play

any role here. Conduct in thAyAr's and PerumAL's defn is different

from that of ours. This is my understanding and please correct if I'm

wrong.

 

> In either case, it appears that one cannot simply

> sit around and do nothing saying that there is

> nothing to do.

 

??? SVB 80.81.82 talks about Sita/pirAtti,draupadi and thirukkaNNa-

mangai ANdAn.

 

SVB 82: pirAtti svasakthiyai vittAL;dhraupadhi lajjaiyai vittAL;

thirukkaNNamangai ANdAn svavyApAraththai vittAn.

 

ThirukkaNNamangai ANdAn gave up all his personal activities,reduced

himself to the abject position of the dog crouching in a kennel. This

was after thirukkaNNamangai ANdAn witnessed the dog owner(a frail

human being) giving up his own life for the sake of his pet dog and

thirukkaNNamangai ANdAn realised how much the omni-potent Lord would

do to save the jIvAtmA. He placed himslf in the position of the

dog,and substituted the omni-potent Lord for the owner of the

dog.

 

AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam

NC Nappinnai

[Guest guest]

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

 

Dear Smt Nappinnai:

 

My humble pranams!

 

A small information on pArathanthryam. Instead of dependence, they

usually mention it as doing something based on other's will. That

is "avargal itta vazhakkaga". It is not that he is dependent, but HE

wants to do what "they" want out of HIS will. So, HIS pArathanthryam

too comes out of HIS swAthanthryam, unlike a jeevatma's

pArathanthryam that does not come out of its swAthanthryam, because

pArathanthryam is the swaroopam of the jeevatma.

 

>With respect to conduct I doubt your statements. Why? KAkAsuran/

>Jayantha,gave physical pain to thAyAr,and when PerumAL used

>brahmAsthram,kAkAsuran went to everybody and finally got tired(I

>don't think kAkAsuran did prapatti!)of flying and fell,that too

>wrongly. KAkAsuran's head was facing thAyAr and feet was facing

>PerumAL

 

"Sitthira Koodatthiruppa Siru Kakkai Mulai Theenda

Atthirame Konderiya Anaitthulagum Thirindhu Oodi

Vitthagane Iramaavo NIN ABHAYAM endrazhaikka

Atthirame Adhan Kannai Arutthadhum Oor Adayalam" - Periyazhwar

Thirumozhi(3-10-6)

 

[ In chitrakoodam, when a crow(jayanthan, the Indra's(?) son)

disturbed Sita Piratti, at that very moment, Shri Rama used the

Astiram(brahmastram) and, the crow, to escape from this, ran around

all the worlds(saptha lokas) and then finally(no one was able to

protect it from the lord's astram) came back to him and did Prapatthi

and at that point, so as to respect the astiram(indirectly brahma),

just took away the eye of the crow using it.]

 

> > In either case, it appears that one cannot simply

> > sit around and do nothing saying that there is

> > nothing to do.

>

> .......

>

> ThirukkaNNamangai ANdAn gave up all his personal activities,reduced

> himself to the abject position of the dog crouching in a kennel.

> This was after thirukkaNNamangai ANdAn witnessed the dog owner(a

> frail human being) giving up his own life for the sake of his pet

> dog and thirukkaNNamangai ANdAn realised how much the omni-potent

> Lord would do to save the jIvAtmA. He placed himslf in the

> position of the dog,and substituted the omni-potent Lord for the

> owner of the dog.

 

Swami Manavala Maamunigal Vyakyanam for this suthram: "Adhavadhu sva-

rakshana hethuvana sva-vyaparangalai vittanengirapadi"

[That is, he dropped his materialistic life that is a basic reason

for survival and self protection.]

This does not mean that he just started sitting in a place idly

assuming lord will save him. He went to Thirukkannamangai, leaving

all his businesses etc and started living for the Divyathampathis of

the kovil and started serving them by cleaning the temple corridors.

 

Kindly refer to the story on Thirukkannamangai Andan in this link:

http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/jan2002/0094.html

 

My apologies in case of mistakes.

 

Yatheendra Pravanam Vandhe RAMYA Jamataram Munim

 

Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,

Lakshmi Narasimhan

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama:

 

Dear Nappinnai,

 

I think I may have put out a muddled post - not

surprising considering that this a very difficult

concept to grasp.

 

Here are certain thoughts on this subject.

 

In the case of Kakasuran too, note that Thayar's

mediation on behalf of Kakasuran happened only after

he fell down helpless. She could have mediated very

early on, but She waited for him to reach that state

first. The state of abject surrender here is not

the obvious one where we feel that way in His

presence by understanding our true nature and our

relationship to Him. Instead, Kaksuran's was one of

sheer inability to do anything and nothing more. A

very interesting subject of study!

 

The case of Thirukkannamangai Andan is an important

one though. Did he really stop doing anything? Or

did he stop doing anything for himself? I request

bhAgavatas with knowledge of his story to clarify.

 

Even if he ended up doing absolutely nothing, there

are two things to note. One is this state has to be

one of doing absolutely nothing - that is not even

trying to eat, sleep or anything. That is, leave

"everything" up to Him. This is a very difficult

state to achieve. Second, this is a unique case.

None of our other acharyas went to this state. All

our acharyas did many things appropriate to the

quality of being a Srivaishnava. They studied,

taught, sang His namas, did service at the temple.

So, while they said His grace was nirhetuka, that

did not preclude them from following certain

principles. Notice too that all these are actions

are Srivaishnavic in nature.

 

This is where my objection comes to interpreting

the nirhetuka krpa as that one has to do nothing.

I think one has to follow the paths laid down by

the acharyas - otherwise you will have people

killing each other, breaking down temples etc.,

stating that our actions do not matter.

 

Notice also that His grace never seems to go to

those who do bhAgavata apacharam, although it does

appear to go to those who may even do bhagavat

apachAram.

 

Finally, I have heard some scholars (PBA Swami?)

say the following: in gaining moksha, the step of

sharanAgati is one small step compared to the

zillion more steps that one has to take. He lifts

us up those steps out of His krpa. This is why we

cannot say that moksha was given due to the act

of sharanAgati. That is, it is incorrect to equate

the two as they are not comparable - hence, sharanAgati

is not the upEyam. However, this does not mean that

one does not have to perform sharanAgati at all. Note

that all of our acharyas have performed the act of

surrender through their acharyas.

 

I realize that I have thrown out a bunch of thoughts

without clear direction. I think this is one subject

that should be addressed by learned scholars and not

novices such as myself. So, I will stop showing my

ignorance. Hopefully some of our elders and scholars

will clarify our doubts in this forum.

 

Azhvar Emperumanar Jeeyar Thiruvadigale Sharanam

 

adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan

 

--- nappinnai_nc <nappinnai_nc wrote:

> Sri:

> Srimathe Ramanujaya nama:

> Dear TCA Venkatesh,

> What Sri TCA Srinivasa Ramanujan says is

> correct according

> to SVB 148 and 149. This, of course, is based on my

> understanding of

> SVB.

>

> SVB 148: krpaiyAlE varum pArathanthriyaththiR kAttil,

> swAthanthryath-

> thAlE varum pArathanthryam prabalam.

>

> SVB 149: ivvarththaththai vEdhapuruShan apEkshiththAn.

>

> ...

 

 

 

The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo

http://search.

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya nama:

Dear TCA Venkatesan,

I'm also sharing my thoughts.

 

> In the case of Kakasuran too, note that Thayar's

> mediation on behalf of Kakasuran happened only after

> he fell down helpless. She could have mediated very

> early on, but She waited for him to reach that state

> first. The state of abject surrender here is not

> the obvious one where we feel that way in His

> presence by understanding our true nature and our

> relationship to Him. Instead, Kaksuran's was one of

> sheer inability to do anything and nothing more. A

> very interesting subject of study!

 

I listened to Ramayanam upanyasam(that too not from SV perspective)

when I was young and so hardly remember the actual incidences! As you

said,thAyAr could have mediated earlier itself if she had wanted. But

she did not do. Here I would go by SVB 148. I feel that PerumAL being

the swAthanthrian,even thAyAr has to wait for the "right" time to act

as the mediator. This aspect is explained by Swami Azhagiya MaNaVALa

PerumAL nAyanAr in AH,2nd prakaraNam "iRaivanin vishESha katAksham".

I don't think thAyAr can act(independently) as and when she pleases

to mediate on behalf of us. She only accompanies Him in all His

duties without displeasing Him. My understanding is that it is the

Lord who chooses the "right" time.

 

On a different note,I have heard that there is a minute/hair line"

difference between even "prapatti" and "sharaNAgathi". My guess is

SharaNAgathi goes out and out by "nirhEthuka krpa" and the "utter

collapse" of the jIvAtmA's efforts while a "tinch" of sahEthukam

(human effort) enters prapatti. This is again my guess only.

 

> The case of Thirukkannamangai Andan is an important

> one though. Did he really stop doing anything? Or

> did he stop doing anything for himself? I request

> bhAgavatas with knowledge of his story to clarify.

 

He stopped all his nithya-naimittika obligations(like sanDhyA-

vandhanam etc)and material activities(worrying about his livelihood

etc). To develop that state,it requires tremendous faith in PerumAL

that He will take care of everything. Even in the temple,he served

not with the intent of doing kaimkaryam(?)

 

> This is where my objection comes to interpreting

> the nirhetuka krpa as that one has to do nothing.

> I think one has to follow the paths laid down by

> the acharyas - otherwise you will have people

> killing each other, breaking down temples etc.,

> stating that our actions do not matter.

 

Swami Azhagiya MaNavALa PerumAL NAyanAr says that NammAzhvAr declares

that he has not done anything good that deserves the merit of His

grace. The cause for NammAzhvAr's anubhavam is the "puNya/good deed"

called "Lord Himself". NammAzhvAr declares that not only in this

birth but in all his previous births too he has not performed any

sADhanAs.

 

AH 102: idagilEn nOnbu aRivilEn engaiyAlum sADhana thrayajam alla"

sADhana thraya-karma,jnAna,bhakti

 

"idagilEn onRu attagillEn aimpulan vellagillEn kadavanAgik

kAlam thORum pUppaRiththu EththagillEn" - TVM 4.7.9

 

idagilEn-i haven't fed even a handful to those who were hungry

attagillEn-i havn't given a glass of water to the thirsty

aimpulan vellagillEn-haven't controlled the indhriyAs

pUppaRiththu EththagillEn-i haven't done puShpa kaimkaryam

 

"nORRa nOnbu ilEn nuNNaRivilEn" - TVM 5.7.1

 

nORRa nOnbu ilEn-karma yOga

nuNNaRivilEn-jnAna yOga

 

AH is also amazing. I feel if we can have AH and SVB(the two brothers

are amazing and awesome that i'm obsessed with them) in tips,we

understand SV. As you said I do agree that these are subtle topics

and we should listen to experts.

 

> of sharanAgati. That is, it is incorrect to equate

> the two as they are not comparable - hence, sharanAgati

> is not the upEyam. However, this does not mean that

> one does not have to perform sharanAgati at all. Note

> that all of our acharyas have performed the act of

> surrender through their acharyas.

 

SharaNAgathi is not even upAyam,how can it become the end/upEyam?

What about sisupAla(who got mksha)? Did he do sharaNAgathi? DOes any

devotee know if sisupAla did sharaNAgathi? Thanks to dear Lakshmi

Narasimhan for clearly stating about kAkAsuran:-)

 

AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam

NC Nappinnai

[Guest guest]

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

 

> I feel that PerumAL being the swAthanthrian,even thAyAr has to wait

> for the "right" time to act as the mediator. This aspect is

> explained by Swami Azhagiya MaNaVALa PerumAL nAyanAr in AH,2nd

> prakaraNam "iRaivanin vishESha katAksham".

> I don't think thAyAr can act(independently) as and when she pleases

> to mediate on behalf of us. She only accompanies Him in all His

> duties without displeasing Him. My understanding is that it is the

> Lord who chooses the "right" time.

 

This is an interesting subject and I am fortunate to have heard

kalakshepam on this. Before we discuss about swAthanthryam of the

Lord:-), let us understand the following: The swa-roopam and the swa-

bhavam. swa-roopam means the nature, the in-built capability i.e

basically what one CAN. swa-bhavam is more interesting. It is

basically what one WILL do. I assume we all know the difference

between these two words CAN and WILL where the former is to be used

in the context of ABILITY to perform something, while the latter is

to be used in the context where one is WILLING to perform something.

Jeeva-atma-swaroopam is that it is the seshi i.e the body of the

Parama-atma and is a dependent entity on him i.e he is the inner

controller. Does the Jeeva-atma realize it? Many of them do not. Why

so? It is due the swa-bhavam. When this swa-bhavam leads to the

realizing act i.e realizing(as opposed to knowing) the atma-

swaroopam, the jeeva-atma attains salvation(whether it is still

attached to a body or not, "Adhuve Veedu Veedaame"). Now on the other

side, what is Parama-atma swaroopam? HE is the omni-potent, omni-

present and what not. HE is "anoranian" smaller than what we know as

the smallest, "mahato maheeyan" bigger than what we know as the

biggest - in valor, krupai, dayai, kshamai, size everything. All

right. All said, so, why does HE wait indefinitely for every jeevatma

to realize HIM? This question gives a wonderful answer. This is when

one gets to understand HIS swabhavam. Though HE is "anoranian"

and "mahatomahian", HIS swabhavam is such that, HE cares for every

jeevatma. HE eagerly awaits their change of swabhavam to realize HIM

and make HIM feel happy.

 

Now back to the subject,

 

>PerumAL being the swAthanthrian,even thAyAr has to wait for

>the "right" time to act as the mediator. I don't think thAyAr can act

> (independently) as and when she pleases to mediate on behalf of us.

> She only accompanies Him in all His duties without displeasing Him.

 

Perumal though being a swAthanthrian which is HIS swaroopam, has a

swABhavam exactly opposite to it. HE is willing to do what other's

say, for most of the time. "Shriyathe, shrayathe" gives a clear cut

meaning of Piratti's duty. She is to protect and she is

the "Karyunya, Kshama, Daya" roopam of the Lord. And she will

recommend that for ANYONE and EVERYONE at any time.

 

> My understanding is that it is the Lord who chooses the "right"

> time.

Any time that the Lord chooses, is the right time for HIM as well as

the prajai (the subject). The moment we say he chooses, we are

talking about his swa-bhavam and svAthantryam is out of it. I mean,

svAthantryam is the base capability of the Lord to have any swa-

bhavam, but these kind of acts have to be attributed to his swa-

bhavam i.e his willingness to do, rather than his capability to do.

 

> On a different note,I have heard that there is a minute/hair line"

> difference between even "prapatti" and "sharaNAgathi". My guess is

> SharaNAgathi goes out and out by "nirhEthuka krpa" and the "utter

> collapse" of the jIvAtmA's efforts while a "tinch" of sahEthukam

> (human effort) enters prapatti. This is again my guess only.

 

SharaNAgathi is the very first act of falling under the feet of one

(LORD in this context) after the performer realizes his/her inability

to do anything. The RETENTION of this mindset is called the PRAPATTI.

 

Shriman Narayana Charanou SHARANAM -> PRAPATHYE Srimathe Narayanaya

Namaha. [i prostrate(Sharanagathi) unto the lotus feet of Lord

Shriman Narayana(includes Thayar too as she is never separate from

HIM) and will continue to hold(Prapatthi) those feet and stick to

HIM, and I realize I don't have svAthanthryam(na-ma) and I am a

servant/dependent of HIM]

 

Yatheendra Pravanam Vandhe RAMYA Jamataram Munim

 

Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,

Lakshmi Narasimhan