Nirhetuka Kripa

[Guest guest]

Dear prapannas

 

Nirhetuka kripa does not mean the Lord is partial - his grace is constantly

pouring down upon all beings like torrents of the monsoon - but as the rain

fills only upturned vessels - in the same way the Lord "choses" to fill only

those prapannas that are "empty" - the one factor that fills us up and

prevents the descent of saving grace is PRIDE; hence Pillai Lokacharya said

it is easier for a member of the depressed or marginalised communities to

receive the grace of the lord than caste brahmins. The obstructing factor in

caste brahmins being PRIDE - pride of caste, form, wealth and learning.

 

Adiyen

 

Sri Ram

[Guest guest]

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

 

Dear Shri Swamin,

 

>........ The obstructing factor in caste brahmins being PRIDE -

pride of >caste, form, wealth and learning.

 

This is incorrect as per what I have heard. I will explain the

same with an example. "AJAMILAN" was a brahmana by birth, but did not

do ANYTHING as per the brahmana niyamam. He had a son

called "Govindan"(or "Narayanan"?). At the time of his death, just

before he died, he called his son "Govinda" to say something, but he

died after uttering that word. The Lord, out of his Nirhetuka Krupai,

still gave him Paramapadam, just quoting a dumb reason that he called

HIM at the time of death.

 

Nirhetuka krupai of lord does not see any caste or creed. Moreover

your statement seems to be completely made up based on the "current"

world brahmins(that too, not everyone, only those wrong people that

you have seen). Brahmana has no pride because of the caste. Others

should respect a brahmana which is different from he having a pride

for the same. Only to make sure a brahmana does not have a) pride b)

form (?) c) wealth d) learning a brahmana was supposed to a) beg and

eat b) shave off his hair on the head c) wealth? when he begs and

eats? d) Eat only satvic foods in order to maintain a calm and

conrolled mindset. If you want, please blame the modern world people.

I can't accept you GENERALIZING those statement against brahmins in

general, particularly those who lived in the past.

 

Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,

Lakshmi Narasimhan

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Lakshmi Narasimhan,

A small "addition" (if

you will) to your posting on AjAmila.

 

The story of Ajamlila gos

like this: He was born in a brahmana family and HE DID

FOLLOW THE SAMSKARAS AND PRACTICES when he was young.

Once he had gone to the forest to fetch figs for a

yaga. There he saw a beautiful prostitute involved in

Conjugal action with another person. Our AjAmila was

so trapped in her beauty, he became addicted to her.

He went behind her, forgetting all about his duties.

She was a very lowly woman, and to support her, he

started doing all sinful actions, plundering and

pillaging included.

He had many kids and

somehow (I'll get back to it later) the last son was

named "Narayana". Narayana, the toddler, became his

most favourite son, his only companion. He would call

"Narayana" for anything and everything. Come death

time, the yamadhootas, with their gory, very scary

countenances,appeared, seeing which our Ajamila got

really scared. "Narayana, Narayana" yelled our

Ajamila, calling his dearest son, with Perumal not

being in his mind even a lilttle bit!! Then, there

appeared the Vishnudhoothas, who asked the Yamadhootas

to go away and not grab him, as he had chanted the

holy name of the Lord even inadvertently. Such is the

power of the Lord's holyname.

 

There are some points to be noted:

 

* Ajamila did not go to Vaikuntha right after that

incident. After he was spared, he moved to some holy

place (I guess Rishikesh) and did lots of devotional

activities before going to Vaikuntha.

 

* He did not name his last son. When a Rishi of the

lord was visiting town, he happened to stay at

Ajamila's place for the night, the infant was not even

named, as Ajamila had not even bothered. So, the Rishi

christened his last son, "Narayana", thereby becoming

a "Guru" of sorts to Ajamila, as he started calling

the word "Narayana" ever since then. Even in Ajamila's

case, a "Guru" was involved (indirectly, but still)!!

 

* Is it Nirhetuka?? Definitely, according to me.

Ajamila had done nothing to surrender to the lord. The

Lord used his calling his name (accidentally) as a

reason to offer him salvation.

 

I request you all to kindly pardon me for any

inaccuracies or misunderstandings from my side.

 

 

Dasan,

 

Kidambi Soundararajan.

 

*

--- Lakshmi Narasimhan <nrusimhan wrote:

> Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

>

> Dear Shri Swamin,

>

> >........ The obstructing factor in caste brahmins

> being PRIDE -

> pride of >caste, form, wealth and learning.

>

> This is incorrect as per what I have heard. I

> will explain the

> same with an example. "AJAMILAN" was a brahmana by

> birth, but did not

> do ANYTHING as per the brahmana niyamam. He had a

> son

> called "Govindan"(or "Narayanan"?). At the time of

> his death, just

> before he died, he called his son "Govinda" to say

> something, but he

> died after uttering that word. The Lord, out of his

> Nirhetuka Krupai,

> still gave him Paramapadam, just quoting a dumb

> reason that he called

> HIM at the time of death.

>

> Nirhetuka krupai of lord does not see any caste or

> creed. Moreover

> your statement seems to be completely made up based

> on the "current"

> world brahmins(that too, not everyone, only those

> wrong people that

> you have seen). Brahmana has no pride because of the

> caste. Others

> should respect a brahmana which is different from he

> having a pride

> for the same. Only to make sure a brahmana does not

> have a) pride b)

> form (?) c) wealth d) learning a brahmana was

> supposed to a) beg and

> eat b) shave off his hair on the head c) wealth?

> when he begs and

> eats? d) Eat only satvic foods in order to

> maintain a calm and

> conrolled mindset. If you want, please blame the

> modern world people.

> I can't accept you GENERALIZING those statement

> against brahmins in

> general, particularly those who lived in the past.

>

> Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,

> Lakshmi Narasimhan

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo

http://search.

[Guest guest]

Shrimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

 

Dear Shri Vimal,

I stand corrected. Thanks for correcting me. What you have mentioned

is exactly as per Shrimad Bhagavadam. After he was spared, he went to

Hari-Dwaram and adopted Bhakthi-Yoga and attained moksham.

 

Yatheendra Pravanam Vandhe RAMYA Jamataram Munim

 

Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,

Lakshmi Narasimhan

 

ramanuja, vimalkumar ranganathan

<panardasan> wrote:

> Dear Shri Lakshmi Narasimhan,

> A small "addition" (if

> you will) to your posting on AjAmila.

>

> The story of Ajamlila gos

> like this: He was born in a brahmana family and HE DID

> FOLLOW THE SAMSKARAS AND PRACTICES when he was young.

> Once he had gone to the forest to fetch figs for a

> yaga. There he saw a beautiful prostitute involved in

> Conjugal action with another person. Our AjAmila was

> so trapped in her beauty, he became addicted to her.

> He went behind her, forgetting all about his duties.

> She was a very lowly woman, and to support her, he

> started doing all sinful actions, plundering and

> pillaging included.

> He had many kids and

> somehow (I'll get back to it later) the last son was

> named "Narayana". Narayana, the toddler, became his

> most favourite son, his only companion. He would call

> "Narayana" for anything and everything. Come death

> time, the yamadhootas, with their gory, very scary

> countenances,appeared, seeing which our Ajamila got

> really scared. "Narayana, Narayana" yelled our

> Ajamila, calling his dearest son, with Perumal not

> being in his mind even a lilttle bit!! Then, there

> appeared the Vishnudhoothas, who asked the Yamadhootas

> to go away and not grab him, as he had chanted the

> holy name of the Lord even inadvertently. Such is the

> power of the Lord's holyname.

>

> There are some points to be noted:

>

> * Ajamila did not go to Vaikuntha right after that

> incident. After he was spared, he moved to some holy

> place (I guess Rishikesh) and did lots of devotional

> activities before going to Vaikuntha.

>

> * He did not name his last son. When a Rishi of the

> lord was visiting town, he happened to stay at

> Ajamila's place for the night, the infant was not even

> named, as Ajamila had not even bothered. So, the Rishi

> christened his last son, "Narayana", thereby becoming

> a "Guru" of sorts to Ajamila, as he started calling

> the word "Narayana" ever since then. Even in Ajamila's

> case, a "Guru" was involved (indirectly, but still)!!

>

> * Is it Nirhetuka?? Definitely, according to me.

> Ajamila had done nothing to surrender to the lord. The

> Lord used his calling his name (accidentally) as a

> reason to offer him salvation.

>

> I request you all to kindly pardon me for any

> inaccuracies or misunderstandings from my side.

>

>

> Dasan,

>

> Kidambi Soundararajan.

[Guest guest]

Sri:

 

Respected BhAgavathAs,

 

I have been reading each and every post on Nirhetuka Kripa, and I must admit

things are becoming much clearer right now. But one question still remains, it

is necessary to surrender to a Guru, to take us to Vaikuntha. But accepting a

Guru, is it also the handiwork of perumal?? Meaning, is it by Perumal's grace

that we even accept a Guru, or rather a Guru accepts us??

 

What about "AthAto Brahma JijnAsa", anybody who even cares to enquire (including

an advaitin), is he endowed with Perumal's Nirhetuka Kripa?? If that were the

case, anyone who enquires should go back to Vaikuntha, as His grace can't be

just "incomplete" (meaning, just enough to make him enquire, but not complete

enough to go back to Vaikuntha), correct??

 

Finally, a serious question, based on my above understanding, then, can only a

SriVaishnava go back to Vaikuntha??

 

I request all the adiyArs to dispel my doubts.

 

Dasan,

 

KidAmbi SoundararAjan.

 

 

 

 

 

The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Shri Vimal,

I might sound funny, but I am telling what I feel. My apologies in

case it offends any reader including your kind self, but my intent is

not to offend or hurt anyone's belief.

 

It is the prakruthi visesham to think that it is "we" or "I" who does

it. There is nothing wrong in it. Otherwise, due to the very belief

that we have gathered as we grew, we would think that we would not be

motivated to do anything, if we think we are not the doer etc. It is

like telling that the mangoes that we ate taste really good, to

someone, who has neither tasted the mangoes nor knows what is

sweetnees. If that person believes us, he would try it and if he

likes it, he would also realize the nature of mangoes and that of

sweetness. If the person does not believe us, no matter what you say

it would do no good. Similarly, whatever has been told by our

acharyas, has been told from the state of realization and not from

the state of normal beings. For they were gifted to taste the

mangoes. It is upto us to believe them and try the mangoes or be the

way we are. There is nothing wrong in it. I may say, Nirhetuka krupa

is what is the reality. But, only because, I realize and have felt it

and have somehow probably understood it, by, again HIS grace. But, I

can't make anyone "understand" it. We can't make anyone understand

sweetness of mangoes. Certain things have to be realized. For those

who believe(by His grace) in Him, and have realized Him(again by His

grace) it is all his play and the whole world is the Leela Vibhuthi.

For those who don't believe in Him, it is always their effort that

yields result. Either we do something expecting a result out of it

and attach ourselves to the result or do something expecting a

result, but not attach ourself to the result. No matter what we

think, we are all controlled by Him and we can / cannot see the

differences only because of Him. Belief and Analysis are usually(not

always) opponents. If we believe that He is the controller, then we

can't question Him, for we are toys, he made us and he does whatever

he wants, he makes us think/not think, of him or of this

materialistic world. Nammazhwar says not once or twice, but many

times. "yaane nee, en udaimayum neeye", "thannai thaane

thudhitthu", "kadal nyalam aavenum, seidhenum kondenum, keendenum,

yaane ennum". We can say brahmam is only the Gnyanam, or we can say

brahmam has gnyanam or we can say brahmam does not possess any

attributes. It doesn't really matter. If one says, he/she would do

all the sinful actions and still claim it is only the lord who is

doing it, I would challenge that person to do all the sinful actions

and see how far he/she can go, for I strongly believe(He is the

reason) that one could do good/bad only if HE "wills". As I told

before, I may sound wierd, but, this is what I feel and my apologies

for any offense perceived. If we say Nirhetuka krupai, then how did

we find it? Is it because he blessed us to find it i.e we are not

actually finding it but he himself is finding about himself using us?

Nirhetuka or Sahetuka krupai are all our own perceptions or concepts

and to me, everything boils down to one thing. You may think it

sounds like Maya Vadam, but whether we call it leela vibhuthi or maya

mayam idham, it is all his play. We have been given roles. We should

do that(Again doing this is not really in our hands, He only fools

around us;). He confuses us with everything, and make us feel

confused. At some point I even feel, "Just go with the flow and do

whatever as it comes", for He does everything and even to "go with

the flow", He has to will and not really me:))) Whether we try to

follow the sampradayam or follow the tradition or try to protect our

tradition, it is all in His hands. If we say, we could do anything

and everything, that we think as nasty or bad or evil, again, it is

His call and all due to Him. People do what they have been taught,

told, as they grow, as per the place they are brought up / live in

and develop affinity and desire accordingly. I would go with the flow

and stick to our sampradayam "blindly" believing in it, enjoying

everything, as he is the enjoyer inside us and not we really.

 

Note: I know that the entire thing that I have written above would

sound completely out of sense, funny, wierd, stupif whatever, for

some or may be many readers. This is exactly what I am trying to

establish. What we realize, cannot be explained to others. If we try

to, it results in something like above:) i.e He is the doer and He

makes us think that He is the doer and why He makes us think is

because it is His free will and so on. Analysis has no end. Believing

in something and sticking to it and going with that flow is

better. "Avar Avar Thamathamadhu Arivari Vagai Vagai" - Azhwar.

 

Kindly do not ask any questions on the above, as I don't have any

convincing answers to anything that anyone would comment/question on

the above. Please feel free to prove/comment/criticize that the above

is completely wrong as per whatever/whomever you may quote, but

kindly do not expect any explanation from me as I do not have any

that would convince anyone.

 

Adiyen,

Ramanuja Dasan.

PS: I have realized that Email/internet postings or writing itself

for that matter, is not a good medium/way to express/analyze these

things. I sincerely pray Him to make all Bhagavathotthamas to

contribute nice articles that gives us Bhagavad/Bhagavadha

anubhavams, rather than these kind of analysis(may be good for GRE;)