Free will

May 26, 2003

SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA

APPAN THIRUVADIGALE SARANAM

Dear Bhagavatas. Accept my pranam.

Doubts are expressed about Nirhethuka Krubai, Moksham and action.

Let us analyse these points.

Action: Action can be done instinctively with or without knowledge or thought.

The result may be anything

A humorous illustration: One of my friend was wandering with men in a road ,

rather area. away from his habitat. On questioning his motive, the reply was :

Swamin, yesterday I was walking in this road .Suddenly a rickshaw passed by me

crushing the tail of a dog lying nearby, which immediately bit me as I was the

nearest target. The doctor who treated me wants the dog to be produced to verify

whether it was a mad one or not. See my fate! For no fault of mine I am running

after a stray dog besides being bitten by it.

The dog acted on its free will with out any thought. A reflex action.

Most of us act or react in similar situations.similarly

2. Action based on insufficient knowledge. The result will not be as desired.

3. Action based on complete knowledge and sufficient efforts under ideal

conditions

We can expect the results

These conditions apply to material goods and may apply to some extent to

spiritual efforts also. The parameters for MOKSHA are many. Hence, it cannot be

definitely said that results can be achieved by our actions.

MOKSHA; Release from Samsara once for all. The enlightened soul will not be

affected the results of his actions, be it a pleasure or pain. He will consider

both on a par and will be interested in getting away from samsara. He has no

more desire to be full filled or no more work to be carried out here. He may not

get PARAPAPADAM or Emperuman Sriman Narayanan, if he had not concentrated his

thoughts and actions on HIM. Perhaps he may get KAIVALYA MOKSHAM.

Periyazhvar,Nammazhvar , other alwaras and our Poorvacharays have explained this

point very well.

So, should we not do something to reach Sriman Narayanan? YES.

1. We are believers in a supreme GOD who only can grant Moksha.

2. Nonbelievers are free to exercise their will as they like and enjoy or

endure the results.

3. In the first place we find apart from self there are other human beings,

living things, matter and Supreme God.

4. We find that we or other human beings cannot create anything as original

which has not existed before. We cannot create ourselves also.

5. We utilize the surrounding things and human beings as available to us

6. Such utilizations can be called as discovery or invention etc.,

7. But, how did the things used by us came into existence in the world.?

8. Definitely not by our free will or effort.

9. So, the Supreme God is the creator of entire things for his pleasure.

10. Our elders say so and we can accept it.

11. Because, the Supreme God is all-powerful, etc., and no one is equal to

him or greater than him.

12. So when everything is the creation of the supreme god. it is his property

only and we are allowed to have them for some specific purpose. We are

caretakers or DHARMAKARTAS. Can a cashier in a bank think all the money handled

by him while doing his duty as his own?

13. So, the very thought I, mine is shaky.

14. While doing your duty at times, you will have to exercise some option.

You opt for based on the knowledge you have at that time. If you use the word

“WILL’ it is a misnomer. There is nothing free. You have done an act as

considered by you as correct.

15. You cannot usurp the property of Emperuman as yours and think you have

done something.

16. Our actions are influenced by the reactions of our previous acts and our

gunas and our knowledge

17. We do not know our previous births . We will not know our future births.

When such is our condition : We cannot create ourselves or any other thing and

do not know our future. How is it possible to call our thoughts as free will and

construe the bodies as ours and the things in our control to be of ours ? A

MISCONCEPTION

WE ARE IN SAMSARA TO GAIN SOME EXPERIENCE because of our previous actions.

Nothing belongs to us. Our actions are influenced by the bodies we have got this

time {ie., the gunas, indriyas,and our knowledge etc.,}

This type of birth and death will go on forever and it is for us decide whether

we want this world or to get away from it once for all. This option also occurs

to us after a long journey in samsara and at some point we have had the

opportunity of getting God’s grace

Knowingly or unknowingly. That is grace and you have not resented to it. So,

further progress happens.

Let us see more in the next mail Adiyen Ramanuja dasan, T.Parthasarathy.

_

Impress your clients! Send mail from me @ mycompany.com .

Just Rs.1499/year.

Click http://www.rediffmailpro.com to know more.

May 26, 2003

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

Dear Shri Bhagavadhottamas,

>God will shower His grace without any act of surrender. We are

>already His. That is what Sri Alawandar conveys in stotra ratna

>("mama nAtha yadasti yOsmyaham...).

>If we have to do soemthing, how can His grace be nirhEtukam?

>Prapatti as an act is not there in all thenkalai paramparAs. What I

>mean is, some AchAryas do not include this as a ritual in their

>samASrayaNam. So whoever is belonging to these paramparAs does not

>do something that is considered by others as prapatti.

In the above,

>God will shower His grace without any act of surrender.

I strongly disagree with the above statement due to the absence of

the word "too" at the end. God will shower His grace, without any act

of surrender too. This does not mean that one should take for granted

God will anyway shower His grace, and hence can do whatever he/she

wants. This is not as per our Sampradayam.

>Prapatti as an act is not there in all thenkalai paramparAs.

Prapatti as a "physical" act is not there in all Thenkalai

paramparAs. For any act, the cause is the intent. Whether followed by

act or not, the intent is pretty much the actual karma and not the

physial act. As elders say, for Brahmanas, even a thought of killing

a cow or anything else becomes a papam. Why would they say so? Hence,

if the intent is what is the actual karma(immaterial of whether an

act follows it or not), then realizing prapatti or understanding it

or following it whatever, whether for moksham(means) or as His

kainkaryam, all these things become "our" acts.

Iranyan, Sisupalan, Ravanan, pretty much all those asuras who died

out of lord's hands(or weapon) got the moksham. This is what is

Nirhetuka krupai of the lord. He uses His free will. He may choose

anyone at random and give him/her moksham. At the same time, if one

does bhakthi, karma, raja, sankhya yogas etc, then ALSO He would give

moksham(He has promised Himself in Gita). If one "does" prapatti,

then also He would give moksham. If this weren't true, out of 18

chapters, whatever the lord had promised saying one would attain

moksha if he/she does those yogas, would be breached.

Moreover, there are various types of mokshams(Salokyam, Sarupyam,

Sameepyam, Sayujyam, Kaivalyam etc). The moksham attained by Sahetukam

(we doing something for attaining moksham) is not valued as that of

the one attained by Prapatti, is what is my understanding of the

Thennacharya Sampradayam. Note: Sahetukam does not lead to Kaivalyam.

Kaivalyam is a moksham where the atma enjoys itself. Sahetukam "may"

lead to this i.e this Kaivalyam is a trap and hence our Acharyas have

warned us about this. This by no means stops one from following the

Karma, Raja, Bhakthi yogas.

In other yoga margams, one is instructed to do certain things i.e one

must follow certain disciplines in order to attain the results. One

could do prapatti and still live the way one wants to live.

Prapatti is an advanced stage of other yogas. In Prapatti, one

realizes that he/she belongs to Him and hence He is the upayam and

upeyam. The moment we say "He" is the means, then, this too becomes

an effort by us to use Him as a means to attain Him. Whether we go by

markata or marjara nyaya, the point is one puts effort. If a baby

doesn't cry, a mother feeds the baby automatically is what we say. If

the baby is bit by a snake and still doesn't cry, the mother will not

know about this, only to see her baby die. So, we can use these

examples to support individuals views. If we are going to sit like a

baby not doing "anything" assuming he would shower his Nirhetuka

grace, what happens to the world? Is this what our Acharyas told us?

Ok. Assume, you do kainkaryam, instead of sitting idle. Why would you

do kainkaryam? Why not something else? Even then the lord will shower

His grace right? So, why was the concept of Kainkaryam even

introduced/insisted by our Acharyas? Why they introduced the concept

of "change in mindset" which they call as Prapatti? Why did our

Acharyas bring in the tradition of so many things in the name of

kainkaryam, while we could do anything and everything(including what

we call the sinful actions) having realized Prapatti? The only answer

is, when one realizes Prapatti, he/she will automatically tend to

think whatever he/she does as a kainkaryam. So, any act done by a

Prapannan becomes a kainkaryam(and by default, the Prapannan would

not get into sinful actions). But, for this, one needs to know, how

it is, to realize Prapatti and atma swaroopam. No one can make other,

realize Prapatti, by making them read his/her writings because, one

could realize Prapatti only by the lord's grace(or Acharya's grace

i.e the lord's grace through a person).

What Smt Sumithra said was correct from a different point of view. We

could always bring in statements in support of / against, other's

understandings/views. But we need to understand that these mails or

articles can, in no way enlighten people. These articles can add

value. We could discuss so many other things that add value instead

of discussing these rahasyams which lead to combative articles due to

lack of expressiveness, understanding, interpretations etc. I

apologize to everyone to have written many posts on this subject and

has caused a chaos not realizing that this subject is not for these

kind of internet discussions. This is my last post on this subject

and hence request others not to expect any further reply from me on

this, while they could continue to comment/criticize this post at

their will.

My humble apologies in case of any offense perceived.

Adiyen,

Ramanuja Dasan.

May 27, 2003

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya nama:

Srimad Vara Vara Munaye nama:

> In the above,God will shower His grace without any act of surrender.

> I strongly disagree with the above statement due to the absence of

> the word "too" at the end. God will shower His grace, without any

> act of surrender too. This does not mean that one should take for

> granted God will anyway shower His grace, and hence can do whatever

> he/she wants. This is not as per our Sampradayam.

Whether or not "too" appears at the end "does not" matter. Moreover,

Vishnu didn't write anywhere that the Lord "will not" shower His

grace on those who surrender!!! ALL what matters is "His fee will and

nirhEthu krpa". Long time back Tirumalai Vinjamoor Venkatesh wrote a

nice article expressing the views of TennAcArya sampradAyam. The

relation between ParamAtma & jIvAtmA is similar to the relation

between jIvAtmA & acit.

One can not do whatever one wants when one realizes "the true nature"

of God's grace. I can quote "my own" personal life as an example! I'm

born in a TK family and my parents have taught us the gist(beware not

the details!) of TK sampradAyam and yet I used to indulge in "some"

negative acts which I don't do anymore. Why? It's because of

the "proper knowledge" of the nirhEthuka krpa and the "essential

nature of the self". Why did not the Lord give me this knowledge, say

a decade ago? Everyday I ask the Lord "why didn't You do this yrs

back? and things would have been different! Why,why,why?" And then I

laugh loudly at myself looking at the photo of "uRanguvAn pOl yOgam

seidhu" SriRanganATha:-)

> Whether we go by markata or marjara nyaya, the point is one puts

> effort. If a baby doesn't cry, a mother feeds the baby

> automatically is what we say. If the baby is bit by a snake and

> still doesn't cry, the mother will not know about this, only to see

> her baby die. So, we can use these examples to support individuals

> views. If we are going to sit like a baby not doing "anything"

> assuming he would shower his Nirhetuka grace, what happens to the

> world? Is this what our Acharyas told us?

In the "mArjara" case,the effort on the part of the kitten is "so

minuscule" that it "DOES NOT" deserve "ANY" credit/mention! First of

all,the mother is not going to leave the baby in the backyard or

frontyard for the baby to get bitten by a deadly spitting cobra!

If she does, she is either a fool or knowledgeable,"knowingly well"

what might happen to her baby.

It is "HIGHLY IMPOSSIBLE" for anyone to sit idle and not

do "ANYTHING". You can refer to BG. I don't remember the sloka but

I'm 200% sure that it is said in there. Atleast the jIvAtmA will go

to the restroom,or atleast drink a glass of water. This is the nature

of prakrthi. JIvAtmA/AcAryA(Cf AcArya lakshaNam in SVB) "need not"

worry about the world for the world is not "it's creation"! The

person/Lord who created/invented needs to worry and it is solely His

business/concern to rectify what He created/invented acit/jIvAtmA.

Could EmperumAnAr change the entire lIla vibhUthi? NO. Why?

Because,by emperumAnAr's own words(to UyyakkoNdAr),the jIvAtmA

"lacks" the "grace of the Lord" and that is it's fate and that's why

this lIla vibhUthi is still on-going and we are writing posts and

exchanging/sharing views in Ramanuja e-list!

> So, why was the concept of Kainkaryam even introduced/insisted by

> our Acharyas? Why they introduced the concept of "change in

> mindset" which they call as Prapatti? Why did our

> Acharyas bring in the tradition of so many things in the name of

> kainkaryam, while we could do anything and everything(including

> what we call the sinful actions) having realized Prapatti?

The AcAryAs "did not introduce" any new "concept of kaimkaryam". It

is the "innate" or "inherent" trait of the jIvAtmAs! But due to

prakrthi maNdalam,that is relegated to the back door and ego and

other traits have taken predominance thereby "conceiling" the

essential nature of the jIvAtmA. If we say that our AcAryAs

"introduced" some new concept "in the middle" then we can't

claim/chant "lakshmI nATha samArambAm...." in the Guru Parampara

lineage. Our AcAryAs brought out the tradition/concepts,that was

existing time immemorial,to the lime light. That is all. They did not

introduce any new concepts.

> could always bring in statements in support of / against, other's

> understandings/views. But we need to understand that these mails or

> articles can, in no way enlighten people. These articles can add

> value. We could discuss so many other things that add value instead

> of discussing these rahasyams which lead to combative articles due

> to lack of expressiveness, understanding, interpretations etc.

So what kind of "philosophical" or "esoteric stuff" or "other things"

one can discuss in R's e-list? If we say R sampradAyam,everything

(mOksham,hence tirumanthram,prapatti then automaticallly other three

yogas,so on and so forth!) is "INTER-RELATED". If the

jIvAtmA has ego,obviously everything will appear as offensive.

Mind,with Ego in full swing,has the capacity to take anything as

offensive. If there is a value in the post,the reader should take it

otherwise leave/reject it. Or (i)R's list can be shut down! (ii)make

it only TK forum (iii) even among TKs,allow only those "who get recos

from jIyars/AcAryAs" as members. But if it becomes "limited or

restricted" it loses the status to retain the title "Ramanuja/

emperumAnAr dharshanam"! Kindly pardon me and my expressive mind.

AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam

NC Nappinnai

May 27, 2003

Sri:

Srimate Ramanujaya Nama:

Respected Adiyaars,

As the person who started this topic of

discussion, I would like to add a few points.

* According to Smt. Sumithra, it is the will of the person who gives food or

alms to the beggar. Well, but still the beggar still has to beg for food,

right?? Only since the beggar made calls for alms, did the owner decides or

does't not decide to give alms. So, the act of the beggar becomes the main cause

of food. Considering this example alone, Moksha then becomes Sahetukam (Beggar

first makes call for alms, which means Jeevatma surrenders first)

* Lets talk about free will for a second. I had submited this point in a private

mail to one of the active members of this forum. Let me repost the same point

here:

If person A is God and person B is the jeeva. A controls B totally. B is totally

dependent on A. B cannot do any activites on his own (meaning no free will).

This is the scenario. Suppose if B performs something sinful, it is understand

that actually it is person A who is actually the doer. Given this, how can

person A tell person B, "hey, you have done this and not done that, so you go to

hell for that, or undergo karmic reactions for this". Sounds totally illogical,

right?? In other words, if A is the ultimate doer of things, how can he ask B to

do things like "Ask questions" or "Don't do this" or even "Surrender"?? I mean,

isn't it totally illogical if person A even asks B to do anything at all, given

that A is actually the doer??

* With respect to Nirhetukam which means, "Causeless Mercy". Well, the same

Bhagavad Gita, which speaks about Karma Yoga, Jnana Yoga, Bhakti Yoga and

finally Prapatti, somehow fails to talk about the "Causeless Mercy" of the lord.

Perumal only says, "surrender, do this, do that". Not in a single verse has he

said, "Just surrender unto me mentally and remain a vegetable physically". No.

Can I surrender to an Acarya, have Samashrayanam done and mentally pray to

Perumal, "I am yours. I have surrendered unto You. Whatver I do, You are the

Karta", and then end up watching a nice episode of Seinfeld?? Meaning, does it

reflect the traits of a prapanna??

* Based on what has appealed to my logic (which is totally inferior and flawed),

I am of the opinion that we do have a bare minimum of free will. Based on that

free will, we exercise options, we choose. We choose to surrender or not

surrender. If we don't surrender, then again we get lost in this cycle of

samsara.

If we do surrender, then Perumal grants us Moksha. Like Sri Lakshmi Narayanan

pointed out, perumal grants moksha to people are perceived to be undeserving

too, like Sisupala, etc. That is his causeless mercy, or Nirhetuka Kripai. Or in

other words, Nirhetuka Kripai cannot be perceived to be the ONLY means of

Moksham.

* The third idea that is suggested is this: We surrender, but still perumal

chooses to grant moksha or not, based on his will. I think it is a very

dangerous, demotivating point. Historically, there has never been a case in

which Perumal had failed to offer Moksha to somebody who had surrendered. He

might have tested them, like Sri Thondaradippodi AzhwAr, but had never failed to

offer to them Moksha.

* The same Carama Shloka ends with the phrase, "Ma Sucah", means "do not fear".

How many times has Perumal used words like "Asamsayah" which means, "do not

doubt", or even words like "Satyam", which means "Promise"!! The same perumal

who has used very powerful, assuring words like the above, cannot fail to offer

Moksha to a fully surrendered person.

* So, the crux of the matter is this: Instead of just relying on the "Nirhetuka

Kripa" of perumal, it is a good idea for us to follow His instructions. Accept

an AcAryan. Surrender unto Him. And follow the spiritual practices as laid down

by him. Why?? Because Perumal says so.

* Well, stickers to the idea of "ONLY-NIRHETUKA KRIPA" can raise this wonderful

point: They can say that it is the same Perumal who makes a person surrender

unto him. Meaning, if one is even remotely interested in Bhagavath Vishayam, it

is just because of the mercy of Perumal alone, or in other words, Perumal

chooses his surrenderers. We don't have any free-will, and anybody who even

"chooses" to surrender does so because of Perumal's Nirhetuka Kripa. But then

the counter-point is that, then Bhagavad Gita is just a stage-show for Perumal.

Since, he chooses his prapannas, he is just joking when he says things like

"Surrender unto me.." etc.

I really hope and pray that my views are not perceived to be offensive to

anyone. Illogical, unintelligent and immature, ofcourse!!

AzhwAr emperumANAr Jeeyar thiruvadigaLE saranam.

Dasan,

Kidambi Soundararajan.

The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

May 28, 2003

Adiyen too feels that such rahasyams cannot be clarified through just emails.

Hence adiyen doesnt want to continue any further. The best way is to clarify

from our acharyas or other scholars through kalashepams/upanyasams.

Alwar emperumAnAr Jeeyer thiruvadigale sharanam

Adiyen rAmAnuja dAsee

Sumithra Varadarajan

Lakshmi Narasimhan <nrusimhan wrote: