Re:Seshatwam and pArathanthiryam

[Guest guest]

SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

 

Dear Sri Soundara rajan,

You have raised some questions based on my mail on

seshatwam and parathanthiryam. Let me deal with them

one by one.

 

> There is also an analogy of father and son. I am not

able to understand hoe this helps to understand these

concepts.

 

--------------------

 

Any analogy depicting the relationship between seshin

and sesha who happen to be finite objects can not

exactly explain the relationship between God and the

Jiva. Such a relationship can be fully understood only

when it happens between the Infinite and the finite.

(Though the jiva is of Infinite nature, it is hereby

referred to as finite owing to prakriti sambhandam

and in being caught in the cycle of birth and death).

Vedartha sangraha says (verse: 250) “there is no

relationship of the principlal and the subsidiary

between anyone other than Brahman and oneself’.

Therefore every other instance, (as I showed between

father and son) can not be a perfect one. However I

took it up for the sake of bringing out some

understanding. The specific instance of an ideal

relationship between father and son is some thing that

can be conceived as the highest that can happen at the

mundane level because scriptures say that a man is

born as/in his son.

 

In a typical father –son relationship that existed

until a generation ago (even now in some families)

the son (though almost like a clone of his father in

many or all respects - taken as an assumption to

explain the relationship) plays a subsidiary role to

father, doing things for the father or for father’s

sake/pleasure (s) and taking father’s orders always

(p). I request the readers to read my previous mail in

the light of above assumption.

 

 

-----------------------------

>According to the commentaries by Periavachan Pillai ,

Sehatvam is what Lakshmana showed when >obeying his

brother Sri Rama. Paratantriyam is the quality that we

see in Bharata's attitude to Sri Rama. >Our achryas

have admired more the quality of paratantriyam.

Shatrugana's paratantryam to Bharatha is >even

considered superior.

 

 

--------

I assume that Sri Soundara rajan wonders why I left

out the instances of Lakshmana and Bharatha. First of

all, my previous mail was an attempt with my little

knowledge, to understand the concepts of S and P

better. I took up Sita Piratti’s case, for, to my

little mind it appears that every moment in Sita’s

life depicts some or the other of these two qualities.

The upayam as shown by Piratti in having shed her

“swa-shakthi” is easier to grasp and it is possible to

empathise with those moments. There is some corollary

to what Sita piratti says or does to what happens to

us, the average persons. Even when she forcefully and

tearfully pleads with Rama to take her along with him

during vana vasa, there is that subdued tone of

‘irainjuthal’, (hey Rama, idu nyaayamaa? Ennai nee

vidalaamaa?). I find closer understanding to Sita’s

position than to say, Lakshmana’s position which seems

to be beyond my scope. He behaves like an alter-self

of Rama when he advised him against pursuing the

golden deer. (whereas I, as ordinary jivan am more

inclined to speak irrationally even in my prayers to

Rama ).

 

Similarly Lakshmana behaves like the conscience of

Rama when he faced the dilemma of whether or not to

let the sage (Dhurvasa?) in, when Rama was closeted

in a meeting with the deva-thoodas who had come to

tell Rama that the time had come for Rama to leave the

earthly plane. (Source : Raghu vamsam). The

complicated nuances about Lakshmana and Bharatha have

been best explained by Acharyas. But Sita’s message

looks less complicated and easy to grasp as has been

found in Shreevachana bhooshanam.

-----

 

>Similar concepts are found when the jiva attains

paramapada for divine service after his moksha.

 

--------

These were quoted by me (from Vedartha sangraha) in

my reply to Sri Balaji’s queries and not in the mail

under discussion.

 

---

>The concepts of Samipya,Sarupya and Sayujya come to

the picture.

>Though the liberated souls attain the nearness of the

Lord and also the divyadeham like the Lord, they do

not have all the powers of the Lord. For ex., they do

not have the power to create anything.

--

 

Yes, so many other factors also invariably come into

discussion when one looks at it globally, i.e., before

Release (as explained in Mumukshppadi) and after

Release (as found in the last chapter of Brahma

sutras.) To explain this let me do the analysis

methodically.

(1) First of all, what is seshatwam and

parathanthiryam?

(2) What is explained of them in verses 92, 93 &94 in

Mumukshuppadi (MP)?

(3) What happens of them after these verses? (i.e.,

after bhoga dasai)?

(4) The 3rd question is taken up because verse 92

speaks about Eshwaran in the process of destroying

seshatwam. But MP advises us not to leave it. Why?

(5) Does this mean that seshatwam continues or does

not continue afterwards. If so or if not so, why and

how?

 

The first question has been extensively discussed in

this forum, though with the realisation that there are

no equivalent terms in English to explain them.

 

But the definition of sesha-seshi bhava has been given

by Bhagavad Ramanuja in Vedartha sangraha (VS).

Verse 182 says, “ The real and universal definition of

sesha and the seshin (the subsidiary and the

principal) must be enunciated as follows: That whose

nature lies solely in being valued through a desire to

contribute a special excellence to another entity is

the sesha. The other is seshin (i.e., that to which

the subsidiary contributes special excellence)”

Ramanuja in his Gita Bhashyam to verse 7-16 on the 4th

type of devote who happens to be a ‘man of knowledge’

describes him as one who has the knowledge of the

essential nature of the self in being a sesha. So the

knowledge about seshatwam and adherence to the same

are the essential qualities that one desirous of

knowing Him and attaining Him must possess. The

pramana for this statement is verse 243 of VS. “He is

the principal entity (Seshin). The individual is

subservient to Him. If a seeker meditates on the

Supreme with a full consciousness of this relationship

(between the Lord and himself) as the principal entity

and subsidiary entity and if the Supreme Brahman so

meditated upon becomes an object of supreme love to

the devotee, then He Himself effectuates god-

realisation.”

 

Shedding of ‘swa-prayojanam’ (SVB) is what seshatwam

is all about. When one sheds ‘aham’ and is steadfast

on ‘na mama’ (not mine) (Mp-86 – it is to be noted

that the importance of nama: shabhdam precedes the

crucial version in verses 94, 95 & 96), he starts

doing things for the Lord. (explained in simple terms,

this means that even eating food is done for the

prayojanam of God and not for oneself. As Bhagavan has

his body as His body, the sesha eats for the sake of

Bhagavan and not for satisfying his own appetite.)

This is about a ‘man of knowledge’ who understands

‘vasudeva: sarvam ithi’. What God does about this man

is explained in verse 92.

 

Verse 92 says that Bhagavan is in the process of

destroying seshatwam and the subsequent verses explain

why He seeks to destroy it. (already explained in this

forum). But the continuation into Narayana padaartham

thereafter, (95 onwards - which indicates the

beginning of the conclusion of MP about moksham which

is best understood/explained as ‘mutthanaar

mukundanaar pugundu nammuL mEvinaar’.) shows that this

state (92) marks the process of God ‘effectuating

God-realisation’. (VS)

 

The above explanation is given to drive home the point

that the process of destroyal of seshatwam by the Lord

and the establishment of the supremacy of

parathanthiryam (in verse 94) takes place before

Release or in bhoga dasai. Because it is He who

effectuates god-realisation and not he, the jiva. But

that the bhoga dasai continues or stays for ever is

established in Brahma sutras. (4-4-21 :- “ And because

of the indication of equality of enjoyments only (for

the released self with the Brahman)”).

That means Bhagavan is ever merciful to destroy the

disparity between Himself and the Jiva. But the Jiva

which is an embodiment of Knowledge (now than ever

before as it is a realised soul) still holds on to its

sesha bhava because it knows that He is still his

master and he, His servant. This is understood from

the last sutra which says that there is no return to

samsara for the Jiva. Ramanuja says (abridged), “ He

bestows the supreme and unsurpassed bliss (on the

released soul) which consists of experiencing Him in

His own nature; and He does not cause them to return

to samsara.” (questions 3,4 &5 are explained by this).

It is He who effectuated the God-realisation. Once

again it is He makes them enjoy Him and again it is He

who does not send them back to Samsara. The status of

Him as Principal entity thus continues/exists for

ever. Therefore the sesha bhava of the jiva though in

Infinite mode now, continues forever.

 

But the question now is since the sesha –seshi bhava

can exist between Infinite and the finite (as we said

earlier), what is the new equation now as the jiva has

been restored (poor vocabulary regretted) to its

Infinite mode.

The explanation given above based on MP and Brahma

sutras does indicate that the bhava continues though

He has pervaded the jiva (Mutthanaar…). This is

reinforced by another quality namely parathanthiryam

by which the released jiva continues to shed

‘swa-yathnam’ as it was doing in the embodied state

(SVB).

“KrupaiyaalE varum parathanthiryatthai-k-kaattil,

swAthanthiryatthaalE varum pASrathanthiryam prabhalam”

(SVB).

 

Sage Vishwamithra slipped on this account. But there

is no compromise on this aspect. (Brahma sutra

4-4-17). Bhagavan is keen on destroying seshattwam but

not pArathanthiryam. This shows pArathanthiryam is way

ahead of seshattwam. In seshatwam the jiva does action

for the sake of Him (expecting no benefits for

himself) whereas in pArathanthiryam He does the action

through him (with no self-efforts by the jiva).

 

This is best summarised in the Sri bhashyam to Brahma

sutras.(4-4-19)

“ ‘On Him the worlds do rest: and no one goes beyond

Him’ (Kau V –8). The purport of the passage (Chan

VII-xxv-2) that the released self has the freedom to

move about as he likes, is this: He experiences the

Brahman with the manifestations of His glory and

experiences also the enjoyments, lying within the

world of change which exist in the world of

Hiranyagarbha and similar officers which also fall

within Brahman’s glory: therefore cosmic activity does

not belong to the released self.”

 

“If this cosmic control is common to released selves

and to Brahman, then Brahman’s extraordinary character

of being the cosmic Lord can not hold good.”

(4-4-17).Therefore the released soul, though capable

of cosmic activity, desists from doing that because it

has not been ordained so. Every other activity or

enjoyment also takes place - only by His will and not

by its wish.

 

The final inference at mundane level is that since He

is the Principal entity, every action that the jiva

does is for His sake and pleasure (S) and every effort

it makes is by order of Him only (P)

 

Inviting comments and corrections,

AdiyaaL by name,

Jayasree.

 

 

ramanuja, rajan s

<rajan_ramaswamy> wrote:

> Dear all

>

> There has been some a good discussion on the

concepts of seshaatvam and pararatantriyam dear to the

heart of our acharyas. Some thoughts arose in my mind

after reading Jayshree Saranathan's letter on the

above topic.

>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Take Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.

http://mobile./maildemo

[Guest guest]

ramanuja, jasn sn <jayasartn> wrote:

> SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

>

> > But the definition of sesha-seshi bhava has been given

> by Bhagavad Ramanuja in Vedartha sangraha (VS).

> Verse 182 says, " The real and universal definition of

> sesha and the seshin (the subsidiary and the

> principal) must be enunciated as follows: That whose

> nature lies solely in being valued through a desire to

> contribute a special excellence to another entity is

> the sesha. The other is seshin (i.e., that to which

> the subsidiary contributes special excellence)"

 

Dear Smt Jayashree,

 

Will you please give the orginal vEdArtha sangraha verse?

 

If we go by the definition give by you, why does rAmAnuja use words

like "aSEhAvassthOchita aSEsha SEshataika rati", "aSEsha

chidachidvastu SEshi bhUta" in SaraNAgati gadyam?

 

> Ramanuja in his Gita Bhashyam to verse 7-16 on the 4th

> type of devote who happens to be a `man of knowledge'

> describes him as one who has the knowledge of the

> essential nature of the self in being a sesha.

 

That is OK.

 

dAsan

Vishnu

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya nama:

Srimad Vara Vara Munaye nama:

Dearest SowbhAgyavati Jayasree Saranathan,

Hope you're doing great with the blessings of the

Divine Couple. Your post was very....good. I neither have any

expertise nor resoursces to pass comments on your post. I can only

ask questions and doubts. Well, your posts and your name somehow

make me think of the Lord selva piLLai. My favourite laksmaNa/

rAmAnuja is the one with selvapiLLai on his lap. Only a devotee like

you can make a person like me to think of God. Can you

explain/elaborate more on S and P from AzhvArs works if you have

access? This is an important topic for those who wants to understand

our sampradAyam clearly.

 

AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam

dAsAnu dAsI

NC Nappinnai

[Guest guest]

SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

Dear sow Nappinai,

 

Thank for your words of praise. I know I derserve not even 0.01% of

it. A long way to go in understanding our texts.

 

I leave the explanation of S& P in NDP to more knowledgeable persons

of this group.I certainly lack the capability to do the analysis that

you have asked me to do.

 

Anyways let me do some peep into NDP with childish curiosity.

I view the Senniyongu 10 as something for the 'atman', Periazhwar

pillai tamizh for 'anubhavam' and the rest of NDP for 'arivu'. No

other pasuram of the NDP has the greater moving effect on me than the

senniyongu. I think these 10 contain implicit references to S and

Lord's act in Bhoga dasai in destroying seshatwam.

 

Requesting the bhagavathas to correct me,

adiyal

 

ramanuja, "vaidhehi_nc" <nappinnai_nc>

wrote:

>

>

> Sri:

> Srimathe Ramanujaya nama:

> Srimad Vara Vara Munaye nama:

> Dearest SowbhAgyavati Jayasree Saranathan,

> Hope you're doing great with the blessings of the

> Divine Couple. Your post was very....good. I neither have any

> expertise nor resoursces to pass comments on your post. I can only

> ask questions and doubts. Well, your posts and your name somehow

> make me think of the Lord selva piLLai. My favourite laksmaNa/

> rAmAnuja is the one with selvapiLLai on his lap. Only a devotee

like

> you can make a person like me to think of God. Can you

> explain/elaborate more on S and P from AzhvArs works if you have

> access? This is an important topic for those who wants to

understand

> our sampradAyam clearly.

>

> AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam

> dAsAnu dAsI

> NC Nappinnai

[Guest guest]

Dear Ms. nappinnai,

Not that I am an expert in these matters especially not after smt. Jayshri

sAranathan had left these things to specialists.

 

However, I cannot resist writing this pAsura anubavam.

which relates to shEshathvam.

 

The soul's attributes are Anandham-enjoyment, knowledge-gnAnam;

subservience-shEshathvam. Which of these is the predominant attribute of the

soul? Sri rAmAnuja wanted to determine this and sent sri kUrathAzhwAn to

thirukkOTTiyUr nambigaL, who after six months penance got the right answer from

him.

 

He mentioned the pAsuram "adiyEan vuLLAn, vudal vuLLAn...."8-8-2 of

thiru-voi-mozhi.

 

Sri kUrathAzhwAn was filled with glee and excitement and related this to swami

yethirAja.

AzhwAr while wanted to mention the presence of the Lord in the body and soul

mentioned vudal-vuLLAn for the presence of the God in our bodies. However, while

mentioing the presence of the Almighty in the soul -instead of telling

-en-vuLLAn or AthmA-vuLLan- AzhwAr substitues "adiyEan" for soul.

 

The very term "adiyEan" thus represents soul determining the fact the

subservience is the primary and basic attribute of AthmA.

The EDu is excellent in this regard:

"ennuLLAn enna vEaNdumidathil, "adiyEan" vuLLAn engaiyAlEa, gnanam-AnAndham anRu

vashtuvukku nirUpakam, shEshathvam engai. gnaAnAndhangaLilum andharangam

bhagavath shEshathvam engai"

 

That is, instead of mentioning ennuLLAn, by terming "adiyEan vuLLAn" it is

decided that shEshathvam is the innermost attribute of the soul than Anandham

and knowledge.

 

rAmAnuja dAsan

vanamamalai padmanabhan

 

 

-

vaidhehi_nc

ramanuja

Monday, October 04, 2004 9:42 PM

[ramanuja] Re:Seshatwam and pArathanthiryam

 

 

 

 

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya nama:

Srimad Vara Vara Munaye nama:

Dearest SowbhAgyavati Jayasree Saranathan,

Hope you're doing great with the blessings of the

Divine Couple. Your post was very....good. I neither have any

expertise nor resoursces to pass comments on your post. I can only

ask questions and doubts. Well, your posts and your name somehow

make me think of the Lord selva piLLai. My favourite laksmaNa/

rAmAnuja is the one with selvapiLLai on his lap. Only a devotee like

you can make a person like me to think of God. Can you

explain/elaborate more on S and P from AzhvArs works if you have

access? This is an important topic for those who wants to understand

our sampradAyam clearly.

 

AzhvAr emperumAnAr jIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam

dAsAnu dAsI

NC Nappinnai

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

 

Dear Sri Vishnu,

 

The definition was not given by me, but given by Bhagavad Ramanuja

himself in VS verse 182. This is as it appears in the translation of

VS by Sri S.S. Raghavachar, published in the year 2002 by Advaita

ashrama, Kolkatta, Please take note that whenever this writer gives

some information as a quote, the source also will be mentioned and no

tinkering will be done. The writer's own inference will be given as

writer's opinion and not as some body else's, leave alone a mammoth

figure of the sampradhayam. In fact this writer decided to chip in

only when she found the debate on this topic drifting away from core

versions of Ramanuja and Brahma sutras.

 

The sanskrit version of the quote given in my mail is produced below.

So also the translation of rest of the verse to understand what this

special excellence clause that Ramanuja talks about. Based on this

the writer sees no discrepancy in what is being said in this quote

and that which appears in Sharanagathi and Ranga gadhyam.

 

The quote in sanskrit:-

(Verse 182) "ayamEva hi sarvathra sEshasEshibhAva: -

paragathAthishyAdhyAnEcchyA upA-dEyathvamEva yasya swarUpam sa

sEsha:. Para: sEshI."

 

The continuation of the verse:-

" Out of the desire to produce the fruit of the sacrifice, both the

sacrifice and the volitional exertion for the sake of sacrifice, come

to be undertaken, The accessories of sacrifice, come to be attended

to, out of desire to accomplish the sacrifice. Similarly, in the case

of servants their nature lies only in being valued on account of the

desire to contribute something special to the master. Similarly all

entities, sentient and non-sentient, eternal and non-eternal, have as

their sole nature, the character of being valued through a desire to

make some special contribution to the Supreme. Hence all entities are

described as subsidiary to Him."

 

(The explanation relevant to your query ends here. Anyway, the

continuation of the verse is given here to understand the

metamorphosis in thought from giving some `special contribution' to

Him into accomplishing that which is highly desirable.)

 

The quote continues:- "He is the principal entity, the Lord of all,

the sEshin. The srutis say, "He is the controller of all, the Lord of

all (BR VI-iv-22)", " The master of the universe etc (Maha)".

Therefore the definition "That which is attainable through effort and

is the prinicipal is the meaning of `what is to be accomplished'" is

one that can charm only credulous followers." (end of the verse)

 

Dear readers, it is interesting to note that Ramanuja arrives at this

definition after due analysis of other ways of explaining sesha and

seshin which are found in the previous verse. The entire analysis

takes place in the context of explaining the meaning, purpose and

fruits of sacrifices. In the previous verse, he wonders whether it is

right to define the principal as "being aimed at by the act" (of

sacrifice). In that case the definition is needed to be given to two

expressions "being that to which others are subsidiary" and "that

which is subsidiary to another".

 

This will give a correlative definition of the two by which the

principal will come to be regarded as "that which is to be

done". "But it is precisely this factor described as `what is to be

done' whose definition is sought", says Ramanuja.

 

So he goes on to look at other ways of defining. He wonders whether

the subsidiary can be defined as "That which is invariably subsumed

under an effort aiming at a purpose beyond itself ". But here also

comes the question of what is that "aiming at a purpose beyond

itself". Since the very purpose of the entire discussion is to find

out precisely what this `aiming at' principal entity is (Ramanuja

says like this), he attempts to find better definition.

 

He now looks at what others say like "To be aimed at as a purpose is

to be desired and to be possible". Looking at this definition,

Ramanuja wonders what is `being desired?' If others (opponents) say

it `is to be the purpose of effort', Ramanuja thinks that the

purpose of effort is already is established (in previous verses). He

says "the purpose of effort is the purpose for realising which an

agent puts forth effort."

 

The nature of the purpose has already been determined as being the

object of desire. Therefore the effort of the agent comes into

picture here. It is in this context of what kind of effort the

subsidiary is putting forth, that Ramanuja arrives at the definition

based on what the subsidiary does to the Principal, which he explains

in the next verse. The definition therefore is from the point of view

of the subsidiary (the kind of effort that it has to put through –

by contributing special excellence to the principal, just as how a

servant works up to be viewed as someone capable of contributing

special service that would be valued by the master) and the principal

is merely said as `para: sEshI".

 

Taking cue from this, one is able to grasp the perspective of what

Gitacharyan means when He says that the Gyani is too close to Him and

it is difficult to find such a gyani. It is an uphill task to become

one as the gyani. The difficulty in attaining that state is due to

the kind of efforts that have to be put into.

 

And He is one who needs to be understood / attained by such valuable

efforts.The `avashyapeshitam' qualities set for the Srivaishnavite by

Mumukshuppadi also come into my mind as they add value to the efforts

of the seeker. Such a person is indeed the one who is blessed to

get `anthamil pErinbam' whom the vaikunthathu amarar would

receive "vaikunthan thamaremar; emadu idam puguga."

 

Regards,

AdiyaL.

 

 

ramanuja, "Vishnu" <vsmvishnu> wrote

 

Dear Smt Jayashree,

 

Will you please give the orginal vEdArtha sangraha verse?

 

If we go by the definition give by you, why does rAmAnuja use words

like "aSEhAvassthOchita aSEsha SEshataika rati", "aSEsha

chidachidvastu SEshi bhUta" in SaraNAgati gadyam?

 

> Ramanuja in his Gita Bhashyam to verse 7-16 on the 4th

> type of devote who happens to be a `man of knowledge'

> describes him as one who has the knowledge of the

> essential nature of the self in being a sesha.

 

That is OK.

 

dAsan

Vishnu

[Guest guest]

ramanuja, "jayasartn" <jayasartn> wrote:

>

>

> SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

>

>

>

> >

> The continuation of the verse:-

> " Out of the desire to produce the fruit of the sacrifice, both the

> sacrifice and the volitional exertion for the sake of sacrifice,

come

> to be undertaken, The accessories of sacrifice, come to be attended

> to, out of desire to accomplish the sacrifice. Similarly, in the

case

> of servants their nature lies only in being valued on account of

the

> desire to contribute something special to the master. Similarly all

> entities, sentient and non-sentient, eternal and non-eternal, have

as

> their sole nature, the character of being valued through a desire

to

> make some special contribution to the Supreme. Hence all entities

are

> described as subsidiary to Him."

 

Dear Smt Jayashree,

 

How do achit vastus have a desire to make some special contribution?

 

Vishnu