Regarding Prapatti

[Guest guest]

sri:

Srimate Srilakshminrisimha Parabrahmane Nama:

Srimate Sri Lakshminrisimha Divyapadukasevaka

Srivan Satakopa Sri NarayanaYatindra Mahadesikaya nama:

 

namo narayana!

 

THIS POST IS MEANT ONLY FOR SRI MALOLAN NET!

PLEASE DO NOT FORWARD TO ANYONE WITHOUT MY

WRITTEN CONSENT!!

 

Prapatti in general is an act of total and

unconditional surrender to the lotus feet of

Lord Sriman Narayana for the fruit of nithya

kainkaryam for the Dhivya Dampati in Sri

Vaikuntam, aka moksham. A person will get

motivated to perform Prapatti when two

conditions are true, (i) Akincanyam, and (ii)

ananya gatitvam. These two relate to one's

desire for mOksham, but inability to secure it

through one's own effort. Akinchanyam refers

to one's inability to perform Bhakti Yogam as

mOkshOpAyam. " ananya gatitvam " refers to the

condition that we have no other upAyam for

mOksham other than prapatti. " ananyagatitvam

may also be interpreted as total faith in no

one other than Lord Sriman Narayana. However,

Srimad Azhagiya Singar points out in the

current issue of Sri Nrisimha Priya, the

primary meaning for " ananya gatitvam " is the

former meaning, i.e. other than prapatti there

is no other mOkshOpAyam.

 

The actual prapatti is characterized by five

angAs, namely AnukUlya sankalpam, prAtikUlya

varjanam, gOpthruthvavaraNam, kArpaNyam, and

mahAvisvAsam. Here, the mahAvisvAsam refers to

unshakable faith that Lord Sriman Narayana will

accept this simple act of prapatti and put

Himself in place of Bhakti Yogam for mOksham.

 

This act of prapatti may be performed through

three different means, swanishtai, ukti nishtai,

and AcArya nishtai, based on one's level of

knowledge, understanding, and the tradition.

 

Prapatti can be done for immediate effect, i.e.

to ascend to mOksham immediately after the

performance of prapatti. This is called Artha

prapatti. Or, more commonly, thrupta prapatti

is performed and this will result in mOksham at

the end of present life. There is enormous

justification for Thrupta prapatti. Refer to

Srimad Azhagiya Singar's commentary on Srimad

Rahasya Traiya Saram (RTS) appearing in Sri

Nrisimha priya.

 

All of us misunderstand some aspects of

Prapatti at one time or another. These

misunderstandings can be eliminated only

through prolonged study under a sadacharyan.

Far be it for me to claim deep knowledge.

With this disclaimer adiyEn would like to

present the following about Sri PiLLai

Lokacaryar's views from Sri Vacana BhUshaNam.

 

First, the act of prapatti only remedies the

Bhagavan's anger towards us and opens the gate

for the ocean of Lord Sriman Narayana's grace

to flow. Prapatti must be recognized only as

sAdyOpAyam, i.e. a means to appeal to

siddOpAyam which is the actual means for

mOksham. In other words, prapatti as

sAdyOpAyam is NOT a direct means for mOksham.

It only acts as a sort of catalyst.

SAdyOpAyam, i.e. prapatti, invokes the ever

present siddOpAyam, i.e. Sriman Narayana's

grace. Then, the compassion of Lord Sriman

Narayana (siddopAyam) accepts the feeble

prapatti we do and He Himself takes the place

of Bhakti Yogam. Thus Sriman Narayana is real

upAyam for mOksham. In fact the primary

beneficiary of our prapatti is also Sarveswaran

only.

 

Now, adiyEn would like to address the view of

Swami Sri piLLai LokAcAryar (PL) on the subject

of Prapatti. Is there a difference of view

between prapatti as taught to us by our Acharya

paramparai and that of Sri PL? After all, Sri

PL states in Sri Vacana bUshaNam #54,

 

" idhu thannai pArtthAl, pitAvukkup,

putran ezhutthu vAngumAppOlE iruppathonRu "

 

" prapatti for mOksham is like a son asking

his father to give it in writing that he,

the father, will protect him, the son. "

 

The implication is, protecting the son is not

just the prime duty of the father, but it is

the very essence of fatherhood. Therefore, it

is preposterous for the son to even think

of asking his father to commit to protecting

him in writing. Such an act betrays a deep

lack of faith in our Lord.

 

Sri PL also states in #142,

 

" ivan avanaip peRa ninaikkumpOdhu indha

prapattiyum upAyamanRu "

 

" when the jIvan wishes to attain Iswaran,

this prapatti is also not an upAyam "

 

There are many other statements in Sri vacana

bhushanam that seem to put down prapatti as a

means for mOksham. Some of these statements

are given below.

 

#124: " thAn daridhranAgaiyAlE thanakku

kodukkalAvadhu onRumillai "

 

" since he has no possession, there is

nothing for him to give "

 

#146: " Sarva aparAdhangaLukkum

prAyachchittamAna prapatti, thAnum aprAdha

kOdiyilElAy kshAmaNam paNNa vENdumpadi

nillA ninRadhiRE "

 

" Even though prapatti is a remedy for all

kinds of offenses, it also is a member of

offensive acts requiring supplication for

forgiveness for having adopted it. "

 

#147: " nedu nAL anya paraiyayp pOndha

baryayai lajjA bayangal inRikkE, barthru

sahAsaththilE ninRu, " ennai angIkarikka

vENum " enRu abEkshikkumA pole iruppathu

onRiRE ivan paNNum prapatti "

 

" The prapatti he does is like a long-time

unfaithful wife comes in front of her

husband, without any shame or fear, and

asks to be accepted by him. "

 

However, Sri PL also states in #134,

" prapatti upAyatthukku ikkuRRangaL

onRumillai "

 

" prapatti is free of any of these defects "

 

Here, Sri PL is referring to faults associated

with upAsaNa, i.e. prapatti is free of defects

in upAsanA. Regardless, #134 does praise

prapatti.

 

What is it then? Is prapatti a means without

blemish? Or is it a conceited act to be

avoided? While Sri PL repeatedly admonishes

that prapatti must not be considered as upAyam

for mOksham, he also declares that prapatti,

unlike upAsanA, is free of any defects. How do

we reconcile these two contradictory views from

the same author?

 

The key for resolving this apparent contradiction

can be found in Srimad Rahasya Thraiya Saram (RTS)

chapter #23, SiddopAya sodhanA adhikAram.

 

" … AgaiyAl, prapattiyum kUda upAyamanRu

enRu silar athivAtham paNNukiradhuvum

siddOpAyattinudaiya prAdhAnyamadiyAga

iththanai… "

 

" some exaggerate that even prapatti is not

a means (upAyam). The basis for this

exaggeration is to emphasize the

prominence of siddOpAyam "

 

The apparent contradiction in Sri PL's

statements vanishes if we revisit them with

this clarification from Swami Sri Desikan.

 

First, the statement about son trying to get

his father's commitment to protect in writing.

 

" idhu thannai pArtthAl, pitAvukkup, putran

ezhutthu vAngumAppOlE iruppathonRu " #54

 

The phrase " idhu thannai pArkkil " means if

you consider the prapatti we perform as an

independent means for mOksham, then, and only

then, it would be like the son asking for a

written commitment from his father for

protection. This is not inconsistent with the

teachings of our Sampradayam. We have to keep

in mind the preeminence of Sriman Narayana's

compassion in mind relative to our prapatti

which only serves the purpose of removing the

Lord's anger towards us for the sins we have

been committing from beginingless time. We

have to have Mahaviswasam that our puny

prapatti will indeed melt His anger away and

His natural vAtsalyam and kAruNyam will then

come to the fore and Sriman Narayana Himself

will stand in place of Bhakti Yogam on our

behalf and grant us mOksham. Thus, we must

never think that the prapatti we perform is the

reason we get mOksham. It is Sriman Narayana

who is the real upAyam. This is what is

emphasized by Sri PL. Sri PL accepts the need

for prapatti just as much as our sampradayam.

All other statements that seem to put down

prapatti can be resolved in a similar fashion.

The intent of Sri PL is to guard us from the

real danger of complacently falling into the

thought that our prapatti is the cause for

mOksham.

 

Now let us look at one more statement of Sri

PL, #135:

 

" Athma yAdAthma jnyAna kAryamAgaiyAlE

svarUpaththukku ucithamumAy, " siRRa vENdA "

enkiRa padiyE nivrutthi Sadyam AgaiyAlE

sukaramumAy irukkum "

 

" The knowledge resulting from realizing the

true nature of jivAtmA, will lead one to

the appropriate state of inaction (for

mOksham) that is easy as well. "

 

If we look at this statement as the post-

prapatti state, then inaction for moksham at

that state is consistent with the teachings of

our Acharya pramparai. However, if the

realization of the true nature itself is

considered as the act of prapatti, i.e. prapatti

is only a mental realization, not an act at

all, not even a mental act but only a state of

inaction not opposing the Lord's grace for

moksham, then there is a difference.

 

In Chapter 8 of Srimad RTS, Swami Sri Desikan

explains the different categories of mumukshus

(ones who crave for mOksham), such as sva

nishtan, ukti nishtan, and Acharya nishtan. In

Chapter 12 of Srimad RTS Swami Sri Desikan

describes the procedure for performing prapatti

referring to Swami's prAchAryan Sri Nadadur

AmmaL. In combination, these two chapters

propose action and prescribe a procedure for

it. Those who doubt whether Swami Sri Desikan

actually performed Bhara Nyasam as a separate

and overt act for mOksham need to study these

two Chapters in particular, and all the other

chapters as well for good measure.

 

From Srimad RTS, Chapter #8:

 

" EdhEnum oru prakAramAgavum, ArEnum oruvar

anushtikkavumAm prapattikkalladhu

SarvESvaran parama purushArtham kodukka

irangAn enRadhAyiRRu "

 

" without someone performing the act of

prapatti, by adopting one of the

(appropriate) methods, Sarveswaran will

not condescend to grant parama

purushArtham. "

 

In summary, the difference of view on the issue

of prapatti is very subtle. The writings of

Sri PL in fact allow us not to have any

difference at all. However, in practice there

is a difference.

 

-- adiyEn ramanuja dasan

srimad azhagiya singar thiruvadi

 

p.s. This post is intended to give the perspective

on prapatti for the members of Sri Malolan Net.

Pease refrain from initiating polemical arguments.