Sri: Srimathe Ramanujaya nama: Dear bhAgavathas, Accept my pranams. I like to share my thoughts in response to Sri Vikram's posting. (i)First of all we do not need a foreigner to tell us "what our sampradAyam/religion actually is" when there are many learned AcAryAs in our sampradAyam. It is tantamount to asking/enquiring a stranger/third person about "the nature/conduct/personality of one's own mother". BTW,I have come across the book by Lipner and I have read and I don't consider Lipner's words as gospel of truth. Please take it in the right context: Lipner is not a disciple of the disciple of...of the disciple of Sri Ramanuja to make an affirmative statement that "this is what" Sri Ramanuja says. We have to go to an AcArya who comes in the line of Sri Ramanuja to understand the mind of Sri Ramanuja. Lipner's is similar to the word Hindu coined by some moghuls and many of us proudly use that word hindu which appears "nowhere" in our scriptures. (ii)Sri Ramanuja neither invented SriVaiShNavism nor Prapatti. He only "fostered" it. There were AcAryAs,prior to Sri Ramanuja,who were SriVaiShNavas and also Prapannas(following prapatti). In short SriRamanuja "re-visited/re-searched" some of the "concepts" which was already there(vedas) eternally and misinterpreted by Advaitins and Heretics who failed to do a "proper" enquiry into the "nature of Brahman". Keeping aside Sri Ramanuja,we observe that the samskrt word "prapdhyE(prapatti)" sitting in many places in Bhagavad Gita Chapter 7 and Bhagavad Gita was spoken by Lord Himself and hence can not have been a "concept" developed/invented by Sri Ramanuja. Hence Sri Ramanuja's concern(as per Sri YAmunAcAryA's wish)was to write commentaries on samskrt works, to refute Advaitic philosophy and other philosphies which were in vogue during that time,to set things in the right perspective. Hence it was catered to a "specific" set of audience. So one has to see Sri Ramanuja not only from pure academic aspect of Sri VisiShtAdvaitham but also from psychological aspect (what kind of audience did Sri Ramanuja keep in his mind when he wrote the commentaries on samskrt works). (iii) Simple analogy can be taken from academic circle. An author,who specialises and does research in the field of Fluid Dynamics(or you name any subject)writes a text book keeping in mind a "specific" set of people. Not everyone can understand and comprehend that book. So a book can cater to people who are beginners,...or advanced. (iv) Some foreigners doubt the authorship of gadya trayam(whether it was really Sri Ramanuja who composed it as it differs in thought from the other 6 samskrt works). Here psychology enters. Even if we take scientists as examples,not every paper of Albert Einstein reflects the same "mood" of Einstein expressing the "impressions of his thoughts(that is, this is how Einstein thinks)". But then people are affected by the limitation of senses(perception). How do one believe that Sri Ramanuja preached and followed Prapatti(which he didn't say explicitly(although it was implicit) in his 6 samskrt works) just as his predecessors of Sri VishiShtAdvaitham? It is like this(a crude example): I may cook something(say some onion based) to suit the needs of the visitors. A guy who has only seen me cooking(but not eating) such food is highly and surely likely to conclude that I eat onion. Assume that I do not consume onion. The other guy's inference is totally wrong(due to improper observation and enquiry and this is applicable in Lipner's case too). That's why Sri Ramanuja had devoted 100 plus pages for the first aphorism(sUtra)alone in his commentary on BrahmasUtra, namely SriBhAShya. (v) So SharaNAgathi is for "ALL" without any doubt. The AshtAkshari (Tirumanthram) says that Sriman Narayana is the "protector" of all. Just as a husband vouchsafes protection to his wife,while tying the sacred knot,so does the Lord wrt sentient/non-sentient(whoever chants this manthra). When a mortal mother can not bear to see differences among her own kids(who is better than who),how can the Lord, whose child is this Universe(and the jivas like us),see distinction among His own creations(The Lord says in Bhagavad Gita that He created the four classifications/varNas)? This being the case,does it make any sense to say that "sUdrAs have to wait for some more births" to attain mOksha? (vi) Regarding the "means" for attaining mOksha,many have been laid down in shruthi(vedas) and smrthi(Bhagavad Gita prescribing karma,jnAna,bhakti,prapatti as a means for salvation) texts. Bhakti is the longest route and sharaNAgathi/prapatti is the shortest route. Some people think that there is a "subtle" difference between sharaNAgathi and prapatti which is a different issue altogether. People according to their varNas can follow bhakti or prapatti. Why should the Lord prescribe both the routes instead of one method for all? From this it is clear that HE alone is the means and also the end. (vii)I would like to quote Bertrand Russell who declares himself as "agnostic" in the eyes of philosophic audience and as an "atheist" in the eyes of laymen. Why does he have to declare like this instead of one single and simple statement? Because Russell has done a research(mathematically/scientifically)and is of the opinion that it is difficult to prove either way,the existence or the non-existence of God. So he is neutral to the idea of God(science goes by evidence). A layman does not know what "logic(a branch of natural philosophy)" is and hence Russell,without wasting time,declares himself as an atheist. To those who have background in logic(atleast some),he declares himself as agnostic. (viii)Last but not the least I would like to quote Sri PiLLai LOkAchArya's Mumukshuppadi:Carama shlOkam(BG 18.66: sarva DharmAn...mA shuca:)explanation: CUrnikai 182 "karmam(karma yOga) kaimkaryaththilE pugum,jnAnam(jnAna yOga) svarUpa prakAshaththilE pugum; bhakti(bhakti yOga) prApya ruciyilE pugum; prapatti(total surrender) svarUpayAthAthmya jnAnaththilE pugum" Meaning:The daily(nithya) and occasional(naimiththika) rituals (karmas),appropriate to their castes(varNas) and stages of life (Ashramas) will be practised by the individual not as means for attaining mOksha but as loving service unto the Lord. Comprehension of Lord's transcendental glory(jnAna/knowledge) shall illumine his own essential nature. Bhakti(devotion to Lord) will be practised not as means for attaining mOksha but as an intense longing for the Lord (just as hunger is a pre-requisite for relishing the food). Prapatti/SharaNAgathi,the loving surrender to the Lord, leads to the acquisition of a "correct" perspective of the "true" or essential nature of the individual soul, namely,"absolute and exclusive dependence on the Lord and complete self-abnegation". So sharaNAgathi(Lord as the sole means as indicated in BG 18.66),alongwith other two rahasyas,namely, Tirumanthram and dhvayam,is ideal for all and since this has come from the Lord Himself (as an upadhEsha to Arjuna),it is as old as the vedas and hence not developed by any "later" SriVaiShNava scholars for fun but has been preserved(the teaching that started from the Lord) and observed/practised by all Sri VaiShNava AcAryAs. Please forgive for any wrong informations and if I have hurt others' feelings(and also for the lengthy and boring mail). All credits go to Sri Ramanuja's grace and AcAryAs. Thanks to Sri Mukunda and Sri Lakshmi Narasimhan for having already expressed some of the things I wanted to add. AzhvAr EmperumAnAr JIyar thiruvadigaLE sharaNam NC Nappinnai
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |