Search:

From the Bhakti List Archives

mani2 • April 29, 2002 


--- In bhakti-list@y..., "Shruti Dhara"  wrote:
> One such source made the statement that there were two forms of 
approach to 
> Sri Narayana:
> 1) bhakti yoga--which was none other than the ashtangha system with 
a 
> distinct theistic orientation
> 
> and the other
> 2)prapatti yoga, prescribed for our circumstances

Jagadisha Dasa,

The views of Ramanuja on this issue are indeed very difficult
to discern, especially when viewed through the filters of the
later tradition. One of the key ideas that motivates the later
acharyas, beginning a few generations after Ramanuja, is that
that there are two separate and *mutually exclusive* lifestyles
of sAdhana, one difficult, the other easy. The former is the
Vedantic upAsana known as bhakti-yoga, and the other is 
prapatti, total self-surrender, which as Martin pointed out
is sometimes not even mentioned as a yoga.  Some other 
post-Ramanuja interpreters twist the issue further and go
to the extent of declaring bhakti-yoga a path to an inferior moksha
because it is tinged with self-effort and egotistical action. 
This latter view considers prapatti as not a way in any
traditional sense but purely a recognition of svarUpa on
the part of the jIva. It technically is not a sAdhana for
them.

If we impartially look at all the works of Ramanuja and
approach them with 'samanvaya' (unity of teaching) in mind,
it is my opinion that none of these later conclusions
are sustainable as they stand. In particular, the idea that
bhakti-yoga and self-surrender are mutually exclusive is
totally without foundation and has absolutely no basis in
Ramanuja's teachings. Even if we turn to the writings of
Ramanuja's immediate successors, or, looking earlier, to
the writings of Yamunacharya and the Alvars, we cannot find
a solid basis for this theory. Furthermore, the denigration
of bhakti-yoga as either a non-path to full brahmAnubhava,
or as a difficult path impossible for people of this day
and age to practice, is also totally without foundation in
Ramanuja's writings (or the writings of pre-Ramanuja
Vaishnavas in the tradition) and indicates, in my opinion,
a fundamental misunderstanding of how Ramanuja viewed
yoga as a whole.

What is clear, however, is that there are many varieties
of bhakti-yoga or upAsana.  Some were more reliant on the
ashTanga method and others not. The mumukshu chooses one depending
on purva-samskAra and mindset.  Self-surrender is part and parcel
of bhakti-yoga and must motivate every element of the devotional
process.  It is in this regard that the idea of
the prapatti-yoga finds its full force in
Ramanuja's writings, and not in a "choose one or the other
and the two paths are totally divorced from one another"
philosophy which is so often preached these days.

If we take Yamuna and Ramanuja at face value, I find it hard
to believe that they were equivocating when they each wrote:

   sva-dharma-jnAna-vairAgya-sAdhya-bhakty-eka-gocaraH |
 
   [Narayana] is attained *only* by bhakti, which is 
   brought about by dispassion, self-knowledge, and 
   the performance of one's duties.

                 -- Yamuna's Gitarthasangraha, v.1

   ... parama-kAruNika-puruSa-uttama-prasAda-vidhvasta-sva-anta-     
   dhvAntasya+ananya-prayojana-anavarata-niratiZaya-priya-viZadatama-
   pratyakSatA-Apanna-anudhyAna-rUpa-bhakty-eka-labhyaH |

   [The Lord] is *solely* attainable by bhakti, of the form
   of meditation which is as clear as vision itself, which
   is inexpressibly dear, which is without break, which has
   no other goal other than the Lord, and which itself is
   accomplished by the destruction of one's inner darkness
   by the grace of the Supreme Person who is eminently 
   merciful.

                 -- Ramanuja's Vedarthasangraha, para 91

These statements, I believe, are the keystones to understanding
the Yamuna's and Ramanuja's philosophy, and all their works
should be understood together without destroying their primary
meaning.


> I have a few questions. Kindly respond if you have any information 
or 
> thoughts you would share:
> 
> 1) in Lester's book Ramanuja is quoted as (more or less) not 
regarding 
> Patanjali's formulation as a valid approach to Bhagavan. Meditation 
has as 
> its true fruit, bhakti. Are than any other references which support 
this and 
> is this a generally accepted view?

Ramanuja himself does not quote Patanjali. This is probably
because the SutrakAra has rejected the Patanjalian system in
the 2nd adhyAya of the Vedanta Sutras (etena yoga-pratyuktaH).
Perhaps to avoid confusion, and to avoid being even thought
of in the same breath with anyone who considered the individual
self as a worthy goal of realization, Ramanuja has chosen not
to cite the Yoga Sutra in support of his idea of sAdhana. 
However, his works are replete with terminology taken from
the Yoga system.  The subcommentator Vedanta Desika brings out
many of these ideas in his elaborations on Ramanuja's original
words, citing the Yoga Sutras where appropriate.

In short, the conclusion is correct. Applying the Patanjalian 
method with some modifications supports the upAsana of the
Gita and the Upanishads and leads eventually to brahma-sAkshAtkAra
and brahma-prApti.

> 3) Does anyone know of any syncretisms between Sri Vaishnavism or 
> Vaishnavism and Yoga?

The only person to my knowledge who views Ramanuja
primarily in the yogic mold in this day is Sri Rangapriya Swami
of Sri Ashtanga Yoga Vijnana Mandira, Bangalore. He repeatedly
emphasizes that even prapatti should also be considered a yoga
and is never divorced from it, with the idea that yoga is
defined as by the Yajnavalkya Smrti (cited by Desika in his
gloss on Ramanuja's Gitabhashya):

   ijyAchAra-dama-ahimsa-dAna-svAdhyAya karmaNAm
   ayam vah paramo dharmo yad yOgEna AtmadarSanam

   Of all religious activity -- worshipful sacrifice,
   good conduct, self-control, non-violence, charity,
   and study -- this is the highest dharma: to perceive
   the Highest Self through yoga.

Since yoga is the uniting of the individual self with
the Highest Self, prapatti should also be thought of
as a yoga, with its accompanying spiritual discipline.
While prapatti-yogin does not rely on an intense a meditative
practice as the ashTAnga-yogin, the prapatti-yoga is
enjoined to nonetheless keep his mind at all times
centered on the Highest Self and meditate on Him.

By the way, Sri Rangapriya Swami will be giving a lecture
entitled 'Ramanuja and Yoga' this Saturday, and many of
these questions may be answered. Please see 
http://ramanuja.org/svss/rangapriya.shtml or send me
email for more information.
 
> 4) What were supposedly the contents of Nathamuni's Yoga Rahasya? 
Is Sri T. 
> Krishnamacharya's manuscript of the Yoga Rahasya considered 
authentic 
> amongst Sri Vaishnavas?

The Yoga Rahasya is considered lost, and there is an
episode in Yamuna's life which documents this to an extent.
Sri T. Krishnamacharya is said to have visualized the
Yoga Rahasya in a yogic state, so whether or not you
accept this as the work of Nathamuni's depends on how
much faith you have in T. Krishnamacharya's siddhi as
a yogi.

Generally Sri Vaishnavas do not accept this work to be
the authentic yoga-rahasya.

Hope this helps -- I have been brief but I'll be happy
to elaborate further.

aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,
Mani




--------------------------------------------------------------
           - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
To Post a message, send it to:   bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Group Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bhakti-list
Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/
 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/