Search:
Bhakti List Archives

Re: Doubt in Visishtadvaita metaphysics

From the Bhakti List Archives

Sadagopan • September 2, 1999 


Dear Sri Srinivasan:
The answers to your questions on
Kaivalyam and its difference(lower staus)
from Moksham are answered by 
Sriman S.M.S.Chari in his books
on VaishNavam and thesitic mysticism of
AlwArs . 

Understanding the difference between kaivalyam and 
Moksham is an important aspect of appreciation
of our sampradhAyam. I hope you can 
acquire these two books with the help
of Sriman Krishna Kalale .
With best Wishes,
V.Sadagopan 

At 02:42 AM 8/31/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Narayana Narayana.
>
>I have a doubt in Visishtadvaita metaphysics. I understand the
>following:
>1. It is said that the self, in its essential nature, is a sesha of the
>Lord. 
>2. Ignorance of this fundamental fact is caused by Avidya. 
>3. On self-realisation, when avidya dissipates, the self realises its
>essential nature of seshahood. 
>
>My doubt is:
>
>If a person attains Atma-swarupa-jnana, would he also not realise his
>seshahood and enjoy Sriman Narayana? If so, why does Srivaishnavism
>reject kaivalya (atma) seeking? I have also read in an old posting (on
>kalai differences) that some consider kaivalya-muktas will be in the
>fringe of Sri Vaikuntha and some consider they will be outside Sri
>Vaikuntha. How is this justified when an atmajnani would also
>automatically realise his essential liegehood to Narayana?
>
>A follower of the path to Atma-swarupa-jnana may not know his essential
>leigehood to Narayana, but on realisation, wouldn't he know? - that is
>the question.
>
>I humbly request our members to clarify this doubt.
>
>Narayana Narayana.
>
>Parthasarathy Srinivasan.
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
>
>
>