Bhakti List Archives

Free-will vs Pre-determination- poser-4

From the Bhakti List Archives

jasn sn • Wed Aug 07 2002 - 09:14:11 PDT 


SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA.

The discussion continues..

The Q-4 raised:-

# Sri Krishna Kashyap_s mail- God_s problem vs
individual_s problem _who is
responsible for the jiva_s sorry state of affairs?
If it is due to jiva acting on free will, what does
the lord imply in BG
16-19? _aham.. aaseerushu yonishu ajasram kshibhaami
(the
words have been interchanged in order to draw the
meaning[_1])

Sri Sriram says:-

The jIvA is responsible. According to the law of
karma, we reap what we sow.
Good and bad deeds progressively and recursively place
the jIvA in
appropriate environments. Nonetheless, the jIvA at all
times has the ability
to choose - to stay and wallow or break-free and soar.


Sri Raghunanadan says:-

1. In the introduction of many vyakyanams, our
poorvacharyas begin with this:
The lord has put in lot of efforts to help the
jeevatman to attain paramapadam. 
This starts withcreating the leela vibuthi……
……………………………… to take birth in the
leela vibuthi. Now with these statements, it is clear
that the Lord gives us all the freedom to do what we
want. If everything that we do was pre-determined,
then why sould the Lord put in all these efforts
[krushi] to attain us? 

Observation:-

According to Sri Krishan Kashyap and Sri Sriram, it is
the individual’s problem.
According to Sri Raghunandan, it’s a shared problem.
Because God has also some stakes in the way that
things are building up with the jiva’s affairs. 

The poser:-

Does not the reading of the above indicate that the
truth must lie at one of the extremities (Either
freewill or predetermination)or somewhere in between?
If the former is proved right, (either of the two) our
analysis will become easy. It is enough to prove one
or disprove the other.
But in the second possibility, we have to accept both
and find out the dividing line, like how much freewill
and how much predetermination? Is the dividing line a
constant one at all times and for all occasions is
also a moot point. 

Simplifying further, 
we may ask  whether it is God’s problem alone or the
individual’s, or shared by both. In the latter case,
the problem of defining how much and under what
conditions come into fore.

A little acquaintance with Hindu philosophy may make
us vote for the second possibility. For we have been
generously  treated with notions of surrender for the
ultimate release and 
We believe that by doing prapatti (in our own volition
/ as part of free will) we transfer the burden of
release to the lord’s feet.

This implies that it is God’s problem in the case of
the prapannan, (after prapatti is done) and it is the
individual’s problem if he is  a non-prapannan. The
individual must come into terms with the reality and
make an effort to appeal to god to grant him
surrender. A sure case of freewill is implied here. 

But is it so is the million dollar question!
Taking cue from Mumukshuppadi (MP)- 258 and 259, there
seems to exist a tricky twist in the way we interpret.
In his vyakhyaanam, Sri Manavala manunigal says (258)
–until now the jiva had believed that the
‘yathna-palithangal’ (the efforts and the results from
the efforts) are his. That is a virodhi bhavam. Now as
the jiva has come to do the ultimate surrender,( that
the yathna prayathnangal are HIS), the virodhi bhavam
vanishes.
This is like telling that you are transferring your
debts to God’s account by doing prapatti.
But it is not so.
The actual meaning of prapatti or what happens in
prapatti is found in MP 191.
Sri manavala mamunigal explains that ‘sarva  dharman’
means the dharma is that, which is instrumental for
getting some results –‘dharmamaavathu – phala
saadhanamai yirukkum adu’
It is implied that efforts are there to continue, even
after prapatti, the person must continue his action.
Only that he has now renounced the results.
So the efforts or yathnam have been there before and
after prapatti and the difference is in the
expectation of phalam. Now the phalam are for the
lord. Earlier it was for the jiva- so thought the
jiva.
Just because the jiva thought so, the effort can not
be termed as his (arising from his will)
And now (after prapatti)as the phalam has been
absorbed by the lord, you can not say the efforts are
HIS-only now.
They (efforts) have been HIS always
and as long as the jiva thought (due ‘limitations’ and
guna–mix)that it is entitled to the results because it
was the doer, there was bondage. When it realised that
the lord is entiltled to the results, the doership
still rests with him with the realisation that the
doer is the lord.
In any case, the doer, the one who makes the act of
doing is the lord. Freewill is only  a ‘mayakkam’ (
The issue of doership has been discussed in poser-3)

This shows that the yathna-palithangal have never been
the jiva’s. The doership remains the same. The
‘mayakkam’ is in the jiva. 

Once again in the next verse (259)(MP)
Hmanavala mamunigal explains, until now the jiva was
in dhu:kham for two reasons. If it had thought that it
was doing its affairs on its own, there is  dhu:kham
from how to go about further.
If it had believed that god alone had been the
caretaker of its affairs, once again there was
dhu:kham, because the jiva would be troubled by
thoughts, ‘Had the lord abandoned me? How can I
survive if He ignores me?’etc.
Theefore the lord says “Soha nimiththam ellai kAN’
There is no room for dhu:hkam. Because you are not the
adhikari for the ‘yathna –palithangal’
Your protection is my responsibility as the
yathna-palithangal are mine.

If it is said that this assurance is for ‘rakshanam’
upon prapatti and not applicable to conditions prior
to prapatti, then it is not so. Because the lord
implies that even the yathanam (effort) for prapatti
are not his (the jiva’s)!!It is what God has made it
happen!

How and why?
Acharya Hrudhyam (14) “vathsalaiyaana matha….”
Like a compassionate mother(important to note
–compassion of the lord is not selective in times of
surrender etc,) who allows the child to eat mud
because it wanted to eat (prompted by guna-mix and
karmic limitations), but takes it back and applies the
alternative to undo the effects of mud eaten, 
 and like a mother who cooks different dishes as per
the different tastes of the members of the family and
serves them,
it is the lord who makes the efforts to happen and the
results to happen.

This is what is told by Thirumazhisai alwar  too in
Naan mukhan Thiruvandhadhi (88) 
“seyal theera sindhiththu vaazhvaarE vAzhvAr”
the explanation in AH is that ‘there is nothing that
the jiva can do, only Emperuman does”

 Another question arises here.
If it is agreed that it is god’s problem, what is the
answer for Ghandhari’s lamentation? Why didn’t the
lord apply HIS grand will and  prevent suffering? 

At the end of the war, Ghandhari asked Krishna, 
“ the pandavas and kauravas are all dead; 
why did you allow this? Oh Krishna.
You could have stopped the war,
You had the tongue, 
you had the  power”

Then she cursed and in effect crippled Krishna, But HE
refused to give a direct answer.
 He knew the answer but did not reveal it.
For if he had given the answer, He would have been
called as the most cruel one.
The answer lies in his assertion that He is yama in
carrying out justice – the balance ultimately coming
to rest on weighing the pros and cons , the plus and
minus of karma of the respective jivas.

Even if God had wished, he could not and did not
safeguard some people under certain circumstances.
Perhaps the ‘limitations’ (discussed in poser 1)had
tied up hands and that the time was not ripe. Perhaps
he blessed Sishupalan and Thirumangai alwar (nam
kaliyanadro?) because they filled up the eligibility
criteria, 
Or he could have just waived the ‘limitations’
In any case it comes out to be god’s problem – HIS
will -HIS writ and hardly the individual’s will.


Jayasree sarnathan

Quote of the mail:-
‘yenadu enbadu yen?
YAn enbadu yen?
   
          -Nammalwar.(TVM 10-10-5)
.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com


--------------------------------------------------------------
           - 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/