Free-will vs Pre-determination -reply to sri Ram kumar
From the Bhakti List Archives
• August 12, 2002
SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA. Sri Ram kumar says:- >The jIva would reduce to an ontological absurdity >in viSishTAdvaita, if the brahman were completely >responsible for the jIva's gyAtRtva, kaRtRtva and >bhOktRtva. The replies given in blue colour (note: wherever the small s is used for self , it denotes the jiva, as also with small b in brahman and small l in lord .The big letter stands for the Lord, Brahman) > What Ramanuja says:- (V.S. ¡V iv-13) ¡§ He is at the time of creation possessed of that characteristic volition which is peculiar to none other than Himself and is to the effect ¡V¡¥ I will Myself become manifold in the form of endless immovable and movable things¡¦, in accordance with His volition, creation is characterised by a peculiarly well defined arrangement of endless and wonderful entities: the differentiation of endless names and form results from the entrance of the individual self, which has Brahman Himself for its self, into all non- intelligent things: and all things other than (the Brahman) Himself have Himself for their basis, have Himself for their abode, are capable of activity through Himself, and are established in Himself¡¨ „« Observation:- The above is self revealing, I suppose. „« No question of ontological absurdity attributed. „« The qualities (in jiva) are relevant as they are with the Brahman. „« But that they have been masked as how dust envelopes the gem is being made out in the other passage quoted below. The brahman by Its Will originally provides the jIva with gyAtRtva, kaRtRtva & bhOktRtva. „« The term ¡¥providing¡¦ is not used by Ramanuja. „« For in his discussion on whether the Brahman, for becoming ¡¥many¡¦, is split or divided and so on, he concludes that It permeates every thing. „« As such Ramanuja finds no distinction between the jiva and the Brahman. „« The distinction comes on account of the karmic limitations on the jiva and the commandment that it can not initiate creation. >Therefore the jIva, should *actively* utilize these abilities >with the realization that these are provided by the brahman for brahman. >ie the jIva learns, acts & experiences in the mood of sAtvika-tyAga >in subservience to the brahman (remeber Sesha-Seshi bhAva) Now what Ramanuja says:- ¡§The Sutrakara speaks of the eternity of the self in the following aphorism and in others, -¡¥the self is not (a produced thing, as there are no scriptural statements to that effect.¡¦ (Ved su, ii, 3.18) in the aphorism-¡¥For that very reason (the self) is the knower¡¦ ) (ved su, ii,3.19) ¡V by mentioning the self to be the knower, he declares that it is natural for the self to be the seat of intelligence. It has been stated that there has been nothing wrong in that (self), which is itself of the nature of intelligence, being at the same time the seat of intelligence: just as there is nothing wrong in gems and other similar objects (although they are made up of the material element of heat and light), being themselves the seat of luminosity. We will establish further on that intelligence, which of itself is unconditioned , is capable of contraction and expansion.¡¨ „« The contraction and expansion is further explained in terms of karmic limitations. „« It is made out that the ability to know, act and enjoy are all in the nature of the jiva as a manifestation of Brahman. „« Upon destroying the limitations, he shines in luminosity as the Brahman. „« The limitations as caused by prakriti sambhandam are extensively discussed by Ramanuja in many places and this perhaps must provide the answer to Mr kashyap¡¦s quiz as to how the prakruti becomes the doer and not the jiva (BG). For jiva in the mould of the Brahman, is eating the pippala fruit as long as confined in material body, (due to prakruti sambhandam) but shines as the bird in splendour without eating it, upon liberation from limitations (Ref:Mundaka) „« Another relevant passage that Ramanuja quotes is-¡¥To whom who is and has a body, there is no destruction of the pleasing and the unpleasing: the pleasing and the unpleasing touch not him who is and has no body¡¦-(Chand) ¡V the body with prakruthi sambhandam. >sAtvika-tyAga = kaRtRtva-tyAga + mamatA-tyAga + phala-tyAga + phala-sanga-tyAga. >kaRtRtva-tyAga = the ability to act is accorded by the brahman. >therefore I give up (tyAga) the notion that 'I am the independent doer'. >mamatA-tyAga = give up ownership of the act. >phala-tyAga = Offer the outcome (whatever it may be), to the brahman. >phala-sanga-tyAga = Give up attachment to choosing *a* particular outcome out of many. >'tyAga' in sAtvika-tyAga would be meaningless, if the jIva were not originally provided with gyAtRtva, kaRtRtva and bhOktRtva by the brahman. >In other words, the word, "tyAga" indicates that jIva has to >*actively* utilize these provided capabilities, but give up (tyAga) >notion these faculties were provided for its own individual >gratification but rather for utilization in Sesha-vRtti (active service) to the brahman. >Otherwise the concept of jIva would reduce to the passive >insentient (jaDa) 'achit' tattva like a stone or log of wood. „« Not said so by Ramanuja and other purvacharyas too. „« The said three attributes of the jiva enable the Brahman to enjoy him. „« A similar expression (log of wood) is used by Nampillai to drive home the view that unless the Lord makes him in his image, how can He enjoy him (bhokhtruttvam). This bhokhtruttvam is once again not due to the jiva¡¦s sva-nirbhandam. It is because ¡§Aanandham avan preethai thuLirezhuppa¡¨.- to make Him enjoy and grow in preethi. Otherwise it will be like enjoying a log of wood. „« Another relevant passage from V.S-(iv, 4.21) ¡¥And on account of the characteristic of equality (between the individual self and the Supreme Self) being solely confined to (the item of) enjoyment¡¦ >All veda-s, bhagavad-gIta and other sAStra-s are addressed to >the sentient (chit) baddha-jIva in order to guide it to perform dAsya-vRtti *actively* for the brahman. >When was last time any of us starved in refusal until >the brahman personally brought food? „« When was the last time any of us ate food that was not given by Brahman? „« If all the intelligent and the non ¡Vintelligent embodiments and every being that is created owe their existence to Brahman and have Him as their self, how can we ever eat something that is not of Brahman or not brought by Brahman? „« To quote Ramanuja in agreeing with Bhaskara¡¦s views of the abheda sruti, ¡¥ the fishermen are Brahman, the slaves are the Brahman, and the gamblers are also the Brahman: man and woman are also born out of the Brahman, women are the Brahman and man also (is the Brahman)¡¦ (Samhotopanishad) „« And by an extension of this, Brahman exists in plants, shrubs, creepers, grass etc - what Ramanuja calls as material embodiments ( note -Ramanuja does not negate the That thou art injunction giving rise to this (above type of) all pervasiveness of Brahman ¡V he qualifies this by interfacing with ghataka sruti). „« Therefore all that we eat is Brahman, the maker of the food (your wife or who?!) is Brahman „« The Taittriya saama ghanam ¡¥ aham annadam¡¦ ¡VI am the eater (in this context) of the food that is Brahman and I am the annam (ref above ¡V Bhokhtruttvam) for the Lord too is valid. ( this passage is quoted by Ramanuja and Nampillai in the course of their discourse) „« We, as annam and annadam are constantly happening but without our knowledge (due to karmic limitations) When we realise us as the annam and annadam and enjoy that status, we would have perhaps lived through the real import of gyAtRtva, kaRtRtva and bhOktRtva! Inference: The qualities of gyAtRtva, kaRtRtva and bhOktRtva as such do not confer freewill, but exist as an extension of Brahman in us!! Jayasree sarnathan. PS:- # The addition of avidya along with the three, as discussed in the list in this context, can not be taken as an attribute of the jiva as per the above explanation. # Refutation of the advatic avidya apart. Ramanuja uses the term avidya to mean ignorance arising out of karmic limitations. This and the reason why and how evil can be found in created beings when the Brahman is all pure, austere and auspicious only, constitute a vast topic which might be taken up for discussion at a later date and at an appropriate context. JS __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.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/
- Next message: Varadarajan Sourirajan: "Thirumaalai-40"
- Previous message: A.Mahesh: "Sri Andal - Rangamannar Sayanam Alankaram - 9th Aug 2002"
- Next in thread: tg_ramkumar: "Re: Free-will vs Pre-determination"
- Reply: tg_ramkumar: "Re: Free-will vs Pre-determination"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]