Re: Vedanta Desika and Manavalamamuni

From the Bhakti List Archives

• February 5, 1997


I thank Mr. Kalale for his brief presentation on the similarities between
the two learned Acharyas.  Although this does not seem to be prevalent in
this group, there are many followers from the respective lineages of both
teachers who sometimes seem to forget that these two branches of the
SriVaishnava "tree of tradition" have grown from the same roots.  I think
the discussion of similarities should be furthered, in an effort to better
understand and appreciate SriVaishnava philosophy as a whole.

I do have one small clarification to make on Mr. Kalale's posting:

>Sri Manavala Maamuni doctrinally states that one should not "ask" for
>surrender because it violates the very nature of jiva - ie. his complete
>dependence on God;  Like a piece of wealth will not ask it's owner to
>protect it, similarly, it is in God's hands and one need not ask for one's
>deliverance. So the upaya is only to "know" that Srimannarayana is the
>protector.

In the views of Manavalamamuni, asking for something in prayer is not
something that should be discarded in Prapatti.  For it is part of the
soul's nature to ask the Lord for the opportunity to serve Him, and perhaps,
even to be saved.  However, this asking should not be construed as an upaya,
i.e., required to propitiate the Lord's grace, for then it would imply that
something other than the Lord Himself has the ability to save us.
Consequently, asking should be viewed as being part of the Upeya of serving
Him, as it is in accordance with our true nature as faithful devotees and
also pleases the Lord.  The analogy is used that even though a mother is
ready to feed a child, it feels a certain sense of joy in knowing that the
child recognizes her and asks to be fed.  However, prapatti in and of
itself, as aptly stated above, lies in simply and wholeheartedly knowing
that Sriman Narayana is our Savior and Protector, leaving all to His
Unbounded and Spontaneous Grace.

Daasanu Daasan,

Mohan