Re: God's Grace
From the Bhakti List Archives
• June 19, 2001
Manni Varadarajan wrote: > >It does not mean arbitrary or capricious. Which means >that if the Lord has chosen Arjuna, or Yashoda, it must >have been due to some reason -- even if the Lord himself >has concocted some pretext out of His own grace unbeknownst >to the individual upon whom He is bestowing His favor (cf. Sri Vachana Bhushana s.386 and Daya Satakam v.74). ..x snipx ........................ >Sri Sadananda writes, on an another note: >> I have another problem in grading the souls in vaikunTa in terms of >> superiority and inferiority of the souls. > >Such a gradation does not exist in Visishtadvaita Vedanta. >All souls which have attained the Lord are fundamentally equal >and enjoy the same infinite bliss in Vaikuntha. You may be >thinking of the Dvaita school where intrinsic differences are >proposed -- and you are right, this makes it better than samsAra >only in name. > >aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan, >Mani Thanks Mani for educating me. Once we accept (a) God by definition cannot be partial and (2) Lord has chosen or chooses an individual soul not randomly but for some reason and (c) there is no intrinsic differences between soul to soul in VaikunTa -and (d) He has no self-motivating (or desire prompted) cause to do anything including the Leela, then, as I see it, we are faced with problems to justify the basis of the selection of X over Y etc. The possible alternatives are: 1. Souls are selected not from VaikunTa but from the ones who have not reached moksha yet - which means that they still have not reached the final goal, hence distinctions due to upaadhi-s based on karma samskaara remain with them. Hence some are suitable and some are not suitable for a given task - The selection then depends on the samskaara of the individual souls rather than the Lord's choice per sec. In other words Lord provides an environment for evolution of that soul by giving him an opportunity to serve in the upliftment of the society. Thus Grace is earned rather than given randomly. 2. His reasons are incomprehensible for our limited intellect - This is alternate way of saying either it is anirvachaniiyam ( sounds like an advaitin!) but only means it is inexplainable by intellect, which is limited by definition; or it is his Leela and who are we to question that - but that sounds authoritative. Both are only a sugar-coated explanations without explaining anything but asking us to accept as it stands. In terms of distinction between the souls in the moksha - Yes the jiiva-jiiva bhinnatvam is accepted in Madhva tradition. That leaves tara tama bheda-s between the jiiva-s - and as I understand they do not provide a justification or basis for the intrinsic differences between jiiva-s - other than it is so. I am not sure if there are any scriptural pamaaNa for that. Since bahujiivatvam is accepted in vishishhTa advaita tradition, if jiiva-jiiva bhinnatvam is not there intrinsically, yet each one is anu pramaanaat - I am facing some difficulties (1) The implication is one jiiva cannot distinguish another jiiva in moksha since sajaati, vijaati and swagata bedha-s are not there. (2) Can jiiva-s distinguish paramaatma? - I understand the anantatvam of the Lord in all aspects and parimita aspect of jiiva - the question is more in terms of through what instruments jiiva distinguishes paramaatma without the upaadhi-s needed to distinguish. (3) Upaadhi-s are not there - (am I right?) - since if upaadhi-s are there we run into problem of accounting on what basis a particular type of upaadhi is given - since in moksha all the karma janita samskaara-s are dissolved (if they are not then we are back to the same limitations as in this leela vibhuuti - since there is tara tama bheda-s in karma and hence karam phala). (4) - anupramaanat - does that imply a boundary in some form - where one jiiva ends and another jiiva starts - if upaadhi-s are not there to provide a distinguishinig boudaries between jiiva and jiiva. how the boundaries are recognized Does jiiva knows he is anupramaanaat - if he does on what basis? (5)- Enjoyment of infinite bliss by finite anu pramaana jiiva - I am not sure what infinity means here- eternal sound right at least time wise. Can jiiva enjoy the bliss without having instruments or upaadhi-s for enjoying? - Is bliss swaruupa lakshaNa of jiiva or Brahman or neither. Question enjoyment of bliss itself is a problem for me - is bliss an object of enjoyment or bliss comes from an enjoyment of an object - Infinite enjoyment from a finite object cannot be there - Infinite enjoyment from an infinite object can be there - One can say that Lord himself is an infinite bliss since He is infinite. But being anu pramaanaat how am I going to enjoy infinite bliss being tiny. Am I getting mixed up here? Or my concepts are all wrong? For some reason having upaadhi-s does not sound logical to my mind since it takes us back for some kaaraNa justifying a particular upaadhi different from other. On the other hand not having upaadhi-s would result indistinguishable features as well as the lack of instruments of knowledge. I need to resolve these in my own mind in self-consistent manner to have a clear understanding of the concepts involved - I also understand that some of these questions arise because of my prior conditioning - as I have it, I do not consider it as a burdon! Too many questions - If you are guessing right, I am focusing my ignorance to prepare myself when Shreeman Dr. S.M.S. Chari's visit here. If you are going to be in Washington area around that time (July 16-21) give us a call. We will find you a place for you to enjoy the Sat Sangh. - He will be in N.J. too after that week and one can take advantage of his presence there. Hari Om! Sadananda -- K. Sadananda Code 6323 Naval Research Laboratory Washington D.C. 20375 Voice (202)767-2117 Fax:(202)767-2623 -------------------------------------------------------------- - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH - To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
- Next message: Sadagopan: "Re: Koora NaarAyaNa Jeeyar's provenance."
- Previous message: Malolan Cadambi: "Re: God's Grace"
- In reply to: Mani Varadarajan: "Re: God's Grace"
- Next in thread: Mohan Sagar: "Re: God's Grace"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]