Re: Discussion of grace
From the Bhakti List Archives
• May 15, 1997
At 05:46 PM 5/13/97 -0700, you wrote: > >> MokshA is >> not a goal to be won by effort , but it should come as a gift of God out >> of His grace . > >If I am not mistaken, this sentence represents the ``opposing >viewpoint'' in S.M.S. Chari's discussion of grace. In other >words, Sri Srinivasa chari is of the opinion that the sentence >above represents the "thengalai" view against which Vedanta >Desika is opposed. I think this is quoted out of context. A thorough perusal of this whole chapter makes it clear . Quoting only the sentence above :MokshA is >> not a goal to be won by effort , but it should come as a gift of God out >> of His grace . will be wrong representation of his ideas. After having discussed with him several weeks, I am sure his views are not so wrong as to go against the fundamental principle : Naasti akritah krtena (karmana).... tad vijnanartham gurum evaabhigacchet srotriyam brahma nistam - the very famous sentence of mundakopanisat which is the basis for 1st sutra of Bramha sutras. The meaning of this sentence is : by works one cannot attain Brahman; hence to attain brahman by knowledge one has to seek it through an appropriate qualified teacher. Sri SMS Chari is not intending that grace is won by effort, eventhough a portion of the sentence states so. There should be some reason for God's special grace so as to award a high spiritual status for an aspirant instead of this ghora-samsara. For that reason an individual effort becomes a sahakari- or associate cause (not the main cause, since main cause is God's grace alone). If one reads even the whole of what Sri Sadagopan has written from SMS chari's books, it will be clear that the stated view is not intended by him. >I think it should be abundantly clear from my previous post >that Desika himself is emphatic that moksha cannot be "won >by effort", and in this specific instance, all acharyas >of Sri Vaishnavism are agreed. There are countless instances >of Desika ascribing everything from the gift of existence to >final salvation as flowing from God Himself. > >Making this a focal point of argument is not a correct one. >One can easily play semantic games and say that the everpresent >compassionate nature of the Lord is a "guNa" rather than >"grace", as Krishna K. indicated. I don't think this is a >meaningful distinction, and certainly not one that I find >in Desika's or Pillai Lokacharya's words. I dont understand how grace and guna are separated . Of course Grace is a guna of Lord only, whether it is common grace or special grace. >In the munivAhana bhogam, Desika's anubhavam of ThiruppaN's >amalan aadhi piraan, he writes that the Lord is "sarvOpakArakan", >always favoring us. Everything from establishing us in >goodness (sat Adi sthApanam) to finally releasing us from >samsAra and giving us the joy of effervescent bliss in the >form of kainkarya or service is a result of His upakAram >or favor. I don't think it matters whether one calls this >upakArakatva grace or part of His nature. If Lord is sarvopakarakan, what is the answer to this: why so many billions of jivas are stuck in this samsara? Is God a tyrant enjoying the plight of imprisoned souls and still a sarvopakarakan? (that is conflicting if some form of sahetuka krpa, is not resorted to and one will logically end up in fatalism or some form of arbitrariness of God.) >This trend to think of moksha as being caused by one's own >effort, or "won" by one's efforts, strikes at the very heart of >Sri Vaishnavism, since it tinges the process of self-surrender >with egoism. It does not matter if selflessness is preached >at the same time, since preaching contradictory things does >no one any good. This is a mis-representation of SMS chari's views . He has never meant that effort wins Grace or effort wins moksa. effort is a vyaja and without it God can be ascribed as arbitrary or partial to some. I am quite surprised of such an representation of SMS chari's views, which I happen to know very well. I even spoke to him today about these views. >It is also clear that thinking or theologizing about some >being "deserving" of grace through self-surrender is also >against Sri Vaishnava philosophy. In what sense does someone >deserve the Lord's grace, or deserve moksha? > >>From our perspective, it appears that great souls such as >Vyasa, Suka Maharishi, Sanaka, Nammalvar, etc., deserved the >Lord's grace. But this is once again just a matter of >perspective. From their perspecive, which is all the more >relevant since they were farther along the spiritual path >than we are, they felt that nothing they had done or could >do could deserve the grace of the Lord. > >Ascribing everything to the grace of the Lord is never >an exaggeration; thinking that nothing on our part forces >the Lord to grace us is also no exaggeration. These two >principles, it seems, form the very heart of Sri Vaishnavam. > >Mani > By the way, Mani, Please call SMS chari, 818-348-8182, He may come to San Jose in a few days. He wants to talk to you before he leaves. Krishna > Krishna Kalale 619-658-5612 (phone) 619-658-2115 (fax)
- Next message: mr.Sampath: "New Subscriber intro"
- Previous message: Satyan, Nagu (MSMAIL): "Sri Ramanuja Charya's Thirunakshaththiram"
- Maybe in reply to: Mani Varadarajan: "Discussion of grace"
- Next in thread: Mani Varadarajan: "Re: Discussion of grace"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]