Thanks to: email@example.com , firstname.lastname@example.org, sadagopan iyengar
Posted by: "Raghavan" email@example.com ragavans85Wed Jan 18, 2012
Adiyen would like to point just one thing,Kaivalyam is Moksham as per thennacharya sampradayam and Aishwaryam as per
Desika Sampradayam.So anyone seeking Kaivalyam (and getting it) cannot be elevated as per
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 srinivasan_ramanujan32 firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
SrI:Srimathe rAmAnujAya namaha.
Thank you for pointing it out. Adiyen actually meant to say what you just stated. But while writing, I think I did not phrase my sentence properly. You are 100% correct. Asking for loukika phalans or kaivalyam is against the nature of the AtmA. However, if we ask such things from Bhagavan alone (as opposed to anya-devata), he will eventually elevate us to a state where we do not ask him for anything. So, the saranagati performed to Bhagavan for aishwaryam/kaivalyam is like a path to an eventual realisation of jiva svarUpam.
Once again, thank you for correcting my mistake.
Adiyen Sri Vaishnava Dasan,
In email@example.com, sadagopan iyengar <sadagopan.iyengar@... wrote:
dear shri srinivas,
your coverage of Swami Desikan's Ashtabhujashtakam is interesting. i have a doubt. you have said that in surrendering to Emperuman for even alpa purushaarttham , we are acting in accordance with our svarupam. could this be so? we are not supposed to seek anything from Him, especially trivial things. this may be better than seeking these from other devatas, but is it stillnot contrary to our svarupam to seek favours from Emperuman? Tthe best form of ananya gatitvam is that enunciated by Azhwar thus--kalaivaai tunbam kalayaadozhivaai, kalaikan mattrilen. even in the Gajendra Moksham episode, the Bhagavata slokam makes it clear that the elephant's saranagati was not for an alpa purusharttham like saving himself from his predicament, but for enabling the offering of the lotus held aloft in his trunk at the feet of the Lord. regards, sadagopan