You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : March 1999

Re: Prappatti

From: Rajagopalan, Murli (Murli)** CTR ** (murlir_at_lucent.com)
Date: Fri Mar 19 1999 - 05:38:12 PST

Dearest BhAgawatAs,

In the context of the "prapatti" thread I have two separate questions:

Q.  Did prapanna-jana kooTastharAna nammALvAr actually receive
moksha-phalam?

At least one sreevaishNava AcArya - Sri NampiLLai (I believe, correct me if
I am wrong) - has called sathakOpan a nitya-samsAri.  I believe that such a
view was made out of extreme respect for Sri NammALvAr without whose
kAruNyam the prapatti sAstra would not have received the emphasis that it
enjoys today.  So, in a sense, NammALvAr exists in the psyche of every
AcArya propagating the doctrine of prapatti and hence is a nitya-samsAri.
This is the only explanation I have been able to give myself for the
nitya-samsAri status of nammALvAr.  Comments are welcome.

Q 2.  Why is there a dichotomy between prapatti and bhakti as two separate
sAdhyOpAyas?

As far as I understand it, without a siddhOpAya (i.e., sreemannArAyaNa) no
upAya will work.  Even for karma and j~nAna to mature and for the aspirant
to attain Atma-sAkshAtkAra, the supreme being's help is required, let alone
the matter for attaining the supreme being Himself.  So, prapatti - which is
the realization that none other than the siddhOpAya can save us from this
sAmsAric misery - seems to be the ONLY upAya and sAdhana (because at some
stage in one's spiritual quest, an aspirant should and will realize that the
only sAdhya is prapatti).  So, why not just say that prapatti is the only
sAdhyOpAya?

-- muraLi kaDAmbi