२९ चरमश्लोकाधिकारः

335

CHAPTER - XXIX

Charamasloka Adhikara

The eminent Charama-Sloka is taught directly to Arjuna by Lord Sri Krishna himself. This verse ordains the performance of self-surrender, the glory of which is expounded by the Mulamantra and the Dvayamantra. Desika traces the circumstances that led to the instruction of this great mantra.

On the eve of the Mahabharata War, Arjuna developed dejection, despondency and was overcome with feelings of compassion towards those, who were not worthy of it. He feared that he would commit grave sin by killing those who stood in battle array against him. He mistook ‘dharma’ for ‘adharma’. Not knowing the right path of action, he surrendered unto the Supreme Paramatman, his charioteer, Sri Krishna, and begged of him to show him the right path by following which he could attain ultimate good.

Then, the most compassionate Lord taught him first of all the nature of the jivatman, which is different and distinct from the body and others, and which is solely subservient to Paramatman. He enlightened him upon the nature of the ultimate object of life and the paths of Karamayoga and Jnanayoga that are accessories to the main path of liberation viz. Bhaktiyoga. Listening to all these, Arjuna was overcome with grief on account of his utter inability to practis Bhaktiyoga and the Lord taught him this eminent path of liberation viz. surrender at the feet of the Lord, which did not require any other accessory than Anukulya Sankalpa, Pratikulya Varjanam, Maha Vishvasa, Karpanya and prayer for protection, and which was an easier means to be performed only once and by which one could attain all objects of life.

Finding him overcome with grief, being unable to practise Bhaktiyoga, the Lord out of compassion taught him this noble path of total surrender unto the Lord as follows:

‘सर्वधर्मान् परित्यज्य मामेकं शरणं व्रज ।

अहं त्वा सर्वपापेभ्यो मोक्षयिष्यामि मा शुचः’ ।

“Abandoning desire in all spiritual means that are not possible of being practised, seek refuge with me alone; I shall redeem you from all sins; do not grieve.”

This glorious truth which was taught to Arjuna was the final teaching of the Lord, and it is in fact the reiteration of the truths taught in the Upanishads. Desika, the celebrated author of this eminent work, declares in the very beginning that the essential meanings of this verse directly taught by the Lord, would be explained according to the unbroken tradition - received from the illustrious line of Acharyas. This verse has profound meanings and has far reaching implications.

The first half of this verse is ‘upaya vidhayaka’ or ordaining the means of attainment of spiritual perfection. The latter half mentions the fruit of such performance and is dependent upon the injunction given in the first half. So, this verse is declared as ‘upaya vidhana pradhana’ or prescribing the means primarily.

The term ‘dharma’ is a means of the attainment of the object of life, that is to be known according to the shastras.

12

Charamasloka Adhikara

337

The word in plural as ‘dharmān’ signifies that such means are many. The term ‘sarva’ suggests those ‘dharmas’ with all their accessories. When the term ‘sarva’ is considered as related to its counter part ’eka’ here, it means that the totality of all means of attainment of liberation. The meaning according to this context is as follows:

All kinds of ‘mokshopayas’ that are enjoined by shastras along with their respective accessories, are signified by the term ‘sarva dharman’. Here, the various types of upasanas prescribed by the Upanishads such as Dahara Vidya, Purusha Vidya, Vaishvanara Vidya and others, are intended by the term ‘sarva-dharman’. But, this term does not exclude the wisdom, of ‘Purushothamatva’ jnanam or ‘Avatara-Rahasya’ jnanam and such things that are inevitable for practise of any means of liberation or mokshopaya.

The term ‘parityajya’ signifies ’tyaga’. As the Lord saw his helplessness to practise any other means, and as He taught this means to Arjuna here, ’tyaga’ means giving up desire to undertake any other means on account of his utter inability (upayantara-nairashyam). This ’tyaga’ or abandonment is giving up of any hope to practise other means. The preposition ‘pari’ signifies this rue or despair on account of his unworthiness for all time to come in ali places. When he realises his utter inability to follow other means at all times, and in all places, he will give up totally his inclination towards all those means at all times. He realises that he cannot even practise them a little according to his ability; so, he will give up his ambition or desire to undertake the means that are ever impossible for him to practise.

This phrase - ‘sarva dharman parityajya’ - signifies the

338

Essence of Srimad Rahasyataya Saram

full competence of the aspirant for adopting the means of surrender. This is just like the statement -

अनित्यमसुखं लोकं इमं प्राप्य भजस्व माम् । In this statement prapya’ is not a vidhi or commandment; but, only a restatement of the form of ‘प्राप्यवर्तमानः त्वम्’ that means ‘you who have come upon this world’. Similarly, the term ‘parityajya’ means you fee: 14.’ -’ you, who are here, having no hope of practising any other means’. So, ‘parityajya’ does not imply abandonment of dharmas, as an accessory to Prapatti. If ‘parityajyam’ is taken as a vidhi or commandment, then it should be understood that it is prescribing tug’ or utter helplessness as an accessory to prapatti. Then it will signify that all dharmas or other mokshopayas are beyond his ability. So this interpretation is also feasible. If ‘parityajya’ is taken as a ‘vidhi’ or ‘commandment’, it is appropriate to say that for the sake of Prapatti you need not practise any dharma, as Prapatti is not in need of anything other than its accessories.

If it is mentioned that the abandonment of all dharmas like Karmayoga, Jnanayoga and Bhaktiyoga, is to be done in their essential nature, as an accessory to Prapatti, then Prapatti will not be possible of being done by all, as it would apply to only those who are competent to practise Karmayoga, Jnanayoga and Bhaktiyoga. Tyaga can be ordained only in respect of one who is competent for it. As the masters of yore and the Alwars have expounded that Prapatti is applicable to one and all that are utterly helpless, this kind of abandonment of Karmayoga and others will not become compatible. In that case, the injunction ‘Vraja’ also will become incompatible.

Charamasloka Adhikara

339

It cannot be said that a difficult path is first prescribed and later on negated for making one adopt an easier path. By realising success in an easier path, one will undertake a difficult path but not vice versa. It cannot be said that though the savants of the past were Prapannas, they adopted upasanas for loka-sangraha. There is no authority anywhere to support this view; even if it is admitted like that, he would be committing sin and would be giving a wrong lead by practising something which is opposed to his adhikara for the sake of loka-sangraha. If there are two paths admitted by the shastras, open to one, who is qualified for them, practising one of them which is possible of being followed by the common people, would be loka sangraha. So, it cannot be said that upasanas were undertaken for loka sangraha.

The interpretation that the abandonment of all duties for attainment of worldly benefits (Pravritti-roopa Dharma) is intended here by ‘parityajya’, ‘Nivritti-roopa Dharama’ or Dharmas that are of the form of renunciations are not activities for one’s own protection (swarakshanartha swavyapara), is also not sound because, even such renunciations are also for one’s own protection. It cannot be asked on the strength of this command “parityajya’, whether the meaning of ‘parityajya’ implies the abandonment of all dharmas such as the pravritti and nivritti dharmas, because in that case, all kinds of divine services rendered with great care and all kinds of ‘apachara-parihara’ (avoiding all kinds of offences) by the savants of the past and the present would become performance of actions opposed to shastras. It cannot be said that those people, who promulgated the traditions of prapasti and who are ever compassionate, were deluded. It is sometime asked that there will be no contradiction if all dharmas are abandoned in their essential nature at the time of surrender, as abandonment of sarva-dharmas lifelong may be opposed to the shastras. Desika points out that this would result in the abandonment of all dharmas that are ‘sambhavita’ or probable at that time such as living in a holy place or having a tuft or wearing the ‘pundras’ and others. So, Desika points out that the meaning of ‘parityajya’ signifies not to resort to any dharma for the sake of prapatti, as an accessory, as prapatti docs not require any accessory like karma and others.

If the meaning of ’tyaga’ is ordained for ‘parityajya’, it may be taken as those people who are incapable of practising other means and those, though capable of other means but who cannot wait for a long time for getting moksha, - are qualified for parapatti. Desika points out that the ancients did not argue whether or not ‘sarva-dharma-svarupa-tyaga was accessory to prapatti, but they sought to know by which words of the ‘charama-shloka’ the competency of ‘akinchanya’ is pointed out and by which terms the ’nyrapeksha’ or non requirement of any other thing for prapatti, is signified.

Some masters expounded that the term ’eka’ signified that this ‘upaya’ did not require any other thing and some others came to an understanding that the ‘äkinchanya’ or the utter helplessness was signified on account of the prescription of this easy means.

If it is asked how there is difference amongst people who are qualified for prapatti as pointed out in the verse –

इदं शरणमज्ञानां इदमेव विजानताम् । इदं तितीर्षतां पारं इदमानन्त्यमिच्छताम् ॥

rse

Charamasloka Adhikara

341

Desika points out that there is no such difference as doubted in this verse. He explains this verse as follows:

‘Vijanatham’ signifies having knowledge regarding upasanas or about the auspicious qualities of the protector that are helpful for prapatti. This does not signify knowledge of all things that are not required for prapatti. Though a person has this kind of relevant knowledge, if he is not capable of following other means, he will become an ‘akinchana’, qualified for prapatti. If it is asked, even if he has the ability, it may be asked whether he should not give up all activities, realising the power of the redeemer? The answer to this question is that such behaviour is an example for his activity after prapatti. If not, all the shastras that prescribe the performance of spiritual discipline, become futile. Even in case he has the knowledge of the other means, even if he has the ability to practise such means, he may decide that prapatti alone is appropriate for him who desires to gain the fruit without delay and he becomes a qualified aspirant for prapatti. This is suggested by ‘idam tithirshathampaaram’ - this means that those who are feeling the urgency to get rid of all 31AE or undesirables as soon as possible.

‘Anantyamichhatam’ signifies that one cannot bear oneself without obtaining the experience of the Supreme fully, which is in accordance with his essential nature. This fact of getting rid of the undesirable and attaining the bliss of divine communion is signified by the phrase

FayTh at’ | Here, Bhakti’ means Supreme Love towards the Lord, and it does not signify Bhaktiyoga. The ‘bhooma’ or plentitude of this bhakti is a particular state, attaining which one cannot live without attaining that divine experience cven for a moment. For some people, this kind of great devotion happens on account of the infinite grace of the Lord, caused on account of their ‘sukruta’. So, the meaning of that verse, can be summarised as below:

Those people who are ignorant of the procedure in other ‘upayas’, those people who have a general knowledge about this particular means of prapatti, those people who have the knowledge of different means such as ‘upasanas’ as well as this means of prapatti, but who have no ability to practise other ‘upayas’, and those who have both these viz., knowledge and ability, but yet unable to bear themselves, if there is delay in attainment - all these people are qualified for self-surrender or praparti.

Desike concludes after discussing all aspects that ‘upasanas’ and ‘prapadana’ are both valid means and meant for capable and incapable (shakra and ashakra) aspirants. Desika states that the shastras are purposeful in respect of both these kinds of adhikarins:

‘अशक्यातिकृच्छ्रेषु दुराशादायशालिनः ।

कस्यचित् बुद्धिदौर्बल्यात् लघुत्यागस्य कारणम् ॥ तत्र प्रपत्त्यनर्हाणां अन्यदित्यपि युज्यते । व्यासादिषु तु नैवेषा नीतिः संशयपातिषु’ ॥

“One who is incapable of practising other means of liberation (i.e. upasanas) but who has a strong ‘durāsha’ namely that there is no means other than Bhaktiyoga and that he would win ‘mukti’ only through Bhaktiyoga, in spite of good advice by well-wishers, will give up the ’laghu upaya’ i.e. prapatti, on account of his ‘buddhi-dourbalyam’

Charamasloka Adhikara

343

or want of knowledge and faith. This lack of faith becomes the cause of abandonment of prapatti. The cause of not adopting prapatti is, therefore, ‘vishvasamándyam’ or want of faith and not competency for Bhaktiyoga. In respect of those, who are not fit for prapatti, on account of ‘vishvasamāndyam’ or lukewarm faith, other means such as nama-samkirtana and others are appropriate. But, in respect of Vyasa and others that are capable of dispelling the doubts of others, it is not appropriate to say that they did not follow prapatti on account of vishvasamândya. Thus, both these paths - viz. Upasana and Prapatti – are meant for two different types of adhikarins.

If it is asked whether the performance of the varna ashrama-dharmas is futile in respect of a prapanna, as they are not accessories to prapatti, Desika answers that it is not so. The upasaka performs them as accessories to upasana, but a prapanna performs them not as an accessory but as ‘svayam-prayojana’ i.e. as loving service to the Divine.

If it is further asked whether kamya-karmas also could be done like this, Desika answers that there is no offence if kamya-karmas are not undertaken as they are opposed to his essential nature. He further clarifies that there is no ‘virodha or fault, if such kamya-karmas are undertaken for ‘Bhagavat bhagavata-samrudyartham’ i.e. for the furtherance and

pleasure of the Lord and the devotees of the Lord.

Thus, Desika has established that abandonment of the ordained duties in their essential nature (svarupa-tyaga) is not proper.

If sarvadharma svarupa tyaga is not ordained here, why not we take it to signify that ‘upayatva-buddhi-tyaga’ is ordained here, by the term ‘parityajya’? Is not Gita teaching. as follows:

‘एतान्यपि च कर्माणि संगं त्यक्त्वा फलानि च । कर्तव्यानीति मे पार्थ निश्चितं मतमुत्तमम् ॥

“These acts too must be performed without attachment and desire in fruit. This is my considered supreme view”.

The answer to this doubt is as follows:

It is proper to ordain ‘upayatva-buddhi-tyaga’ in the duties that are done after prapatti. Then, they will be of the form of ‘phala’. If these dharmas are to be performed without ‘upayatva-buddhi’, then they will necessarily become accessories of prapatti. This will be opposed to the nature of prapatti, which has no accessory other than ‘anukulya sankalpa’ and others. Then prapatti ceases to be fit for an ‘akinchana’. This question does not at all arise as ‘sarva dharma-svarupa-tyaga’ is never ordained here

‘अतः स्वरूपत्यागोक्तौ कैंकर्यस्यापचारता । उपायत्वमतित्यागे तत्स्वरूपांगता भवेत् ॥

“As elaborated above, if the view of ‘svarupa-tyaga’ is adopted, then the ‘kainkarya’ that is done will become a fault as it will result in doing something which is ordained to be abandoned. In the event of giving up ‘upayatva-buddhi’, then such dharmas characterised by ‘buddhi-tyaga’, become accessories to prapatti”.

So, it is concluded that the view that the ‘savrupa-tyaga’ of all dharmas is ordained as an accessory to prapatti and the view that ‘upayatva-buddhi-tyaga’ is ordained, are opposed to all the shastras that ordain that prapatti does not

Charamasloka Adhikara

345

depend upon anything, and to the traditions of the ancient Acharyas, and also to the practises of celebrated masters.

Sometimes, it is asked by some people that when a person has surrendered totally at the feet of the Lord, he is to abide by his knowledge of his essential nature, and that he is not subordinated to shastras. This also is not reasonable; because he has to know the nature of his svarupa only through the shastras and he cannot determine that this purushartha and this means are agreeable to this essential nature of jivatman of vice-versa without the shastras. There is no way of knowing the purushartha or the upaya that is agreeable to him independent of the shastras. He can generally know through sheshatva and others that he should behave agreeably to the Lord; but, he cannot know what ‘kainkarya’ done in what way would please the Lord or otherwise, directly before he is liberated from ‘samsara’. The svarupa jnanam cannot determine the types of services to the divine and the objects to be offered to the Lord. In this respect, there is no way other than the dictates of the shastras to know the righe types of services and the right types of articles of worship. Therefore, till one is liberated from ‘samsara’, he is bound by the dictates of the shastra.

Sri Yamuna has mentioned in this Girartha Sangraha that a bhakta should practise all his ordained duties devoting them all to the Supreme Lord with great love and that he should surrender them all to the Lord, and that he should not have an idea of ‘upaya’ in thosc. When this is applied to a prapanna, it is sometimes doubted whether it would not lead to worship of other dcities and thereby disturbing his ‘paramaikantitva’? It is here mentioned by masters that a Bhaktiyogin as well as a prapanna arc observing those duties as divine service to the Lord and for the sake of the pleasure of the Lord and so, it will not in anyway harm his ‘ananya upayatva’ or the fact of having Lord alone as his ‘upaya’ and ‘ananya-prayojanata’ or having no other goal other than attainment of godhead. The Lord alone assumes the role of the other ‘upayas’ and grants him the desired benefits. The performance of the ordained duties of one’s own station in life does not disturb his ‘ckanthatva’. The Lord, who is the innerself of all deities is worshipped through the worship of gods like Indra, Varuna and others that are associated with those varna-ashrama-dharma, and therefore, there is no disturbance in ‘paramaikantitva’.

The ancient masters have observed these ordained duties and have taught that one should not give up these dharmas.

Therefore, performing divine service along with the performance of the varna-ashrama-dharmas, does not contradict one’s ‘paramaikantitva’. The meaning of ‘माम् ’ and ‘अहम्’

These two terms of the Charamshloka are very significant as they expound the quality of ‘soulabhya’ or accessibility and ‘swatantrya’ or supremacy of the Supreme Paramatman. In the Bhagavadgita, the Lord himself expounds the essential nature of his incarnation as follows:

The knowledge of divine incarnation is an essential accessory to Bhaktiyoga; but, for a prapanna, this knowledge of the nature of incarnation of the Lord, will show vividly his accessibility. The Lord is characterised by both accessibility and supremacy. He is the one refuge of all humanity being easily accessible and He is the Supreme Object of attainment. He is awaiting for an opportunity to save erring humanity. These two terms signify this fact of the Lord’s accessibility. He is showing Himself before all and exhorting man to choose Him. This is suggested by the term

HHH’. The term ‘364’ shows the state of the Lord, eagerly waiting to accept one who chooses Him. So, these two words point out the ‘siddhopaya’ and the term ’ekam’ combined with TA’ signifies that He does not expect anything other than ‘rakshapekshapurvakabharanyasa’ or entrusting the protection of one’s burden preceded with a prayer for protection.

The ‘sadhyopaya’ or means that is to be adopted for gaining the ‘siddhopaya’, is pointed out by the term ‘sharanam vraja’. From this, it is clear that Prapatti is a means of awakening the grace of the protector and happens to be a means for liberation just like Bahktiyoga. The Lord, who becomes pleased with this kind of surrender, happens to be the direct means for moksha. For this means of Prapatti, what one has to know particularly is ’nirapeksha-upayatva’ or a means that does not require any other thing. What all is required is expressed in the terms HT’ and ‘T ’ This term HT4 has all the meanings that have been signified in the Mulamantra and Dvaya, such as ‘sarva-rakshakatva’ or the fact of redeeming all; ‘sarva-sheshitva’ or the fact of having every other thing subservient to Him; ‘sriyahpatitva’ or the fact of being the Lord of Goddess Mahalakshmi and ‘Narayanarva’ or the fact of being the one goal of all living beings. All qualities that are suggested by ‘paratva’ and ‘soulabhya’ are cxplicitly expounded by this term, such as ‘sarvajnatva’ omniscience, ‘sarva-shaktitva’ omnipotence, ‘paramakarunikatva’ supreme compassion, ‘soushilya’ the quality of uniting even with the low and ‘vatsalya’ the quality of not seeing the defects of His devotees. The auspicious divine form of the Lord that is signified by the term ‘charanau’ in the Dvaya-mantra’, which divine form is indicating His supremacy and accessibility, is also signified by the term ‘माम्’.

On account of the four qualities of ‘vatsalya’, ‘swamitva’, ‘soushilya’ and ‘soulabhya’ of the Lord, the Lord was very considerate to Arjuna, who was overcome by compassion towards the unworthy, and carried out his wishes such as halting the chariot in the midst of the two armies and showing his ‘Visvarupa’ and showing again his original form. These four qualities of the Lord are foremost in protecting those that seek refuge in Him. Among the three qualities of ‘Jnana’, ‘Shakti’ and ‘Karunya’, the first two are common for nigraha and anugraha, but karunya is unique for redemption.

Thus, the Lord is signifying Himself, who is characterised by all these qualities necessary for protection

Charamasloka Adhikara

349

CA

and who is showing Himself to all, by the term ‘ATA’. ‘Ekam’ qualifying ‘ATH’ points out that the object of attainment (prapya) is verily the means of attainment (prapaka). Thus, the ‘upaya-phalaikya’ is pointed out by this term.

This means is adopted by one as dictated by the shastra and the aspirant may consider himself also, equally along with the redeeme, as a means or ‘upaya’ and this kind of ‘upayadvitva’ is negated by the term the

It is taught by the masters that the term ct’ is used to point out that one should not count the sadhyopaya or prapatti, as an equal means along with the siddhopaya. Though the means of prapatti is ordained just like Bhaktiyoga for awakening the grace of the Lord, the Lord alone characterised by the qualities of natural ability and compassion, is the main means of attainment. It is not proper, therefore, to think that Prapatti, caused by Him, is also a means equal to Him. This is the meaning of the term

II

The sadhyopaya is thus only a pretext and not the prime means; but, taking this much into account, it should not be said that Prapatti is - H H , fatyraufatufet 4124, अनिवारणमात्रम्, अनुमतिमात्रम्, अचिव्यावृत्तिमात्रम्, चैतन्यकृत्यम्, चित्तसमाधानम्, अधिकारिविशेषणम् , because, all these views are opposed to the commandment शरणं व्रज’.

If ‘sambandha-jnana-matramn’ or mere awareness of the inherent relationship or ‘siddhopayapratipatti-matram’ or mere knowledge of the ever existent means of the nature of the Paramatman, is the meaning of Prapatti, it cannot become something to be ordained as it will be of the form of mere ‘vakyartha-jnanam’. The view of those that mere knowledge is the means of moksha is contrary to the exposition of Sri Bhashyam, as it will be against the command of upasanas. It is to be admitted that it will have to result in action (kartavya-jnana-matram). Even the statement of the form of ‘siddhopaya-svikaram’ implies that one should entrust the burden of one’s protection with a formal prayer after knowing the ‘siddhopaya’.

What is the meaning of ‘anivaranamatram’? If one prevents the Lord to protect oneself by one’s own ability, then the ‘Ishvaratval of the Lord becomes curtailed. If he prevents the Lord from saving him, by indulging in offences, then the surrender made by him should become an act of winning His grace. If he prevents the Lord from saving him by ‘svarakshana-Vyapara’ or actions done for his protection by himself, the Lord may act and make him liberated when that person is incapable of preventing Him in states like ‘sushupti’ or ‘pralaya’ or in such waking state, when he is incapable of functioning.

What is meant by ‘anumati-matram’? This fact of mere permitting or allowing, is common to upasaka also. ‘Achitvyaritimatram’, or being different from non-sentients, also cannot be prapatti. If it were so, even ‘pratikulas’ or those that act against the Lord will also have to be saved. If ‘chaitanyakrityamatram’ is said to be prapatti, then as upasanas and all other functions of the ‘chetana’ are chaitanya-kritya, there cannot be any distinction for prapatti; then, there will be no need for instruction by the Acharyas. If it is said that the spontaneous actions of a sentient are

Charamasloka Adhikara

351

chaitanaya-kritya, then there will be no need for any ‘upadesha’ at all.

If ‘chitta-samadhanam’ or equipoise of the mind is said to be prapatti, then the equipoise of the mind that is not helpful for the ‘phala’ or fruit, will be differing from person to person, according to one’s own ‘ruchi’ or taste and it cannot be taken as prapatti. Then ‘chitta-samadhanam’ will be to function according to one’s own desire’ -

From all this, it is understood that ishvara is one whose good will or prasada is to be gained and He is the prime ‘siddhopayam’ or means ever realised. Bhakti and Prapatti are prasadanas or occasions of gaining His grace and so are sadhyopayas that are अप्रधान

The word ’ekam’ is further explained as follows:

After surrender unto the Lord, the ‘sharanya’ or the redeemer, who has received the burden of protection, stands aloof without depending upon other ‘sadhanas’ prescribed for the attainment of the desired object. An ‘upasaka’ has to surrender first and on the basis of that, should practise ‘upasana’ or meditation and then alone the Lord would be an “upaya’ for that ‘phala’. But, the Lord will not burden an ‘akinchana’, who cannot bear delay with any other ‘sadhana’ in the middle, when once he has surrendered and put that burden on His own auspicious qualities. He becomes, a ‘phala-prada’ or granter of the results without any other expectation. This fact of the Lord’s not requiring any thing other than the proper performance of prapatti once, is also signified by the term ’ekam’.

The term ’ekam’ is also signifying the fact that it is positioned to counter ‘sarva’ in ‘sarva-dharman’ and ‘sarva’ in ‘sarva-papebhyah’. It means that the Lord alone is sufficient and capable of giving all attainments that could be gained by other and different dharmas.

Though ’ekam’ significs the prime means namely the siddhopaya’, it also points out that the one prapatti alone stands in the place of all other dharmas.

Thus, Desika has expounded the several significant meanings of the term ’ekam’ and sumamrises them all in the following verses. Six prominent meanings are pointed out here

‘प्राप्यस्यैव प्रापकत्वं स्वप्राधान्यनिवारणम् । प्रपत्तेः व्याजमात्रत्वं अन्योपायैरनन्वयः ॥ तदंगैरप्यसंबंधः सर्वसाध्येष्वभिन्नता । इत्थमर्थाः षडाचार्यैः एकशब्दस्य दर्शिताः’ ॥

The ‘prapya’ alone is the ‘prapaka’. The importance of the ‘31fefta’ is set aside. Prapatti is only a ‘vyaja’ or occasion; it is not an equal to the ‘siddhopaya’. It is not combined with other means like Bhaktiyoga. It is not requiring the accessories of Bhaktiyoga. It is the one means that can get all objects of attainment. The venerable Acharyas have thus shown the six meanings of the term ’ekam’.

Some expound the meaning of ’ekam’ as oneness of the ‘sharanya’. Even then, Goddess Sri characterises the Lord just like the qualities and the Divine-form. Goddess Sri is the sovereign of all entities and is dear to Him. In His vow of protecting the ‘jivas’, She is also ‘dikshita’ and she is also practising His dharma. Both of them together form one ‘cattva’. Though it is said that the cause of this universe is

Charamasloka Adhikara

353

one, it is known from ‘pramanas’ that it is necessarily characterised. Similarly, here also the one is qualified by Sri.

The term ‘sharanam’ significs all meanings that were expounded to that term in the Dvayadhikara. Though this kind of seeking refuge with the Lord was taught to Arjuna, it may be known that it is applicable to all people. Ramanuja says ‘अनालोचित विशेषाशेषलोकशरण्य’ | And in other such statements such as ‘zwi of Hald4, , un mui a al’, ‘योगो योगविदां नेता’, It is mentioned that this kind of instruction is not limited to Arjuna alone. It is applicable to all people; but, when He is to be sought, one should approach Him on account of having no other refuge. The term ‘vraja’ in the Charamashloka signifies surrender of the self along with all the accessories, as signified by the term ‘prapadye’ in Dvayamantra. In Dvayamantra, prapadye’ is in he First Person, as it relates to the person that surrenders unto the Lord. In the Charamashloka, ‘vraja’ ordains the person standing before Him, and so it is in the ‘Second Person’. This kind of surrender is to be performed only once, and it is not to be repeated as in the case of ‘upasanas’.

It is asked by some, how a person who is ‘aryanthaparatantra’ or utterly dependent upon another one, could be ordained any duty at all? This subservience and utter dependence is known from the Mulamantra and the ‘Adhyatma-Shastra. How can such a person be required to do some duty or ‘kartavya’?

Desika points out that this objection is raised without considering the utmost limit of ‘paratantrya’. The ‘atman’ has ‘kartrutva’, which is dependent upon the Lord. The sutras –

af stefaccia’ (V.S. 2-3-33) Rig dad:’ (V.S. 2-3-40) ordain that the ‘jivatman’ has ‘kartrucva’ as given by the Supreme Paramatman. He carries the commands of the Lord and takes the burden of ‘docrship’ as given by the Lord. If docrship is totally denied to the atman, then it will be similar to the school of ‘Sankhyas’ that attribute doership to matter or ‘prakriti’. It cannot be said that this docrship is ‘svadheena’ F A or depending upon himself, in which case, it will negate the doctrine of the Ishvara ruling over all atmans. It cannot be said that doership that is derived from Ishvara is mere knowership, because in that case, there will be no aspiration for attainment of the object of life (52_METI) and consequently, there will be no activity for following any means. If it is further argued that knowledge and desire, which are of a particular state of knowledge itself exists, and there is no further functioning, then there will be no scope for practising different means for seen or unseen objects and also for acts of divine service that are done as ‘svayam prayojana’. So, it is established that the atman has jnanam, or knowledge, chikirsha’ or desire to function and prayatna or efforts.

This ‘kartrtva’ is unique to the sentient being, as related to ‘prayatna’ or effort - S pray here i Prayatna or effort is a particular kind of consciousness that prompts the body and others. It is not appropriate to say that this kind of ‘karttva’ is only in ‘kainkarya’ or Divine Service and not in performance of a means - ‘upaya-anushtana’. Having the fact of ‘Bhagavat-precti’ or the pleasure of the Lord, as a prayojana, a person practises the ‘upayas’. So, in doership or ‘kartrtva’, the idea of ‘ahamn’ or cgo of the form of ‘I am the doer’, which is the cause of bondage, is to be discarded. One

Charamasloka Adhikara

355

has to reflect that he is functioning only according to the wisdom and power, the body and the indriyas, given to him by the Lord, as prompted by Him, who is the supporter and the ultimate beneficiary and only as he causes him to do these actions. This kind of reflection will not bind the doer. To think that he alone is the doer, and that he is acting for different benefits, will certainly bind him down to ‘samsara’. Even Bhakti’ and ‘Prapatti’ meant for attainment of different gains, are certainly binding. So, for a person, who is aspiring for ‘svabhavika-kainkarya’ and who is not after any other benefit (ananya-prayojana), ‘kartrutva’ or doership during the state of ‘sadhana-upaya-dasa’ is not contrary to his nature, just as ‘kartrtva’ in the state of liberation is not opposed to his nature.

In the state of liberation or ‘mukti’, the doership related to varied Divine-services to the Lord, is on account of the desire of the ‘mukta’, which is according to the wonderful desire of the Lord; but, the doership in this world of bondage, is according to one’s own karma on account of which the Lord causes the variations of the satva, rajas and tamas and this kind of doership is varied. The doership which is related to the effect of rajas and tamas, and also satva, being the cause of attachment to different benefits, is ‘bandhaka’ or binding. The ‘karttva’ or doership that is on account of the preponderance of satva-guna, which will have the desire for the attainment of the Lord, is the cause of liberation. The ‘kartitva’ or doership of a liberated soul is not related to ‘guna-traya’. So, there is no contradiction between statements positing doership and denying doership to the atman, as they are related to particular vishayas or states. The statements that deny doership to the atman affirm that one should not think the ‘kartrtva’ - that is356

Essence of Srimad Rahasyattaya Saram

subordinated to the Lord, and to the gunas, that are dependent upon the Lord - as ’nirapeksha’ or independent doership. The statements that affirm docrship to the jivatman declare that for the knowledge ‘chikirsha’ or desire to act, and effort, that are derived from the will of the Lord, the atman is the ‘ashraya’. So, there is no contradiction between these two kinds of statements.

It is established that the jivatman is fit for being commanded by the Lord to function, according to His intention, as the Lord has blessed him with doership. So, the jivatman has doership dependent upon the will of the Lord. So, there is every justification to command him to seek refuge with Him by the term ‘vraja’.

This ‘sharanagati’ dharma is ordained as something to be done, just like Bhakti and others. It is to be remembered that it is not something which is independent of Paramatman’s will; but only on account of Him alone, that these are caused. Here, a prapanna should think that his doership is ‘paradheena’ or dependent on Paramatman. The statement of some masters that forgiveness is prayed of the Lord for the prapatti done by one, should be understood as related to prapatti done with ‘ahankara’. If a prapanna feels that he is offering something of his own to the Lord to be protected, that is not proper. Desika points out here, that such forgiveness is prayed to set right the feeling of ‘ahankara-sparsha’. It is not an offence to have surrendered according to shastra. ‘Paradheena-Kartrtva’ or dependent doership, is not a fault. The view that any prohibited deed will not taint a person, who is aware of his essential nature of having no doership, is not tenable, as he has in reality dependent doership (978andra4).

Charamasloka Adhikara

357

The meaning of ‘vraja’ is sometimes explained as knowing the relationship of the protector and the object to be protected, and it is explained that a ‘mumukshu’ should gain ‘shastra-janya sambandha-jnanam’ or knowledge of the inherent relation between the ‘sheshi’ and the ‘shesha’ that is gained from the Shastra. But, this is quite opposed to the commandments of the shastra for practising the means of Bhakti and Prapatti for realisation of spiritual perfection. This knowledge, that is gained from the shastras, is actualised by ‘shravana’ and ‘manana’ that are ‘raga-praptha’ or possible on account of one’s interest, and this kind of knowledge does not need any prescription or ‘vidhi’. The masters of yore have pointed out the defects such as contradiction to the commandments of Bhakti and Prapatti, in respect of those that posit that ‘avidheya-jnana’ is a ‘moksha-sadhana’. So, it cannot be said that ‘vraja’ signifies only as related to the knowledge of the relationship of the aspirant and the Supreme Paramatman. When one realises from the shastras his inherent relationship with the Lord, he will then desire to know, how he could attain the Lord, and this means of Bhakti and Prapatti are also ordained according to the competence of the aspirant and are particular kinds of knowledge that are different from mere ‘sambandha-jnanam’.

Desika explains in a Tamil verse, the summary of the Charamashloka, showing vividly the several meanings of the term ’ekam’.

“I alone am the means and the end or the fruit. The sadhaka seeks refuge with me not independently, but being a dependent upon me. The means of ‘sharanagati’ is also not a regular upaya, but only a pretext. Other sadhanas like Bhaktiyoga and others, are not even accessories to ‘sharanagati’. There is to other accessory for this, which is to be gained with difficulty. I myself stand in the place of other means. I alone am the messenger having the quality of sousheelya and others. I am also the master of everything Get rid of your sorrow by taking resort in me.” - Thus, says Lord to Arjuna, through this verse.

In the first half of this verse, the ‘adhikari-krutya’ or the duty that an aspirant has to do, has been prescribed. In the latter half of the verse, the Lord, the all-protector, who accepts the burden of protection, describes what he would do to save the aspirant and make the aspirant freed from cares and worries.

The verb - a ’ is in the first person’, and implies the subject as ‘T’ or ‘aham’. Even so, why is the word ‘aham’ is used?

This term is significant because it points out the Lord who is omniscient and omnipotent, who is capable of relicving from all sins. The idea is this -

“I alone - who am having no equal or superior to Me, and who bound the erring soul to samsara - am full of mercy caused by the pretext of your surrendeș, am going to release you from all sins forgiving all your faults. Nobody can obstruct me from protecting you.”

Is it not verily said that the Lord Vishnu is the bestower of liberation?

9319: YITAT: A Fall तेनैव मोचनीयास्ते नान्यैः मोक्षयितुं क्षमाः’ ॥

Charamasloka Adhikara

359

“The living beings (animals) are bound by the Supreme, on account of His leela. They are to be liberated only by Him. They are not possible of being liberated by others.” Thus, in this term ‘aham, the grace of the Lord that was awakened by the surrender of the soul and the natural compassion and other qualities of the Lord, and also the unsurpassed ‘swatantrya’ of the Lord, are suggested and these are useful in setting aside all the obstructions for the liberation of the surrendered.

The natural compassion of the Lord generates His grace that ignores the infinite offences of the soul by a mere pretext of a prapatti. So, this grace will be supported by the supreme power of the Lord, and will be capable of destroying all obstructions for attainment of liberation of the ‘ashritas’. So the term ‘aham’, which has the sense of emphasis viz., ‘I alone, of this nature’, is very significant in this verse,

The word ‘ai’ signifies the person, who surrenders unto the Lord, after gaining the discrimination of the three entities and who has renounced the attainment of the objects of life such as ‘ऐश्वर्य’ , ‘कैवल्य’ after having realised their defects of littleness and transitoriness, and who is yearning for the attainment of the supreme object of life of the form of the attainment of Paramatman, and who has given up other difficult means on account of his incapacity, and who has done what ought to be done by surrendering unto the Lord, who is the prapya’ and ‘sarva-virodhi-nirakarana kshama’ - (or ultimate object of attainment and who is capable of setting aside all obstructions to his attainment) and who has nothing more to do for the attainment of his desired object. After having mentioned the ‘moksha-prada’ (the granter of liberation) and the incapable jivatman who has surrendered unto Him, by these two terms ‘3764’ and ‘rat’ - the ‘bandhakas’ or obstructions that bind one to samsara are mentioned by the term ‘sarva-papebyah’ Hd919’ ‘from all sins!

‘Papa’ or sin is an ‘anartha-sadhana’ or a means causing untoward results that may be ‘pratikula-prapti’ or attainment or disagreeable things, or it may be ‘anukula-niyritti’ or loss of agreeable things. This term ‘papa’ here, signifies the ‘samsarika-punya’ or the agreeable things in this worldly state, as this term ‘papa’ is related to the mumukshu or an aspirant after liberacion. Even ‘svarga’ and others are undesirable attainments for an aspirant after liberation. Thus, by the term ‘papa’, the cause of bondage of both ‘punya’ and ‘papa’ is implied in this context. The plural number in ‘papebyah’ points out that such causes are infinite. Here, the term ‘sarva’ signifies ignorance, karma, the reminiscent impressions, and the relationship with the gross and subtle body and inclination for the undesirable things. The group of all these obstructions is signified by the term ‘sarva papebyah’.

In the ‘Sharanagati Gadyam’, Bhagavan Ramanuja has mentioned the groups of all ‘virodhis’ in three paragraphs beginning with ‘mano-vakkaya’ etc. The statement “When the Lord wills to grant moksha even sins cannot obstruct”, does not mean that there will be no displeasure of the Lord, even in case of intentional sins and so there is no need of expiation. The meaning of the statement is that, when the Lord becomes pleased with the surrender done unto Him, there will be necessarily liberation. The Lord will prompt

Charamasloka Adhikara

361

such a person to surrender again for forgiving those faults and he forgives them duly and grants moksha.

The statement that the Lord relishes the faults of the surrendered, just as the dirt in the body of the lover is relished etc., should be taken in the sense that even if wicked people surrender unto the Lord, the Lord will not let them down.

Instead of this, if it is meant that intentional sins done after prapatti will be enjoyable to the Lord (bhogya), it will result in the consequence of amassing more and more such sins to please the Lord. If on the other hand, intentional sins occur on account of the ‘prarabdha-karma’, the Lord will inflict light punishment upon them, if they do not repent and pray for forgiveness, and take them to His side in the end. Even this kind of light punishment is a way of the Lord’s forgiveness.

The argument that in the case of people, who have committed intentional sins after prapatti, and have not regretted for them, and have never asked for forgiveness, there is not even the slight punishment as witnessed in this world, is not sound, because the mode of inflicting punishment is of different kinds for different types of offences and so we are seeing different kinds of punishments inflicted on them such as suffering from the three kinds of 3 , Hautfah, fugach torments, diminution of knowledge, obstructions for ‘bhagavadanubhava’, breach in the enjoyment of the bliss of service to the Lord and the Bhagavatas, censurt by the celebrated oncs, the destruction of particular kind of ‘sukruthas’, the disregard by the satvikas, the affliction of frustration of one’s desires and similar such punishments. The infliction of punishment varies from

362

Essence of Srimad Rahasyarraya Saram

person to person in such cases of committing intentional sins after prapatti according to the intensity or otherwise of the offence and the kinds of punishments that are listed above can be seen being enforced on them. So, it cannot be said that the incidence of punishments like this, docs not happen in case of intentional sins.

So, it is an established fact that normally a prapanna does not commit any intentional sin after prapatti, and in case, on account of his past karma, such sins occur, he prays for forgiveness with repentance; and in case, one does not repent, the Lord purifics them by inflicting suitable punishment. A prapanna is, therefore, sure to attain his object of attainment with certainity.

‘विवेकिनां प्रपन्नानां धीपूर्वागस्यनुद्यमः । मध्यानां अनुतापादिः शिक्षा कठिनचेतसाम्’।

The term ‘mokshayishyami’ gives the assurance - “I am going to relieve you from samsara, when you desire.” The Lord has vowed that he would not forgive certain sins When it is so, is not this statement - I free you from all sins - contradictory?

The answer to this question is that these two references, relate to different subjects, and therefore, non-contradictory. The instances mentioned to point out that Lord would not forgive, means that such sins would not be forgiven, when one undertakes other light means of expiation. Prapatti is of the form of an expiation of all sins and the Lord is going to forgive all sins, when one undertakes this means and seeks His forgiveness. This statement of the Lord, is not a statement of consolation or 3497’. Releasing from sins means to give up His will to punish one who has behaved

Charamasloka Adhikara

363

na

disagreeably from beginningless-time towards Him. When this ’nigraha’ or the will to punish is terminated, all kinds of effects of ’nigraha’ such as ignorance and others, disappear. To put it positively, Ishvara’s nigraha-nivritt is verily Ishvara prasada. Termination of ignorance in respect of the prapanna means extension of the knowledge of the reality.

The destruction of the karma on account of the eminence and efficacy of ‘upasana’ or ‘prapatti’, means that the Lord gives up His desire to dispense the results of those karmas to those people. ’ ’ or non-tainting of karmas, means that an intention to give the result of such karmas in respect of those that have taken refuge with the Lord, is given up totally by the Lord; or, we may say that an intention to dispense those results will never arise in the mind of the Lord.

If all karmas are thus relieved of the aspirant, what karmas of an aspirant of moksha - a prapanna or an upasaka - are transmitted to his friends and foes? Those karmas of his that do not taint him or that are destroyed and such punya karmas, done intentionally after prapatti and are stultified from yielding the results by more powerful karmas - ‘अश्लेषविनाशविषयानि’ and ‘बुद्धिपूर्वोत्तर पुण्येषु कर्मान्तर प्रतिबद्धफलानि’ are transmitted.

The Lord is going to transpose these karmas at the time of the fall of his body, and not at the very time of commencement of the mokshopaya, because those friends and foes may at some further time change their attitude of friendship or enemity towards the upasaka or prapanna.

Is it proper that the karmas done by some one are transmitted to some others in this way as it leads to the reaping of consequences without doing actually any such deed good or bad?

It is answered that this kind of transmission of karma - good or bad – to the friends and foes of the prapanna or upasaka takes place on account of the activities of those people of the form of ‘upachara’ or benefaction or ‘apachara’ or offence. As this kind of transmission of karma, happens on account of their good-will or ill-will about the upasaka or prapanna, there is no wrong in such transmission. That is why, there is no mention of neutrals as recipients of good and bad karmas. This is in fact the good will or wrath of the Lord in respect of those people, who treat a jnani well or in a bad manner. ‘Sarva-papebyah’ includes - 1. all obstructions for the attainment of Paramatman

according to his desire (prapti-virodhi) 2. all obstructions for the practise of spiritual disciplines;

(upaya-virodhi) and all causes that lead to the experience of disagreeable things (pratikula-anubhava-hetu). Prapti-virodhi is of this form -

The will of the Lord that “this atman who has committed offences is not worthy of experiencing me.”

Upaya-virodhi, is the will of the Lord that “this atman may not become capable of choosing Me after knowing My nature.”

Pratikula-anubhava-hetu, is of this form -

The will of the Lord to award one the respective fruits of the offences committed by him.

Charamasloka Adhikara

365

If the Lord gives up His will of the above nature, all causes of punishment get terminated and the aspirant attains the Paramatman.

When the termination of the stream of all obstructions of the form of causes and effects, happens - as mentioned in ‘sarva-papebhyo-mokshayishyami’, it amounts in declaring that such a person gains the manifestation of complete bliss of Divine experience. It is 1961: STH’ or established by itself.

The destruction of obstructions results in the full experience of the Divine and no separate effort is needed for that experience. When once an atman manifests its true nature of being subservient to the Lord and experiences the bliss of Divine communion, he will realise that all things that were appearing disagreeable earlier, are only agreeable to him in the state of liberation. Even this is implied in ‘sarva-papebhyo-mokshayishyami’.

By the word ’ekam’ in this verse, if oneness of upaya and phala is implied, then the ‘anishta-nivritti’ of the form of ‘sarva-papebhyo-mokshayishyami’ explicitly points out this ‘ishta-prapti’ or attainment of the object desired. This has been suggested in the previous verse as '

H o ld’. When all sins of the form of obstructions to the attainment of Paramatman are totally terminated, as declared in ‘sarva papebhyo mokshayishyami’, there is no cause for the obstruction of Divine experience and so, there cannot happen, the experience of the mere atman, divested of Divine experience.

One might have got rid of all sins that obstruct the experience of duf, birth and death; but, if he has not got rid of the obstructions to ‘paripurna Bhagavadanubhava’, he366

Essence of Srimad Rahasyatraya Şaram

may rest in bliss of the experience of his atman alone. As such a person is having no relationship with the experience of the ‘achit’ or the experience of Paramatman, he is called a ‘kevala’; but, it is not ‘mukthi’ or full liberation. Sometime, the term ‘Kaivalya’ is used for Bhagavat-prapti’ also. There, the meaning of that term is the termination of all ‘upadhis’ or limiting adjuncts. So, ‘sarva-papebhyo-mokshayishyami’ implics the attainment of the full bliss of Divine Communion (Paripuran-Brahma-Anubhava).

As this verse assures the termination of all sins - the obstructions of the form of some karmas, to the full experience of Parabrahman, also get totally terminated, and therefore, such a person will attain Baramatman, as the Lord himself has declared as wideft’. This assurance, “you will attain Me alone” signifies the bliss of communion with the Supreme Paramatman. For gaining such complete experience, there will be ‘archiradi-gaci’ and ‘desa-visesha prapti’. The passage of the liberated person through ‘archiradi’ to attain the Divine Abode of the Lord, is well known from the Upanishads and the Sutras.

All this, is signified by the statement ‘HTTP:’ (Do not grieve). This statement affirms the faith of the aspirant that he may not have any apprehension regarding the ultimate goal of attainment, as all causes of griet get terminated for one who adopts this means of liberation. There is no room for an aspirant to grieve when the Lord has taught this means of surrender, which is not difficult to adopt, and which is capable of averting all obstacles without any delay.

The grief that is terminated here, is not the grief Arjuna had earlier on account of the destruction of his relatives, as

367

that was terminated by the Lord through the instruction of the self. It is also not the grief he entertained, whether he was bom to ‘asuri-sampath’, because that also was terminated by the Lord, who gave him an assurance that he was born to ‘daivi-sampath’. What is the grief that is terminated here, then?

When Arjuna realised his disability to practise Bhaktiyoga, which was an arduous means, set with many obstructions, and to be practised for a long time, he intensely grieved that he was incapable of following that discipline for attainment of spiritual perfection. The compassionate Lord taught him an easier means free from all obstructions, that needed to be performed once, and made him doubtless in attaining the ultimate object of life. Then, Arjuna felt relieved. The assurance of the Lord, thus relieves Arjuna of his intense sorrow caused by the difficulties in following other means. So, it is this sorrow of Arjuna that is terminated by the statement मा शुचः ।

The Lord enjoined Arjuna who was depressed on account of his incapability to practise the spiritual discipline of Bhaktiyoga, to surrender unto Him, and be freed from all worries and fears. The incapable aspirant entrusted the burden of his protection to the capable Lord and the, compassionate and all powerful Lord accepted it. So, the Lord, who is omnipotent and compassionate, and who speaks the truth alone, gave the assurance that He would save him from all sins. Arjuna had no doubt about this, and his fear was dispelled. From this, it becomes evident that a person who realises his utter helplessness, will be intensely sorrowful and he would fear what would happen to him. A person who is ‘bheeta’ or full of fear, is qualified for ‘prapatti’

368

Essence of Srimad Rahasyattaya Saram

or self-surrender. After prapatti, he will be freed from fear and sorrow, as he would have no doubt about the attainment of the ultimate goal on account of the grace of the Lord, awakened by his surrender unto Him.

Desika has explained elaborately the significance of the statement #1 Ta’ : 1. One need not grieve, whether or not one has to struggle

hard, practising a difficult means which is not possible of even very capable people, and which needs to be practised for a long time with patience; One need not grieve whether or not one is fit for practising prapatti, when he has faith in the Lord and the realisation of his helplessness; One need not grieve about the ‘siddhopaya’, who is all powerful, compassionate and accessible to all. He is a person, in whom one can have full trust. One need not fear whether there would be short comings in the accessories, as in the case of upasanas, though there are certain deficiencies on account of

temporal and spacial variations; 5. One need not fear regarding the occurrence of

intentional offences after prapatti, if he has surrendered to the Lord for avoiding such offences. Such offences never recur on account of that prapatti; One need not fear whether he would be hurled to hell on account of intentional sins done by him after prapatti, as the Lord would purify him by appropriate punishments, if he does not repent;

Charamasloka Adhikara

369

7. One need not fear whether his body would follow him

even after that life, because the body would continue in that birth, so long as he desires to continue; One need not fear whether the prapatti done by him would not be fruitful, on account of some wrong behaviour of his; One need not fear whether he would be having further birth on account of the ‘prarabdha-karma’, because the prapanna has specially surrendered to the Lord for

granting him moksha at the end of that body; 10. One need not fear whether there would be delay in the

attainment of liberation on account of the mere experience of the nature of the jivatman (kaivalya), because the Lord has given the assurance that he would relieve him of all sins.

Desika has pointed out that the profound meanings of this Charamakavya or final statement would be taught by the celebrated Acharyas at their ‘charamadasa’ or last moments to the deserving disciples.

The gist of this celebrated verse is summarised as follows:

“You entrust the burden of your protection to me along with five accessories without wandering in other spiritual means that are yielding the results with long delay, which are difficult to know and practise by you, who are of little knowledge, little ability and who exists for a limited time and who cannot bear delay, deciding that I alone, am accessible to all and that, I am the one refuge of the entire world, and that I am characterised by all qualities helpful for redeeming one.” YS

“I who am supremely compassionate and all powerful, and who am pleased with your surrender, will for my own sake relieve you, who have done your duty and entrusted the burden of your protection unto me, from the infinite, many-fold, unsurmountable hosts of all obstructions, once and for all. I shall make you an equal to me in enjoying the bliss of communion with me and endow you with my complete service which is of the form of the spontaneous flow of the ecstasy of my experience at all times in all places and all states. I shall derive supreme joy by making you thus. You need not grieve.”

Having expounded the meanings of this supreme mantra, Desika declares that this way of exposition was taught by the preceptors of yore. The preceptors who sought refuge with the one and non-second Lord, who is ever associated with the Mother ‘Sri’, who is the one dharma standing in the place of all dharmas, and who is the bestower of all objects, and who got rid off all sorrows, - expounded this path of explanation for this sacred mantra.

‘एकं सर्वप्रदं धर्म श्रिया जुष्टम् समाश्रितैः ।

अपेत शोकैराचार्यैः अयं पन्थाः प्रदर्शितः’ ।

In the concluding verse, Desika pays his homage and veneration to the great Acharyas, who expounded in a glorious way the meanings of this eminent verse, which happens to be the ultimate teaching of the Lord Krishna to Arjuna. This verse is here, praised as the eminent ‘Koustubha gem’ that emanated when the milky ocean was churned. This Charamashloka is similar to that ‘koustubha gem’ and is picked from the vast ocean of Mahabharata composed by

na

Charamasloka Adhikara

371

CIIL

the great Veda Vyasa. This verse is also very dear and pleasing to the Lord, just like that ‘Koustubha gem’. Our Acharyas realised that this verse enshrines the supreme meaning of ‘sharanagati, as propounded by the shrutis and the smrutis. The path taught in this celebrated verse, is cherished by all people with great respect. The interpretations of our Acharyas happen to be the staircase (a flight of stairs) to the highest place of liberation. The cminent Vyshampayana as well as Shuka, Shounaka, Narada and other celebrated sages nod their heads with joy and appreciation in response to the glorious way of explanation of this great verse. They consider that it is their good fortune to listen to such eminent exposition.

‘व्यासाम्नायपयोधि - कौस्तुभनिभं हृद्यं हरेरुत्तमं श्लोकं केचन लोकवेदपदवीविश्वासितार्थं विदुः । येषामुक्तिषु मुक्तिसौघविशिखा सोपानपंक्तिष्वमी ari4144 1445494: 81: For: appa:’ ॥