Search:
Bhakti List Archives

Re: brahman's pervasiveness in ugly matter

From the Bhakti List Archives

Lakshmi Narasimhan Venkatapathy • August 19, 2002 


Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha!
Dear members,
I would like to share some thoughts that sprang up in my mind when I read 
this mail. Well 'akila heya pratyanika' is a a quality of brahman. So, the 
quality has to be explained from the brahman's perspective. The failures for 
us, the human beings, would be when we try to define that in our own terms. 
Well, let us try analysing few things that we encounter in our everyday 
life. Pig! the one that rolls in the mud and stinks most of the time. I 
repeat it stinks! but for whom? for human beings and may be for few more 
animals too. But, a male pig loves the female one. The mother pig loves its 
kids. They like and love and are happy. It plays in the mud and it stinks. 
Man for that matter, cleans up the pig, kills it and eats it and says the 
taste is pretty good. This simple example explains so many things in our 
life. The words ugly, good etc are for us  - the beauty lies at the eye of 
the beholders. For Sri Ramanujar, the view point was that of brahman. 
Brahman distinguishes none. He exists everywhere. There is no ugly or good. 
Though this is the quality of the brahman, it has to be defined in a term 
that has to be understood by every human being. If there is no distinction 
between beauty and ugly, good or bad - what do you call that quality as? It 
is a good quality right? Even the judge who is neutral to the good and the 
bad is called the good. If judge was not neutral you still call him bad. So, 
from that perspective, because the brahman doesn't distinguish between good 
and bad, beauty and ugly, that very quality - impartiality - of brahman is 
defined as good. I could have stopped with this to explain "akilaheya 
pratyanikam", but for, animal faeces! I tend to smile at this one, because 
it is very simple to answer this. What are we? We are just ugly beings 
wrapped up by an excellent skin. Can anyone see us and feel pleasant if we 
remove our skins? What is inside us? We are just made of achit - the Five 
elements. Don't we know that our blood stinks, our flesh stinks. Just 
because it is inside us does it mean we are good? All these things are 
bio-chemicals as the science calls them, and the five elements as our 
shastras call them. They have good, bad, pungent, stinking, pleasant and 
what not? All kind of smells. But they are just achit! It is a combination 
of them that make them likable or not for human beings. So, what is wrong in 
brahman being inside that? It makes no difference. The difference is only 
for the human beings. I cannot go and play in the mud while a pig can and a 
buffalo can. Why should I compare myself with brahman? For brahman, the pig, 
the buffalo or myself are all one and the same. These make up his shareera. 
My hands may feel that it is cleaner than my legs that are ugly. But for me, 
it doesn't make a difference. I don't treat my hands better than my leg for 
that. For brahman, we are the bodies and though we are for specific purpose 
and differ between us, the difference is not seen by the brahman. Remember! 
Brahman is impartial!!! I don't know whether this convinces the person who 
raised the question, I just thought I would share my thoughts. Learned 
persons, please correct me if I were wrong.
Adiyen Ramanujadasan,
Lakshmi Narasimhan


>From: Bhashyam Raghunandan 
>Reply-To: bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
>To: bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: brahman's pervasiveness in  ugly  matter
>Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 03:38:47 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Dear Sri Ramkumar,
>I think for the Brahman, there is no distinction
>between the goog and ugly matter.  Sriman Narayana is
>should be certainly present in all substances.  Why
>ugly matter, he should be present in those animals
>which live on this ugly matter.  He should be present
>in those krimis in the ugly matter itself.  According
>to our philosophy there is no substance which is not a
>shareera of the Brahman.
>"Akila-heya-pratyaneekan" does not mean that he is not
>present in ugly matter, but it means that he posses no
>bad qualities.  He is also called as "Apahathapapma"
>which means that while he is all pervading, no dosha
>of a specific substance will affect him in any way.
>Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan.
>Raghunandan
>--- tg_ramkumar  wrote:
> > Bear with me on this stinker.
> >
> > To those that say "everything is verily brahman",
> > "brahman is verily everything",
> > "matter is a mode of brahman's existence",
> > "brahman pervades everything" and such -
> >
> > Could you explain what you mean?
> >
> > What do you think of brahman's pervasiveness in
> > despicable things
> > such as animal faeces?
> >
> > Please do not ignore SrI-rAmAnuja's descriptions of
> > the brahman
> > such as  "akhika-heya-pratyanIka",
> > "samasta-vastu-vilakshaNa",
> > "trividha-chetana-achetana-svarUpa-sthiti-pravRtti-
> > bhEdam", "sakhaletara vilakshaNa",
> > "aSesha-dosha-asamspRshTam".
> >
> > aDiyEn
> > //Ramkumar
> >
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------
>            - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
>To Post a message, send it to:   bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
>Group Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bhakti-list
>Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com



--------------------------------------------------------------
           - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
To Post a message, send it to:   bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Group Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bhakti-list
Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/
 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/