Re: avathAram
From the Bhakti List Archives
• January 4, 1996
Salutations to all ! I would like to add to this discussion regarding the avathArams. a) vEdAntins would not find it tenable to accept budDha as an avathAram, because it denies the very existence of something called "Athman" (let alone paramAthman). I think all vEdAntins (advaithins, vishishtAdvaithins and dvaithins) do not accept the "nairAtmavAdam" of the boudDhamatham. And I dont think, a budDhist too would find it tenable to accept budDha as an avathAram. My guess is that at some point in History (may be jayadhEva of ashtapadhi fame) a need for such a synthesis was felt, and it was done. I dont think we have a pramANa for accepting budDha as an avathAram. On the contrary we have a number of pramANas listing the dashAvathAras explicitly, such as svAmi dEsikan's sthotram. b) Let us consider the motivation for Him to descend as an avathAram. i) Someone already mentioned that it is a part of His leela (sport) ii) I would also like to recall that famous verse in Gita: "parithraNAya sAdhUnAm vinAshAya cha dhushkruthAm ^^^ dharmasamsthApanArThaya samBhavami yuge yuge" Observe the word cha (AND). It is not vA (OR). He Himself says that "I manifest myself (descend as an avathAram) to 1) protect the good, 2) destroy the evil AND 3) to well-establish the dharma" How can He, who is the essence of the vEdas descend as an avathAra of budDha, who rejected the vEdas ? If He did, would not He not be contradicting reason #3 ? I am sure the learned scholars in this group will see this logic, and establish the truth. c) This is not directly relevant to this topic. But I thought I should share this with the group. I remember a discourse (I think Sri Krishna Premee's) where a witty and humourous samadhAnam was answered to this hypothetical question: Question: Why does He not take avathArams these days ? After all some of our politicians are worse than rAvaNa and the other asurAs ! Answer: True, there may be some people today, who could match the asuras of yore. Yet, he does not take an abvathAram. In that Gitashloka, He also has another condition - "to protect the good" ! May be, there is not a single "good" person; for otherwise how would He (who rushed to the rescue of Gajendra, Prahlada and Draupadi) keep quiet ? Probably there are "good" persons too; but they dont seem to ask Him for help with full confidence in Him ! That's why He has gone "out of business" these days ! vAchaka dOshaha kshanthavyAha. adiyEn maDhurakavidhAsan, Ramesh Srinivasaraghavan
- Next message: Vish Vishwanath: "(no subject)"
- Previous message: Mani Varadarajan: "Re: Avataaraas"
- Next in thread: Mani Varadarajan: "Re: avathAram"
- Maybe reply: Mani Varadarajan: "Re: avathAram"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]