Re: PramAnas for Brahman as being different from its Body
From the Bhakti List Archives
• May 1, 2000
SrI: SrI Lakshminrusimha ParabrahmaNE namaha SrI Lakshminrusimha divya pAdukA sEvaka SrIvaN SatakOpa- SrI nArAyaNa yateendra mahAdESIkAya namaha Dear SrI HarikrishNa, namO nArAyaNa. >> Saatvata Samhita, Poushkara Samhita and JayAkya Samhita are >> regarded as the "Ratna Traya" (Three Jewels) in pAncAratra. >> -------------------------------- > > While I do not normally take issue with nonshruti Samhitas, I must point out > that these are not exactly mainstream. Exactly on what basis should I accept > the Samhitas? I would be interested to know. The Puraanas, for example, are > explicitly described as the fifth Veda. Are there similar references in the > shrutis to the Pancharaatras? > Also, I would like to know if Saatvata Samhita is the same as Saatvata > Tantra? SAtvata samhita is an authoritative pAncarAtra text. Please refer to treatises like Agama prAmAnya of YAmunAchArya (Trans. By Van Buitenen), PAncarAtra Raksha of SrI VEdAnta DESika, AgamAs and South Indian Vaishnavism by Dr V.VaradAchAri, The Glory of Lakshmi - the english trans. by Dr V.VaradAchAri, of Pandit V.KrishnamAchArya's Sanskrit Introduction to the Lakshmi Tantra, Introduction to pAncarAtra and Ahirbudhnya samhita by Otto Schrader, pAncarAtra and early vaishnava theology by Matsubara etc. These have more information for your questions. > Previously you wrote, ". This gives them [Gaudiya Vaishnavas] a > very contradictory metaphysical stand since BhagavAn is > savisEsha (who has various guNas, form etc) and He can't > simultaneously be nirvisEsha" (without any attributes whatsoever) > as "NirguNa Brahman"." > > But here now you are arguing for the existence of a Brahman > separated from its attributes, or somehow superior to its > attributes. Either Brahman is the same as its form or different > from it. If different from it, then you are arguing for the > existence of two entities. In that case the criticism above > applies even more to your point of view. I am sorry to say again that you have misunderstood what I have written. Please go through them again. Since Brahman is saviSEsha, it has many attributes. This by itself clarifies that Brahman is different from its attributes. The theory of NirviSEsha Brahman refers to an entity which is not characterized by any attribute at all. Brahman being omniscient, knows everything. He knows through the jn~yAna he has. That jn~yAna is technically referred to as dharmabhUta jn~yAnam (dbj), which is present as an inseparable attribute to Brahman. There are various states of its dbj corresponding to various kalyANa guNas. Brahman also has an eternal form, inseparable from it at SrI VaikuNTham. Brahman also has chit and achit as its sarIra, inseparable from it. Brahman's swaroopa is also characterized by Sattyatvam, jn~yAnatvam, aanandatvam etc. Since Brahman is characterized by many inseparable attributes, it is certainly SaviSEsha and is not at all nirviSEsha. > > Also, the idea that the formless Brahman is superior to Brahman with form is > contradicted by Bhagavad-Giitaa: > > mattaH paratara.m naanyat ki~nchidasti dhana~njaya | > mayi sarvamida.m prota.m suutre maNigaNaa iva || giitaa 7.7 || > > O conqueror of wealth, there is no truth superior to Me. Everything rests > upon Me, as pearls strung on a thread (bhagavad-giitaa 7.7). > > Here, "Me" can only apply to the person Krishna, and not to anything inside > Him taking that form, or whatever. This is a very straightforward statement, > and comes in a scripture that everyone accepts. There is absolutely no contradiction. "Me" primarily refers to the person, who is Brahman and not its attribute viz. the "Divine Body". By the statement "Everything rests upon Me as pearls strung on a thread", it obviously points to the Brahman who is all-pervading and the supporter etc of chit +achit. This is certainly the straight-forward meaning. The person speaking is Brahman and not its body by itself. Hence, "Me" is used by Brahman (KrishNa) to denote Himself and not His body here. "Me" here, connotes Him, who is actually all-pervading. Brahman while manifesting to Arjuna and speaking these words is with a body of certain dimension. The "limited body" in front of Arjuna is obviously not the thing that pervades everywhere to support everything as a thread supporting the pearls. Thus "Me" verily connotes the Brahman itself. Also, there is absolutely _nothing wrong_ is connoting the "body" by the word "Me/My" in certain cases. We can certainly frame meaningful sentences like "My Weight is 70 kg" etc, wherein "My" refers to the body. Lord KirshNa also has used the word "Me" to connote His divine Body (Ex: BG 6.14,6.15, wherein the yOgi aspiring for jIvAtma sAkshAtkAram is instructed to meditate on the form of Lord which is SubhASrayam). Such persons need not meditate upon the essential nature of Brahman characterized by Satyatvam, jn~yAnatvam, aanandatvam etc. Only the bhakti yOgi needs to meditate upon them alongwith other kalyANa guNas and forms specific to the upAsana he chooses. This is the distinction between the stages in the meditation by the yOgis, who are aspiring for the jIvAtma sAkshAtkAram and ParamAtma sAkshAtkAram : In the former, the yOgi, who although knows about the svaroopa of Brahman as being characterized by Satyatvam etc, needn't meditate upon them, since his goal is only jIvAtma-sAkshAtkAram ; while in the latter, the bhakti yOgi should certainly meditate upon the essential characteristics of Brahman also apart from other things, to attain his goal of ParamAtma sAkshAtkAram. The meditation upon the divine form of Lord for the former is to get rid of sins that obstruct from attaining the goal of jIvAtma sAkshAtkAram. Once that yOgi attains a good amount of concentration etc due to the blessings of PerumAL, he should perform the dhyAna yOga as prescribed in BG and ever meditate upon himself (jIvAtma svaroopa) with specific characteristics. This will result in his jIvAtma sAkshAtkAram. This jIvAtma sAkshAtkAram is a _must_ for ParamAtma sAkshAtkAram, since only when the essential characteristics of jIvAtma is realized (ie. sAkshAtkAram), the meditation upon the sarIra-sarIri bhAvam between the yOgi, who is a jIvAtma and ParamAtma can take place during the upAsana (bhakti yOga). I will elaborate these things if needed, in a systematic way after few months. ------------------------- Third pAda of third adhyAya discusses the nature of various upAsanAs ie. Brahma VidyAs. It gives the clarifications on what all attributes of Brahman are essentail for meditation in all Brahma VidyAs, and what are specific to certain Brahma VidyAs etc. In the Aananda adhikaraNa, Sage BAdarAyana (alias VyAsa) states "aanandAdaya pradhAnasya" (3.3.11), which implies that "Bliss etc qualities are a must for meditation in all upAsanas". The qualities are the Satyatvam, jn~yAnatvam, aanandatvam and anantatvam (all four from TaittirIya Up - Aananda Vidya, which the current adhikaraNa is discussing about). amalatvam (from Mundaka Up - akshara Vidya) as a quality of Brahman to be meditated upon in addition to the above is stated in the sUtra 3.3.33 - aksharadhi adhikaraNa. The present context in Aananda adhikaraNa is on TaittirIya Upanishad. Now, the question arises as to why not other qualities of Brahman mentioned in TaittirIya Upanishad for Aananda vidya, like the following is not included for meditation : "tasya priyam-yEva Siraha | mOdO dakshiNa-pakshaha | pramOda uttara pakshaha | aananda aatmA | bramha puccham pratishThA | " (II.5) ie."Priyais his head, MOda is his right wing , pramOda is his left wing , aananda is his trunk and Brahma is the tail that supports them all " Sage BAdarAyana answers this doubt in the next sUtra (3.3.12): " priya-Sirastvataadyapraptihi upacayApacayau hi bhEdE " ie. "Having Priya as the head etc donot come in ; for with difference , there would be thickness and thinness ". Bhagavad RAmAnuja in SrI BhAshyam says that the Upanishad only makes up the representation of Brahman in a human form. The argument is that, if Brahman is made up of different organs/members such as head, wings and tail, then some would be large and some small; some would be thick and some thin, and this would be in conflict with the passages like Taittriya Upanishad text occuring earlier, defining Brahman viz. "Satyam , jn~yAnam, anantam Brahma". In other words, the unchanging and all-pervading characteristics of Brahman will be violated if Brahman by itself is a combination of different organs as in this case. It will also violate texts which say that Brahman is neither thin nor thick: "astUlam anaNu ahrasvam adIrgam ....." (BruhadAranyaka Up. 3.8.8) ie. "Brahman is neither gross nor subtle, neither short nor long .....". This pramAnam is given in SrutaprakASika explaining the term "etc" used by BhAshyakAra wrt the pramAnas which would get violated. In VEdAnta Deepam, BhAshyakAra makes the point that, understanding of Brahman in this way will make Brahman be liable to change in size and form, which will contradict Upanishad texts like "Satyam jn~yAnam anantam Brahma", advocating all-pervasiveness and unchangability. Also, those texts that advocate the "partless" nature of Brahman will be violated. This sUtra certainly rejects the identity of Brahman with a body composed of many organs and establishes that, the essential nature of Brahman is only characterized by Satyatvam, jn~yAtvam etc and they only needs to be meditated upon as the essential characteristics of Brahman. Brahman certainly has an eternal divine form with many organs and also takes up many such forms in various avatAras. But, that divine body is not verily the Brahman. In the sUtra 3.3.14, Sage BAdarAyana gives the reason for such description of Brahman in Upanishads : "aadhyAnAya prayOjanAbhAvAt" ie. "For meditaion, since there is no other purpose". BhAshyakAra comments that, various varieties of Joy are being represented as various organs of Brahman, to comprehend Brahman as "bliss" (aanandamaya). It is for this specific Brahma Vidya. In the next sUtra (3.3.15), Sage BAdarAyana adds a reason for not taking these attributes (Priya as head etc) for meditation in all the upAsans : "aatma-SabdAcca" ie. "On account of the term aatma " { TaittirIya Upanishad : "anyo(a)ntara aatmA(A)nandamayaha }. BhAshyakAra comments that, aatma cannot have parts like head, trunk etc and its having Joy for its head etc should thus only be a representation for the sake of comprehending Brahman as "bliss". Again its very clear that, Brahman being an aatma can't be made up of parts like head, hands etc. ------------------------- A upAsaka should also meditate upon the arcirAdi mAraga. There are other upAsana-specific forms and upAsana-specific auspicious qualities of Brhman that needs to be added in the meditation of Brahman, in accordance with the upAsana adopted by a bhakti yOgi. --------------------------- To just give a sample of the references in Brahma sUtras listed in the previous posting : 1. SUtra 1.2.7 belonging to SarvatraprasiddhyadhikaraNa is : " armakaukastvAttadvyapadESAcca nEti cEnna nicAyyattvAdEvam vyOmavacca " "If it is said - 'No, because Brahman is stated to dwell in a very small place and to be of very small size', the reply is 'No ! Because He has to be so meditated upon ; in Himself He is like ether ". This adhikaraNa is an enquiry into a passage in ChAndOgya Upanishad. The message from this sUtra is that, though Brahman in its essentail nature is all pervading, it is prescribed to be meditated upon _as though_ in a very small place and size, since a finite being can't meditate upon an infinite easily. 2. SUtra 1.2.30 belonging to VaiSvAnara-adhikaraNa is "abhivyaktErityASmaratyaha" => "For the purpose of (meditator) forming a vivid image / implying definiteness. Thus opines ASmarathya . Bhagavad RAmAnuja says that, this sUtra answers the question "Why the highest aatma, who is unlimited, is to be meditated upon in a limited form ? ". Then BhAshyakArar says that the next sUtra answers the question as to Why the Highest Brahman is represented like a man having head and limbs in the VaiSvAnara Vidya. That sUtra 1.2.31 is "anusmrutEhE BAdarihi" ie. "For meditation; BAdarAyana thinks". Thus, its only for the sake of meditation. note : ChAndOgya Up personifies Brahman ie.VaiSvAnara as one with head, eyes, breath, trunk, chest, feet etc, as representing tEjas, earth, components of a yaj~nya etc. 3. Dahara adhikaraNa on Dahara Vidya. ChAndOgya Upanishad instructs one to perform meditation upon the one who is in a very small place of the body. To clarify that, this is only for the purpose of meditation, Sage VyAsa says : "alpaSrutEhE iti chEt tat uktam" (1.3.20) "How described as small (dahara) ? - Answered already". In VEdAnta Deepam, Bhagavad RAmAnuja (ie. BhAshyakAra) comments : "Objection : Since jIvAtma is like a point of an awl, it can be described as small. How can the ParamAtma be described as small when He is all-pervading - greatest of all ? Reply : This has already been discussed in the second pAda, first adhikaraNa, seventh sUtra (1.2.7). Its so said, only for the purpose of meditation." The gist of the sUtra is also give above. 4. In the next adhikaraNa viz. PramitadhikaraNa, a kaThopanishad text is discussed, which says " Purusha, the controller of the past and the future dwells in the heart of the meditator's body, in a form of the size of the thumb ...."(4.12). To the question as to why the limitless Brahman is said to be of the size of the thumb, Sage BAdarAyana says "Hrudi apEkshayA tu manushyAdhikAratvAt" (1.3.24) implying : "Because He is present in the heart, the mention of the size is in consideration of human heart's size - He is present in the heart for meditation to be performed by men". ------------------ Regarding the divine body of Brahman : The all-pervading ParaBrahman SrIman nArAyaNa takes/has form, and makes His devotees meditate, reciprocate lovingly etc in a finite media. This act of great compassion by the infinite Lord, only magnifies His glories. The Suddha Sattva material comprising His divine body is also jn~yAnAnanda-maya, similar to His essential characteristic, which is also jn~yAnAnanda. It is in this light Sastras say that, Brahman and its form are same in nature. Brahman, a chEtana, feels the sense of "I" (ie.pratyaktvam) and has dbj. But, an achEtana like Suddha Sattvam does not posses pratyaktvam (ie. feeling of the "I" ness) and doesn't have dbj. Hope that you get to understand other pramAnas quoted earlier. Please go through the originals patiently and also the English books of SrI SMS Chari like Fundamentals of ViSishtAdvaita VEdAnta and Vaishnavism, on these topics, for understanding the concepts comprehensively. > I also have many more pramaanas to quote regarding the > Krishna/Vishnu issue, as well in regards the Bhagavaan/Brahman > issue. I will save them for later, since I will be out of town > this weekend. Please do send them to me whenever you can. As suggested by SrI Mani, we will take the discussion off-line. The stand of ViSishtAdvaita (vEdAnta) , on these issues has been explained convincingly for the SrI Vaishnava list members. If you have something else to say, lets discuss in private. Thanks for your understanding. -------------- Reg. an allegation by a member that I posted an article after requesting the topic to be closed in the list : The mail in which I asked to close the discussion (of elaborating GVs point of view, claiming it to be superior etc) was posted by Fri, 21st Apr, 16:53:09 hrs in my time zone. The member accusing me, then made the next posting on Sat, 22nd Apr, 07:48:34 hrs in my time zone, claiming that I have incorporated mAyAvAda in my posts and started again elaborating GV philosophy. Thats why I sent a reply to the list again and re-iterated him to wait patiently and go through the SV books and read other postings, before jumping to conclusions. There was absolutely no fault from my side. With due respect to the objectives of the list, I am not interested in replying back to the latest mail by that member. adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan, anantapadmanAbhan. krishNArpaNam. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get paid for the stuff you know! Get answers for the stuff you donÂ’t. And get $10 to spend on the site! http://click.egroups.com/1/2200/2/_/716111/_/957205366/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------------- - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH - To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list@eGroups.com Visit http://www.ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/ for more information
- Next message: Sadagopan: "Re: Information on SarpadOsha NivArana PujA."
- Previous message: Sadagopan: "Saranagathi Vol.03.003"
- Next in thread: Anand Karalapakkam: "Re: PramAnas for Brahman as being different from its Body"
- Maybe reply: Anand Karalapakkam: "Re: PramAnas for Brahman as being different from its Body"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]