Re: Vedic deities
From the Bhakti List Archives
Anand Karalapakkam • Fri May 28 1999 - 16:57:56 PDT
SrI Lakshminrusimha ParabrahmaNE namaha
SrI Lakshminrusimha divya pAdukA sEvaka SrIvaNN-
SatakOpa SrI nArAyaNa yateendra mahAdESikAya namaha
Dear Sri Sudarsan (of Singapore),
namO nArAyaNA.
The question by Sri Sudarsan is certainly a very
important one and Sri Mani has very well clarified
many a things based on granthams like vEdArtha
Sangraha, Srimad Rahasya Traya sAram (SRTS). In this
context, adiyEn would like to just share few things
which were learnt from Sri U.Ve. KarunAkaran swAmi.
In SRTS, SwAmi dESikan cites this fundamental
knowledge arising from the study (ie. proper
understanding) of sAstrAs "Those who have a
discriminating intelligence, never worship either
Brahma, or rudra, or any of other (demi)gods, for
the fruit of their worship is very limited "
( MahabhArata: Santiparva 350.36). We SriVaishnavAs
know this fact very well. But, in certain nitya and
naimittika karmAs which we have to certainly perform,
(eg: SandhyAvandanam) it seems as if one is instructed
to worship anya dEvatAs. In this context, Sri Mani wrote:
> In truth, all names, though they conventionally
> denote different individuals or objects, in reality
> only refer to the Supreme Self (paramAtmA).
This is a very important teaching of vEdAnta (*), which
one has to bear in mind especially while performing
nitya and naimittika karmAs.
(*) :In the Brahma sUtrAs, BAdarAyanar makes this point
in the VaiSvAnara adhikaraNa.
-----------------------------------
Infact, swAmi dESikan specifically raises this
pUrvapaksham ( :-), all possible doubts are
mercifully forethought by our thoopul piLLai) in the 24th
adhikaraNam of SRTS, which discusses about the nature of
sAdhyOpAya :
pUrvapaksham (in essence) : Rites prescribed according to
VarNA and Ashrama dharmAs, and bhakti yOga are inconsistent
with exclusive devotion to SrIman nArAyaNA. This is because
varNAshrama dharmAs involve the mediatorship of other
dEvatAs (like Indra, agni, SUrya etc). Thus,
paramaikAntins should shun them. Also, since bhakti
yOga(upAsana) has varNAshrama dharmAs as its angA, bhakti
yOga also has to be shunned (ie. only prapatti has to
be adopted).
SiddhAntam (in essence) : This objection can arise only
because of the lack of clear understanding of the conclusion
arrived at in such treatises as SrI BAshya. In Brahma vidyAs
(upAsanas) such as Pratardana vidya and Madhu vidya, it is
_clearly_ stated that a mumukshu should meditate upon the
Supreme Self having Indra and other deities as His body (**).
BAshyakArar has declared/established that, during the
performance of VarNAshrama dharmAs, the object of worship
is only the Supreme Self (SrIman nArAyaNA), who has the
respective deities as His body. Thus, ParamaikAntitvam is
not lost when one performs nitya and naimittika karmAs
with sAthvIka tyAgam and the knowledge that the anyA dEvatAs
are attributed of PerumAL and words such as agni, indra,
rudra etc directly denote SrIman nArAyaNA, the Supreme Self.
ParamaikAntitvam gets lost in the following cases :
(i) the worship of anya-dEvatAs (during nitya and naimittika
karmAs), as though they are independent of SrIman
nArAyaNA.
(ii) Worshipping/having some connection with anya-dEvatAs(for
certain specific fruits), when they are not at all
concerned with nitya and naimittika karmAs.
Thus, bhakti yOga, which has varNAshrama dharma as its
anga is not inconsistent with paramaikAntitvam.
------------------
(**): In pratardana vidya, the body of Lord Indra has to be
meditated upon, with nArAyaNA as the antaryAmi. It is important
to note that, the yOgi who adopts this brahma vidyA is not
actually worshipping Lord Indra, though that dEvata is related
in a way to this brahma vidyA. Since the sAstrAs prescibe the
nature of brahma vidya to be like that, one has to follow it
as it is, if he wishes to adopt it as a sAdhyOpAya. It also
doesn't come under anya dEvatA worship since it is the antaryAmi
nArAyaNA who is concentrated upon. Here, the antaryAmi refers to
nArAyaNA who is pervading inside the body of Lord Indra. nArAyaNA
is infact the supporter and controller of Lord Indra. Thus, in
this upAsana, SrIman nArAyaNA, qualified by the body of Lord
Indra is meditated upon. Similarly, there is another Brahma vidya
in which the body of Lord Shiva has to be meditated upon, with
SrIman nArAyaNA as the antaryAmi.
But, these brahma vidya are different from other brahma vidyAs
in which the divya mangaLa vigraha of PerumAL itself is
meditated upon (ofcourse PerumAL is the antaryAmi in
His divya mangaLa vigraha)- PerumAL qualified by His divine
body is the object of meditation here. It is also to be noted
that, there are various other specific attributes that needs
to be meditated upon, while adopting a particular upAsana.
Those things can be understood from SriBashyam. The above
discussion on the things to be remembered while performing
upAsanAs, is restricted with the "context" of this posting.
----------------------------
It is established in vEdAnta that, as far as a
mumukshu/paramaikAntin is concerned, while he is either
adopting certain upAsana Or performing nitya - naimittika
karmAs, he has to perform the meditation/worship to only
SrIman nArAyaNA, with the required knowledge as discussed
above. Ofcourse, the option to perform exclusive worship
to anya dEvatAs in these circumstances is very much there -
It is adopted by those who are not paramaikAntins/mumukshus;
they will get certain fruit of that worship accoringly.
---------------------------
The next question is: "Why to take such a circuitous route
of meditating upon the body of an anya dEvata with the
antaryAmi as srIman nArAyaNA, while performing either
upAsana Or performing nitya-naimittika karmAs ?? "
It is because, sAstrAs says so. It is sAstrAs which
stipulates, whether a certain act is either "right" or
"wrong". When sAstrAs (bhagavad Aj~nA : divine command of
SrIman nArAyaNA) say that a particular act of worship /
meditation is in such and a way and has to be adopted by
a mumukshu/paramaikAntin in that way, it is perfectly a
valid thing. A mumukshu can't think on his own that such
a stipulation by sAstrAs is contradictory to his
goal/nature. It is infact "questioning/revolting against"
the very command of his/her own master - SrIman nArAyaNA.
---------------------------------------
The next question is: " Can one then go to a anya dEvata
temple and worship say Lord Shiva, with the thinking that
nArAyaNA is the antaryAmi ? It seems as if it is perfectly
valid, since such a view is adopted even in a Brahma
vidya. "
One can't perform such a worship - It is against the
nature of a paramaikAntin/mumukshu. The answer is again
based on the fact that, it is sAstrAs, which dictates an
act to be either "right" or "wrong". sAstrAs never
prescribe a mumukshu to perform such a worship. There
are many pramAnams for that (refer SRTS). Infact, a
mumukshu is proscribed (ie. forbidden) from performing
such worship. The point is that, what is applicable
while performing an upAsanA, can't be applied out of the
way to some other thing, according to one's own whims and
fancies. For instance, during yEkAdasi, when the BrAhmana
bhOjanam (for srAddham ie.devasam) is performed by those
brAhmanAs, they don't incur any sin. This is because
sAstrAs says so. Applying this to one's own convenience,
one can't claim that one can eat rice during an yEkAdasi,
and not incur any sin, if it is a marriage dinner on that
day. This is again because, sAstrAs doesn't say like that.
For a mumukshu/paramaikAntin to either worship or meditate
on PerumAL, he has to follow the sAstrAs as to how to do
it. He can't select his own way of worship etc. sAstrAs
are the only guide.
He also can't have some pre-concieved notion that worshipping
PerumAL through Divya prabandham, nAma sankeertanam, rahasya
mantrams and going to His temples are the only valid way
to worship Him, since it is directly geared towards PerumAL.
If one understands vEdAnta properly, it is again crystal
clear for him/her that worshipping PerumAL during the nitya-
naimittika karmAs, yaj~nAs etc are also perfectly valid and
directly geared towards PerumAL. Only the required
understanding of the sAstrAs is needed to perceive it
clearly.
----------------------------------------------------
Some pointers regarding the avoidance of the temples
of anya dEvata (in addition to what has been stated above) :
a. anya dEvata temples follow the AgamAs ( like Saiva,
SAkta ) which are inconsistent with the teachings of vEdAs.
Only pAncarAtra and VaikhAnasa AgamAs are based on vEdAs.
BAdarAyanar establishes this in Brahma sUtrAs.
sUtra (2.2.35), pasupatya adhikaraNa : "patyurasAman~jasyAt"
(ie. the doctrine of pasupati is to be disregarded, because of its absurdity). Thus,
as a follower of vEdAs, one can't take up a worship
which is opposed to vEdAnta - one can't entertain such
a worship also. Anything which is opposed to vEdAs has
to be rejected. The Saiva, sAkta AgamAs follow the
doctrine of pasupata religion or its variant => vEdAntins
has to shun such temples.
b. Those who don't know about such conclusions of vEdAnta,
say, "Those who go to all the temples, irrespective of
the deity/AgamAs followed are more _religiously tolerant_
than SriVaishnavAs". First of all, we shall leave the fact
that such a claim has no basis from sAstrAs - which
dictates something to be right or wrong or religiously
tolerant etc. Even when viewed in a general sense,
Sri VaishnavAs are the utmost religiously tolerant ones.
SriVaishnavAs certainly have great reverence for, say,
Lord Shiva. But, according to Saiva AgamAs, a portrait
of an incident (according to Saiva purAnAs) that VarAha
PerumAL and Brahma tried to measure the height of Shiva etc,
and how Shiva later did some minor "sikshai" (small
punishment) to PerumAL etc is to be present in the backside
of the sannidhi (while performing the pradakshanam, this
will be invariably seen). In front of the MeenAkshi amman
temple, big portraits/sculptures with Lord Shiva beating,
kicking etc PerumAL in all His incarnations ( matsya,
kUrma, varAha, nrusimha........) are present. But, in the
divya dEsams, not even a single sculpture will be there,
which will trouble the heart of even a staunch devotee
of Lord Shiva, even when SrIman nArAyaNA is the Supreme
Lord. Is it not obvious as to who is more religiously
tolerant ? Do they expect SriVaishnavAs to visit their
temples, when the very PerumAL, who is most dear to
their hearts is insulted in various ways, with
various sculptures signifying it ? Who can call himself/
herself a stauch devotee of SrIman nArAyaNA and
simultaneously go and witness such insults imparted to
Him ? This obviously adds to the reasoning of
SriVaishnavAs shunning anya dEvata temples (politely;
not with enimity etc; let them have their own worship,
celebrations etc; we needn't disturb them).
----------------------
Lord Shiva is glorified as a great Vaishnava in many a
places in scriptures. SwAmi dESikan also glorifies
Lord Shiva accordingly. But, we also don't know, which
Lord shivA it refers to( Shiva is a post ; the story told
in the purAnAs may pertain to some Shiva of the past ; we
can't be sure that the present Lord ShivA is the one told
in the sAstrAs etc). There are various other issues as
well.
But, if we have to pay the respects to Lord Shiva as a
Vaishnava, again we need to resort to sAstrAs. It boils
down to this : If Lord Shiva comes in front of us, with
all the Srivaishnava symbols like "UrdhvapuNdram" etc,
then only we have to prostrate etc (Lord Shiva is in the
bhAgavatha goshti now). If Lord Shiva, even while
personally appearing in front of us, is not presenting
himself as an "adiyAr (devotee) of SrIman nArAyaNA" (by
the respective SriVaishnava attires), paramaikAntins
should not prostrate to Lord Shiva. To just understand this
better : Even while one's father is fully fit to be
prostrated, one can't prostrate to him, if he is having
yaj~nopavItham around his ears; One can't prostrate his
own mother when she is in her menstruation cycle.
---------------------------------------
Lets now move onto the SandhyAvandanam issue.
Sri Mani wrote :
> Basically, Gayatri Devi is pictured as sitting within
> the sun at each time of the day. In the morning, she
> is pictured as the consort of Brahma, a girl of
> reddish color reciting the Rg Veda. At noon, she is
> called "sAvitrI" and is seen as the consort of Rudra,
> a young woman of white color reciting the Yajur Veda.
> In the evening, she is called "sarasvatI", and is
> seen as the consort of Vishnu, an old woman of dark
> color reciting the Sama Veda. By the way, these are
> all slokas from smRti texts, not Veda mantras.
>
> These slokas are typical of serious meditational
> practice. Clearly, Gayatri is pictured as growing
> through the day and associated with Brahma, Siva, and
> Vishnu at various times for meditational purposes. I
> can't say more than this; more knowledgable scholars
> in India should be consulted.
>
> However, I am certain that even these slokas, if one
> wishes to recite them, have to be understood with the
> idea that Gayatri Devi is a manifestation of the
> Supreme Self based on the principles explained above.
As discussed previously, we can meditate upon the form of
gAyatri dEvi with nArAyaNA being the antaryAmi. Here, the
jIvAtmA gAyatri dEvi residing inside that body is not
concentrated upon => no anya dEvata worship is performed.
This is a valid meditation since it has been prescribed so
for SandhyAvandanam, which is a must to be performed by
a dvija, as per the commands of SrIman nArAyaNA. But, we
can also perform the whole sandhyAvandanam directly
meditating upon say Lakshminrusimhan Or VeerarAghavan OR
SrInivAsan Or NamperumAL OR Kutti KrishNan etc, with
appropriate understanding of the mantrAs/slokas.
AzhwAr,yemperumAnAr,dESikan,Azhagiyasingar thiruvadigaLE SaraNam
adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan
ananthapadmanAbha dAsan
krishNArpaNam
- Next message: Mani Varadarajan: "pAda-yAtra"
- Previous message: Sampath Rengarajan: "Re: On DD kshEthrAdanam"
- In reply to: Mani Varadarajan: "Re: Vedic deities"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
