Re: Vedic deities
From the Bhakti List Archives
• May 28, 1999
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 pasupatiis 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 ]