Search:
Bhakti List Archives

bhishma-stuthi-8

From the Bhakti List Archives

M K Sudarshan • June 23, 1997 


srimathE lakshmi-nrsumha parabrahmaNE namaha
sri vedanta guravE namaha

Dear "bhAgavatOttamA-s", 

The opening verse of the "bhishma-stuthi", we saw, went as follows :

iti matirupakalpitA vitrishnA
  Bhagavati sAtvata-pUngavE viBhUmni I
svasuKha-mupagatE Kachi-dvihartum
  prakriti-mupEyushi yatBhava-pravAha-ha II

The dying BhishmAchArya-r says in the above verse that he is surrendering
his mind ("buddhi") entirely to Lord Krishna Who has appeared before him at
his death-bed in much the same manner as the Lord's "appearances"
("yatBhava- pravAha-ha") in His many "avatarA-s" of the past! The Lord
"descends" into the World of Creation which is but a "playground" on which
is played His many "sporting exploits" ("avatara-leelA-s") !!

A deep reading of this particular verse in the "bhishma-stuthi" will not
fail to arouse some questions about the general subject of "avatarA-s" in
the minds of the readers/reciters.

The questions may read something as follows:

The Lord Krishna who appeared before BhishmAchArya-r, we know, was but a
local Yadava-clan leader. To all appearances Krishna was like an ordinary
person of those "dvA-para yuga" times though with an unusual background.

He was born in captivity, whisked off clandestinely to foster-parents in
Nandagopan's hamlet at Gokulam; he grew up in the wild woods of Brindavanam;
he frolicked and gambolled with the cow-girls.

Then growing up to be a youth he avenged his parent's humiliation at the
hands of the tyrant, Kamsan. 

He grew up to be a skillful statecraftsman steeped in the high-flying palace
politics of Hastinapur; he was a bit of a "power-broker" and "lobbyist"; he
was also a gallant paramour who wedded his two spouses, Rukmini and
Satyabama, through rather adventurous means. He became a trusted mentor and
steadfast friend to the Pandava family; single-handedly he master-minded
their rehabilitation as rulers of Hastinapur through a long and bloody
fratricidal war in Kurukshetra; he was known to be a diplomat, envoy,
war-strategist and battle-commander of the highest order. He was a master of
"double-speak" or the spread of "misinformation" (as it is known in the
world of military propaganda) meant to sow confusion in the enemy-camp; he
was also well-versed in the sleight-of-hand tactics of armed combat.

Krishna was ever ruthless in the pursuit of what he felt were his interests
or of those whom he held dear.

Now, when we recall all the above seemingly "mortal facts" of SriKrishna's
life, we might begin to wonder why BhishmAchArya-r chooses to describe it
all in terms of being the "playful exploits" of a divine "avatara" descended
into the world -- as in "svasuKha-mupagatE Kachi-dvihartum;
prakriti-mupEyushi yatBhava- pravAha-ha"!

It is never so difficult to see why Arjuna acknowledged Krishna as the
"para-brahmham" since we know the Lord "revealed" Himself to him in the
course of delivering the 'GitA-shAstrA'.

But in the case of BhishmAchArya-r we know there is no record of the Lord
similarly "revealing" Himself; Krishna simply appeared in an
"as-is-where-is" state and stood by the "pita-mahar's" death-bed during his
"antima-prayANam" when there was none around at that time.

So the question cropping up is this : when the Lord did not "reveal" Himself
to BhishmA, how was the wise "pita-mahar" (his feeble mind rapidly losing
its vital moorings in the painful hour of death) absolutely so sure that He,
Krishna, a mere Yadava-clan chieftain, was indeed that Supreme Soul, the
"para-brahmham" of all Creation ?

The answer to that question lies in one of the most esoteric techniques of
"god-realization" that SriVaishnava thought propounds : the technique called
"avatAra-rahasya-chintana" or the "realization of the nature and truth of
the Lord's "avatara" or descent into the world of creation".

This technique is also variously referred to as a "rahasya-mArga" (a secret
passage-way to Godhead) by some "achAryA-s".

Now, we may ask ourselves if this so-called "technique", if it were to
regarded as a "margA", would it then also qualify to be called as a "yoga"
or "upAya" in the sense in which "bhakti", "prappati" or "gnyAna" or "karma"
are known ?

"AchAryA-s" have clarified that "avatara-rahasya-chintana" is not a separate
"yoga" by itself. But it is a powerful and highly effective tool, which if
used well by men, unfailingly creates mental states conducive to the growth
of "bhakti" and/or "prappati". They emphasise that if a soul were to truly
realize the nature and purpose of the "Lord's avatara-s" then the next step
is but a very short and easy one to "bhakti"/"parama-bhakti"/"prappati".

Now, as is wont with all of us, we may begin to ask if there are any
"pramANam-s" that seek to establish the validity of the tall claims made on
behalf of this rare and special technique or "rahasya-mArga".

Of course there is "pramANam" for this "mArga" and it is in the Vedas itself !

In fact, the said Vedic "pramANam" is so very apt to BhishmAcharya's situation!

We shall examine that "pramANam" in the next post.

srimathe srivan satagopa sri narayana yathindra mahadesikaya namaha
sudarshan