Ishwara though formless, takes a sākāra form for the benefit of all - Agasthya Samhitā

[V Subrahmanian]

In the Agastya Samhita, we hear:

ईश्वर उवाच

शृणुष्वावहिता देवि यदेतत्प्रतिपाद्यते ।

सर्वेश्वरः सर्वमयः सर्वभूतहिते रतः ।।२।।

सर्वेषामुपकाराय साकारोऽभून्निराकृतिः।

स भक्तवत्सलो लोके संसारीव व्यचेष्टत । भक्तानुकम्पया देवो दुःखं सुखमिवान्वभूत ॥ यदा यदा च भक्तानां भयमुत्पद्यते तदा । तत्तद्भयविघाताय तत्तद्रूपो व्यजायत ॥ — अगस्त्य संहिता ३.३,४,५

हे देवि! मैं जो कह रहा हूँ उसे ध्यानपूर्वक सुनो। निराकार प्रभु जो सबके ईश्वर हैं, सभी रूपों में हैं तथा सभी प्राणियों की भलाई में लगे रहते हैं, सबके उपकार के लिए आकार ग्रहण कर अवतार लेते हैं।

~ अगस्त्यसंहिता अध्याय ३

Ishwara though formless, takes a sākara form for the benefit of all. The same idea of Shankara bhāshya:

 स्यात्परमेश्वरस्यापि इच्छावशात् मायामयं रूपं साधकानुग्रहार्थम् । (Brahma sutra bhashya: 1.1.vii.20) (Ishwara, out of compassion, takes on, by His Maya, a form to grace the spiritual aspirant."

 stated in Agastya samhitā.

warm regards

subbu

[V Subrahmanian]

On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 7:22 AM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

Dear Subbu ji

On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 at 4:35 PM, V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> In the Agastya Samhita, we hear:
>
> ईश्वर उवाच
>
> शृणुष्वावहिता देवि यदेतत्प्रतिपाद्यते ।
>
> सर्वेश्वरः सर्वमयः सर्वभूतहिते रतः ।।२।।
>
> सर्वेषामुपकाराय साकारोऽभून्निराकृतिः।
>
> स भक्तवत्सलो लोके संसारीव व्यचेष्टत । भक्तानुकम्पया देवो दुःखं
> सुखमिवान्वभूत ॥ यदा यदा च भक्तानां भयमुत्पद्यते तदा । तत्तद्भयविघाताय
> तत्तद्रूपो व्यजायत ॥ — अगस्त्य संहिता ३.३,४,५

This experience of sukha and duḥkha (Iva - as though) seems to apply to
avatāras rather than the Bhagavān Viṣṇu etc? Or do we say that even
brahmāji experienced fear as per bṛhadāranyaka - so experience of duḥkha
(as though, no doubt) applies equally to avatāras as well as the more
longer lasting forms like Śrī Mahāviṣṇnu?

Can we in that case say that the forms of Śrī Rāma and Śrī Mahāviṣṇu are
both quite similar sākāra manifestations with only the bhūloka and Satya
loka being their different places for their līla ?

Dear Raghav ji,

Yes, the experience of fear, anxiety, etc. is seen to be there for Mahavishnu and the avataras as well.  In the case of the former we have the examples of Draupadi, Gajendra, etc. calling out to Bhagavan and his responding to them.  It is said that Krishna, in the battle with Jarasandha had to run away several times, may not be due to fear but for other strategic reasons. Sri Rama laments in the Valmiki Ramayana:  Upon the abduction of Seetha, Rama weeps addressing Lakshmana: There can't be a greater sinner than me that I am undergoing misery after misery..

One can come up with many such incidents. 

Logically too, it can be said that even the form of Ksheerabdhi shaayee Vishnu is a manifestation and not the default form.  There can't be a default form for the Brahma Tattvam. The Tattvam is nishkriyam, nirgunam, niraakaaram.  Only Advaita would agree with this. 

warm regards

subbu 

Om

>
>
> हे देवि! मैं जो कह रहा हूँ उसे ध्यानपूर्वक सुनो। निराकार प्रभु जो सबके
> ईश्वर हैं, सभी रूपों में हैं तथा सभी प्राणियों की भलाई में लगे रहते हैं,
> सबके उपकार के लिए आकार ग्रहण कर अवतार लेते हैं।
>
> ~ अगस्त्यसंहिता अध्याय ३
>
> Ishwara though formless, takes a sākara form for the benefit of all. The
> same idea of Shankara bhāshya:
>
>  स्यात्परमेश्वरस्यापि इच्छावशात् मायामयं रूपं साधकानुग्रहार्थम् ।

Always good to read this …. I think it’s your favourite quotation :)

Om
Raghav

>
>  stated in Agastya samhitā.
>
> warm regards
> subbu

> _______________________________________________
> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listm...@advaita-vedanta.org
>
_______________________________________________
Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/

To unsubscribe or change your options:
https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l

For assistance, contact:
listm...@advaita-vedanta.org

[V Subrahmanian]

Dear Raghav ji,

I agree with you.

regards

subbu 

On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 2:22 PM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula <raghav...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Subbuji

I remember you mentioning that even these divine forms of īśvara are pāñcabhautika according to (certain acāryas of) vedānta. There was some debate on this no doubt. 

Along such lines - The śarīra-s are pārthiva in bhūloka and vāyavīya and ākāsīya in successively higher lokas like tapo loka and satya loka - this is as per brahma sutra.

Śrī Appayya Dīkṣitendra places vaikunṭha and kailāśa as aspects of satya loka.

Taking all of the above into account, it implies,  īśvara by his māyā śakti, in order to bless devotees, takes on pārthiva and (more subtle) ākāśīya śarīras, (respectively) in bhūloka (avatāras like śrī rāma) and satya loka (forms like śrī mahāviṣṇu, maheśvara etc). 

Om

Raghav

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

The forms that Ishvara takes on are not a real part or aspect of the Self or Brahman tattva. However, within the mayic world, there is bheda with regard to the dharma, gunas and functions associated with the forms. The tiger is stronger than the deer; tiger has claws and the deer has hooves. There is an Order to Ishvara's lila, that is known through the pramanas. "Tiger" has a default form underlying its various manifestations.

So in principle, Vishnu can correspond not only to a particular essential form projected by Ishvara (that manifests anew in the cyclical creations) but also to a specific function or role within His creation. And in principle, Vishnu can be the superior manifestation than Shiva (like tiger over deer), or vise-versa. This is a matter of how the sampradaya understands the puranas and ithihasas. 

The advaita sampradaya of course rejects this graded approach to the devatas. We look upon Shiva and Vishnu as equally all-powerful and all-knowing, who take on similar roles or alternating statuses on different occasions for the sake of the jivas. That is Ishvara lila. In fact, any ishta-devata can be fully-representative of Ishvara tattva for the devotee who seeks Ishvara through that form; and Ishvara can manifest a cognitive world for that jiva in which that Ishta devata reigns supreme or at least is fully representative of Him. This is possible in Maya.

It is like a std 1 class where kids identify a certain teacher as "maths" and another as "english". But in the class next door, the teachers switch their roles. And the children of the two classes fight which teacher knows what.

As far as whether Vishnu experiences fear etc., we cannot literally assign fear to Vishnu in His highest manifest form where He knows Himself to be Brahman and manifests purna-Ishvara tattva in relation to Creation. However, the same Vishnu when He incarnates as the avataras does appear in ways that the jivas cannot distinguish as lila. So there is room for speculation over how much He assumed the veil of ajnana and the limitations of body-mind, when He took on these avatara roles; or whether that Vishnu awareness and powers are ever present and accessible even while He participated in the jiva-world as-if at our level. The typical bhakti position would be the latter. 

Ref: https://kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part14/chap9.htm

thollmelukaalkizhu

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "advaitin" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to advaitin+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te3W0XnwzEqUtyA6u7GurG4ofqFMJPXmL-fKevscoB-mTw%40mail.gmail.com.

[putran M]

The advaita sampradaya of course rejects this graded approach to the devatas.

I meant (a real) superior vs inferior ordering of Devatas. Google defines graded approach as

“

A graded approach is a structured method that aligns the level of control, analysis, or action to the associated risk or importance of a product, process, or activity. Instead of applying uniform measures to all situations, a graded approach focuses resources and attention where they are most needed, ensuring that more stringent controls are used for higher-risk situations and less stringent ones for lower-risk scenarios”

So, in that sense, advaita says Ishvara Himself offers a graded (adhyaropa) approach for the jiva suited to its present needs, including the choice Ishta Devata.

thollmelukaalkizhu 

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

I found a couple of relevant lines in a page (attached) of shivamahapuranam written in a normal tamil that I can read, at least slowly. The first highlight is Vishnu praising Shiva as responsible for creation, preservation and destruction. In the second highlight, Shiva tells Parvathi that She reveals Herself as  Narayana (samam/equal to Him), then that She and Himself (Shiva) are equal in stature, in fact that All is (revealed/known as) Himself only.

thollmelukaalkizhu 

[V Subrahmanian]

Yes, Putran ji,  the idea that Narayana is Parvati is mentioned in other places too. In many sources She is the sister of Narayana, called Vishnu māyā, Yoga māya, Nār̥āyani, etc.  

warm regards
subbu

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-oFU-99-WLtdcxOf-cMruZhiHCXke1VdMGZKocnjpzJ9g%40mail.gmail.com.

[putran M]

Namaskaram,

See again a few pages later. In this passage, Sanatkumara tells Vyasa what he has heard from Nandideva:

(The trimoorthis are revealed thus) To the right of Rudradeva is Brahma and to His left is Vishnu. All the three have the same svarupa [Paramashiva/paramatma]. We should meditate on Paramashiva as Brahma in the morning, as Vishnu during mid-day and as Rudra in the evening. The same Moorthi, divine Entity on account of the three forms of work (creation, preservation, destruction) does them through the [the manifestation of] three forms/moorthis. The yogis ought to realize, (of the nondual pranava) Vishnu becomes [is represented by, manifests as] akAram, Brahma is ukAram, and Rudra is makAram.

------------------

An analogy that came to my mind: the same person wears three caps and is called by three names for three jobs. Advaita's primary focus is on the fact that the underlying "person"/Entity is non-dual; the caps and names (however we argue over their mithyatva) are mere transactional identifiers of the 'One' and should not be confused as denoting three (or more) different beings. Dvaita schools separate themselves from us here itself.

thollmelukaalkizhu 

[V Subrahmanian]

Very nice. For Gayatri too three times three different forms and names but entity is same.

regards 

subbu

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKqm3-owsz3%3D7od%3DAnX4P94yjjGug07nDbASsx1YvukfEqbvmg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

Very nice. For Gayatri too three times three different forms and names but entity is same.

 

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

For sUrya also 😊 udaye brahmarUpoyaM madhyAnhetu maheshwaraH astamaane svayaM vishNuH…trayeemUrty divAkaraH stOtra and bhishOdeti sUryaH is the Upanishad 😊

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

And one can also refer athavaNi sUryOpanishad and ganeshArthavasheershaM and find out how sUrya and Ganesha have been eulogized as parabrahman.