Brahman has no default form; Only contextual form - Varaha Purana

[V Subrahmanian]

Brahman has no default form; Only contextual form

Here we find the Lord Varaha saying this premise of Vedanta in the Varaha Purana:

वराहपुराणम्/अध्यायः १४४

https://sa.wikisource.org/s/b68

नागभोगोपवीतं च रुद्रमालाधरं प्रभुम् ।।

अरूपमपि सर्वेशं भक्तेच्छोपात्तविग्रहम् ।।२४।।

Though formless, this Lord (Shiva) assumes form according to the will of the devotees.

This premise is acceptable only to Advaita Vedantis. For others this theory of Veda/Vedavyasa is opposing.

Shankaracharya's quote in Brahma Sutra Bhasya:

स्यात्परमेश्वरस्यापि इच्छावशात् मायामयं रूपं साधकानुग्रहार्थम् । (1.1.vii.20)

Brahman, who is essentially formless, assumes various illusory forms to grace the respective seekers.

Shiva sculpture, Dieng Plateau in Java, Indonesia

[Raghav Kumar]

Namaste Subbu ji

That is the crux of the issue of whether the forms worshipped as Ishvara are indeed direct manifestation of Ishvara or they are exalted jeevas who attained those forms and as arthavAda they are praised as Ishvara. 

Once we acknowledge that icchAvaShAt, Ishvara can directly assume a mAyAmaya sharIra (which did not have a prior karma chronology as is indeed the case with devatAs), then both avatAras of bhUloka like Sri Krishna and also other forms like vAmana, Narasimha,  Uma Haimavati etc asserted by the shAstra as available for interaction in other lokas are all direct forms of Ishvara who is himself kAraNopAdhika and has no one fixed or default form. The mere fact that these direct forms of Ishvara are bhautika does not imply jeevatvam.

 "Any intelligent being endowed with a bhautika form (of one or more of the five elements) is necessarily a jeeva" has hetu vyabhichAra in the case of avatAras. So once that idea is dismissed, the forms worshipped viShNu etc ., can well be within the bhautika prapancha without any detrimental to their IshvaratvaM.

Om

Raghav

Thank you and Venkat ji for clarifying the sAyujya question amongst other insightful posts.

Om

Raghav

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

--
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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te2ed36vFjkBh%3DA%3DEGpu-B%2B3H4RYD%3DN-5TUn-GRcwH1kuw%40mail.gmail.com.

[sunil bhattacharjya]

Dear Subbuji,

I think one of the best statement on Brahman is given in the Chndogya Upanishad :

सर्वं खल्विदं ब्रह्म तज्जलानिति शान्त उपासीत । अथ खलु क्रतुमयः पुरुषो यथाक्रतुरस्मिँल्लोके पुरुषो भवति तथेतः

प्रेत्य भवति स क्रतुं कुर्वीत ॥ ३.१४.१ ॥

Is there be any question, which is not answered by this.

Regards,

Sunil KB

[Bhaskar YR]

The bhautika element can't be ignored. Mayopadhi can be of this nature too. This is what the Laghuchandrika says for 'aprAkRta'

praNAms
Hare Krishna

Yes, when this 'bhautika' / upAdhi element is not ignored, obviously this bhautika upAdhi is different as a result names and forms of this and its origination too different. In this way, rAma is NOT krishNa and KrishNa is NOT vAmana etc. aprAkruta shareera we often hear in dvaita philosophy, if at all we attribute an aprakrutic shareera / upAdhi to the Ishwara, with the same breath we have to accept Ishwara has an aprakrutic vraNAm and aprAkrutic sins as well after all what we are defining here as Ishwara is shuddha sattva pradhAaM which is a part and parcel of some 'original' ajnAna only. ashareeratvaM is svAbhAvika for the Ishwara / brahman and due to apekshitOpAdhi saMbandha he would appear as saguNa / kArya brahman. paraM chet jnAtavyaM aparaM chet prAptavyaM says bhagavatpAda is katha bhAshya. If we say Ishwara is sattva guNa yukta mAyAvi and jeeva is malina sattva guNa yukta ajnAni and for the both there is some original ajnAna as the base it is as good as saying the same ajnAna is the dominating force in both jeeva and Ishwara!!?? From this conclusion there is hAny to say Ishwara is nitya, shuddha, buddha, mukta Ishwara and Ishwara is avidyA vinirmukta and eternally pure (nitya parishuddha).

Further 'dehavAn eva lakshyate' can be equally applicable to paramArtha jnAni also since he has the paramArtha Atma jnana and that jnana of Atman/brahman would fetch him the knowledge that he was / is/will always be bodyless only since what he is 'is brahman' and the very nature of this brahman is disembodiedness. 'ashareeratvaM svAbhAvikaM'. In this sense not only rAma or Krishna each and every one is ashareeri only . And when 'we' think we are shAreeri the shareera of rAma, Krishna, devi, shiva too have the shareera with bhautika element like Krishna is having the legs which he decided to show to the hunter to do deha tyAga and rAma entered sarayu river to put full stop to his mAnusha janma.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar

Bhaskar YR


-----Original Message-----
From: Advaita-l <advaita-...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org> On Behalf Of V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 11:46 AM
To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Cc: V Subrahmanian <v.subra...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Fwd: Brahman has no default form; Only contextual form - Varaha Purana

Warning

This email comes from outside of Hitachi Energy. Make sure you verify the sender before clicking any links or downloading/opening attachments.
If this email looks suspicious, report it by clicking 'Report Phishing' button in Outlook.
See the SecureWay group in Yammer for more security information.

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 10:06 AM H S Chandramouli via Advaita-l < adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste.
>
> Sri Subrahmanian Ji wrote
>
> Reg << Even in the case of the form of say, Krishna, the 'bhautika'
> element is
> very much there: From a fetus in the womb, to the baby, there was
> growing up into an adult, a man and one who became grand and great
> grandfather. All these are characteristics of any other human body >>,
>
> Body of Sri Krishna is not admitted to be “bhautika”.
>

Namaste.

I am aware of the fact that it is not bhautika. But such a body was 'conceived' in the womb, delivered, grew up, became old, etc. There is also a mention in the Bhagavatam that Krishna was even wounded by arrows and bled. Surely the need for sleep, food, etc. was also there. One might say all this is 'leela'. But the body behaved in no different way than any other body. Krishna also was cremated for which Arjuna had gone. All this is not due to karma of the ordinary jiva type.

I meant only this. The bhautika element can't be ignored. Mayopadhi can be of this nature too. This is what the Laghuchandrika says for 'aprAkRta' in
Advaitasiddhi:

तथा च अप्राकृतपदेन प्राकृतविलक्ष्सणमायोपाधिकत्वेन.... If anyone can
elucidate this line that would help....

He says this in the gloss for the Siddhi's words: अत एव 'अरूपतोऽप्राकृतशे'ति स्मृत्यैवारूपश्रुतिगत्युक्तेः...(Pariccheda 2 ananthakrishna Sastry edition page 744)

regards
subbu

>
> BGB, Introductory part to 1st Chapter,
>
> << स च भगवान् ज्ञानैश्वर्यशक्तिबलवीर्यतेजोभिः सदा सम्पन्नः
> त्रिगुणात्मिकां स्वां मायां मूलप्रकृतिं वशीकृत्य, अजोऽव्ययो
> भूतानामीश्वरो नित्यशुद्धबुद्धमुक्तस्वभावोऽपि सन् , स्वमायया देहवानिव
> जात इव च लोकानुग्रहं कुर्वन् लक्ष्यते । >>
>
> << sa cha bhagavAn j~nAnaishvaryashaktibalavIryatejobhiH sadA
> sampannaH triguNAtmikAM svAM mAyAM mUlaprakRRitiM vashIkRRitya,
> ajo.avyayo bhUtAnAmIshvaro nityashuddhabuddhamuktasvabhAvo.api san ,
> svamAyayA dehavAniva jAta iva cha lokAnugrahaM kurvan lakShyate | >>,
>
> Translation by Krishna Warrier << The Lord is in eternal possession
> of knowledge,lordliness, executive power, strength, energy and
> splendor. He has under His control His All-pervasive mAyA (Illusive
> power) or material nature, whose essence is the three constituents.
> Thus, though unborn,immutable, Lord of beings, and, in essence,
> eternally pure, conscious and free, He appears, by virtue of His mAyA,
> to be embodied and born as man, for ensuring the welfre of the world
> >>
>
> BGB, referred part above, also mentions
>
> << स आदिकर्ता नारायणाख्यो विष्णुः भौमस्य ब्रह्मणो ब्राह्मणत्वस्य
> रक्षणार्थं देवक्यां वसुदेवादंशेन कृष्णः किल सम्बभूव । >>
>
> << sa AdikartA nArAyaNAkhyo viShNuH bhaumasya brahmaNo brAhmaNatvasya
> rakShaNArthaM devakyAM vasudevAdaMshena kRRiShNaH kila sambabhUva | >>
>
> Anandagiri tIka on this observes
>
> << *अंशेनेति** ।*
>
> स्वेच्छानिर्मितेन मायामयेन स्वरूपेणेत्यर्थः । >>
>
> << aMsheneti | svechChAnirmitena mAyAmayena svarUpeNetyarthaH | >>
>
> BGB 4-6 also mentions
>
> << तां प्रकृतिं स्वाम् अधिष्ठाय वशीकृत्य सम्भवामि देहवानिव भवामि जात
> इव आत्ममायया आत्मनः मायया, न परमार्थतो लोकवत् ॥ ६ ॥ >>
>
> << tAM prakRRitiM svAm adhiShThAya vashIkRRitya sambhavAmi dehavAniva
> bhavAmi jAta iva
>
> AtmamAyayA AtmanaH mAyayA, na paramArthato lokavat || 6 || >>
>
> Translation (Swami Gambhirananda) << By subjugating that Prakriti of
> Mine, sambhavami, I take birth, appear to become embodied, as though
> born; Atma mAyayA, by means of my own mAyA; but not in reality like an
> ordinary man >>
>
> Regards
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 10:15 PM V Subrahmanian via Advaita-l <
> adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Dear Raghav ji,
> >
> > Even in the case of the form of say, Krishna, the 'bhautika' element
> > is very much there: From a fetus in the womb, to the baby, there was
> > growing up into an adult, a man and one who became grand and great grandfather.
> All
> > these are characteristics of any other human body.
> >
> > I think in the Advaita siddhi there is a clarification on what
> > really is
> > a-prAkRta: The Laghuchandrika commentary states the distinction
> > between what is a-prAkRta and prAkRta. I would like to get more clarity on this.
> >
> > warm regards
> > subbu

> > > Thank you and Venkat ji for clarifying the sAyujya question
> > > amongst
> other
> > > insightful posts.
> > >
> > > Om
> > >

> > > P S. The pic sent by you looks more like viShNu rather than Shiva
> > > but apparently he is called tri-shira Shiva.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.
> rarebooksocietyofindia.org%2FpostDetail.php%3Fid%3D196174216674_101522
> 54158471675&data=05%7C01%7Cbhaskar.yr%40hitachienergy.com%7Cbe09459837
> 9c4181712108db19535ab3%7C7831e6d9dc6c4cd19ec61dc2b4133195%7C0%7C0%7C63
> 8131618020948270%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV
> 2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=dQjShPu%2F
> RFNPYdwtF%2B4TpYWPRzsNyFaCuEWiEAZLXZc%3D&reserved=0
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Archives:
> > > https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F
> > > lists.advaita-vedanta.org%2Farchives%2Fadvaita-l%2F&data=05%7C01%7
> > > Cbhaskar.yr%40hitachienergy.com%7Cbe094598379c4181712108db19535ab3
> > > %7C7831e6d9dc6c4cd19ec61dc2b4133195%7C0%7C0%7C638131618021104506%7
> > > CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI
> > > 6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vYg3gh3JuHCmPiDwz77B
> > > rspE4VkWc%2Be8kvSeWdPcfLY%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > > https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F
> > > lists.advaita-vedanta.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Flistinfo%2Fadvaita-l&data=05
> > > %7C01%7Cbhaskar.yr%40hitachienergy.com%7Cbe094598379c4181712108db1
> > > 9535ab3%7C7831e6d9dc6c4cd19ec61dc2b4133195%7C0%7C0%7C6381316180211
> > > 04506%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIi
> > > LCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2BI8FkbhE1BW
> > > bxqxe7Kl1bhZ5mKW9NbL3Yq8gBDFB2Vc%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > > For assistance, contact:
> > > listm...@advaita-vedanta.org
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Archives:
> > https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fli
> > sts.advaita-vedanta.org%2Farchives%2Fadvaita-l%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cbha
> > skar.yr%40hitachienergy.com%7Cbe094598379c4181712108db19535ab3%7C783
> > 1e6d9dc6c4cd19ec61dc2b4133195%7C0%7C0%7C638131618021104506%7CUnknown
> > %7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiL
> > CJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vYg3gh3JuHCmPiDwz77BrspE4VkWc%2B
> > e8kvSeWdPcfLY%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fli
> > sts.advaita-vedanta.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Flistinfo%2Fadvaita-l&data=05%7C0
> > 1%7Cbhaskar.yr%40hitachienergy.com%7Cbe094598379c4181712108db19535ab
> > 3%7C7831e6d9dc6c4cd19ec61dc2b4133195%7C0%7C0%7C638131618021104506%7C
> > Unknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik
> > 1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2BI8FkbhE1BWbxqxe7Kl1bhZ
> > 5mKW9NbL3Yq8gBDFB2Vc%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > For assistance, contact:
> > listm...@advaita-vedanta.org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Archives:
> https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flist
> s.advaita-vedanta.org%2Farchives%2Fadvaita-l%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cbhaskar
> .yr%40hitachienergy.com%7Cbe094598379c4181712108db19535ab3%7C7831e6d9d
> c6c4cd19ec61dc2b4133195%7C0%7C0%7C638131618021104506%7CUnknown%7CTWFpb
> GZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0
> %3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vYg3gh3JuHCmPiDwz77BrspE4VkWc%2Be8kvSeWdPcfL
> Y%3D&reserved=0
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flist
> s.advaita-vedanta.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Flistinfo%2Fadvaita-l&data=05%7C01%7C
> bhaskar.yr%40hitachienergy.com%7Cbe094598379c4181712108db19535ab3%7C78
> 31e6d9dc6c4cd19ec61dc2b4133195%7C0%7C0%7C638131618021104506%7CUnknown%
> 7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJX
> VCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2BI8FkbhE1BWbxqxe7Kl1bhZ5mKW9NbL3Yq8
> gBDFB2Vc%3D&reserved=0
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listm...@advaita-vedanta.org
>
_______________________________________________
Archives: https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.advaita-vedanta.org%2Farchives%2Fadvaita-l%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cbhaskar.yr%40hitachienergy.com%7Cbe094598379c4181712108db19535ab3%7C7831e6d9dc6c4cd19ec61dc2b4133195%7C0%7C0%7C638131618021104506%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vYg3gh3JuHCmPiDwz77BrspE4VkWc%2Be8kvSeWdPcfLY%3D&reserved=0

To unsubscribe or change your options:
https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.advaita-vedanta.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Flistinfo%2Fadvaita-l&data=05%7C01%7Cbhaskar.yr%40hitachienergy.com%7Cbe094598379c4181712108db19535ab3%7C7831e6d9dc6c4cd19ec61dc2b4133195%7C0%7C0%7C638131618021104506%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2BI8FkbhE1BWbxqxe7Kl1bhZ5mKW9NbL3Yq8gBDFB2Vc%3D&reserved=0

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

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Raghav ji,

Please find attached an interesting discussion in the Sanskrit Vichara Sagara on the untenability of avatAra sharIra to be bhautika.

As its a file attachment, it will be rejected by the advaita-l server, others can view it by seeing the corresponding message in the advaitin google groups: https://groups.google.com/g/advaitin

Regards,

Venkataraghavan

On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 12:57 PM Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l <adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

Even to be embodied (janma) usually requires prArabdha. But not so for
Krishna, Rama etc. That is the whole point of avatAra-vAda which is
accepted by all acharyas.

So when janma is possible without prArabdha, so also the other
ramifications like pain, hunger etc.



On Tue, 28 Feb, 2023, 6:23 pm Raghav Kumar Dwivedula, <
raghav...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Raghav Kumar Dwivedula <raghav...@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 28 Feb, 2023, 6:23 pm
> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Fwd: Brahman has no default form; Only contextual
> form - Varaha Purana
> To: Kaushik Chevendra <chevendr...@gmail.com>
>
>
> The concept of Leela takes care of the paradox of the AptakAma Ishvara
> experiencing (as though) hunger, pain etc.
>
> Rama wept when Sita was kidnapped. That does not militate against his
> freedom from avidyA and prArabdha.
>
> So hunger and pain can be as though present (for all practical purposes)
> even for avatAras.
>
> On Tue, 28 Feb, 2023, 4:52 pm Kaushik Chevendra, <
> chevendr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Namaste sir.
>> The difference is quite simple. Even if we accept bagavans shareera as
>> bhautika. The feeling of hunger, pain ,death etc are all effects of
>> prarbdha karma. No pain can be experienced without any prarabdha karma. So
>> if we want to say that bagavan had experienced hunger, pain in his body. We
>> will have to admit that there is prarabdha karma for bagavan. Which is not
>> at all acceptable
>>
>> On Tue, 28 Feb, 2023, 3:22 pm Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l, <
>> adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, Sri Krishna was "as though born endowed with a body" (dehavAniva
>>> jAtaH) etc, as though ate, as though died etc. But the sharira through
>>> which he manifested the Leela was not "as though born", "as though
>>> cremated
>>> by Arjuna," etc. Its unnecessarily to say that about the bhautika sharIra
>>> through which Sri Krishna, a manifestation of Ishvara, was anything other
>>> than bhautika. The fact that the sharIra was available for cremation by
>>> Arjuna is conclusive evidence for it's bhautikatvaM.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, 28 Feb, 2023, 1:01 pm Kaushik Chevendra via Advaita-l, <

>>> adva...@lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> I am aware of the fact that it is not bhautika. But such a body was
>>> > >> 'conceived' in the womb, delivered, grew up, became old, etc.
>>> There is
>>> > >> also a mention in the Bhagavatam that Krishna was even wounded by
>>> arrows
>>> > >> and bled.
>>> > >

>>> > > The bhautika element of bhagavan's body is only till the fact that
>>> it's a
>>> > > part of prakriti and not completely different from him.
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > Please read as "not completely different from prakriti".
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> > >>
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > 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
>>>
>>
_______________________________________________

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 Venkat ji,

Thanks for sharing the Vichara sagara pages on the topic.  Upon reading this, a question arises: 

The author has said: the bodies of avatara purushas like Rama and Krishna are not bhautika.  They did generate sukha (to the punyavaan jivas) and duhkha (to the papavaan jivas).  Yet, the very avatara bodies are themselves not a product of punya or otherwise of Rama and Krishna; the jivas' punya/papa alone is the cause of the sukha, etc. 

My question is:  In the 13th chapter of the BG, kshetram (prakriti) is defined as:

महाभूतान्यहङ्कारो बुद्धिरव्यक्तमेव च ।
इन्द्रियाणि दशैकं च पञ्च चेन्द्रियगोचराः ॥ ५ ॥

इच्छा द्वेषः सुखं दुःखं सङ्घातश्चेतना धृतिः ।
एतत्क्षेत्रं समासेन सविकारमुदाहृतम् ॥ ६ ॥

Here kshetram is all that is observed, experienced. This consists of the pancha koshas (including the sense/action organs, manas, buddhi, prana, sthula shariram, ahankara) and the outside world of shabda, sparsha, etc. Also, the reactions that the contact of the sense/action organs with the outside world of sound, etc. These reactions are stated to be sukha, duhkha, etc. All of this is together called kshetram: prakriti and its parinaama-s. Kshetrajna, the pure Consciousness is the 'other', distinct from kshetram.

Now, if the avatara bodies of Rama and Krishna generates sukha/duhkha to the ones who saw them during those avataras, there was essentially contact of the sense..organs of the jivas with those avatara bodies. The gopis had the sparsha anubhava. So many in those avataras had sparsha anubhava of the avatara bodies. The bodies then will have to come under shabda, sparsha, etc. Taking the 13th chapter specification of the kshetram, the avatara bodies will have to be admitted to be products of prakriti. Only murta dravyam can be vishaya for chakshus, sparsha, etc. 

In the case of bhaktas who experience the divine bodies of Rama, etc. long after the avataras have ended their earthly role, the manasa pratyaksha generates sukha. But even manasa must depend on aindriya anubhava had before. In this case, the bhakta has seen/read the puranas account of the rupam of the Lord and that input helps the mano vrittis. Bhaktas have even visions of the Lord, speak with Him, hug, etc. This is not purely mental; they see the divine form in front of them, touch, etc. HH Sri Abhinava Vidyatirtha Swamigal's savikalpa samadhi, etc. anubhavas have been documented. He leaned forward and touched the feet of Ambal during one such vision. All these must happen with some material dravya, even if the vision is subjective. Acharyal has said: if the Lord, during such a vision, had given a fruit or any other object, that will remain even after the vision ceases and shall be a proof of the vision.  Such fruit necessarily is bhautika. 

In the light of the above, how do we reconcile the Vichara sagara opinion with the kshetram definition? I am only seeking to get clarification.

warm regards

subbu

  

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Subbuji,

I don't have a strong opinion on the subject, but it appears to me that a mAyAmaya sharIra can also be pratyaksha yogya, if Ishvara so wishes - this pratyaksha yogyatva need not be limited to being an object of the instrument of sight, it may be extended to the other four organs of perception too. Therefore, it is possible for the devotee to touch Ishvara's feet even if they are not bhautika.

The intent with saying that the body is mAyAmaya sharIra is not that the vision of the Ishvara is merely a mental / subjective vision of the upAsaka - rather that the body that Ishvara takes up then is made up of mAyA, and therefore is not subject to the physical / biological restrictions of a bhautika sharIra. 

There are several examples that come up in advaita sharada of this idea:

1) Anandagiri gItAbhAShya upodghAta अंशेनेति । स्वेच्छानिर्मितेन मायामयेन स्वरूपेणेत्यर्थः ।

2) Anandagiri gItAbhAShya TIkA: 4.2

यथा लोके कश्चिज्जातो देहवानालक्ष्यते, एवमहमपि मायामाश्रित्यत्या स्ववशया सम्भवामि - जन्मव्यवहारमनुभवामि, तेन मायामयमीश्वरस्य जन्मेत्याह - तां प्रकृतिमित्यादिना ।

3) Anandagiri gItAbhAShya TIkA: 4.9

मायामयमीश्वरस्य जन्म, न वास्तवं, तस्यैव च जगत्परिपालनं कर्म, नान्यस्य, इति जानतः श्रेयोऽवाप्तिन्दर्शयन् , विपक्षे प्रत्यवायं सूचयति - तज्जन्मेत्यादिना । 

4) appayya dIkshitendra, nyAyarakshAmaNi 1.1.20 

रूपवत्त्वञ्च ब्रह्मणोऽपि सम्भवति; सत्यस्य रूपस्य नीरूपशास्त्रविरोधित्वेऽपि मायामयस्य तदविरोधित्वात् । ब्रह्मणि च रूपस्य ‘माया ह्येषा मया सृष्टा यन्मां पश्यसि नारद’ इति वचनानुसारेण मायामयस्यैवाङ्गीकारात् । न च तद्बोधकवचनानामप्रामाण्यप्रसङ्गः ; मायाविदर्शितमायादृष्ट्यनुवादवत् प्रामाण्योपपत्तेः । इह च ‘हिरण्मयः पुरुषो दृश्यते’ ‘यन्मां पश्यसि’ इत्यादौ तथैव दृष्ट्यनुवाददर्शनाच्च । आरम्भणाधिकरणे व्युत्पादयिष्यमाणेन न्यायेन शरीरेऽपि व्यावहारिकप्रामाण्योपपत्तेश्च । न च शरीरं कर्मजन्यमेवेति नियमः ; इह अनन्यथासिद्धलिङ्गावगमितस्य परमेश्वरस्य शरीरसिद्धौ ‘रमणीयचरणा रमणीयां योनिमापद्येरन्’ ‘कपूयचरणाः कपूयां योनिमापद्येरन्’(छा. ५.१०. ७) इत्यादिश्रुतीनामनीश्वरशरीरविषयत्वकल्पनोपपत्तेः । न च सर्वपाप्मोदयश्रुतौ फलमिव, शरीरं कर्मजन्यमिति श्रुतावपि शरीरत्वावच्छेदेन कर्मजन्यत्वे लाघवमित्युपपत्तिस्तात्पर्यलिङ्गमस्तीति तदनुरोधेनैतत्सङ्कोचकल्पनं न युक्तमिति वाच्यम् । श्रुतिदर्शितफलात् पुरुषबुद्धिकल्प्योपपत्तेर्दुर्बलत्वात् । एतेन – परमेश्वरस्य शरीराङ्गीकारे दुःखमपि स्यात् ; ‘न ह वै सशरीरस्य सतः प्रियाप्रिययोरपहतिरस्ति’(छा. ८. १२. १) इति श्रुतेः – इति निरस्तम् । पुण्यपापफलोपभोगार्थकर्मसंपादितस्यैव शरीरस्य तया श्रुत्या दुःखाविनाभावप्रतिपादनात् । परमेश्वरेणोपासकानुग्रहार्थमिच्छापरिगृहीते शरीरे तदप्रसक्तेः ।

What about Anandagiri AchArya in his TIkA to mANDUkya indicatinh that avatAra sharIra can be pAncabhautika? See the context below:

मूर्तस्त्रिशूलादिधारी महेश्वरश्चक्रधारी वा परमार्थो भवतीत्यागमिकाः । तदपि भ्रान्तिमात्रम्। अस्मदादिशरीरवत् तस्यापि शरीरस्य पाञ्चभौतिकत्वात्।

Here he does admit that Ishvara's body is pAncabhautika, but his intent is to say that the body is not real (paramArtha), so make of it as you will.

In any case, I think it can be argued either way, and I don't have strong views on the matter. Presenting both sides of the case - each side can pick whichever argument appeals to them.

Regards,

Venkatraghavan 

--
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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te37dKWa6-0-%2BotOtiaMTKk8DTeRYdAtxOgPbdQWMEVF%3DA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bhaskar YR]

what is to be gained whether Ishvara's sharIra is bhautika or otherwise

praNAms
Hare Krishna

Yes we don’t gain anything after ascertaining (!!??) the source of bhagavaan shareera. And it is hardly matters as long as bhagavaan gracing, blessing and granting boons to his/her devotees through the mAyAmaya or apraakrutika or bhautika shareera. And it is only his choice to assume mAyAmaya shareera ( all of a sudden a very well built Narasimha from a pillar or varaaha or kUrma or matsya) or getting the bhautika shareera like rAma, krishna like any other mortals by following the natural janana-maraNa process.

But curious question would always remain in Astika mind is whether Krishna and rAma have the default forms and sitting somewhere with their family members or without family members (assuming they were mere jeeva-s and gone!!!) somewhere in ayOdhya or dvAraka or some lOka other than where they were easily visible and accessible to even normal people and even to foes and perverts when they were serving the purpose of avatAra along with their family members 😊 and whenever there is call or earnest prayer they would travel and appear before their devotees with their default peculiar forms and give darshana OR some Chaitanya which does not have any particular form or any particular guNa-vishesha assuming the form which is in accordance with sAdhaka's upAsya devata (like formless water taking the shape in jug, jar, tumbler, tank etc.) appear before him and bless!! sAdhakAnugrahArthaM, apekshitOpAdhi saMbandhaM, Ishwara's particular nAma rUpa is avidyAkruta etc. give strength to later position. Since there are jeeva-s ( some exalted ones and some normal), jagat and Ishwara ( neither normal jeeva nor exalted jeeva-s like devata but some super powerful Chaitanya) and this Ishwara, the super powerful Chaitanya is ready to assume any form and commanding and ruling everything.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
Bhaskar YR

[V Subrahmanian]

Copying from an old post:

In the short work 'Bhārata sāra sangraha stotram', Sri Appayya Dikshita concludes by pointing out that Rama and Krishna were jiva-s, endowed with karma, delusion, etc. on the authority of the Mahabharata:

गोप्तारं ततो गच्छेत् सरव्यास्तीर्थमुत्तमम् ।

तत्र रामो गतः स्वर्गं सभृत्यबलवाहनः ॥

देहं त्यक्त्वा दिवं यातः स्थास्यतीन्द्रस्य वैभवात् ।’  

[Rama went to svarga along with his retinue, after giving up the body, and remains there with Indra's lordship.]

इति गोप्रतारतीर्थमहिम्ना श्रीरामस्य स्वर्गप्रतिष्ठावचनात्; सभापर्वणि यमसभावर्णने -

Having thus proclaimed the greatness of Go-pratāra, Sri Rama's settlement in Svarga, the sabhā parvan of the Mahabharata while describing the Assembly Hall of Yama further says:

तस्यां राजर्षयः पुण्यास्तथा देवर्षयोऽमराः ।

यमं वैवस्वतं तात प्रहृष्टाः पर्युपासते ॥

ययातिर्नहुषः पूरुर्मान्धाता सोमको नृगः ।

  इत्यारभ्य  स्वर्गप्राप्त्यनन्तरं यमसभायामास्थाय तमुपासीनानां राजर्षीणां परिगणनेन, ’रामो दाशरथिश्चैव लक्षमणश्च प्रतर्दनः’ इति परिगणनेन च सोऽपि कर्माधीनलोकप्राप्तिको जीवविशेषः स्यात् ।

In the Assembly Hall of Yama are present: Rajarshi-s with puṇya, devarshi-s, deva-s, who happily meditate upon Yama. Also are Yayati, Nahusha, Puru, Māndhāta, Somaka, Nṛga. Having enumerated those present in the Assembly and meditating Yama, the Mahabharata includes: Rāma the son of Dasharatha, Lakshmana and Pratardana. By so counting Rama along with all other entities, it can be concluded that Rama is a jiva who has attained a loka that is subject to and attainable by karma. 

After giving one instance for Rama to be taken as a jiva by someone, Sri Appayya Dikshita gives an instance where Krishna is also not free from such a possibility:

ततः शार्ङ्गं धनुःश्रेष्ठं करात्प्रपतितं मम। मोहापन्नश्च कौन्तेय रथोपस्थ उपाविशम् ।।

Mahabharata Aranyaparvan: 3.21.25

Krishna says to Yudhishthira: Thereafter the excellent bow,  śārnga, fell off my hand. O son of Kunti, deluded as I was, I, sat in the chariot.  

इति आरण्यपर्वणि शाल्वयुद्धे कृष्णस्य मोहाज्ञानवचनेन सोऽपि जीवविशेषः स्यात् ।  The above words of Krishna admitting his delusion and ignorance, can result in someone taking him to be a jiva.

Sri Appayya Dikshitar concludes that explanation: तस्मात् कृत्स्नमपि भारतं गीतानुगीतामोक्षधर्मवैष्णवधर्मशास्त्रसहितं विशेषध्वनिवृत्त्या शिवपारम्यविश्रान्तं तत्प्रधानमेव भगवता श्रीवेदव्यासेन कृतमित्येतत् सुप्रतिष्ठितमिति सर्वम् समञ्जसम् ॥

Thus, the entire Mahabharata including the Bhagavadgita, the Anugita, Moksha dharma, along with vaishnava dharma shastra, by the method of 'viśeṣadhvani', ('unique/emphatic purport') is upholding the supremacy of Shiva alone. Such is the way Bhagavan Veda Vyasa has composed the MB. This fact has been firmly established (by us) in this work:  'Bhārata sāraga sangraha stotram'. 

In the foregoing were given some references from Appayya Dikshitar's work for Rama and Krishna's jivatva. However, does he really mean that? The purport of Dikshitar's words is: If one would just go by a sentence or two here and there and conclude something, then the consequence will be that Rama and Krishna will have to be held to be jiva-s. The word 'syāt' is indicative of this. He wants the global picture to be considered and not any stray verses to determine what he has in mind. Dikshitar's mind is best seen in this one important verse:

  Appayya has very clearly stated why he undertook the task of bringing to light Shiva-supremacy:

// viShNurvA shankaro vA shruti-shikhara-girAmastu tAtparya-bhUmiH
na-asmAkam tatra vAdaH prasarati kimapi spaShTam-advaita-bhAjAm |
kintu-Isha-dveSha-gADhAnala-kalita-hRRidAm durmatInAm duruktIH
bhanktum yatno mama-ayam nahi bhavatu tato viShNu-vidveSha-shankAm ||

The meaning of the above beautiful verse is:

'I have not the slightest objection, to anyone coming to any conclusion, that the spirit of the Vedas and the Vedantas, declare either Vishnu or Shiva as the First God. I am a follower of the
Advaita doctrine. I have no difference between Shiva and VishNu. But if in order to establish Vishnu as the main God, if somebody starts abusing Shiva or hates him, I cannot bear it. There are as many proofs or pramanas in the Vedas, Vedantas, Puranas and Agamas to establish that Shiva is a mighty God, as there are to prove that Vishnu is a powerful one. However, I am propagating my religion and indulging in debate and disputation, only to persuade everyone not
to hate Shiva. Let no one have the slightest doubt that I either hate or wish to denigrate Lord Vishnu simply because I praise the grace and greatness of Lord Shiva.'

The sublime devotion of Dikshita to Lord Vishnu is fully seen from his great work 'Varadaraja stava' where he has sung in ecstatic poetry about Lord Varadaraja of Kanchipuram. Vaishnavas declare that Vishnu is the supreme being and that Shiva has a lower status, being a mere jiva. Sri Dikshita however proves in his 'Ratna-traya-parIkShA' that Shiva, Vishnu, Ambika, all the three are the same, viz., the supreme reality, and proves it with the pramanas taken
from the puranas, vedas and agamas. //

The above is quoted from the book: 'Sri Appayya Dikshita' (p.66,67) by Dr.N.Ramesan, IAS.

Regards

subbu 

[Bhaskar YR]

Thus, the entire Mahabharata including the Bhagavadgita, the Anugita, Moksha dharma, along with vaishnava dharma shastra, by the method of 'viśeṣadhvani', ('unique/emphatic purport') is upholding the supremacy of Shiva alone. Such is the way Bhagavan Veda Vyasa has composed the MB. This fact has been firmly established (by us) in this work:  'Bhārata sāraga sangraha stotram'. 

 

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

I don’t know whenever I read these type of statements whether shiva para or vishNu para reminds me mere ‘anger tales’ by some fanatic fans!!  Do we really need to belittle visuNu to prove the supremacy of shiva or do we really need to depict shiva in a bad light to prove the supremacy of vishNu??  When, as an advaitin, we have the firm conviction that driving force behind shiva & vishNu is one and the same. 

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!