May Bhaktas of Shri Krishna
Raghunandan H.P
In article: <4d65lv$i...@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu> Murthy Navarathna
<mur...@nstl.com>
> I thought that Lord Vishnu always marries only incarnations of sri
> Lakshmidevi who is number 2 in the above structure. Since Lord Krishna
> married Sri Tulsidevi, conversly, isn't she at the same level as
> Sri Lakshmidevi?
>
True. When he accepted Tulsi as wife it was not due to Tulsi alone,
there was Laxmi aaveshha/saanidhyaa in Tulsi. The Lord treats only
Laxmi and none else as his consort.
Same should be said about the 16000 consorts of Shri Krishna in
dvaarka.
Tulsi can never be the same level as Laxmii (so also the 16000
consorts of the Lord).
>>..
>>..
>> Ganesha, SubramaNya
>> Naarada
>> Saptarishis
>All kinds of poojas (including Shodashopachara pooja) are performed to
>the dieties in the above order. Even though Ganesha is at a comparitively
>lower level, how come he gets worshipped first (even before his father
>Rudra is worshipped)?
Shaastra prescribes that all worship be done to the Lord and in
relation to him only. Performing pooja to Ganesha first does not
violate taaratamya because it is not done to Ganeshha at all.
It is first done to the Vishvambara muurthy form of the Lord who
is the antaryaami of Ganesha.
Ganesha is puujya not only because of his intrinsic worth, but
more so because he is the adhishhTaana of the Vishvambara form of the
Lord who provides vighna naashaktva and all other qualities (that
Ganesha is famous for ) to Ganesha.
The Lord has himself dictated that his Vishvambara form
in Ganesha will remove obstacles and therefore Ganesha who is the
adhishhTaana for such a form should be worshipped.
This does not mean that Ganesha is superior to the Lord or Shiva
(his father) for that matter.
>
>Finally, can some one tell me where would Gangadevi (Mother of Bishma)
>fit in the above list?
>
I suppose she would fit in anywhere below varuNa. I shall enumerate
in detail later.
>Thanks in advance,
>
>Murthy
>
--
Regards
- hpr
H.P.Raghunandan
hpr...@genius.tisl.soft.net
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
This posting brought to you via the SRV auto-moderator, v 1.20, 11/28/95
Send message with 'help' (no quotes) in body, to s...@atlantis.mae.cornell.edu
(Please remove this signature from follow-ups to avoid posting rejection)
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Vijay Sadananda Pai
Raghunandan H.P <hpr...@aes.tisl.soft.net> wrote:
>YudhishThira and Vidura are amshas of Yama. All the three can coexist.
>Yama is the amshi and YudhisThira & Vidura are amshas.
What, in this case, is an amsha. I am familiar with the term & meaning
of avesha, and have seen the word amsha (e.g. ete camsha kalaH pumsam /
kRShNas tu bhagavaan svayam), but am not sure how it applies to jiivas.
I'm not at all troubled by coexistence, I'm just curious about how
they attained different destinations after their lives.
>Regards
> - hpr
Yours,
Vijay
Raghunandan H.P
<vija...@mandolin.rice.edu>
writes
> I have a question; in the Bhagavatam (I can dig up the verse
> with a little effort), I believe it says that the Pandavas, along
> with Draupadi, were headed for the paramam padam (Vaikuntha) after
> their lives, and that Vidura returned as Yama to Pitrloka (where
> Aryama had been temporarily serving as Yama). [These matters
> are discussed in the First Canto of the SB] How does this
> reconcile with Yudhishthira also being Yama?
>
No conflict.
YudhishThira and Vidura are amshas of Yama. All the three can coexist.
Yama is the amshi and YudhisThira & Vidura are amshas.
Just as Indra and Arjuna coexisted and Karna and Suurya also.
--
Regards
- hpr
H.P.Raghunandan
hpr...@genius.tisl.soft.net
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
Vijay Sadananda Pai
Madhva's Mahaabhaarata commentary:
>What, in this case, is an amsha. I am familiar with the term & meaning
>of avesha, and have seen the word amsha (e.g. ete camsha kalaH pumsam /
>kRShNas tu bhagavaan svayam), but am not sure how it applies to jiivas.
>I'm not at all troubled by coexistence, I'm just curious about how
>they attained different destinations after their lives.
For which H.P. Raghunandan responded in a letter:
jiivaamsha & paramaatmaamsha are totally different.
paramaatma avataara is different from the above 2.
A technical defintion in sanskrit of
1. jiivaamsha - jiivaamshatvam.h naama ekadeshatvesati tatkam.ranimitta
dehavatvam.h.
Translation - The property of jiivamshatva should include
a. part of the jiiva ( ekadeshatva )
b. owning a body caused by the kama.r of the original
jiiva (amshi)
Amongst jiivas the amsha is normally inferior in intrinsic attributes
w.r.t the amshi.
e.g: Amshi Amsha
---------------------------------------------------
Yama Vidura, YudhishhTiraa
Here the bodies attained by Vidura and YudhishhTira are
the result of the karma of Yama.
If Vidura/YudhishhTira experience extreme happiness/sorrow
then Yama also experiences it not otherwise.
The converse is not true.
Vidura and Yudhishhtiraa displayed great adherence to Dharma
( typical of Yama).
The amshas need not display similar qualities/attributes. E.g:
e.g: Amshi Amsha
---------------------------------------------------
Shiva Ashwattaama, shukaacharya
Brihaspati DroNaachaarya, Uddhava
Whereas Ashwattaama supported the Lord's foes , shuukaacharya
sang his Glory.
Whereas DroNaachaarya supported the Lord's foes , Uddhava
sang his Glory.
2. paramaatmaamsha - paramaatmaamshatvam.h naama paramaatmabhinnatvesati
paramaatmasadR^isha alpaguNavatvam.h
Translation - The property of paramaatmaamshatva means
a. Difference with the paramaatma (paramaatmabhinnatvam.h)
b. Similarity with paramaatma (paramaatmasadR^ishhatvam.h)
(like chetanatva - sentience, nityatva etc)
c. Attributes limited in quality and quantity
(alpaguNavatvam.h)
Every jiiva is said to be an amsha of the paramaatma.
Shrisha Rao
Vijay Sadananda Pai <vija...@mandolin.rice.edu> wrote:
>I asked this question about amshas, regarding personalities listed in
>Madhva's Mahaabhaarata commentary:
{*chomp*]
>For which H.P. Raghunandan responded in a letter:
[*chomp*]
> jiivaamsha & paramaatmaamsha are totally different.
[*chomp*]
A small note: there are said to be two kinds of jiivas, "saamsha"
(sa-amsha) and "niramsha." The saamshas display amshaamshii-bhaava,
and can occupy more than one body at one time, etc. Niramshas such as
your sincerely are confined to one body at a time, and do not display
this kind of ability.
The amsha does not enjoy the glory of the amshi, nor does the amshi
suffer the misery of the amsha. While generally the amsha is less
potent than the amshi, there is an example for the reverse being true
-- Arjuna, the amsha, defeated Indra, the amshi, in the battle over
the KhaaNDava forest. In that case, however, the aavesha of Nara over
Arjuna, and the fact that Krishna was with him, were responsible.
In fact, this episode is the one related to by the Anu-vyaakhyaana as
showing Krishna's "achintyaadbhuta shakti." The Lord's unfathomable
prowess was responsible for Indra's own amsha apposing him and
defeating him in battle.
> Every jiiva is said to be an amsha of the paramaatma.
Yes, but in that instance, there is no identity, whereas the amsha and
amshi in the case of jiivas are really the same person.
Regards,
Shrisha Rao