Musings on Vega-setu stotra

[Guest guest]

srimathE lakshmi-nrsumha parabrahmaNe namaha

sri vedanta desika guravE namaha

 

Dear bhAgavatOttamas,

 

In my last posting we narrated the episode in the Srimad Bhagavatham where

Krishna remarks to his foster-mother, Yasodha : "It is only when I am bound,

amma, that you can ever hope to be free". She mulled over it. Then we said

that what Yasodha fully grasped from Krishna's words (which her neighbour

didn't fathom) could be said to be an excellent illustration of the

esotericism of "gathAgathAni" in Verse #6 of the Vega-setu stotra.

 

Which leaves us with some stark questions : What did Yasodha understand ?

And how is it an illustration of "gathAgathAni" as we understand it in the

context of the 'vega-setu stotra' ?

 

What Yasodha understood perfectly from Krishna's words was that there is a

strange and mysterious principle of INVERSION that determines relations

between godhead and man.

 

"gathAgathAni", as phrased by Swami Desikan in his "vega-setu stotra", also

is a delectable illustration of the principle of "INVERSION" that governs

the equation between two different states of consciousness viz., that of

"mortality" and of "divinity".

 

Hence Yasodha could be said to be one of the earliest but rather elusive

"vyAkhyAna-kartA-s" of the "gathAgathAni" effect !!

 

Let me explain all this.

 

If you look closely, both in the phrase "gathAgathAni" in the "vega-setu

stotra" and in Yasodha's understanding of Krishna's remarks in the

Bhagavatham story, you will notice there is a common underlying element of

an "inverse relationship" working somewhere within the two.

 

Please recollect now the standard explanation to Verse #6 of the "stotra"

which states that as a devotee dwells ever more deeply and faithfully on the

Lord's "shuttling" (in the Tirumazhisai Alwar episode) he begins to

progressively sense a gradual decline in his own frenzied and 'karmic'

restlessness and can eventually experience complete cessation of his own

"shuttling between "death" and "re-birth"". Now look closely, please, and

you will observe the "inversion" occuring here in the "divine" element as it

is said to begin shuttling just as soon as the "mortal" element ceases its

shuttle; conversely, observe the "divine element" not performing

"gathAgathAni" so long as the "mortal element" remains caught up in eternal

"pUnaRapi-janam-pUnaRapi-maRaNam" !

 

Next,in the case of Yasodha in the Bhagavatham story the "principle of

inversion" is made self-evident by Lord Krishna himself when he subtly but

categorically tells his mother, "It is only when I am bound, amma, that you

can ever hope to be free." Although this was said in the dramatic context of

the Bhagavatham story, Krishna's pregnant remarks were not lost on Yasodha

as can be seen from how, in the episode, she alone grasps the import of it

all but leaves her neighbour behind utterly nonplussed. It is clear that

Yasodha fully comprehended the "element of inversion" that Krishna, the

divine child, was insinuating when He nonchalantly uttered the words,"I have

to be bound and all tied-up, amma, if you must become free" and then merrily

ran away to do more mischief !

 

Yasodha understood then clearly that a devotee must first learn to "bind"

the Lord to his heart by means of ropes ("siru-thAmbinAl kattU") woven out

of the strands of true 'bhakti' before he can lay claim to "release" from

his own mortal "coils".

 

"Acharyas" and great scholars point out that this very same "Principle of

Inversion", governing the interaction between "divinity and humanity", is

exemplified further elsewhere too in the Bhagavatham. Here are some instances :

 

-- when a devotee constantly dwells on the event of infant-Krishna being

"incarcerated" in the prison of Kamsa, then he is gradually himself "freed"

from human bondage ( i.e. "freedom" being the inverse of "incarceration")

 

-- when a devotee steadily contemplates on the various incidents in Gokulam

recounting Krishna "stealing" butter, then the devotee renders himself, or

his soul, fit to be "stolen" by the Lord ( i.e. here the object "stolen" is

deemed the inverse of the agency that "steals")

 

-- when a devotee constantly meditates on the various incidents in Gokulam

where Yasodha got "annoyed" with young Krishna for His incessant pranks,

then verily he paves the way for the Lord to treat the devotee's own

"pranks" in this earthly life (i.e. "pApa-pUnya karma-s") with a great deal

of "indulgence" (i.e. "indulgence" being the inverse of "annoyance")

 

-- when a devotee constantly remembers the fact that Krishna "served"

sometime his foster-father, Nandagopan, as a common shepherd or cow-boy,

then the devotee begins to sense within himself a "mastery" over his unruly

sense-organs that lead him astray in life ("servitude" being the inverse of

"mastery")

 

-- the more a devotee contemplates on the several incidents in Gokulam where

the child Krishna "hid" Himself, in the houses of "gopikas" and other

neighbours, to escape from his mother, the more clearly He "reveals" Himself

to the devotee within his inward mind (i.e. "hide" is the inverse of

"reveal").

 

Thus, through Verse #6 of the "vega-setu stotram" of Swami Desikan, a very

subtle lesson can be learnt by all of us, and that is : in the relationship

between "mortality" and "eternity", between "sarira-sariri", between

"jivAtmA-paramAtmA" there is a very ethereal bond of relationship that is

characterised by a "Principle of Inversion". A true devotee of the Lord is

one who, our great 'Acharyas' say, has realized this principle not at just

the dry intellectual plane but at the heart of his very being.

 

Dear "bhAgavatOttamas", I know many of you have had excellent formal

education. Many of you are top-notch professionals in your own fields of

secular endeavour. Some of you in the US are the best talent from India

having gone from the IITs, the IIMs, colleges of engineering and computer

sciences back home. Now to you this "Principle of Inversion" I have been

talking about may sound a bit far-fetched and like a lot of "wooly" stuff.

You may look at this principle with a great deal of scepticism, as I myself

once used to do a long while ago. It might indeed strain your reasonable

faculties to have to believe that there is a "Principle of Inversion" that

mysteriously operates one's relationship with a personal God and which must

be mastered before one can begin to really appreciate the tenets and nuance

of Sri Vaishnavism.

 

To those of you who cannot help such thoughts I shall endeavour to offer an

honest explanation by way of "food for thought" in my next posting after

which I would like to conclude this series of "Musings on the Vega-setu stotra".

 

srimathE srivan satagopa sri narayana yathindra mahadesikaya namaha

 

sudarshan.

srimathE lakshmi-nrsumha parabrahmaNE namaha

sri vedanta desika guravE namaha