more on "bandhu" and KamAsikAshtakam

[Guest guest]

srimathe lakshmi-nrsimha parabrahmane namaha

sri vedanta gurave namaha

 

Dear "bhagavattOtamAs,

 

Last week I was discussing Verse 4 of the

"kAmAsikAshtakam" which reads as :

 

bandhumakhilasya janto-ho

bandhura-paryanka bandha ramaniyam

vishama-vilochana meeday

vegavati pulina keli narasimham !

 

In my comments on the phrase,"bandhumakhilasya janto-

ho", I had tried to show how the term "bandhu" is invested

by our poet-philosopher-preceptor, Swami Desikan, with

more significance than actually meets the eye.

 

I tried to show in my post, you will all recall, that the Lord

is "bandhu" not only to "bhaktA-s"/"prapannA-s" like

Draupadi,Prahladan or Gajendran; He is also "bandhu"

of all "jantu-s" of all "akhilam" --- ones that are

ignorant or "indifferent" to the Lord and downright

evil ones like Hiranyakasippu as well!(I narrated

a small story of a widow, her son and and their Unseen

Benefactor to exemplify the "indifferent jantu-s" of the

world; and as for evil "jantu-s", I had quoted the

unusual precedent where the Lord bestowed on Hiranyakasippu

a rare privilege for which even His 'bhaktA-s' do not

readily qualify i.e taking a "jantu" in His arms and laying

it upon His lap: what as per "Sri-siddhAntam" doctrine,

we know, constitutes the crowning, consummative moment

of "mOksha" in "parama-padam").

 

A member who read the above post of mine wrote to me

saying, "from the general drift of your comments, does it

not appear that the Lord makes no distinction between

good, evil and indifferent "jantu-s" of the world and

treats them all alike? Is this not a rather amoral,

un-scriptural view to take?".

 

Certainly, this is a point worth further pondering and

discussing about, isn't it ?

 

Indeed, if there was a God who made no distinction between

good, evil and indifferent "jantu-s" and freely awarded

His Kinship, His "bandhu"-ship, to one and all without

discrimination, then what kind of perverse God would

that be ?!

 

Where then is the need for "dharmA" or "sAstrA" in this

world? What then would be the moral difference between

good and evil, between sin and righteousness, between

redemption and damnation?

 

If everyone is eligible for the Grace of the Great Benefactor,

the "akhilasya-bandhu", if the gates of heavenly paradise

were to be open to all, then, wouldn't earth be turned to

veritable Hell? Wouldn't morals and mores, values and

self-restraint all flee this world?

 

Yet why then (we should ask ourselves) why then does

Swami Desikan use the expression,"bandhumakhilasya

janto-ho?!(the true Kinsman of All Creatures--good, bad

and the indifferent). Isn't Swami Desikan then guilty of a

poetic malapropism? Is he not employing poetic hyperboles

which though sounding good to the literary ear ("ramaniyam",eh?)

nevertheless do nothing but pure mischief in misleading

our minds and head headlong into a swirling eddy of moral

confusion("vishama-vilOchanam" at work here, perhaps??!)?

 

This poetic "vishamam" (mischievousness) of Swami Desikan

actually reminds me of the good Christian who queried

his village pastor,"Sir, you talk of the God Almighty

being All-Compassionate. Why would such a God then have

to damn souls("jantu-s") to eternal perdition in Hell?".

The village pastor was hard-pressed to defend the

compassionate Lord but somehow managed a devious response:

"Sir, the Lord indeed created Eternal Hell

but His Compassion hath made it eternally empty."

 

The good Christian pondered over this for a while and

then it struck him that if Hell was really designed to

be eternally empty, then, where was the moral difference

between good Christians like himself and the sinners,

blasphemers and evil un-believers of the world?!!

 

It is reported the good pastor promptly and swiftly

withdrew from the scene before any further uncomfortable

supplementaries from the good Christian came his way !

 

Now, the uncomfortable posers before us are:

 

(1) How can Swami Desikan's Lord, our Great Lord Narasimham

of the "kAmAsikAshtakam", accomplish the un-accomplishable

or reconcile the irreconciliable?

 

(2) How is it possible for Him to be "bandhu" to one

and all in this world ("akhilasya-janto-ho") ?

 

(3) How can the Lord ever avoid being tainted with the

reproach of "amorality" if He chooses to shower

the Grace of His "bandhu"-ship on all alike :

good, bad and indifferent "jantu-s"?

 

Now, dear "bhagavatOttamA-s", when describing Lord

Narasimhan our great "AchAryA-s" can often be seen to use

a singularly apt expression :

 

"aghatitha-ghatana-sAmarthyam"

 

The literal translation of the above phrase is:

 

"the resourcefulness to accomplish what is

truly un-accomplishable".

 

The Lord of Ahobilam as we know from "puranA" was an

un-paralleled Master of "aghatitha-ghatana-samarthyam"!

 

Look at the way He assumed the mutually irreconciliable

form of Man and Animal; consider how He set out to

accomplish what was thought to be un-accomplishable:

the destruction of the powerfully evil, Hiranyakasippu;

the Lord seemed to appear out of nowhere and yet He was

present but a few yards away in a pillar within the

precincts of Hiranyakassipu's palace itself; He chose

as His weapon nothing but mere nails with which to battle;

He overcame every single obstacle, reckoned as

insurmountable, that came between Him and the adversary!!

 

All this we know from the "purAna".

 

To One such who was indeed so renowned for "aghatitha-

ghatana-samarthyam", we must ask ourselves, to One such

who excelled in "making the impossible possible", would it

really be so difficult to accomplish that fine and delicate

"moral reconciliation" which we now say is required between

the Lord's position as (a) the "bandhu" of all "jantu-s" of

the world and as (b) One who maintains, at the same time, the

inviolable moral order which surely prevails

over good, evil and the indifferent, giving

each its due or what it deserves under a divine system of

dispensing reward, punishment and retribution?

 

This is the crux of the issue, isn't it? Believe me, it's a

tough one to unravel too, dear "bhAgavatOttamA-s"!

 

But unlike the village pastor I do not

intend to flee from the scene.

 

I shall return to squarely address this question in

my next post.

 

srimathe srivan satagopa sri narayana yatindra mahadesikaya namaha

sudarshan