AntarvyApti and BahirvyApti (Was Doubt)

[Guest guest]

SrI:

SrI Lakshminrusimha ParabrahmaNE namaha

SrImatE rAmAnujAya namaha

SrImatE nigamAnta mahAdESikAya namaha

SrI nArAyaNa yateendra mahAdESikAya namaha

 

Dear Smt Lakshmi,

namO nArAyaNa.

> Veda says "Anthar Bhahischa tat Sarvam Vyapya Narayana

> Sthithaha"

> I have a doubt regarding Antharvyapthi & Bahirvyapthi.

> Regarding Amtharvyapthi: When our Athma itself is

> Anumathram how can Emberuman reside inside

> it.Similarly Time is said to be Vipu then how is

> Bhairvyapthi possible.

>

> Could anyone enlighten me regarding this.

 

SwAmi DESikan explains that Lord nArAyaNa (ie.divyAtma swaroopam)

is physically not present inside a jIvAtma.

 

In the chillarai rahasyam virOdha parihAram (50), swAmi

DESikan asks the following question and answers it by himself :

 

Qtn : A jIvAtma is aNu (atomic) in nature to the extent that

there is nothing which is smaller than that. There is

nothing like "inside a jIvAtma" since by nature it is

aNu. Similarly, kAlA (ie.time) is vibhu (all pervading).

So, there is nothing like "outside the kAlA" since by

nature it is all pervading. When these are the facts ,

How can the Lord be said to be present inside and outside

of everything ? How can He be told to be inside a

jIvAtma and outside the kAlA ?

 

Ans : The purport of such Scriptural statements is that,

ParamAtma is present everywhere alongwith all the entities

ie. In all the dravyAs, there is no pradESa (place) in

which Lord does not exist.

 

< Ref: SrI SrIrAmadESikAchArya's vivaraNam and moolam >.

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

 

Lets disuss the implication of the above answer by

SwAmi dESikan.

 

Wherever either "in" or "out" of some entity exists ,

Lord is there. Whenever either "in" or "out" of some

entity can't be defined (ie.non existent) the question

of Lord's presence out there does not arise at all. This

will clarify the meanings of "antarvyApti" and

"bahirvyApti".

 

The question whether the color of the horn of a rabbit is

either brown or white does not arise since rabbit does not

have a horn in the first hand. Similarly, when there is

nothing called "inside" of a jIvAtma , the question as to

whether PerumAL is inside it does not arise at all.

 

kAlA exists everywhere - both at material and Spiritual

world. So, there is nothing outside of kAlA.

 

So, ParamAtma is not physically present either inside a

jIvAtma Or Outside kAla. He exists alongwith them. This is

how the antarvyApti and bahirvyApti of such entities has to

be understood.

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

 

In the Moolamantra adhikAram of SrImad Rahasya Traya SAram,

SwAmi DESikan "defines" antarvyApti and "bahirvyApti", while

discussing the meaning of the word "nArAyaNa".

 

" antarvyApti-yAvadu -- ivaiyuLLa idatthil tannai illaiyenna -

voNNAdapadi kalandu niRkai. bahirvyApti-yAvadu -- ivai illAda

idatthilum yengum thAn vuLanAgai ".

 

ie. antarvyApti (Immanence) = Being inseparably present with

other things/beings, such that it can not be said that

Lord is not present where they are (=> Lord always being

present wherever they are).

 

BahirvyApti (Transcendence) = Being present in those places

where they are not present.

 

SwAmi DESikan then clarifies the VishNu purANam verse (1.9.41)

"nArAyaNamanIyAmsam aSEshANAmanIyAmsAm ..." that it does not

mean nArAyaNa as being smaller than the aNu jIvAtma in size.

SwAmi DESikan refers to the Sruti vAkya (ChAndOgya Up - SAndilya

Vidya) which is ascertained in Brahma-SUtra and SrIBhAshya to

mean that Brahman being smaller in size than the "grain" implies

that it is of the size of the upAdhi (conditioning factor)

viz.grain (in this context).

 

UttamUr SwAmi comments in a good amount of detail on these

original texts of SwAmi DESikan. aDIyEn will take up that

explanation in a separate posting (probably within this week if

more free time is around).

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

 

Clarifications on couple of verses of NammAzhwar's ThiruvAimozhi

which has been earlier (few months back) quoted by a member for

the understanding that ParamAtma is inside a jIvAtma :

 

1. "parantataN paravaiyuL........

karanthu yengum parantuLan ivai yunda karanE " (1.1.10)

 

Please go through PiLLAn's commentary. He says

about the "vyApti" of yemperumAn (Lord) ie. PerumAL's

vyApti is present in minute particles (achits/

insentients) and also in chits.

 

UttamUr swAmi in his commentary, asks this question

particularly ie.regarding vyApti and as to whats

antarvyApti and bahirvyApti is all about.

 

In this pAsuram, yemperumAn is said to be "karantu

parantuLan" ie. "maRaintu Sambandappattu irukkirAn".

 

UttamUr swAmi explains as to how time and dharmabhUta

jn~yAnam of PerumAL being vibhu, does not have

anything outside it and thus PerumAL can't be "outside"

them logically. Infact, swAmi adds that time does not

have "inside" also since it is partless (niravaya). If

one understands that antarvyApti to be "inside" an

entity and "bahir vyApti" to be "outside" an entity,

then time can't have both antarvyApti and bahirvyApti.

antarvyApti for an entity can also mean the united

presence of yemperumAn, everywhere that entity exists.

 

"abhinava dESikan" UttamUr swAmi has explained this

pAsuram, following SwAmi DESikan's clarifications.

 

UttamUr SwAmi explains beautifully as to how

"idam thigazh poruL tharum" in this pAsuram explains

the antarvyApti of yemperumAn in such a way as

explained above. Just as how the sambandha (relation /

union) of the "aNu" jIvAtma with the paramANu(*) of

achEtanas, the same sambandha exists between ParamAtma

and jIvAtma. The "idam" in the pAsuram refers to those

tiny places where jIvAtma is present with paramANus

(evident from other lines in the pAsuram). Thus, it is

not that ParamAtma is inside jIvAtma.

 

UttamUr SwAmi explains as to how the usage of word

"thigazh" carries more significance : It refers to

prakAsatvam (manifestation). jIvAtma manifests

to itself, without any external aid ie. the feeling of

"I" always exists for a jIvAtma. If jIvAtma has to have

parts (Or split by some means), then that feeling

can't be a single I, but as a union of many parts.

The feeling of "I" by itself signifies as to how jIvAtma

is partless. UttamUr SwAmi says that, this word "thigazh"

dispels the question as to whether jIvAtma and achEtana

aNu(s) have internal parts.

 

Please refer to UttamUr SwAmi's commentary for more detailed

information.

 

(*) : ParamANu is the fundamental unit of prakruti which

is partless. jIvAtma and ParamAtma does not reside

inside this ParamANu, since by definition it has

no internal parts. The ParamANu of NayyAyikAs

(Logicians of NyAya SAstra), which is a nitya

padArtha for them and the upAdAna-kAraNam of Jagat

for them, is not accepteble to VEdAntins. What they

call as "TriaNuka" (Triad) is the "ParamANu" Or

simply "aNu" for VEdAntins (Ref: SrI BhAshyam).

 

2. "aDiyEn uLLAn udal uLLAn ......" (8.8.2)

 

yeedu : "IraNdAm pAttu. yennudaya hrudayattilE

pugunthirunda aLavandRikkE, yen SarIrattilEyum

pugunthu kalandAn yengiRAr".

 

Thus, NampiLLai explains that, by this pAsuram,

NammAzhwar says "Not only having entered my heart,

He (Lord) has also entered and mingled in my body".

 

So, this might convey the meaning that "aDiyEn

uLLAn" refers to "Present in my heart", rather than

"Present inside myself the jIvAtma".

 

Also, after narrating the anectode wherein the esoteric

significance of the word "aDiyEn" was explained by

ThirukkOshtuyUr Nambi to KUratAzhwAn, NambiLLai says :

 

" yennuLLAn yennavENdum idatthilE aDiyEnuLLAn yengaiyAlE

jn~yAna-aanandangaL anRu vastuvukku nirUpagam;

sEshatvamengai. jn~yAna-aanandangaLilum antarangam

bhagavad sEshatvamengai"

 

ie. "By using 'aDiyEnuLLAn' (ie. in 'aDiyEn') instead of

"yennuLLAn" (ie. in me), it is meant that jn~yAna,

aananda etc are not the primary identifiers of a

jIvAtma. Its only sEshatvam (to ParamAtma)

ie. Bhagavad SEshatvam of a jIvAtma is more important

than jn~yAna, aananda etc which identify a jIvAtma ".

 

In this very pAsuram, AzhwAr says "kadisEr nARRatthuL ....".

nARRatthuL implies "inside smell (vAsanai)".

 

NampiLLai clarifies : "nARRatthuL yenRArEnum, vAsanaikku

uLLum pRambum illAmaiyAlE nARRatthilE yenRu koLga"

 

ie. "Though said 'inside smell', since inside and outside

for smell does not exist, it has to be taken as "in

smell".

 

In a similar fashion, since there is no "inside" for a jIvAtma,

the purport of pramAnas on antarvyApti of ParamAtma w.r.t.

jIvAtma has to be appropriately understood.

 

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

 

Few months back, a member had mentioned that Bhagavad RAmAnuja

has explained that ParamAtma is physically inside a jIvAtma,

in VEdArtha Sangraha. To aDiyEn's knowledge it is not there

in that grantha to that effect.

 

aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,

anantapadmanAbhan.

krishNArpaNam.

[Guest guest]

Sri:

 

Dear Sri Anand,

 

The grandson of Abhinava Desika Sri Utthamoor Swamy in you is awakening - it

appears, with your heavy down pour of posts in such great details and anubhavam.

Thanks for sharing AzhwAr pAsuramss along with vedic references on AntharvyApthi

and bahirvyApthi.

 

adiyEn uLLan.. pAsurams and your explanation reminede me of another PAsuram of

NammAzhwAr:

 

yaavum thaanaay ozhindhaanai /

yaadhum yevarkkum munnOnai./

thaanum sivanum biramanum/

aagip paNaittha thani mudhalaith/

thEnum, paalum kannalum amudhum aagith/

thitthitthu en .."Oonil, uyirl, uNarvil ninRa onRai uNarndhEnE."

 

AzhwAr says: (in the last two lines) He is the combination- the sum total of

honey, sugar cane juice, the nectar and the milk tasting so sweet when ( I have)

realised that Emperumaan stands (resides) in oon (Body), uyir (jIvan) and

uNarvu.. (perception.. ? feeling?) (Please forgive me for my free

translation.)

 

Smt Lakshmi has been very helpful in asking these queries that enables

-Bhagawathas- come out with such great anubhavams. (also there are exceptions

like adiyEn's rambling like this too.) Previously she had asked "otthAr mikkAr

illaadha maa maayaa) and also on tharpaNam, tridhaNdi sanyasi etc.. Thanks Smt

Lakshmi.

Regards

Narayana Narayana

adiyEn Narayana dAsan Madhavakkannan

[Guest guest]

Asmad gurubhyo namah,

 

Sri Anand Karalapakkam has done a good job of explaining this issue. I

would like to make some comments on this subject- antarvyaptitva and

bahirvyaptitva.

 

My views are based on some dialogs I had with Dr. SMS Chari a while ago who

is a great thinker. The mistakes here, if any are totally mine and the

credit belong to SMS chari and other gurus who taught me. I am trying to

remember what he said and record my thoughts here as much as I my(incapable)

mind allows me to do so. I am not saying that whatever I have written is

exactly correct. I would like learned scholars to critic this information.

I want to learn more.

 

What is anutva? I am sure everyone has a particular answer. Let me take a

strike at that. It is an infinitesimally small entity. if X is a measure

of size, take for example Delta X, as Delta X tends to zero. It is a point

definition of some sort. Anutva is a physical attribute, since it relates

to size which is again a physical attribute. physical attributes are those

which are perceived by our senses - skin, eyes, ears etc. In other words

they are perceptible to pratyaksha pramana. Is atma perceptible to

pratyaksha pramana ? NO. Hence jivatma is not perceptible to our senses.

(analogy - can you see through your tongue? - NO, similarly you cannot

perceive jivatma through senses). It is only perceptible to jnana or "

sudhha dharma bhuta jnana". Similarly Paramatma is also perceptible to

suddha dharma bhuta jnana. Hence state the shastras _ na chakshusa pasyati

kachanainam hridaa manishaa manasabhiklrptah " - one cannot see him with

help of indriyas such as eyes but he is seen through pure mind / bhakti".

NOte that in the case of jivatma also statements such as : utkramantam

stitham vaapi bhunjanam va gunanvitam vimudha nanupasyanti pashyanti jnana

chakshusah" n - " The deluded one does not see this jivatma while it stays

in the body (while living) nor when that jivatma leaves the body at death,

But it is verily seen by the jnanis - jnana chakshusah - who have the eyes

of knowledge. yatanto yoginaschainam pasyanti atmani avastitam - The yogis

see this atman by effort who have surrendered themselves to ME ( Lord

Krishna) through the eyes of YOGA. In other words, our self (jivatma) is not

visible for pratyaksha jnana but only to yoga samskrita jnana or suddha

chitta ( pure mind with yogic siddhi attained by resorting to HIS lotus

feet). self is a spiritual entity and hence it is visible to a spiritual

entity namely our jnana.

 

NOte that jivatma is a spiritual entity and hence size does not make any

sense to it. But are the shastras which state - "valagra shata bhagasya

shatadha kalpitasyacha jivo bhagah sa vijneyah sa cha ananthyaya kalpate " -

" jiva is of the size of one ten thousandth part of a hair tip" - which

indicates that jiva is infinitesimal, are in error? NO the meaning here is

indicative ie. jiva is a very subtle entity which can be associated with

body of any small size. In fact when jiva leaves the body and before it

gets into another body, it still has suksma sarira ( ie. indriyas and manas,

which are also subtle physical entities. remember that indrias and manas

are one of the 24 evolutes of matter). Jiva is associated with subtle

sharira, hence it is known as anu. Anutva LOOSELY refers to jiva being

infinitesimal. A spiritual entity cannot have size. However, all it means

here is that jiva can be associated with matter however small in size. It

is a unitary principle and it is always agreeable to itself and that it does

not have parts ( anukulatva, ekatva). Jiva has a locus. sharira or body is

the locus. It has a geographical attribute. Hence it is related to this

physical reality. GOD is located everywhere. HE feels from everywhere. Jiva

feels only in the body where it is or feels from a single point (here jiva

means jiva's svarupa).

 

Similarly, vibhutva does not really mean all pervasiveness in a purely

physical sense. It is sarva murtha dravya sambanditva - ie. God is

associated with all entities however subtle or gross.

since jiva is spiritual and is visible to only the yogic spiritual eye or

jnana, what harm is there to realize that God who is all pervasive, is

associated with every entity including jiva ? This is a spiritual pervasion

not physical. Having said this, anutva should be taken in a spiritual sense

and not physical sense.

 

Coming to Time, remember that jiva and paramatma are nirvikara entities.

what is time? it is a measure of change. It measures age, like childhood,

youth and oldage. It measures some kind of change such as revolution of the

earth around the sun etc. What if I bring to your attention that time has no

meaning in the spiritual world. "na kalah tatra vai prabhuh". time does

not rule there ( in vaikunta). In this sense God is beyond the concept of

time. time does not have any effect over HIM. In fact it cannot be not

defined for change less entities. In this sense GOD is beyond time. He

transcends time.

 

I would like you to consider my thoughts here along with the shastraic

answer given by Sri Anand Karalapakkam.

 

Bring to your attention - the issues "immanence" and "transcendence". GOD

supports concept of time. ie. Without him time is not defined. time is

sesha of GOD - He is adhara, niyamaka and seshin - IN that sense he is

within time and beyond time. time cannot control or constrain GOD. but

time is verily held together and made existent by the power of GOD.

similarly everything - prithvi, wind ,fire, indriyas, objects that are both

inferior and those that are auspiscious -- in all of them there is this

immanence and transcendence of GOD. He is within and without everything

that can be thought of including our own thoughts. In this sense antar

bahischa tat sarvam vyapya narayanah stithah.- should be understood.

 

NEHA NANASTI KINCHANA - ABRAMHATMAKA NANATVAM ATRA PRATISHEDATI - The GOD

NOT-ENSOULED MULTIPLICITY IS DENIED BY THIS STATEMENT. THERE IS NOTHING THAT

IS NOT ENSOULED BY GOD. WHAT DOES ENSOULED MEANS? ADHARA-NIYAMAKA-SESHIN.

(SUPPORT, CONTROLLER, SUBSTRATE (VISESHYA, AND THE UNIVERSE AND SOULS ARE

HIS APRITHAK SIDDHA VISESHANA - INSEPARABLE ATTRIBUTES). IN A SPIRITUAL

SENSE ENSOULMENT ALSO MEANS - ANTARVYAPTITVA. BAHIRVYAPTITVA - MEANS HE IS

BEYOND ALL THIS . TRIPADASYA AMRITAM DIVI. NOTHING HERE CAN DEFINE HIM

COMPLETELY, 3/4THS OF HIM IS UNKNOWN AND IS IN THE VAIKUNTAM.

 

while thinking about this universe, we should not forget that jiva and GOD

are spiritual entities and not physical ones.

 

Uttamoor swamy mentions in the katopanishad bhasya - 2-20 anoraniyan mahato

mahiyan -

 

roughly - summary of his comments are : God is capable of being associated

with an infinitesimal entity without being affected by it. note the

sentences here :

 

antah pravesha yogyatvam anutvam. yogya padena antah praveshabhavat antah

pravesho nasti iti jnapyate. anu padasya alpa parimanatva arthakatve

aniyastvam alpatara parimanatvam iti vaktavyam. tat mahati asminna ghatate.

ataha anoraniyan itsasya durgrahat durgrahatarah ityeva arthah!!! mahat

padena atyanta mahat bhinna grahanavat anu padena atyanta anu bhinna grahane

tu tadantah praveshopi suvachaha

 

" It means capacity of paramatma to go inside an infinitesimally small

entity (anu). Here capacity means that real "going inside" is ruled out!.

If you define anu as related to minute size, aniyan has to be defined as

smaller than the minute entity (anu). On the other hand what is bigger than

mahat (all pervading)? this cannot be defined. Hence, it is better to

understand anu as subtle or difficult to comprehend and aniyan as subtler or

more difficult to understand. If you delink size from the meanings of mahat

and anu ( understand that they are spiritual entities rather than physical

ones) it is possible to even comprehend entering inside of paramatman in

jivatman as spiritual entities. Regarding mahat, when all entities are

addressed by mahat, God's niyantritva or controllership of everything

provides meaning for his being greater than the all pervading vibhu ( mahato

mahiyan). Note that space itself is supported by paramatman! hence all

pervasion is a dependent concept to space.

 

Hope this clears the issue at hand.

 

By the way....

 

Adiyen has personally benefitted by talking to SMS Chari often. learning by

talking to scholars is hundred times more effective than reading books.

"pustaka jnanam mastake na tishtati" - book knowledge does not stay in the

head!. I think more people in US should pick up the phone and call SMS

chari and ask him questions while he is here. Such a great person's brain is

not used properly and he is not getting younger day by day. First of all

rarely people of his calibre visit US. I dont think we can find such

scholars who have learnt under gostipuram swamy / peria parakala swamy

gudartha deepika fame) etc every other day. He is a brilliant vedantin and

an excellent visistadvaita scholar with great english books to his credit.

Honestly I could understand only a fraction of the information given by him.

He is writing his book "philosophy of Upanisads - according to Samkara,

Ramanuja and Madhva" which is a great book. Adiyen had the grace of our

acharyas, since I could type some portions or the book and discuss many

issues with him face to face. - tad viddhi pranipatena pari prashnena

sevaya - one should serve a guru and learn. If you need to contact him he is

available only for a few more weeks at - 818-348-8182 ( LA area in CA). He

is returning to India after that. Adiyen has used a lot of information

obtained by talking to SMS chari in the gita classes.

 

Adiyen believes in the rigvedic hymn - "Aa no bhadrah krathavo yantu

vishvatah" - Let noble thoughts come to us from all directions. Knowledge

is very important irrespective of who teaches it. adiyen learnt a

considerable amount of sanskrit and vedic recitation from Anantha shastri

and Veerabhotla shastri, who are not even srivaishnavas. There should be no

barriers to knowledge; however, one should know what orientation a teacher

has and appropriately understand issues according to one's choice.

 

adiyen

 

Krishna Kalale

[Guest guest]

|| srImate vEdAnta rAmAnuja maha desikAya namah ||

 

Dear bhAgawatAs,

 

These are some of my layman thoughts on the subject.

I do not have too many sAstraic statements to quote,

just some logical analysis of the subject.

 

Given that Ramanuja has classified dravyas into six

categories, viz, prakrti, kAla, jnAna, nithya-vibhUti,

jeevAtma and paramAtma, let us pose ourselves this

question. Can any dravya CO-EXIST with any other

dravya?

 

Since we all intimately know the prakrti and kAla

dravyas, let us analyze these two. For these two

dravyas, the answer to the above question is YES. We

see prakrti everywhere around us, and so do we

experience kAla. Since prakrti and kAla are

orthogonal entities they can very well co-exist. Yet,

can we really make statements such as "prakrti is

inside kAla" or "kAla is inside prakrti." No, because

they are different (vilakshaNa) from each other.

 

Now consider jeevAtma, kAla, and paramAtma. Here

again the three entities are totally different from

one another. ParamAtma is described by RAmAnuja as

"sva-itara-samasta-vastu-vilakShaNa" - "He is

different from all entities other than Himself

(including jeevAtma and kAla)."

 

Extending the same analogy to these entities as well,

it is clear that paramAtma and jeevAtma can co-exist.

So, the aNutva of jeevAtma and the vibhutva of

paramAtma do not contradict each other. Similarly,

the vibhutva of kAla and the vibhutva of paramAtma do

not contradict each other.

 

Having said this, bahir-vyApti and antar-vyApti of God

can be explained as follows.

 

Bahir-vyApti constitutes the supporting aspect

(AdhAratva) of God. That is, no entity in the

universe whether aNu or vibhu can EXIST without Him

(His svarUpa). This is the purport of the definition

of nArAyaNa as nArAh ayanam - All entities (other than

Him) find their abode in Him. So, all entities are

"inside" Him not physically but as supported entities.

 

Antar-vyApti constitutes the controlling aspect

(niyantratva) of God. That is, no entity in the

universe whether aNu or vibhu can FUNCTION independent

of His will (His sankalpa). This is the purport of

the definition of nArAyaNa as nArANam ayanam - He has

made all entities (other than Himself) His abode. So,

He is "inside" everything not physically but as a

controlling entity.

 

Obviously my understanding of the topic is elementary,

so I would urge you to correct me if I am wrong and

shed more light on this subject.

 

|| sarvam srI krshNArpaNamastu ||

 

- adiyen, murali kadambi

 

 

 

 

Kick off your party with Invites.

http://invites./