vinAyaka & mAtru gaNa in shankara bhAshya

[Guest guest]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

Last year in advaita-L list we had discussed shankara bhAshya on gIta

(9-25) wherein shankara says worship of vinAyaka & mAtrugaNa is tAmasic &

avaidik. Sri Jaldhar prabhuji & Sri Vidyashankar prabhuji have gracefully

expressed their opinions on this commentary. I've shared my understanding

on the issue. Following is the relevant part of it. I request learned

members of this list to share their line of thinking.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol.

bhaskar

 

//quote //

 

Sri Jaldhar prabhuji:

 

In 9.25 Krishna Bhagvan is saying those who worship (other) Devatas go the

Devatas, those who worship the Pitrs go to the Pitrs and those who worship

the "Bhutas" go to them.

 

So to summarize it is those spirits and Godlings who are worshipped only

out of fear of some bad luck if they are ignored which is being called

Tamasic here. We cannot reduce the whole figures of Mataji and Ganesh

Bhagawan to such minor status.

 

> praNAm Sri Jaldhar Prabhuji

> Hare Krishna

> Thanks for your kind clarification. Just I quoted 9-25 & shankara's

commentary on it as passing comments. Swamiji of HN pur also not discussed

this issue in length. He just says, vinAyaka, chaturbhagini, mAtru gaNa

etc. are the names appear in tantra shAstra. I have checked other

commentaries also on this verse as well as 17-4 prabhuji. In BG As It Is

srila prabhupad says it is evil spirits like bhuta, preta etc. Chinamaya

also of the same opinion. Sri Madhusudana Saraswati in guDartha dIpika

(English translation by Swamy Gambhirananda - RK Mission) while commenting

on this verse clearly says those who have the quality of tamas are

bhUtEjyaH, as you said above worshippers of beings, but these beings are

nothing but yakshas, the rAkShas, vinAyaka (pls. note the singular) & group

of mAtrukAs (16 in Nos.).

> Well, shankara's bhAshya goes like this: bhUtAni vinAyaka mAtrugaNa

(*mAtru gaNa* shankara says while commenting on 17-4 as sapta mAtruka-s)

chaturbhaginyAdIni yAnti bhUtEjyaH bhUtAnAm pUjatAH..here ijyA (worship) in

bhUtEjya is very important prabhuji. it does not make any sense if we

interpret bhUta-s are mere evil beings which one worship (chinmayananda

comments on this verse it is only wicked persons like rowdies, goondas

etc.). This has been discussed in gudArtha dIpika prabhuji. In 17-4 it is

mentioned that brAhmins & others who fall from their caste, duties acquires

aerial bodies after the fall of their present bodies and they become ghosts

called ulkAmukha, kata, pUtana etc. pretAs are a class of piShacha-s (here

author quotes manu write of dharma shAstra). So, it is clear that shankara

referring to bhUtas as tAmasi shanktis only which have been being

worshipped tAmasi people.

> The VinAyaka is the popular synonym for ganEsha apart from vighnEsha,

gaNapati etc., Sri Varasiddi Vinayaka vrata is most popular festival in

South India. So, there is no harm in guessing that shankara hailed from

South India may be referring to this vinAyaka only. In atharva veda there

is one Sri ganEsharthavashIrsham which says he is permanent resident in

mUlAdhAra chakra (tvam mUlAdhAra stitOsi nityaM) (Shat chakras i.e.

mulAdhAra, svadhishtAna, maNipura, anAhata, viSudda, AgnA chakras & related

kundalini yoga, as we know purely based on hatha yogic tAntric sAdhana).

Moreover, it is also interesting to be noted that gaNapati referred in Rig

vEda mantras such as gaNAnAntva gaNapatiM havAmahe (2.23.1) & Rig vEda

saMhita's ganapati sUkta (10.112.9) (AtUna indrakshumantam chitram grabham

sangrubhAya .....ni Shu sIda ganapate etc.) & the gaNapati what we are

worshipping today in a bizzare form are completely different. I request the

Sanskrit scholars in this list to highlight the difference what we can

observe by going through these mantras.

> It is not that vinAyaka is a foreigner to tAntric sAdhana, as Sri Vidya

prabhuji mentioned all most all deities of hindu pantheon has tAntric

background. So, our vinAyaka is not an exception to that. Apart from his

auspisious form (maNgala rUpa) there is a custom in tAntric tradition which

prefers worship of vinAyaka in rudra rUpa (source : yantra, mantra & tantra

- kannada book by shillela Basavaiah Shastri) & there is *siddhi mantra*

with bijAkshara also mentioned to get subtle powers (siddhis). In tAntric

sAdhana vinAyaka worshipped as *shakti gaNapati* or vIra vignEsha with a

military form with 5 heads, ten hands holding various weapons. Apart from

this various varieties of shakti ganapati well explained in tantra

shastras. One of the forms this shakti ganapati is *ucchishtta gaNapati

which is completly in ugly form associated with unclean things like orts

etc. This type of deity specifically used to prophiate the vinAyaka in

vamAchAra mArga.

> With the above, we can say that *vinAyaka* mentioned by shankara in his

commentary is one of the forms of vignesha used in tAntric sAdhana.

> Now as regards mAtru gaNa & chaturbhagini, shankara says in 17-4 prEtAn

bhUtagaNAscha saptamAtrukAdInshcha anyE yajante tAmasA janAH..I've given

madhusudana's commentary above, so, who are these sapta mAtrukAs, these

matrukAs are nothing but aspects of mAta pArvati in durgA form (ravi

prabhuji kindly correct me if I am wrong) purANa story says that these

sapta mAtrukas are manifested from durgA mAta when she wants to tackle the

mAyA shakti of rakta bijAsura. The worship of these matrukas shankara says

will be done by tAmasa janAH.

 

The Vedic status of Devi is well established in Shri Sukta etc. In

Chandogyopanishad Uma the dughter of Himavan is said to be the giver of

Brahmavidya. Shankaracharya does not make any complaint in that regard.

> shankara in his bhAshya on kena not categorically admits it is indeed

daughter of Himavanta. He takes this as second option the word *athava*

(or) is important here. Nevertheless shankara mentions in second option

she is wife of Eshvara.

 

> Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

> humble praNAms once again prabhuji

> bhaskar

 

//unquote //

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar