The Divine Form

[Guest guest]

dear sri sadagopan,

is there really any schools of vedic thought which believes that worshipping the

deities is not for advanced people ? all acharyas despite difference in their

philosophical outlook have been worshipping the deities.

regards

rajaram v.

sadagopaniyengar <sadagopaniyengar wrote:

Srimate SrivanSatakopa Sri Vedanta Desika Yatindra Mahadesikaya Nama:

 

 

 

The Divine Form

 

 

 

A benign and beautiful countenance, a broad forehead capped by a long and

glittering crown, eyes like fresh lotus blooms-long, broad and red-lined, truant

locks of curly hair falling on the forehead, the body of a well-built wrestler

but delicate beyond measure, two hands raised upwards and holding the discus and

conch respectively, with two other hands held out in protective and munificent

mudrAs respectively, the broad and manly chest adorned by the constant presence

of the Consort and innumerable garlands of Tulasi, lotus feet which are the

source of the sacred Ganga and the refuge of the righteous---this is how we know

our Lord. Even if one of the aforesaid features is absent, we feel something

lacking. On the rare occasions that people like me think of Emperuman, we

picturise Him only thus. We think of Him as being a Rama or a Krishna, a Divine

Being with unimaginable beauty and with countless adornments, with a divya

mangala vigraham that is a delectable treat to the eyes, that is an unfailing

source of solace and inspiration to the troubled heart, that compels the

beholder to return again and again for a fleeting glance.

 

 

 

What gives us the idea that the Lord is indeed like this and not anything else?

How can we be sure that this is indeed His form? From our childhood, we have

stood before His image in various temples innumerable times, drinking in, willy

nilly, all His extraordinary beauty, which imprints itself indelibly on our

mind’s screen. It is this impression that throws up the aforesaid image of the

Lord in His arcchAvatAra, whenever the mind has an occasion to think of Him,

which, alas, is not often. Thus it is the Lord’s divine form as found in various

temples, the arcchAvatAra, which is the source of our knowledge of His looks.

This is reinforced by Scriptural descriptions, which wax eloquent on the subject

at the least provocation, glad to recount once more the bewitching features of

the Supreme Being.

 

 

 

All of us must have come across our “enlightened” brethren who are of the firm

view that a God with four arms and all the paraphernalia mentioned above, is a

mere figment of human imagination/ creation. To these people, all the temples,

all the utsavams, all the scriptural recitations, and in short, the whole idea

of the Lord having a form, is laughable. They accuse us of demeaning the Supreme

Being by endowing Him with a human body and faculties, be they however

extraordinary. Once we even think of Him as having a body, they say, we lower

Him to our level, the level of mortals with perishable bodies and subject to the

enshackling bonds of Karma. We may say that the Lord’s form that we have in mind

is infinitely superior to that of mere mortals, but our friends are not

convinced and insist that we do Him great injustice by even thinking of Him as

having hands, legs and other body parts like us. Ipso facto, the entire practice

of ritualistic worship, including offering Him a sacred bath, food, etc. become

irrelevant and meaningless. If the Lord has no body, where is the need for

bathing or feeding Him? It is ludicrous, they say, to treat Him as an ordinary

mortal in need of all these attentions. Thus, along with the arcchAvatAra and

the Lord’s images, these people would throw out of the nearest window, all modes

of worship as known to and practiced by us for ages.

 

Our friends are not atheists, but believe firmly in a God who is all pervasive,

all-powerful and all knowing, without any constricting form whatsoever, be it

with two hands or four. The entire universe is His form, they say, and aver that

temples, rituals and formalised congregationist worship are all wrong. What we

have to meditate upon is a formless, attributeless, colourless Brahman, which is

bereft of all features, whether redeeming or otherwise-an impersonal God who

would be extremely difficult to relate to, to love and cherish, to worship and

to remonstrate with in times of distress.

 

 

 

To us, used to temple worship with all its trappings, it appears as if our

friends are talking through their hats. However, our knowledgeable friends come

up with several authoritative scriptural texts in favour of a formless Lord.

They quote the Shruti, which declares, “ na tasya pratimA asti, yasya nAma mahat

yasha:”(He, whose glory knows no bounds, has no images-VAjasanEyi Samhita of

Shukla Yajur Veda). This is fortified by another quote, which specifically

denies the Supreme Being a body-“ na tasya kAryam karaNam cha vidyatE”.

 

 

 

In arriving at the true purport of Veda vAkyAs, the aid of upabrahmanas

(clarificatory and supportive texts) like ItihAsAs ( Srimad Ramayana and Sri

Mahabharata) and PurANAs (like the Sri Vishnu Purana), is indispensable. No

scriptural text can be taken in isolation and its meaning arrived at on that

basis. The Veda Purusha himself is reported to be afraid of those who

misinterpret the Shruti based merely on superficial study (“bibhEti alpa shrutAt

Veda: mAm ayam pratarishyati iti”).

 

 

 

The interpretation our friends place upon the text “ na tasya pratimA asti”

belongs to the aforesaid category, and is without an appreciation of the true

meaning of the word “pratimA”. Our friends take it to mean “image” and arrive at

the erroneous conclusion that the Lord has no images, and hence deny sanctity to

the numerous images of the Lord in various temples, making us all fools

worshipping mere stones. Our Acharyas, on the other hand, favour the other

meaning of the word, viz., “equal”. This leaves us with the more acceptable

version, which reads, “He has no equals”. In English too, when we say “He is the

spitting image of GOpAla”, we mean that he is equal in all respects, especially

looks, to GOpAla. This interpretation is also more appropriate to the context,

considering what follows-“yasya nAma mahat yasha:”. The whole sentence would now

mean, “He, whose glory knows no bounds, has no equals”, which makes eminent

sense. And the meaning of “equal” ascribed to the term “pratimA” is quite a

popular usage, not something coined merely to reinforce one’s viewpoint. For

instance, Sri Ramanuja uses the word to remind us that the Lord is without an

equal in the three worlds-“lOkatrayEpi apratima prabhAva!”

 

 

 

Another oft-quoted Srimad Bhagavata sloka is as follows, which supposedly terms

all worshippers of images immature, and accepts maturity only to those who are

able to see Him everywhere.

 

“PratimAsu aprabuddhAnAm, sarvatra samadarsinAm”.

 

 

 

While we have no quarrel with the second half of the sloka ascribing wisdom to

those who see everything as His form, it would be a travesty of the scripture to

say that millions of faithful worshippers, who flock to countless temples and

are moved beyond measure by the Lord’s divine form, are fools.

 

The inaccuracy in such an interpretation also comes to the fore, when we find

Sri Rama worshipping in the temple of Sriman Narayana as a prelude to His

Coronation. The night prior to the great event, Sri Raghava, along with Sri

Mythily, visits the temple of Sriman Narayana within the palace precincts and,

after a purifying bath and with a balanced mind, worships the Lord to His

heart’s content, offering Him food and partaking of the same as bhagavat

prasAdam. Here are the worthy words of Sri Valmiki-

 

“GatE purOhitE Rama: snAtO niyata mAnasa:

 

saha patnyA VisAlAkshyA NArAyaNam upAgamat.

 

 

 

Pragrihya shirasA pAtreem havishO vidhivat tadA

 

MahatE daivatAya Ajyam juhAva jvalitE analE.”

 

 

 

It is crystal clear from the aforesaid that during Sri Rama’s times, there were

temples to the Lord, that ritualistic worship was indeed in vogue and the Lord

was offered food, which was partaken of by the devotee later as “prasAdam”.

 

 

 

Similarly, in Sri Mahabharata too, the BhIshma Parva contains slokas, which

comment with wonderment on the occasional strange behaviour of the Lord’s images

in His temples. It appears that the divine vigrahAs used to shake, roar with

laughter, spit blood and fall down by themselves-

 

 

 

“DEvatA pratimAschaiva kampantE hasanti cha

 

vamanti rudhiram cha asyai: svidyanti prapatanti cha”

 

 

 

Innumerable such texts can be found in the scripture to establish the sanctity

of idol worship.

 

The Rigveda Samhita (eighth ashtaka, eighth adhyAya, 13th sarga, 3rd khanda) too

provides more proof, if further proof were needed, by referring to the wooden

image of the Lord which floats in the ocean, unsculpted by human hands, to which

the devotee is exhorted to pay obeisance-

 

“adO yat dAru plavatE sindhO: pArE apourusham

 

tat Arabhasva durhaNO tEna gaccha parastaram”.

 

 

 

After racking our brains needlessly about the legitimacy of the arcchAvatAra, it

finally occurs to us that all this exercise is indeed futile. All we have to

remember is that Azhwars, endowed with unblemished wisdom (“mayarvara

madinalam”) were enthusiastic votaries of the Lord in His arcchAvatAra, often

travelling thousands of miles on foot to have a glimpse of the Lord ensconced on

some remote mountain peak amidst inhospitable environs. And if Sri Kalian

remarks, “ErAr muyal vittu kAkkai pin pOvadE”, expressing his preference for the

easily worshippable Lord in the temples vis a vis the unseen and unknown Supreme

Being reigning in Paramapadam, do we need further proof of the sanctity of idol

worship? The thousands of pasurams poured out by Azhwars in praise of the

Emperumans at various divyadesams stand as unshakeable testimony of the

legitimacy of the arcchAvatAra and its worship.

 

 

 

Having successfully silenced our learned friends, we relax in the relief of not

having to concentrate on a formless, colourless, odourless Brahmam, devoid of

the ananta kalyANa guNAs like boundless love, infinite mercy, total

accessibility, matchless magnificence, etc., secure in the Azhwars’ assurance

that our Lord is indeed one with all auspicious attributes, ever ready to

impress us with His exploits as a cowherd, a half-lion or a Delightful Dwarf,

displaying a kaleidoscope of enthralling forms and features, all with the

purpose of emancipating us and affording us eternal bliss in His exalted

company.

 

 

 

Srimate Sri LakshmINrsimha divya paduka sevaka SrivanSatakopa Sri Narayana

Yatindra Mahadesikaya Nama:

 

dasan, sadagopan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oppiliappan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now