Sri nArAyanA and Sri Krishna - 2

[Guest guest]

Sriman nArAyanAya namaha

Sri krishnAya namaha

Srimathe rAmAnujAya namaha

Sri vedAntadesikAya namaha

 

It looks like we can provide more explanation of the Sriman nArAyana

vs. Sri Krishna and the associated concepts from Sri Vaishnava

exegesis.

This article is prompted by an email received in response to a

previous article on this topic. Also some liberty is taken here

in expounding some minor topics of interest, and also repeating

some aspects metioned previously.

 

We have mentioned earlier that for some it seems to be difficult

to understand the order of the cosmic expansion of the bhagavAn

portrayed in the Gita and Bhagavatam.

We mentioned that the vedam is clear. It says:

'nArAyanAya vidmahe vasudevAya dimahe tanno vishnu prachodAyAt', and

that

Bhagavatam extols the two found in this mantram.

 

It was pointed out that many a debate among the mimAmsakAs tried

to resolve the meaning of polytheism in the vedas, and that

they have concluded that such multifarious worship is not needed,

and that one should put our faith in the brahmam(atAto

brahmajigyAsA),

sat (ekam sat vipra bahuta vadanti), and the Protector.

 

Why does brahmam gets associated with nArAyanA? The purva mimAmsa

exhorts

that we pursue the knowledge of the protector by saying

 

Sa VishNurAhahi

Thum brahmEthi aachakshathE

Thum brahmEthi aachakshathE

 

In specific, the mimAmsAs have tried to identify what the brahmam

closely corresponds to: is it indra, agni, sUrya, sOma, kuberA,

yamA, varuna, etc. The following secret from the exegesis was

revealed.

These deities are limited by karma (limited set of actions)

and hence they have limited sovereignty. We are left to consider

Siva or nArAyanA as possible limiting forms of the brahmam.

According to Scriptures Siva or Rudra terminate in chaturmukha

who in turn is expressed by equivalent terms hiranyagarbha,

prajApati, and svayambhu. Only Sriman nArayana does

not seem to terminate in other attributed limited manifestations.

Thus it is proper to identify Sriman nArAyanA as the brahmam.

This is the Isvara gyanA taught in the Sri vaishnava exegesis.

This is the major conclusion of the pAncharAtra sampradAyam

implicitly

adopted in the Sri vaishnava tradition. Many other vedic sampradAyams

have accepted this approach as well, if not entirely in an ekAnayAna

view.

Some historical justification is provided later for these

observations.

 

We pointed out that Srimad Bhagavatam would amplify

this Sriman nArAyanA-Sri vAsudevA aspect by mentioning

the same concept in two different ways as follows:

 

nArAyana parA vedA devA nArAyanAngajAha

nArAyana parA lokA nArAyana para makhaha

nArAyana paro yogo nArAyAna param tapaha

nArAyana param gyanam nArAyana para gatihi (Bhagavatam: 2:5.15-16)

 

vAsudeva parA vedA vasudeva parA makhaha

vAsudeva parA yogA vasudeva parah kriyaha

vAsudeva param gyAnam vAsudeva param tapaha

vAsudeva paro dharmo vasudeva para gatihi (Bhagavatam: 1:2.28-29)

 

Srimad Bhagavatam sees the Lord both as Sriman nArAyana and as

Sri vAsudeva -- in equal breath -- just like the vedam would.

The rishi does not extend this word play by mentioning Sri Krishna

in the same fashion. Sri Krishna is the Sri vAsudeva we are talking

about as explained below.

 

Sri vAsudevA is identified with the creator mentioned

in the Purusha sukhtam and nArAyana sukhtam by the following

slokam in Bhagavatam:

 

paSyantyado rupam adabhra cakshushA

sahasra padoru bhujAnanAdbhutam

sahasra mUrdha SravanAkshi nAsikam

sahasra maulyambara kuNdallollasat (Bhagavatam 1:3.4)

 

The vedic obsession with sahasra sIrsha purusha is evident here

as well. Moreover, Sri Krishna is portrayed as purAvatAram

in the following slokam:

 

rushayo manavo deVa manu putra mahaujasah

kalAh sarve harereva sa prajapatayah smritAha

ete camSa kalAh pumsaha krishnas tu bhagavAn svayam

indrari vyAkulam lokam mridayanti yuge yuge (Bhagavatam 1:3.27-28)

 

 

Also bhAgavatam unequivocally points out the bhagaVan seen by devaki

is sAkshAt nArAyAna himself in His full splendor commonly known in

practice:

 

tamadbutam bAlakamambhujekshaNam

chaturbhujam sanka gatAyutam |

srivatsa lakshmam kalasobi kaustubam

pitAmbaram sAndra payota sowbakam |

 

mahArhavaidUrya kirita kundala

dvisha parishvakta sahasra kundalam |

uttAma kAnchyangata kankaNAdibir

virOchamAnam vasudevaishata|| (Bhagavatam 10:3.10)

 

Thus Sri nArAyAna is born in full splendor, and assumes

the from and role of Sri krishna and performs all the lilAs.

 

These facts have been sung by the Azwars as well. Thus the tatvam

are considered authoritative.

 

Coming to the minor points, the slokas from the Bhagavatam

can be interpreted as follows: it illustrates the KrishnAvatAram

as purnAvatAram while comparing the mortals and demigods with

various auspicious amsams of the Lord. And Bhagavatam unequivocally

says 'Krishnas tu bhagavAn svayam' - Sri Krishna is sAkshAt

Bhagavan ( Sriman nArAyana and Sri vAsudeva ).

 

A rasikA pointed out that 'krishnasthu bhagavan swayam' is popular

among dvaitha/tattvada doctrine also, and many

scholars in dvaitha refuted the reverse claim of Gaudiya vaishnavam

with strong reasons/tattva.

 

Thus many vaishnavAs and smArthas, and dvaitins would take issue

with order reversal in Gaudiya vaishnavam which can be deemed

to be contrary to purAnAs and vedAs. We only take issue with the

exegetical aspects of this eastern vaishnava sampradaym; but its

core faith in Sri Krishna can justifiably form a branch of

vaishnavam.

 

This rasikA also pointed out that the dvaitha siddhantha says that

Shiva is endowed with many doshas, thus he won't fit the bill, e.g.,

he is a dependent jeeva(for his existence), that he has limited

knowledge of Narayana when compared to Chaturmukha and Lakshmi,

and that he is karma baddha thus experience prarabdha etc.,

to name a few, while Narayana is dosha doora, meaning he is devoid

of any doshas normally attached to a jeeva - starting from

chaturmukha to insects, in spite of being full of auspicious guna.

 

Also the rasikA pointed out the following: the namaka-chamaka

that the smarthAs chant daily actually glorifies Lord Sankarshana.

It is said that Lord Sankarshana is the devatha

for namaka-chamaka, and Shiva being born from Sankarshana(as per

Bhagavatha Purana V skanda) we pray to Sankarshana indwelling in

Shiva.

Sri vaishnavAs should note that the claim is immediately seen

in the nyAsam of Sri Rudram which mentions:

'sankarshanA murthy swarUpo yosAvAdityaha

pramapurushaha sa esha rudro devata.'

 

Chamakam worships Sri Rudra by calling Him as agnA-vishnu:

the opening phrase is

'agnA vishnu sajosha sema vardantu vAngiraha.'

Here AgnA-vishnu can be taken to be Sri Sankarshana also.

One should note that there were temples explicitly for

SankarshanA and vAsudeva in the ancient times,

according to some authentic inscriptions.

 

We can elaborate on these points as follows, and indicate some

opinions

on reciting rudra and chamaka.

 

It should be noted that Charturmukha and prAjApati refer to Brahma.

The literal creation facts of the vedas associate various devathAs

with specific work aspects of the bhagavAn, and hence there are

limited by the capabilities of their roles. Thus we say the devathAs

are limited in their powers as well and sometimes subject to

the dhoshAs associated with such roles. The suha rahasyOpanishat

would point out this limited role but their existence

in the brahmam and hence the bhagavAn as follows:

 

chaturmukendra deveshu manushyAcva-kavAdishu

chaitanyamegam brahmAta: prajgyAnam brahmamaiyapi.

 

'The chaitanyam that resides in Brahma(charutmukha), Indra, devAs,

manushAs, horse, pasu, etc. is the same brahmam'.

 

The universe manifested by the will of the bhagavAn. This is

the purport of the Purusha sUktam. From the bhagavAn, the purusha,

the brahma, and the rest manifested:

'tasmAt virAta jAyata - virAto adipUrusha: '

This is also implied by the start of the uttara nArAyanam:

'adyasambUta prithivai rasAscha

viswakarmaNa samavartadaAti

tasya tvashtA vitatat rUpameti'

 

It is also said that the brahmam ( Sri nArAyAna) contains everything:

'tasmin sarvam pratiStitham' - nArAyana sUktam 8.

 

Now that creation order is explicit, the particular devAthas

can be discussed as follows:

In the svEtavatAra upanishat, Siva seems to be the cause of

the universe. In the atarvasiras upanishat, Sri Rudra seems

to be the cause of the universe. In Taittriya upanishat,

Hiranyagarbha seems to be the cause of the universe.

In AtarvaNasAkhA, the Sambhu seems to be object of meditation

and the cause. Nyaya dictates by sAmAnyavishesha these terms should

terminate in something particular, hence their termination

at brahma and virAta purusha since the revered Purusha suktam

does not mention the multifarious primary objects of worship

implied by non-vaishnava upanishats, however auspicous

the worshiped deities may be. All forms and jivAs

are said to originate in brahma (chaturmukha) and virAta purusha who

in turn resulted from the auspicious will of the brahmam.

Thus the special role for brahma and purusha.

 

The origin of almost every imagined deity is opined

in the nArAyanopanishat as follows:

 

ata purushohavai nArAyanO kAmayata| prajA Srujeyeti|

nArAyAnA prAnO jAyAte|

mana: sarvendriyAni ca yAyur jyotirApa: pritivI

viswasyadArini| nArAyAnAt brahmA jAyAte| nArAyAnAt rudro jAyate|

nArAyanAt prajApati: prajAyate|

nArAyAnAt dvAdasAdityA rudrA vasava: sarvAni cchamdAmsi

nArAyAnAt deva samutpatyante|

nArAyAnAt pravartante| nArAyanAt praLeyante|

etat rigvedasiroyodite|

 

This slokam cites Rig Vedam as the authority for its claim.

All encompassing primary force is passionately expressed in this

mantram.

Sri Vaishnava exegesis takes cues from Sruti such as these mantras,

and declares that the terms svayambhu, hiranyagarba, and prajApati

should refer to nArAyAna or smoothly transition into nArAyAna.

The bhagaVan himself is equated with nArAyAna because of

the all-encompassing attributes associated with specifics

terminating in nArAyana. Another declaration from the Sruti that

Sri Rudra is created from Brahma is taken to imply that nArAyanA

is the primary cause and effect, and Sri Rudra is a limited

form of worship. Also it is said that from the Rig vedam, one can

discern

that Vishnu and Rudra have similar qualities in vanquishing enemies,

but more often vishnu dominates with satva guna.

Also vishnu is also said to be earlier than Rudra in the evolution

of

religion portrayed in the Rig veda.

 

Also more popular starting point of the VishishtAdvaitam is

Mahopanishad which states:

 

'eko ha vai nArAyAna Aseeth na brahmaha na ISAnaha

neme dyava pruthivi na nakshatrAni na sUryaha.'

 

Sriman nArAryAna existed, manifestly alone, the only purusha, and

neither

brahma nor Siva, nor the sky, nor the earth, nor the stars, and nor

the sun.

 

This upanishat is also the starting point of the Pancharatra

sampradAyam,

and this upanishat is emphatic in laying out the Sriman nArAyana

tatvam.

 

Subalopanishad would also say same thing. Thus nArAyanopanishat,

maha nArAyanOpanishat, mahOpanishat, subAlopanishat, sAnti parvA of

mahAbhArata, Gita, and the grand mahAbhAratam itself expound the

ancient

vishnu and nArAyana tatvam.

 

The mantras cited here are used by Sri parAsarabhattar himself on his

commentary of SriVishnu sahasranAma slokam 26:

 

suprasAdah prasannAtmA viswasRtviawabhugvibhuhu

satkartA satkritaha sAdhurjanhur nArAyanO naraha|

 

Sri Sankara would interpret the term nArAyanA in this slokam

as the seat of the everything.

 

More nArAyana tatvam can only be learned from the teachings of a

competent

achArya.

 

Many upanishads emphasize the subtle connection between Sri Vishnu

and Sri nArAyAna, and the purAnAs point out the derived nature of

Rudra.

This precedence relationship goes back to vishnu and rudra tatvam

found in the Rig vedam itself. The primary gods of Rig vedam are

Brahmanaspati, Vishnu, and Rudra, Indra and Agni. The ferocious

qualities

of Rudra and Vishna are the same. Thus they blend in some aspects.

Moreover, Rudra begets Maruts, and somewhere Vishnu is addressed as

the source of maruts by the term 'evAya marut'. If Rudra is father

of the maruts and if vishnu is source of maruts, it is possible

that Vishnu comes before Rudra. This may or may not be direct

intent of the mantras but it is certainly derivable.

 

However some upanishats seem to emphasize primacy in the derived

devathas,

but no harm is implied since we can assume that the prema

was momentarily in such specific lakshanAs of the Lord.

 

Also owing to the ekAnAyAna roots of Sri vaishnavam,

Sri Rudra is not normally worshipped by the Sri VaishnavAs.

Also why worship the Lord with destructive attributes

when we appreciate Him for the sAtvik attributes? But Sri Rudram

and Chamakam being a part of the vedas, Sri vaishnava veda vidwans

do recite them at limited opportunites such as veda pArAyanam, but

most Sri vaishnavas in the general populace never

even have listened to them once!

 

However, a particular avatAram of the Lord is combinated form that

exhibits the vishnu and rudra gunas - it is the nrusimhAvatAram.

This combination was required to take advantage of the loop-hole

of the varam given to Hiranya kasipu. On pradosham days,

some Sri vAishnavAs recite Sri Rudram and Chamakam to praise

Sri nArAsimhA. But this is perhaps limited to the temples

and Ashramams. This practice is certainly not seen

in the Sri vaishnava the households, at least widely.

 

The order of brahmA, rudra and nArAyAnA would also be playfully

mentioned by Sri Desika in mahAvIra vaibhavam as follows:

 

chaturmukeswara mukaihi putra powtrAdi sAline|

nama: sIta sametAya rAmAya grihamEtine||

 

'Let us salute Sri RamA, who as nArAyAna has chaturmukha, Iswara,

etc.

as putrAs and powtrAs, etc.'

 

Sri Sankarshana is worshipped in Sri vaishnava sampradAyam

as part of the vyuhA aspects of paravAsudeva: viz., vAsudeva,

sAnkarshanA,

pradyumna, and aniruddha refer to various creative and destructive

aspects of the bhagavAn according to pAncharAtra Agamam which most

Sri VaishnavAs follow. Especially Sankarshana is said to refer to

the destructive aspect. And, each form emanates from the previous

form

in the specified order. And (para) vAsudeva is the nArAyAnA of the

vedAs,

and the nArAyanA mentioned in the sAntiparva of mahAbhAratA.

Also Sri vAsudeva possesses all six gunas found in the mental plane:

gyanA, aisvarya ( lordship- no one above ), Sakti, balA (strength),

vIrya and tejas( splendor).

These six gunas are implied by the mantram

'SadguNyavigraham devam.' (Lakshmi tantra ).

 

These are the same qualities Sri rAmAnuja mentions repeatedly in

several places and would add many more to the list.

For example, in saraNAgati gatyam, Sri Ramanuja would wax eloquent

by singing

'swAbAvikAnavadisaya gyanabalasvarya viRyasakti tejas

sowsIlya vAtsalya mArdva Arjva sowdarya sAmya kAruNya

mAdurya gAmbIrya owdArya chAturya stairya dairya sowrya parAkrama'

 

Where does Sri Lakshmi fit in these arguments? The vadagalai

Sri vaishnavam gives equal role to Sri as well as to SrimAn.

Yet Sri is said to originate from SrimAn himself according

to his sankalpam. The sItA upanishat would say as follows:

'srI devi trividam rUpam krithvA

bhagavat sankalpagunyEna lokarakshanArtam rUpam dArayati.'

 

'Sri assumes three forms ( Sri, nIlA, and bhumi )

for the loka rakshakam according to bhagavat sankalpam.'

 

There are many other auspicious intents and actions

of Sri mentioned in the upanishats and AgamAs.

Especially she is said to reside in him always in the Srivatsam

and merge in this spot at the end of the praLayam; this is

according to Sruti!

 

deva na: subamAtanotu

 

dAsan

V. Varadarajan