Mani-manjari vs Navadvipya-mahatmya (was Gaudiya epistemology and ontology)

[Guest guest]

I was looking up parts of the Garuda Purana as posted online here:

http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/garuda-purana.htm

 

Came across this set of verses that makes things even more confusing:

 

QUOTE

3.16.66-67 "O lord of birds, I shall explain to you the total

incarnations of Vayu. Listen. Of the fourteen Indras, the second is

called Virocana who is identical with Vayu. With his eyes expanded

all around, he, the partial incarnation of Marut, is also called

Rocana.

 

3.16.68 "When the Lord Rama incarnated on earth, Vayu was born as

Hanuman for rendering assistance to Rama.

 

3.16.69 "When Lord Krsna descended on earth, he was born as Bhima,

the offspring of Vayu.

 

3.16.70-71 "Vayu will be born as Maniman daitya, known as Sankara.

He will be so called, for he will abolish caste and destroy dharma.

 

3.16.72 "Then he will be born as the son of Vasudeva. There will be

none equal to him in the fourteen worlds. He will be fully equipped

with wisdom.

 

3.16.78-80 "Of the 23 forms of the Supreme Lord Brahma, Vayu is one.

In the enjoyment of eternal bliss, pleasure, etc., Vayu is at par

with Brahma. This truth knows no variation; listening to this leads

to release.

UNQUOTE

 

3.16.70-71 says that Vayu will incarnate as the Maniman daitya,

known as Shankara. In the next verse, who is being referred to

as "son of Vasudeva"? Is it Madhvacharya (Vaasudeva)?

 

Why would Vayu be responsible for creating Mayavada and then

reincarnate later as Madhvacharya to defeat it? Its too complicated

at this moment, what with the "23 forms of Brahma", etc that I have

no idea about.

 

Incidentally, Madhvacarya also said that the Mayavadi philosophy was

eternal (i.e., in a periodic sense). It is introduced and gains

influence every Kali-yuga.

 

~Carl

[Guest guest]

On Tue, 14 Mar 2006, krishna_susarla wrote:

 

> achintya, "Carl" <rind_19 wrote:

>> Also, just wanted to repeat: I clearly remember reading that

>> Maadhvacharya said that whatever good Shankara spoke came from Lord

>> Shiva, and the deception from Manimaan. So the good aspect is

>> implicitly acknowledged here. I don't have the reference, though.

>

> If you ever find the reference, I would love to see it. Feel free to

> post it here if you do find it again.

 

 

I don't have a reference either, but I know the Madhvas do say this; I just

spoke to someone from Udupi about this a week or so ago.

 

MDd