Significance of 10 - avataras, upanishaths.

[Guest guest]

Dear Haribhakthas,

 

Lord Shri Hari has infinite forms / rUpas but some of them are more

popularly mentioned in the literatures and thus more popularly known

as follows:

1)chathr rUpas( 4) : shrI vAsudEva, shrI samkarShaNa, shrI

pradhyumna, shrI aniruddha.

2)chathur vimshathi rUpas(24) : shrI keshava etc

3)sahasra rUpas : shrI vishwa etc ( as per shrI vishNu sahasranAma)

 

Apart from this there are many other groups also. Scholars may kindly

add to this list.

 

But generally the dhasha rUpas ( shrI mathsya etc ) are more

popularly referred as dasha avathAras. Lord shrI Hari is often

referred as dashAvathari. Even shrImat Ananda thIrTha bhagavathpAdha

prays/ praises these 10 rUpas in dwadasha sthOthra. In daasa

sahithya, we see abundant songs on dashaavathara. It looks that only

shrI vaadhiraaja in the dashaavathaara stuthi prays some other rUpaas

like shrI hayagrIva, shrI dhanvanthari, shrI mohini etc. along with

the prominent 10 rUpas. Perhaps nowhere else we see these 10 rUpas

grouped with any other rUpas. What is the speciality of these rUpas

and on what basis only these 10 rUpas are included to form a group.

For eg during samudhra maThana, Lord shrIhari taken shrI kUrma, shrI

dhanvanthari, shrI mOhini rUpas, but only kUrma rUpa is included in

the dashAvathara.

 

We find details about many of these 10 rUpas in bhagavatha and in

other puranas. There are dedicated purANas for the first 5 rUpas(

mathsya, kUrma, varaha, narashimha, vAmana puraaNa) but I am not

sure where shrI vEdavyasa has described shrI rama rUpa in detail. Is

it not little surprise that we don't find enough details about shrI

rama in shrI vedavyasa's literature? Similarly very little

description is available about shrI Buddha rUpa and shrI kalki

rUpas. Any reasons or guesses?.

 

Similarly out of many upanishaths, ten are more popular and known as

dashOpanishath. It looks many times that there are only 10

upanishaths but I understand there are many more. Please clarify.

 

It is known that the number 10 represents `fullness' (dashapramathi).

It also represents 10 directions (8+2). Any other significance of

number 10?

 

Scholars may kindly enlighten us.

 

ShrI hari priyathaam.

B.Gopalakrishna

[Guest guest]

>

> bgkvarna [bgkvarna]

> Wednesday, June 11, 2003 6:56 PM

 

> Dear Haribhakthas,

>

> Lord Shri Hari has infinite forms / rUpas but some of them are more

> popularly mentioned in the literatures and thus more popularly known

> as follows:

> 1)chathr rUpas( 4) : shrI vAsudEva, shrI samkarShaNa, shrI

> pradhyumna, shrI aniruddha.

> 2)chathur vimshathi rUpas(24) : shrI keshava etc

> 3)sahasra rUpas : shrI vishwa etc ( as per shrI vishNu sahasranAma)

>

> Apart from this there are many other groups also. Scholars may kindly

> add to this list.

 

Here's a little add to the list:

 

1. kR^iddholkAdi paJNcharUpa (kR^iddholka, maholka, vIrolka, dyulka,

sahasrolka)

2. ajAdi ekapaJNchAshaDrUpAH (As, the abhimAni devatA for each 51

letters).

3. AtmAdi chaturUpAH: AtmA, antarAtmA, j~nAnAtmA, paramAtmA.

4. shiMshumAra (I have heard that, this rUpa of the Lord rotates the

entire brahmANDa on a certain axis. No idea of the source. shiMshumAra

means scorpion).

5. vishvAdi chaturUpa: vishva (a.k.a. vishvambhara), taijasa, prA~jna,

turIya.

6. As the abhimAni or antaryAmi of different 24 tattvas.

7. 72000 rupAs in the nADis: 36000 puruSha rUpa, 36000 strI rUpa.

8. On the sushumna nADi, apparently, he resides in each of 7 nodes (I

don't know the technical name) with a different rUpa. The 7 nodes each

have lotuses with different number of petals. I have heard that the

magnificient Lord stays on every petal with a different rUpa.

9. annamayAdi paJNcharUpa: annamaya, manomaya, prANamaya, vij~nAnamaya,

Anandamaya.

 

10. Other individual forms: kapila, dattAtreya, dhanvantari, hari,

krishna, yaj~na, tApasa, mahidAsa (the seer of Aiteraya Upanishad),

nara, nArAyaNa, R^ishabha, mohinI, dhanvantarI, shrI vedavyAsa, shrI

hayagrIva, hamsa, virATpuruSha, vishvarUpa, vaTapatrashAyi.

 

Correct me but isn't it that He has a bimba rUpa for every jIva? Also

pls let me know if there are any duplicates in the above.

 

The listing of His forms, or His qualities is certainly an immensely

pleasurable act.

 

> grouped with any other rUpas. What is the speciality of these rUpas

> and on what basis only these 10 rUpas are included to form a group.

 

I guess the purpose of grouping is for easy-remembrance. If you can

think of any 'criteria', let me know. Even I have been searching for the

same.

 

> We find details about many of these 10 rUpas in bhagavatha and in

> other puranas. There are dedicated purANas for the first 5 rUpas(

> mathsya, kUrma, varaha, narashimha, vAmana puraaNa) but I am not

> sure where shrI vEdavyasa has described shrI rama rUpa in detail. Is

> it not little surprise that we don't find enough details about shrI

> rama in shrI vedavyasa's literature? Similarly very little

> description is available about shrI Buddha rUpa and shrI kalki

> rUpas. Any reasons or guesses?.

 

Though the 5 'dedicated' purANas have the avatAra names, there isn't any

'dedication' out there. The Kurma purANa contains instructions by the

kUrma rUpa (on how to worship Shiva!). Narasimha purANa is an upapurANa,

not a major purANa. There is a 'kalki upapurANa' also. Nearly every

other purANa talks of Rama and Krishna (check Agni and Brahma purANa,

for example). shrI vedavyAsa himself is described in many purANas.

 

> Similarly out of many upanishaths, ten are more popular and known as

> dashOpanishath. It looks many times that there are only 10

> upanishaths but I understand there are many more. Please clarify.

 

This dashopaniShat concept started with Shankara writing commentaries on

them. No scriptures mention any such group. Apart from the 10,

mahAnArAyaNopaniShat, shvetAshvatAra, atharvashira, atharvashikhA are

well known and quoted.

 

narasimha-tApanIya (Shankara is said to have written a commentary on

that), subAla (quoted by Ramanuja), mahopaniShad (references to it can

be found in nirNayasindhu also), kaushItakI, jAbAla are also known.

 

Sri Vijayindra tIrtha quotes from brahma-bindu, kaivalya, rAma

(tApanIya) upaniShads.

 

Among the vast array of texts our Srimad Acharya quotes, many shAkhAs

are quoted; there are Upanishads with the some of those shAkhA-names:

maitreyI, mudgala; though I am not sure if the Upanishad actually

belonged to the said shAkhAs. Similarly, I am not sure if we consider

kali-santaraNa as authentic.

 

We do not accept many other texts, though accepted by others, as

Upanishads. Muktika is notable in this regard. There is another list of

200 + upanishads published (including a certain Allah Upanishad, whose

starting passage matches nearly with the prayers of Muslims).

vajrasUchika is another text quoted by many, but our learned friend

Shrisha Rao says that it is actually a work of the buddhist scholar,

Dignaga.

 

AFAIK, Vishishhtadvaitins also reject the muktikA. It is only advaitins

that take it seriously.

 

Pls correct in case of a mistake.

 

> It is known that the number 10 represents `fullness' (dashapramathi).

> It also represents 10 directions (8+2). Any other significance of

> number 10?

 

It is the first 2 digit number. 2 = dvaita.

It is the first 2 digit number that is valid in both decimal and binary

systems. Binary = 2; value of 10 in binary = 2. dvaita = 2.

It also signifies that doctrine holding 1 (advaita) and doctrine holding

0 (shUnyavAda) are to be treated side-by-side.

10 happens to be total number of our indriyas: 5 j~nAnendriyas and 5

karmendriyas.

10 happens to be in the middle of 9 (nava-graha) and 11 (ekAdashi or

ekAdasha rudra).

10 is exactly that much away from the no. of letters in my first name

(7), as is the no. of letters in my full name (13) away from 10.

10 was one of my beloved numbers (others being 1 and 0) in childhood.

All basic mathematical operations are easy with 10.

 

Pls take all of that in good humor. We see many people (scholars

included) perform all these numerological stuff. There does not seem to

be any point in such, except use of some ability to link numbers from

various sources. Is such some kind of sAdhanA? Or is it just for fun?

 

If one sees the literature, it is that these numbers are used to

indicate numbers of higher magnitude: dasha iti sarvaM, dashashabdo

anekavAchi, thereby removing any significance that one might attach to

numbers.

 

Correct me if I am wrong.

 

Regards,

Krishna Kadiri

[Guest guest]

Forwarded reply from Shrisha Rao.

 

 

sr3u [shrao]

Saturday, June 14, 2003 7:00 AM

 

>

> Krishna K

> Thursday, June 12, 2003 12:21 PM

 

> We do not accept many other texts, though accepted

> by others, as Upanishads. Muktika is notable in this

> regard. There is another list of 200 + upanishads

> published (including a certain Allah Upanishad, whose

> starting passage matches nearly with the prayers of

> Muslims). vajrasUchika is another text quoted by many,

> but our learned friend Shrisha Rao says that it is

> actually a work of the buddhist scholar, Dignaga.

 

I'm flattered, but it is actually Bannanje Govindacharya who says this.

I expect he is quite right, but have not verified the matter

independently.

 

On the subject of Upanishads being ten in number, " traditional "

collections of greater strengths are reported: 60 based on that number

translated into Persian at the instance of the amity-seeking but

short-lived Mughal emperor Dara Shikoh; 108 based on the number

commented upon by the

Advaitin called " Upanishad Brahma Yogin " (and of course, the recent,

somewhat different 108 based on the spurious Muktika), etc. The

publisher Motilal Banarsidass published a collection of 188 Upanishads a

few years ago (but some of these are quite spurious).

 

 

> > It is known that the number 10 represents `fullness'

> > (dashapramathi).

> > It also represents 10 directions (8+2). Any other

> > significance of number 10?

 

 

It is not so much that the _number_ represents fullness, as that the

_word_ `dasha' which can also mean " ten " is taken to mean `pUrNa' or

`ananta'. Even words like `aneka' (usually " many " ) and `sahasra'

( " thousand " ) are similarly construed.

 

Regards,

 

Shrisha Rao

[Guest guest]

Dear KrishNabhaktas,

Here is a forwarded message from Sri Srisha Rao on this subject.

 

Namaste,

Vasu Murthy

 

 

------ Forwarded Message

sr3u <shrao

Sat, 14 Jun 2003 01:30:57 +0000

-owner

Re: Significance of 10 - avataras, upanishaths.

 

, " Krishna K " <kadirik@i...>

 

wrote:

 

[*chomp*]

 

> We do not accept many other texts, though accepted by others,

 

as

> Upanishads. Muktika is notable in this regard. There is another list of

> 200 +

 

upanishads published (including a certain Allah Upanishad, whose

> starting

 

passage matches nearly with the prayers of Muslims).

> vajrasUchika is another

text

quoted by many, but our learned friend

> Shrisha Rao says that it is actually a

work of

the buddhist scholar,

> Dignaga.

 

I'm flattered, but it is actually

Bannanje

Govindacharya who says this. I expect he is quite

right, but have not

verified the matter independently.

 

On the subject of Upanishads being ten in

number,

" traditional " collections of greater strengths are

reported: 60 based on

that number translated into

Persian at the instance of the amity-seeking but

short-

lived Mughal emperor Dara Shikoh; 108 based

on the number commented upon by the

Advaitin called

" Upanishad Brahma Yogin " (and of course, the recent,

somewhat

different 108 based on the spurious Muktika),

etc. The publisher Motilal

Banarsidass published a

collection of 188 Upanishads a few years ago (but

some of

these are quite spurious).

 

> > It is known that the number 10 represents `fullness'

 

(dashapramathi).

> > It also represents 10 directions (8+2). Any other

 

significance of

> > number 10?

 

It is not so much that the _number_ represents

 

fullness, as that the _word_ `dasha' which can also

mean " ten " is taken to mean

`pUrNa' or `ananta'. Even

words like `aneka' (usually " many " ) and `sahasra'

 

( " thousand " ) are similarly construed.

 

Regards,

 

Shrisha Rao

 

> Krishna

Kadiri