Numbers in our philosophy

[Guest guest]

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

wrote:

> 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?

 

I understand that the numbers carry a significant role in our

philosophy. Numbers convey the concept more unambiguiously than

description. I heard that Shri Harikathamruthasara is a good example

to see how numbers are encapsulated in our philosophy. Numbers are

also represented in terms of names, each letter representing some

digit.There are plenty of examples in our texts. Everyone who goes

through Shri Harikathamruthasara would appreciate number magic in

that.

One would see plenty of strange numbers while going through the "

Creation of Universe " or " Time measurement " according to our

philosophy. So I think numbers are not just numbers but something

more than that in our philosophy. Whether it is just the

interpretation of modern brains or something deeply inherited in our

rich culture is to be decided.

 

namskAra

B.Gopalakrishna.

[Guest guest]

Reply to bgkvarna on Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 01:19:02PM -0000:

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

> wrote:

> > 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?

>

> I understand that the numbers carry a significant role in our

> philosophy. Numbers convey the concept more unambiguiously than

> description. I heard that Shri Harikathamruthasara is a good example

> to see how numbers are encapsulated in our philosophy. Numbers are

> also represented in terms of names, each letter representing some

> digit.There are plenty of examples in our texts. Everyone who goes

> through Shri Harikathamruthasara would appreciate number magic in

> that.

> One would see plenty of strange numbers while going through the "

> Creation of Universe " or " Time measurement " according to our

> philosophy. So I think numbers are not just numbers but something

> more than that in our philosophy. Whether it is just the

> interpretation of modern brains or something deeply inherited in our

> rich culture is to be decided.

 

Yes, even I understand, numbers play a vital role in our philosophy. Shri

Bannanje

has talked hours together on the greatness of number 18 and in connection to the

Mahabharatha and specifically BhagavathGeetha. He relates this to " Jaya "

" Purnatha "

" Reaching the Lord Shri Hari " . I think experts can comment more on this.

 

-Shesh

[Guest guest]

>

> bgkvarna [bgkvarna]

> Monday, June 16, 2003 6:49 PM

>

> Numbers in our philosophy

 

> digit.There are plenty of examples in our texts. Everyone who goes

> through Shri Harikathamruthasara would appreciate number magic in

> that.

 

Please give some verses from harikathAmR^itasAra explaining such

significances.

 

> One would see plenty of strange numbers while going through the "

> Creation of Universe " or " Time measurement " according to our

> philosophy.

 

I have not said that there is no mention of numbers in our philosophy;

one sees a vast spectrum of numbers in our understanding of Time. But

the issue is not that. Let me take an example to demonstrate this:

 

Our Acharya says;

 

bhaktirj~nAnaM savairAgyaM praj~nA medhA dhR^itiH sthitiH |

yogaH prANo balaM chaiva vR^ikodara iti smR^itaH || 2.134

 

A person who has those 10 qualities is called Vrikodara (our dear

Bhimasena devaru).

 

Srimad Acharya has said just that much and nothing more. Sri Vadiraja

also does not get into any number related theories. But an

over-enthusiastic person can do the following:

 

There are 10 upanishads. A person who understands the depths and depths

of all 10 upanishads is vR^ikodara.

There are five j~nAnendriyas and five karmendriyas. A person who, by his

qualities, keeps all of them under control, is called vR^ikodara.

 

One can go on and on and find spiritually acceptable notions from such

interpretation. How far is that warranted -- is the question. Did the

author have that idea in mind when he wrote that? Did a spiritually

realized person or yati let us know that the original person used

certain number to convey some special knowledge?

 

Most of the times, such number-theories are based on current knowledge.

Take the example of the Gita. One hears a lot on the 18 chapters stuff.

18 chapters, 18 days of war, 18 parvas in MBh to start with. More one

searches, more similarities one can obtain.

 

But are we aware that some recensions of the Gita say that it actually

contains 746 verses (according to a study done by some shAstri in 1950s,

AFAIK. Apparently, he thinks that such verses were ignored by Shankara

because they were too damaging to his theory), thereby making it quite

possible that there is one more chapter (I agree it is not absolutely

essential that there be one more chapter, but what removes the

possibility). Apparently some Kashmiri rescensions of the text have 746

verses.

 

What then to become of number-theories that were formulated for 18

chapters? What if we find corroborative evidence, at a later date that

Srimad Acharya's words (that MBh is highly interpolated; some portions

have been rejected or some have been accepted)? What if the number of

parvas are found more than what are found or less than accepted 18?

 

> So I think numbers are not just numbers but something

> more than that in our philosophy. Whether it is just the

> interpretation of modern brains or something deeply

> inherited in our rich culture is to be decided.

 

Therefore, all modern 'number theories' seem to rest on flimsy grounds,

unless some aparoxa-j~nAni has certified such representations.

 

Regards,

Krishna