AntarvyApti and BahirvyApti - I

[Guest guest]

SrI:

SrI Lakshminrusimha ParabrahmaNE namaha

SrImatE rAmAnujAya namaha

SrImatE nigamAnta mahAdESikAya namaha

SrI nArAyaNa yateendra mahAdESikAya namaha

 

Dear devotees,

namO nArAyaNa.

 

This posting is on the " antarvyApti " and " bahirvyApti " of

SrIman nArAyaNa over all the other entities.

 

In the chillarai rahasyam virOdha parihAram (50), swAmi

DESikan asks the following question and answers it by himself :

 

Qtn : A jIvAtma is aNu (atomic) in nature to the extent that

there is nothing which is smaller than that. There is

nothing like " inside a jIvAtma " since by nature it is

aNu. Similarly, kAlA (ie.time) is vibhu (all pervading).

So, there is nothing like " outside the kAlA " since by

nature it is all pervading. When these are the facts ,

How can the Lord be said to be present inside and outside

of everything ? How can He be told to be inside a

jIvAtma and outside the kAlA ?

 

Ans : The purport of such Scriptural statements is that,

ParamAtma is present everywhere alongwith all the entities

ie. In all the dravyAs, there is no pradESa (place) in

which Lord does not exist.

 

< Ref: SrI SrIrAmadESikAchArya's vivaraNam and moolam >.

 

Thus, SwAmi DESikan explains that Lord nArAyaNa (ie.divyAtma

swaroopam) is physically not present inside a jIvAtma.

-----------------------------

 

Lets disuss the implication of the above answer by

SwAmi dESikan.

 

Wherever either " in " or " out " of some entity exists ,

Lord is there. Whenever either " in " or " out " of some

entity can't be defined (ie.non existent) the question

of Lord's presence out there does not arise at all. This

will clarify the meanings of " antarvyApti " and

" bahirvyApti " .

 

The question whether the color of the horn of a rabbit is

either brown or white does not arise since rabbit does not

have a horn in the first hand. Similarly, when there is

nothing called " inside " of a jIvAtma , the question as to

whether PerumAL is inside it does not arise at all.

 

kAlA exists everywhere - both at material and Spiritual

world. So, there is nothing outside of kAlA.

 

So, ParamAtma is not physically present either inside a

jIvAtma Or Outside kAla. He exists alongwith them. This is

how the antarvyApti and bahirvyApti of such entities has to

be understood.

--------------------

 

In the Moolamantra adhikAram of SrImad Rahasya Traya SAram,

SwAmi DESikan " defines " antarvyApti and " bahirvyApti " , while

discussing the meaning of the word " nArAyaNa " .

 

" antarvyApti-yAvadu -- ivaiyuLLa idatthil tannai illaiyenna -

voNNAdapadi kalandu niRkai. bahirvyApti-yAvadu -- ivai illAda

idatthilum yengum thAn vuLanAgai " .

 

ie. antarvyApti (Immanence) = Being inseparably present with

other things/beings, such that it can not be said that

Lord is not present where they are (=> Lord always being

present wherever they are).

 

BahirvyApti (Transcendence) = Being present in those places

where they are not present.

 

SwAmi DESikan then clarifies the VishNu purANam verse (1.9.41)

" nArAyaNamanIyAmsam aSEshANAmanIyAmsAm ... " that it does not

mean nArAyaNa as being smaller than the aNu jIvAtma in size.

SwAmi DESikan refers to the Sruti vAkya (ChAndOgya Up - SAndilya

Vidya) which is ascertained in Brahma-SUtra and SrIBhAshya to

mean that Brahman being smaller in size than the " grain " implies

that it is of the size of the upAdhi (conditioning factor)

viz.grain (in this context).

 

UttamUr SwAmi comments in a good amount of detail on these

original texts of SwAmi DESikan. aDIyEn will take up that

explanation in a separate posting (probably within this week if

more free time is around).

-----------------------------

 

Clarifications on couple of verses of NammAzhwar's ThiruvAimozhi :

< At the outset, it may seem as though NammAzhwAr is expressing

the theory that ParamAtma is inside a jIvAtma >

 

1. " parantataN paravaiyuL........

karanthu yengum parantuLan ivai yunda karanE " (1.1.10)

 

Please go through PiLLAn's commentary. He says

about the " vyApti " of yemperumAn (Lord) ie. PerumAL's

vyApti is present in minute particles (achits/

insentients) and also in chits.

 

UttamUr swAmi in his commentary, asks this question

particularly ie.regarding vyApti and as to whats

antarvyApti and bahirvyApti is all about.

 

In this pAsuram, yemperumAn is said to be " karantu

parantuLan " ie. " maRaintu Sambandappattu irukkirAn " .

 

UttamUr swAmi explains as to how time and dharmabhUta

jn~yAnam of PerumAL being vibhu, does not have

anything outside it and thus PerumAL can't be " outside "

them logically. Infact, swAmi adds that time does not

have " inside " also since it is partless (niravaya). If

one understands that antarvyApti to be " inside " an

entity and " bahir vyApti " to be " outside " an entity,

then time can't have both antarvyApti and bahirvyApti.

antarvyApti for an entity can also mean the united

presence of yemperumAn, everywhere that entity exists.

 

" abhinava dESikan " UttamUr swAmi has explained this

pAsuram, following SwAmi DESikan's clarifications.

 

UttamUr SwAmi explains beautifully as to how

" idam thigazh poruL tharum " in this pAsuram explains

the antarvyApti of yemperumAn in such a way as

explained above. Just as how the sambandha (relation /

union) of the " aNu " jIvAtma with the paramANu(*) of

achEtanas, the same sambandha exists between ParamAtma

and jIvAtma. The " idam " in the pAsuram refers to those

tiny places where jIvAtma is present with paramANus

(evident from other lines in the pAsuram). Thus, it is

not that ParamAtma is inside jIvAtma.

 

UttamUr SwAmi explains as to how the usage of word

" thigazh " carries more significance : It refers to

prakAsatvam (manifestation). jIvAtma manifests

to itself, without any external aid ie. the feeling of

" I " always exists for a jIvAtma. If jIvAtma has to have

parts (Or split by some means), then that feeling

can't be a single I, but as a union of many parts.

The feeling of " I " by itself signifies as to how jIvAtma

is partless. UttamUr SwAmi says that, this word " thigazh "

dispels the question as to whether jIvAtma and achEtana

aNu(s) have internal parts.

 

Please refer to UttamUr SwAmi's commentary for more detailed

information.

 

(*) : ParamANu is the fundamental unit of prakruti which

is partless. jIvAtma and ParamAtma does not reside

inside this ParamANu, since by definition it has

no internal parts. The ParamANu of NayyAyikAs

(Logicians of NyAya-VaiSESika SAstra), which is a nitya

 

padArtha for them and the upAdAna-kAraNam of Jagat

for them, is not accepteble to VEdAntins. What they

call as " TriaNuka " (Triad) is the " ParamANu " Or

simply " aNu " for VEdAntins (Ref: SrI BhAshyam).

 

2. " aDiyEn uLLAn udal uLLAn ...... " (8.8.2)

 

yeedu : " IraNdAm pAttu. yennudaya hrudayattilE

pugunthirunda aLavandRikkE, yen SarIrattilEyum

pugunthu kalandAn yengiRAr " .

 

Thus, NampiLLai explains that, by this pAsuram,

NammAzhwar says " Not only having entered my heart,

He (Lord) has also entered and mingled in my body " .

 

So, this might convey the meaning that " aDiyEn

uLLAn " refers to " Present in my heart " , rather than

" Present inside myself the jIvAtma " .

 

Also, after narrating the anectode wherein the esoteric

significance of the word " aDiyEn " was explained by

ThirukkOshtuyUr Nambi to KUratAzhwAn, NambiLLai says :

 

" yennuLLAn yennavENdum idatthilE aDiyEnuLLAn yengaiyAlE

jn~yAna-aanandangaL anRu vastuvukku nirUpagam;

sEshatvamengai. jn~yAna-aanandangaLilum antarangam

bhagavad sEshatvamengai "

 

ie. " By using 'aDiyEnuLLAn' (ie. in 'aDiyEn') instead of

" yennuLLAn " (ie. in me), it is meant that jn~yAna,

aananda etc are not the primary identifiers of a

jIvAtma. Its only sEshatvam (to ParamAtma)

ie. Bhagavad SEshatvam of a jIvAtma is more important

than jn~yAna, aananda etc which identify a jIvAtma " .

 

In this very pAsuram, AzhwAr says " kadisEr nARRatthuL .... " .

nARRatthuL implies " inside smell (vAsanai) " .

 

Note: nARRam in tamil implies " Smell " and not " Bad Smell " . In

chaste tamil, only if the prefix " dur " is added, will that word

viz. durnARRam mean " bad smell " .

 

NampiLLai clarifies : " nARRatthuL yenRArEnum, vAsanaikku

uLLum puRambum illAmaiyAlE nARRatthilE yenRu koLga "

 

ie. " Though said 'inside smell', since inside and outside

for smell does not exist, it has to be taken as " in

smell " .

 

In a similar fashion, since there is no " inside " for a jIvAtma,

the purport of pramAnas on antarvyApti of ParamAtma w.r.t.

jIvAtma has to be appropriately understood.

 

aDiyEn will post the next (final) article on this issue after

sometime.

 

aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan,

anantapadmanAbhan.

krishNArpaNam.