Re:On Gaudiya VaishNana Theories(Was: Please Clarify...)

[Guest guest]

SrI:

SrI Lakshminrusimha ParabrahmaNE namaH

SrI Lakshminrusimha divya pAdukA sEvaka SrIvaN SaThakOpa-

SrI nArAyaNa yateendra mahAdESIkAya namaH

 

namO nArAyaNa!

 

Dear Shree Ananthapadmanabhan,

 

You had mentioned :

>SrI KrishNa is a vibhava avatAra of Para-Brahman.

 

I understand that Lord Sri Krishna is a purnAvatAram of Sriman nArayanA. I am

not able to clearly understand the difference between purnAvatAram and vibhava

avatAram,if any. I feel that I stand to be corrected in this

regard(purnAvataram).

 

I hope you would further elucidate on vibhava avataram and purnAvataram and

clear my doubt.

 

adiyEn mAlola narasimha dasan,

 

mAlolan cadAmbi

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______

 

Get your free @ address at

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Gopaladesika Mahadesikaya Namah:

 

Dear Sri Malolan Cadambi,

 

This post- by Sri Anand Karalapakkam about a couple of years ago, for a query

raised by Sri Ramkumar.

This gives lot of insight into the subject. Please go thro' it.

 

Sri Anand, please forgive me for posting this without your permission. adiyEn

had saved this in my data base, as one of the great posts. (mostly all your

posts get into this data base).

 

Regards

Narayana Narayana

adiyEn Narayana dAsan Madhavakkannan

====================================

Sri rAm gopAlswAmy wrote :

 

shriimad bhaagavta-puraaNam talks about various incarnations of bhagavaan

(including kR^shhNaavataara) and says:

 

" ete ca amsha kalaaH pumsaH kR^shhNaH tu bhagavaan svayam |

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^******

indra-ari vyaakulam lokam mR^Dayanti yuge yuge || " [1.3.28]

 

" All of the above-mentioned incarnations are either plenary portions or

portions of the plenary portions of the Lord, but Lord shrii KR^shhNa

is the original Personality of Godhead. All of them appear on planets

whenever there is a disturbance created by the atheists.

The Lord incarnates to protect the theists. "

 

 

It seems to be apparently inconsistent with paaN^caraatra.

Is not, according to paaN^caraatra, shriiman-naaraayaNa is the Original_

Personality of Godhead and shrii. kR^shhNa is a vibhava-avataara ?

 

I wonder what the word " svayam " means in the above context.

 

[ Also, dhyaana-shlokam for shriimad bhagavad giita itself says,

" ... paarthaaya pratibodhitaaM bhagavataa naaraayaNena svayaM.. "

Is the dhyaana-shlokam universally accepted as authentic ?

===========================================

 

Sri Anand's reply:

Various issues are being addressed here by our dear devotee

Sriman rAmkumar GopAlswAmy , who in the past has come up with very

interesting questions that has given lot of opportunities for

all of us to know about the sampradAyam much better .

 

 

1. Qtn : By the above Srimad BhAgavatham (SB) verse can one come

to the conclusion that KrishNA is the actual God & nArAyaNA

is secondary ( " expansion ? " ) to Him ?

 

Ans : This verse doesn¡Çt even mention about nArAyaNA . Usage

of

" KrishNA " here can _at best_ be considered in

" comparison " with other vibhava avatArams (incarnations).

The verse simply says that in comparison with the

above mentioned avatArams , KrishNA is actually

bhagavAn whereas others are amsAs of Him . This doesn¡Çt

(

even in the remotest sense ) imply that nArAyaNA is

an amsA of KrishNA or something like that .

 

Please note that previously , KrishNA was also listed

as one of the incarnation of Hari (nArAyaNA) by Sage SUtar .

Actually the sages request Sage sUtar to describe various

incarnations of Lord Hari ( SB 1.1.13 & 1.1.18 ) . So , the best

extrapolation from this verse that one can obtain is that ,of all

the incarnations (avatArams) that so far has been listed by

Sage sUtar , KrishNA is the perfect avatAram ( ie. Poorna

avatAram ie. Svayam ) of nArAyaNA & all other avatArams

are only amsAs of nArAyaNA , ie. KrishNA is non-different

from nArAyaNA since KrishNA is svayam bhagavAn &

all other avatArams are not same as nArAyaNA since they

are only His amsAs .

 

Even if one makes the extrapolation of the greatest order &

gives an interpretation which cannot be derived from this verse

like " nArAyaNA is also an amsA of KrishNA " it contradicts

hundreds of pramAnams from VedAs (including Upanishads ) ,

IthihAsa purAnAs , Divya prabandham , pAncarAtrA etc . So ,

such type of claim is obviously not supported by Scriptures .

 

2. Qtn: If the word " ete " is interpreted to mean _all_ the incarnations

that has been described so far by Sage SUtar , it leads to

a conclusion that KrishNA is the _only_ poorna avatAram of

nArAyaNA & all other avatArams like nrusimhA , rAmA are

only His amsAs . This obviously contradicts hundreds of

pramAnams . What then is the exact purport of this verse ?

 

Ans : adiyen is giving the answer to this question based on the

Srimad BhAgavatham series appearing in " Nrusimha PriyA " .

The section pertaining to our discussion was written by

late Sri atthi nrusimhAchAryA (vaikuNThavAsi) . Now , it is

continued by Sri SthalasayanAchAryA. This tamil series has

been released in a book format by " Sri Nrusimha PriyA Trust "

during 1995 , which has the description of Srimad

BhAgavatham till 3rd Canto , Ch 23 .

 

 

The answer to the question lies in the " chatri nyAyam " used

in sanskrit . It is described as follows :

" chatrinO gacchanti " => a group of people having

umbrellAs are going . Actually , not everyone in that group

needs to hold an umbrellA . But that group is reffered to,

asif everyone is holding the UmbrellA because many are

holding it => generalization is done. This is the

" chatri nyAyam " .

 

All avatArams of the type NrusimhA , RAmA are Poorna

avatArams only , since they are taken by the same

nArAyaNA . In this verse , " chatri nyAyam " is employed

ie. Eventhough all the poorna avatArms ( no umbrellA)

seems to be grouped with that of many other avatArams

(anupravesA etc; with umbrellA ) by the word " ete " , its

actual import from the application of " chatri nyAyam " is

that the word " ete " refers to the amsa avatArams

( with umbrella) only . So , the comparison of

KrishNAvatAram is strictly not with all the avatArams

that has been listed before , but only with other amsa

avatArams . If one fails to recognize the " chatri nyAyam "

employed , it leads him into a contradiction .

 

 

3. Qtn : Can this be further explained in the light of the " context " in

which Sage sUtar uttered this verse ?

 

Ans : Actually , the sages were very eager to know about many

things . First of all , they paid their salutations to Sage

sUtar who was a great rishi having immense knowledge

& the fruit of that knowledge viz. ardent devotion unto

Sriman nArAyaNA . Sage sUtar was in such a position

because he did lot of kainkaryams to his achAryA

& got his blessings (in form of kAlakshebams etc) . Since

the katAkshA of a sadAchAryA ( AchAryA of a Sat

sampradAyam ie. SampradAyam starting with Sriman

nArAyaNA ) fell unto Sage sUtar , he could understand

all the imports of the vedAs correctly & easily ( All

these things are in a way told by the sages themselves

to Sage sUtar while glorifying him )

 

Sages told Sage sUtar that , since the kali yugA will be

filled with people who have mandha buddhi (lack of spiritual

knowledge ) & short life, aisvaryam etc & will be

immersed in samsArA , the upadesam of the sAram

(essence) of scriptures needs to be done (ie. Kali yugA

people have mandha buddhi => perform lot of speculations

instead of understanding the tattvA properly under the

guidance of a " sadAchAryA " => they can¡Çt understand the

essence of vedAs ) . They wanted to know the things which

would be of ultimate benefit to all the jIvAtmAs , acts that

needs to be followed by jIvAtmAs so that it will please

bhagavAn , __about the incarnation of bhagavAn as

son of Devaki__, leelAs performed by bhagavAn in various

incarnations , glories of nAma sankeertanam , glories of

parama bhAgavathOthamAs whose mere katAkshA will

sanctify a person .

 

The sages being ardent devotees of KrishNAvatAram ,

which got winded up quite recently , they eagerly asked

Sage sUtar to especially describe that avatAram in detail

in which bhagavAn as KrishNA alongwith BalarAmA did

various super human acts . They also wanted to know

the person unto whom dharmA has taken shelter off

after the departure of KrishNA to Sri VaikuNTham .

 

So , among all the vibhava avatArams , their __focus__ is

on KrishNAvatAram , though they wanted to know

about all the avatArams of bhagavAn Sriman nArAyaNA .

 

Sage sUtar after briefly explaining about nArAyaNA¡Çs

svaroopam , He being antaryAmi of chit & achit , He being

the sarIrI of chit & achit (ie. Chit & achit are His sarIrA) &

allied tattvAs , starts enlisting various avatArams of

Sriman nArAyaNA viz. Yoga nidrA form , BrahmA , 4 kumArAs ,

Naradar , Nara NArAyaNA , KapilA , DattAtreyA , ya~jnA (son

of son of sage ruchi & his wife Ahuti ) , King rushabA ,

King pruthu , matsyavatAram , koormAvatAram , Dhanvantari ,

Mohini , NrusimhA , vAmanA , parasurAmA , VyAsA , rAmA ,

BalarAmA , KrishNA , BuddhA & Kalki .

 

Then Suta pourAnikar continued that the number of

incarnations of Sriman nArAyaNA (Hari) are

innumerable like thousands of rivulets flowing from a

river & goes on to say that RishIs & devAs (demigods),

Manus & prajApatis are all amsAs of Lord Hari

(1.3.26-27) .

 

Now the stage is set for the verse 1.3.28 in our

discussion. Note that there were innumerable amsAvatArAs

that has been enlisted in comparison with the svayam

avatArAs.

 

The word " ete " if applies to all the incarnations enlisted

sofar , then by " chatri nyAyam " we can understand the

actual purport of the verse .

 

Alternatively, if we look at the previous two verses

( 1.3.26 & 1.3.27 ) , the focus is on the innumerable

avatArAs which are like rivulets from a river & enlisted

rishis , manus etc who all are basically amsAvatArAs.

So, obviously , SUtar wants to reiterate that they are

only amsAvatArAs (ie. They are not same as nArAyaNA)

& are different from His svayam avatArams . Now , a

good representative from the list of poorna avatArams has

to be chosen in order to differentiate from the amsAvatArams.

SUtar chose " KrishNA " because all the sages were His

ardent devotees & their focus was also with that avatAram.

KrishNA is also well known for the shadguna paripoornam .

 

 

Alternatively , the sages being KrishNA¡Çs ardent

devotees,

(obvious from their questions) shouldn¡Çt be made anxious

since while enlisting various avatArams of Lord Hari ,

innumerable number of amsAvatArams were mentioned &

esp. in verses 26 & 27 this was openly enlisted ie. Sages

should be assured that their darling KrishNA is

neverthless " svayam bhagavAn " Sriman nArAyaNA &

is not a mere amsAvatArA . So , Suta pourAnikar chose to use

" KrishnA " in the verse 28.

 

4. Qtn : Is there any commentary available on Srimad BhAgavatham

by Sri Vaishnava AchAryAs ?

 

Ans : There are atleast 3 known commentries in Sanskrit .

 

a. A commentry attributed to Sri Krishna Guru , disciple of

Sri SomayAji AndAn (pre Desikan period) .

 

b. " SukhapakshyA " by the stAlwart Sudarsana sUri of

" SrutaprakAsikA " fame .

 

c. " BhAgavatha tAtparya chandrikA " by

Sri Venkata KrishnamAchAryA ( probably Late 18th Century ) .

 

adiyen doesn¡Çt know whether the famous

" VeerarAghaveeyam " is different from the third one .

Neverthless it is also there .

 

Srimad RangapriyA swAmi has translated " Uddhava

GeetA " into KannadA if adiyen remembers rightly (

Sri Krishna Kalale has mentioned this ) .

 

Ongoing tamil series in Nrusimha PriyA is also there.

Someone should seriously consider publishing the

sanskrit commentries of our poorvAchAryAs which are

simply lying as manuscripts . Once it comes out ,

some bhAgavathA(s) should translate it into Tamil ,

English & other languages for the benefit of all

bhAgavathAs. Many Nectar among nectars are being

neglected somehow. The bhagavad anubhavam

obtained from AzhwAr's Divya Prabandham is more than

thousand times the bhagavad anubhavam that one can

possibly obtained from Srimad BhAgavatham . So , this

granthA is not given that much importance in our

sampradAyam . Also , Vishnu purAnam is much superior to

Srimad BhAgavatham while explaining tattvAs ( very crucial

to interpret many Upanishadic passages ) . SarIra sarIrI

bhAvA , nArAyanA tattvam , Sri tattvam etc are well

established in Sri Vishnu purAnam . Moreover , it is

much shorter than SB though containing almost the same thing

. Infact SB of vyAsar is the expansion of VP of his father

ParAsarar.

 

Nevertheless , SB is another nectar & invaluable

commentries of our most merciful AchAryAs should be

made available to everyone so that the true tattvam is

understood by all the interested baddha jIvAtmAs .

 

 

5. Qtn : Who is nArAyaNA ? what is the difference between Him & the

avatArams like KrishNA , rAmA , ranganAthA & PeraruLALan ?

 

Ans : nArAyaNA is not merely someone with 4 hands , conch , chakrA

etc . nArAyaNA is the paramAtmA who pervades everywhere with

infinite kalyAna gunAs & ever associated with " Sri " (Lakshmi).

 

" nArAyaNA " refers to the divyAtma svaroopam which pervades

everywhere & He is the Brahman (source of creation ,

the maintainer & in whom it dissolves ) .

 

nArAyaNA is always personal because of His infinite kalyAna

gunAs . Just because He is all pervading , it doesn't mean that

He is impersonal . The same infinite nArAyaNA takes many

forms for the pleasure of His devotees & the body of such forms

are made up of the special aprAkruta material called

" suddha sattvam " & such incarnations are out of His own will

(ie.Not because of karmA). The infinite qualities of nArAyaNA

are not because of His form . It is based on His svaroopam &

His dharmabhooda jn~Anam both of which are infinite . For

example , a human being speaks , laughs , shows compassion to

others , makes friends etc because of the jIvAtmA & not

that the material body by itself is doing all these things .

Similarly,nArAyaNA is present inside the divine body(divya angaLa

vigraham) & thereby gives oppurtunities to His devotees to serve

Him. Thus " nArAyaNA " is different from nArAyaNA^

 

 

Òs form .

 

But , nArAyaNA eternally gives the sevai (darSan) with divya

mangaLa vigrahA at Sri VaikuNTham . But muktAtmAs &

nityasUrIs can also enjoy the divyAtma svaroopam of

nArAyaNA which is million times more blissful than His divya

mangaLa vigrahA .

 

Unfortunately , baddha jIvAtms can^Òt have the sAkshAtkAram of

Him (ie. DivyAtma svaroopam). It is debarred for them by the

sankalpam of nArAyaNA . Wherever " nArAyaNA " is mentioned

it refers to His divyAtma svaroopam & not to His form , of which

the four handed form which He takes is the most famous . A

baddha jIvAtmA can atbest know about nArAyaNA (divyAtma

svaroopam ) & discuss about His kalyAna gunAs & in that way

meditate on His divyAtma svaroopam , but cannot have its

sAkshAtkAram.

 

But nArAyaNA doesn^Òt wash away his hands . He is ever

merciful & thus takes beautiful forms . So , His

" divya mangaLa vigrahA " is the sole refuge for His devotees.

 

A yogi does the sAkshAtkAram of His divya mangaLa vigrahA

at his heart if he chooses that upAsanA . If some other yogi

chooses to perform some other Brahma VidyA (upAsanA) , he

can have the sAkshAtkAram of the divya mangaLa vigrahA of

nArAyaNA say in the orb of the sun. But , the greatest &

most merciful avatAram is the archAvatAram , in which even

the rouges , thieves , non - devotee , devotee , rich , beggar ,

athiest,animals & all sorts of living entities can see with

their material eyes the archA thirumeni ( divya mangaLa

vigrahA ) of Sriman nArAyaNA . This display of immense

Soulabhyam & Sowseelyam by Sriman nArAyaNA although

being the Param poruL (Supreme Being) is the main

reason for His ardent devotees like AzhwArs to dive into

various devotional moods filled with mystic experience in

communion with the supreme Lord & in that bliss comes forth

their most nectarine Divya Prabandhams , which is so potent

to change even a stone hearted athiest into a bhAgavathA

filled with all bodily horripulations during his bhagavad

anubhavam .

 

When we meet a friend , we don^Òt say that we are meeting a

" material body " of a jIvAtmA . The whole system of jIvAtmA &

the material body is taken together in consideration & thus we

say " I met Mr.X out there " .This is basically because ,the

jIvAtmA is inseparably united with the body , as long as it is

within it . Similarly , though we would have had the fortune of

seeing only perumAL^Òs archA thirumeni (or possibly only the

ornaments ) , we would say " I saw PerumAL in Garuda

vAhanam ( during temple Utsavam) " because nArAyaNA

is inseparably united with that archA thirumeni .

 

The greatness of the archAvatAram is that the greatest

purushArtam of Bhagavad kainkaryam at Paramapadam

(Sri VaikuNTham) can even be experienced (though not in

same degree ) in this world of samsArA .Thatswhy , Divya

Desams are known as BhoolOka VaikuNTham - it doesn^Òt

belong either to the actual paramapadam , nor to the

materialistic world ( because of the special bhagavad

anubhavam & performance of kainkaryam ) . There is no

other refuge to a baddha jIvAtmA than to enjoy the Divya

MangaLa vigrahA of Sriman nArAyaNA in various Divya

Desams & simultaneously enjoy His kalyAna gunAs

through most nectarian Divya prabandhams

( anubhavam of AzhwArs) & perform various kainkaryams

to Him & His devotees . All these become possible only

because of the most merciful archAvatAram which rightly

makes the devotees act according to their svaroopam

( nature ) of being a seshan ( servant) of Sriman nArAyaNA.

But for the archAvatAram , the devotees would be like " fish

out of water " since their natural state (svaroopam) of

performing bhagavad kainkaryam won^Òt become possible in

that case .

 

The glories of archAvatAram esp. in Divya Desams is that ,

each such avatAram has a unique story behind it . The

story (sthala purAnam) by itself will be so much nectarian &

such leelAs of Sriman nArAyaNA can be remembered

forever. PirAtti takes the role of a jIvAtmA & teaches how

a baddha jIvATmA should yearn for Sriman nArAyaNA

culminating finally in their marriage of prapatti . What a

glorious way in which the Divya DampatIs preach the prapatti

sAstrA to a baddha jIvAtmA through their sacred marriage

(thiru kalyAnam) & kalyAnotsavam !! On top of this ,

nArAyaNA performs various leelAs in His archAvatAram

(Speaking with the likes of thiruk kacchi nambi & AzhwArs ,

order someone like Adivan Shatakopa Jeeyar for sampradAya

propagation , write taniyans for the likes of ananthAzhvAn ,

so on & on ) .

 

No stopping at this , He even brings apparent

suffering to Himself ( RanganAthA during Muslim Invasion

etc ) just like rAghavan (rAmAvatAram) was in deep sorrow &

cried heavily due to His separation from SItA . LeelAs such

as this can^Òt be beared by His devotees &

they still more vigorously engage in bhagavad anubhavam &

kainkaryam ( Just imagine the deep emotional traumAs that

our AchAryAs would have experienced during the time of

muslim invasion & how our AchAryAs saved ranganAthA &

sampradAyam ) . Infact , such leelAs are for those supreme

devotees , who would display their deep love to the fullest

possible extent in such situations since in archAvatAram ,

it is the responsibility of the devotee to even bathe &

dress Him ; what to speak of protecting Him from invaders ?

 

While contemplating on these things, one can say that

the leelAs of vibhava avatArams also fade away in

comparison with that of the leelAs of archAvatArams.

 

Thus , after understanding the actual tattvam of nArAyaNA one

can easily say that there is no difference between rAmA ,

krishNA & ranganAthA since it is the same nArAyaNA who

is taking various such forms for the pleasure of His devotees.

Be it a four handed form , two handed human form or

a form of a fish (matsyAvatAram) , it is the same nArAyaNA

(divyAtma svaroopam) who is inside such forms. Since the

paramAtmA who is the possesor of all kalyAna gunAs , is

the sameone irrespective of whether He is inside a four

handed form or a two handed form , the personality in rAmA,

KrishNA , ranganAthA & peraruLALan are all same though

their forms are different . So , it is completely wrong to say

that four handed form of nArAyaNA will have x number of

qualities , two handed KrishNA form will have y number of

qualities , four handed archA form will have z number of

qualities etc , since it is the same nArAyaNA (divyAtma

svaroopam) the possesor of all the kalyAna gunAs , present

inside all these forms . Moreover it is also completely wrong

to limit the number of qualities of nArAyaNA to a finite number.

He actually has uncountable number of qualities .

 

 

Having understood the tattvam , one should engage in

bhagavad anubhavam . Now ,if someone asks " who is nArAyaNA ? "

then immedietly the beautiful divya mangaLa vigrahA of

Sriman nArAyaNA in any one of the Divya Desam should come to

the mind in a flash :

( thiruk kamala pAdam , araich chivanda Adai , andhi pol

niRaththAdai , UndhI , thiruvayitRu udharabandham ,

thiruvAra mArbu , mutRum unda kandam , seiya vAi ,

kariyavAgip pudai parandhu miLirndhu sevvari vOdi neenda

ap peria vAya kangaL , kOlamAmaniyAramum muththuth

thAmamum neela meniyum , sudarAzhi , pAnchajanniyam,

kousthubam , Srivatsam , vanamAlai , thiruthuzhAi mAlai ,

kireetamum .....) . All the bhagavad anubhavams of

our AchAryAs & AzhwArs are perfect since they are

born out of the deep understanding of the tattvam , hitam

& purushArtam .

 

So , if someone holds the view that the form of nArAyaNA

is same as nArAyaNA , then hundreds of pramAnams which

describe Brahman / nArAyaNA , suddha sattvam etc are

violated . Nevertheless , the deep love of a devotee towards

nArAyanA's divine form might make him think that He &

His form are same ( baddha jIvAtmAs have access <seeing>

only to His form .

 

It is also to be noted that meditation on the divyAtma

svaroopam of nArAyaNA is completely different from the

theory proposed by mAyAvAdIs regarding the meditation on

Brahman who is nirviseshA (attributeless ) .

Sri U.Ve. KarunAkaran swAmy during upanyAsams beautifully

says regarding the thiru uLLam of Bhagavad rAmAnujA

on those who try to meditate on an attributeless object :

" First of all , for an object to be known , it should have

some attributes. Without any attributes , there is no

possibility of meditating on it , since how will you fix

its co ordinates ?. Actually , Brahman is full of attributes.

Nirvisesha Brahman is not supported either in pratyakshA or

anumAnA or sabda pramAnam . So, those who claim that

they are meditating on an abstract attributeless object are

#1 frauds for they are telling something which is

impossible " .

 

Anyway , by telling that an object is attributeless , an

attribute is ascribed to it !

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri.Madhavakannan and Malolan Cadambi,

 

namo narayana. adiyen's pranamams.

 

Sri.Anand's articles on understanding our Sri sampradayam are excellent read

and this particular one and other articles on Iskcon Vs Sri sampradayam are

in adiyen's data base as well. In case any one need to read them adiyen will

be happy to forward them. adiyen used to print out these article and

circulate among the interested devotees to understand our sampradayam

better. No doubt Sri.Anand has excellent background and understanding of

other Vaishnava sampradayams as well.

 

regards,

 

dasan venkat

 

 

madhav.vasudevan <madhav.vasudevan

11 October 2000 10:29

Re:On Gaudiya VaishNana Theories(Was: Please Clarify...)

 

 

>

>

>Sri:

>Srimathe Gopaladesika Mahadesikaya Namah:

>

>Dear Sri Malolan Cadambi,

>

>This post- by Sri Anand Karalapakkam about a couple of years ago, for a

query

>raised by Sri Ramkumar.

>This gives lot of insight into the subject. Please go thro' it.

>

>Sri Anand, please forgive me for posting this without your permission.

adiyEn

>had saved this in my data base, as one of the great posts. (mostly all your

>posts get into this data base).

>

>Regards

>Narayana Narayana

>adiyEn Narayana dAsan Madhavakkannan

>====================================

>Sri rAm gopAlswAmy wrote :

>

>shriimad bhaagavta-puraaNam talks about various incarnations of bhagavaan

>(including kR^shhNaavataara) and says:

>

> " ete ca amsha kalaaH pumsaH kR^shhNaH tu bhagavaan svayam |

> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^******

> indra-ari vyaakulam lokam mR^Dayanti yuge yuge || " [1.3.28]

>

> " All of the above-mentioned incarnations are either plenary

portions or

> portions of the plenary portions of the Lord, but Lord shrii

KR^shhNa

> is the original Personality of Godhead. All of them appear on

planets

> whenever there is a disturbance created by the atheists.

> The Lord incarnates to protect the theists. "

>

>

>It seems to be apparently inconsistent with paaN^caraatra.

>Is not, according to paaN^caraatra, shriiman-naaraayaNa is the Original_

>Personality of Godhead and shrii. kR^shhNa is a vibhava-avataara ?

>

>I wonder what the word " svayam " means in the above context.

>

>[ Also, dhyaana-shlokam for shriimad bhagavad giita itself says,

> " ... paarthaaya pratibodhitaaM bhagavataa naaraayaNena svayaM.. "

> Is the dhyaana-shlokam universally accepted as authentic ?

>===========================================

>

>Sri Anand's reply:

>Various issues are being addressed here by our dear devotee

>Sriman rAmkumar GopAlswAmy , who in the past has come up with very

>interesting questions that has given lot of opportunities for

>all of us to know about the sampradAyam much better .

>

>

>1. Qtn : By the above Srimad BhAgavatham (SB) verse can one come

> to the conclusion that KrishNA is the actual God & nArAyaNA

> is secondary ( " expansion ? " ) to Him ?

>

> Ans : This verse doesn$B!G(Bt even mention about nArAyaNA .

Usage of

> " KrishNA " here can _at best_ be considered in

> " comparison " with other vibhava avatArams (incarnations).

> The verse simply says that in comparison with the

> above mentioned avatArams , KrishNA is actually

> bhagavAn whereas others are amsAs of Him . This

doesn$B!G(Bt (

> even in the remotest sense ) imply that nArAyaNA is

> an amsA of KrishNA or something like that .

>

> Please note that previously , KrishNA was also listed

> as one of the incarnation of Hari (nArAyaNA) by Sage SUtar

..

> Actually the sages request Sage sUtar to describe various

> incarnations of Lord Hari ( SB 1.1.13 & 1.1.18 ) . So , the

best

> extrapolation from this verse that one can obtain is that ,of all

> the incarnations (avatArams) that so far has been listed

by

> Sage sUtar , KrishNA is the perfect avatAram ( ie. Poorna

> avatAram ie. Svayam ) of nArAyaNA & all other avatArams

> are only amsAs of nArAyaNA , ie. KrishNA is non-different

> from nArAyaNA since KrishNA is svayam bhagavAn &

> all other avatArams are not same as nArAyaNA since they

> are only His amsAs .

>

> Even if one makes the extrapolation of the greatest order &

> gives an interpretation which cannot be derived from this verse

> like " nArAyaNA is also an amsA of KrishNA " it contradicts

> hundreds of pramAnams from VedAs (including Upanishads ) ,

> IthihAsa purAnAs , Divya prabandham , pAncarAtrA etc . So ,

> such type of claim is obviously not supported by Scriptures .

>

> 2. Qtn: If the word " ete " is interpreted to mean _all_ the incarnations

> that has been described so far by Sage SUtar , it leads to

> a conclusion that KrishNA is the _only_ poorna avatAram of

> nArAyaNA & all other avatArams like nrusimhA , rAmA are

> only His amsAs . This obviously contradicts hundreds of

> pramAnams . What then is the exact purport of this verse ?

>

> Ans : adiyen is giving the answer to this question based on the

> Srimad BhAgavatham series appearing in " Nrusimha PriyA " .

> The section pertaining to our discussion was written by

> late Sri atthi nrusimhAchAryA (vaikuNThavAsi) . Now , it is

> continued by Sri SthalasayanAchAryA. This tamil series has

> been released in a book format by " Sri Nrusimha PriyA Trust "

> during 1995 , which has the description of Srimad

> BhAgavatham till 3rd Canto , Ch 23 .

>

>

> The answer to the question lies in the " chatri nyAyam " used

> in sanskrit . It is described as follows :

> " chatrinO gacchanti " => a group of people having

> umbrellAs are going . Actually , not everyone in that group

> needs to hold an umbrellA . But that group is reffered to,

> asif everyone is holding the UmbrellA because many are

> holding it => generalization is done. This is the

> " chatri nyAyam " .

>

> All avatArams of the type NrusimhA , RAmA are Poorna

> avatArams only , since they are taken by the same

> nArAyaNA . In this verse , " chatri nyAyam " is employed

> ie. Eventhough all the poorna avatArms ( no umbrellA)

> seems to be grouped with that of many other avatArams

> (anupravesA etc; with umbrellA ) by the word " ete " , its

> actual import from the application of " chatri nyAyam " is

> that the word " ete " refers to the amsa avatArams

> ( with umbrella) only . So , the comparison of

> KrishNAvatAram is strictly not with all the avatArams

> that has been listed before , but only with other amsa

> avatArams . If one fails to recognize the " chatri nyAyam "

> employed , it leads him into a contradiction .

>

>

>3. Qtn : Can this be further explained in the light of the " context " in

> which Sage sUtar uttered this verse ?

>

> Ans : Actually , the sages were very eager to know about many

> things . First of all , they paid their salutations to Sage

> sUtar who was a great rishi having immense knowledge

> & the fruit of that knowledge viz. ardent devotion unto

> Sriman nArAyaNA . Sage sUtar was in such a position

> because he did lot of kainkaryams to his achAryA

> & got his blessings (in form of kAlakshebams etc) . Since

> the katAkshA of a sadAchAryA ( AchAryA of a Sat

> sampradAyam ie. SampradAyam starting with Sriman

> nArAyaNA ) fell unto Sage sUtar , he could understand

> all the imports of the vedAs correctly & easily ( All

> these things are in a way told by the sages themselves

> to Sage sUtar while glorifying him )

>

> Sages told Sage sUtar that , since the kali yugA will be

> filled with people who have mandha buddhi (lack of spiritual

> knowledge ) & short life, aisvaryam etc & will be

> immersed in samsArA , the upadesam of the sAram

> (essence) of scriptures needs to be done (ie. Kali yugA

> people have mandha buddhi => perform lot of speculations

> instead of understanding the tattvA properly under the

> guidance of a " sadAchAryA " => they can$B!G(Bt understand

the

> essence of vedAs ) . They wanted to know the things which

> would be of ultimate benefit to all the jIvAtmAs , acts

that

> needs to be followed by jIvAtmAs so that it will please

> bhagavAn , __about the incarnation of bhagavAn as

> son of Devaki__, leelAs performed by bhagavAn in various

> incarnations , glories of nAma sankeertanam , glories of

> parama bhAgavathOthamAs whose mere katAkshA will

> sanctify a person .

>

> The sages being ardent devotees of KrishNAvatAram ,

> which got winded up quite recently , they eagerly asked

> Sage sUtar to especially describe that avatAram in detail

> in which bhagavAn as KrishNA alongwith BalarAmA did

> various super human acts . They also wanted to know

> the person unto whom dharmA has taken shelter off

> after the departure of KrishNA to Sri VaikuNTham .

>

> So , among all the vibhava avatArams , their __focus__ is

> on KrishNAvatAram , though they wanted to know

> about all the avatArams of bhagavAn Sriman nArAyaNA .

>

> Sage sUtar after briefly explaining about

nArAyaNA$B!G(Bs

> svaroopam , He being antaryAmi of chit & achit , He being

> the sarIrI of chit & achit (ie. Chit & achit are His sarIrA)

&

> allied tattvAs , starts enlisting various avatArams of

> Sriman nArAyaNA viz. Yoga nidrA form , BrahmA , 4 kumArAs ,

> Naradar , Nara NArAyaNA , KapilA , DattAtreyA , ya~jnA (son

> of son of sage ruchi & his wife Ahuti ) , King rushabA ,

> King pruthu , matsyavatAram , koormAvatAram , Dhanvantari ,

> Mohini , NrusimhA , vAmanA , parasurAmA , VyAsA , rAmA ,

> BalarAmA , KrishNA , BuddhA & Kalki .

>

> Then Suta pourAnikar continued that the number of

> incarnations of Sriman nArAyaNA (Hari) are

> innumerable like thousands of rivulets flowing from a

> river & goes on to say that RishIs & devAs (demigods),

> Manus & prajApatis are all amsAs of Lord Hari

> (1.3.26-27) .

>

> Now the stage is set for the verse 1.3.28 in our

> discussion. Note that there were innumerable amsAvatArAs

> that has been enlisted in comparison with the svayam

> avatArAs.

>

> The word " ete " if applies to all the incarnations enlisted

> sofar , then by " chatri nyAyam " we can understand the

> actual purport of the verse .

>

> Alternatively, if we look at the previous two verses

> ( 1.3.26 & 1.3.27 ) , the focus is on the innumerable

> avatArAs which are like rivulets from a river & enlisted

> rishis , manus etc who all are basically amsAvatArAs.

> So, obviously , SUtar wants to reiterate that they are

> only amsAvatArAs (ie. They are not same as nArAyaNA)

> & are different from His svayam avatArams . Now , a

> good representative from the list of poorna avatArams has

> to be chosen in order to differentiate from the amsAvatArams.

> SUtar chose " KrishNA " because all the sages were His

> ardent devotees & their focus was also with that avatAram.

> KrishNA is also well known for the shadguna paripoornam .

>

>

> Alternatively , the sages being KrishNA$B!G(Bs ardent

devotees,

> (obvious from their questions) shouldn$B!G(Bt be made

anxious

> since while enlisting various avatArams of Lord Hari ,

> innumerable number of amsAvatArams were mentioned &

> esp. in verses 26 & 27 this was openly enlisted ie. Sages

> should be assured that their darling KrishNA is

> neverthless " svayam bhagavAn " Sriman nArAyaNA &

> is not a mere amsAvatArA . So , Suta pourAnikar chose to use

> " KrishnA " in the verse 28.

>

>4. Qtn : Is there any commentary available on Srimad BhAgavatham

> by Sri Vaishnava AchAryAs ?

>

> Ans : There are atleast 3 known commentries in Sanskrit .

>

> a. A commentry attributed to Sri Krishna Guru , disciple of

> Sri SomayAji AndAn (pre Desikan period) .

>

> b. " SukhapakshyA " by the stAlwart Sudarsana sUri of

> " SrutaprakAsikA " fame .

>

> c. " BhAgavatha tAtparya chandrikA " by

> Sri Venkata KrishnamAchAryA ( probably Late 18th Century ) .

>

> adiyen doesn$B!G(Bt know whether the famous

> " VeerarAghaveeyam " is different from the third one .

> Neverthless it is also there .

>

> Srimad RangapriyA swAmi has translated " Uddhava

> GeetA " into KannadA if adiyen remembers rightly (

> Sri Krishna Kalale has mentioned this ) .

>

> Ongoing tamil series in Nrusimha PriyA is also there.

> Someone should seriously consider publishing the

> sanskrit commentries of our poorvAchAryAs which are

> simply lying as manuscripts . Once it comes out ,

> some bhAgavathA(s) should translate it into Tamil ,

> English & other languages for the benefit of all

> bhAgavathAs. Many Nectar among nectars are being

> neglected somehow. The bhagavad anubhavam

> obtained from AzhwAr's Divya Prabandham is more than

> thousand times the bhagavad anubhavam that one can

> possibly obtained from Srimad BhAgavatham . So , this

> granthA is not given that much importance in our

> sampradAyam . Also , Vishnu purAnam is much superior to

> Srimad BhAgavatham while explaining tattvAs ( very crucial

> to interpret many Upanishadic passages ) . SarIra sarIrI

> bhAvA , nArAyanA tattvam , Sri tattvam etc are well

> established in Sri Vishnu purAnam . Moreover , it is

> much shorter than SB though containing almost the same thing

> . Infact SB of vyAsar is the expansion of VP of his father

> ParAsarar.

>

> Nevertheless , SB is another nectar & invaluable

> commentries of our most merciful AchAryAs should be

> made available to everyone so that the true tattvam is

> understood by all the interested baddha jIvAtmAs .

>

>

>5. Qtn : Who is nArAyaNA ? what is the difference between Him & the

> avatArams like KrishNA , rAmA , ranganAthA & PeraruLALan ?

>

> Ans : nArAyaNA is not merely someone with 4 hands , conch , chakrA

> etc . nArAyaNA is the paramAtmA who pervades everywhere with

> infinite kalyAna gunAs & ever associated with " Sri " (Lakshmi).

>

> " nArAyaNA " refers to the divyAtma svaroopam which pervades

> everywhere & He is the Brahman (source of creation ,

> the maintainer & in whom it dissolves ) .

>

> nArAyaNA is always personal because of His infinite kalyAna

> gunAs . Just because He is all pervading , it doesn't mean

that

> He is impersonal . The same infinite nArAyaNA takes many

> forms for the pleasure of His devotees & the body of such

forms

> are made up of the special aprAkruta material called

> " suddha sattvam " & such incarnations are out of His own will

> (ie.Not because of karmA). The infinite qualities of nArAyaNA

> are not because of His form . It is based on His svaroopam &

> His dharmabhooda jn~Anam both of which are infinite . For

> example , a human being speaks , laughs , shows compassion to

> others , makes friends etc because of the jIvAtmA & not

> that the material body by itself is doing all these things .

> Similarly,nArAyaNA is present inside the divine body(divya

angaLa

> vigraham) & thereby gives oppurtunities to His devotees to

serve

> Him. Thus " nArAyaNA " is different from nArAyaNA^

>Srimate Sri Laksminrisimha Divya Paduka Sevaka

>Srivan Satakopa Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya Nama:

>