Bhavanopanishad and Bhaskararaya

[Guest guest]

Dear Srinivas,

 

Namaste.

 

Apart from Bhaskara and Upanishad Brahma, Shri Appayya Dikshitar had written a

commentary on Bhavanopanishad. I have a copy of it. I can give it to you.

 

As regards my criticism, who am I to point out Bhaskararaya. To judge a

person, either one should be on par with him or one should be greater than him.

So, criticism is ruled out. I have just placed certain facts. People may or may

not accept it, it is upto them. If hot spicy biryani and delicious rice

porridge with saffron powder and cow ghee is served before a person, one would

select either of the dish depending upon his nature (gunas). A tamasika person

would go for biryani and sattvika person would go for rice porridge. Same is

the case with mantra sastra and devatas. Pro-vedic is sattvika and anti-vedic

is tamogunaatmaka.

 

You can select any form depending upon your nature provided it conforms to

one’s kula dharma and varna asrama. Now, having tasted both the dishes, a

sattvika person would naturally get inclined towards rice porridge.

 

And it is absolutely waste of time discussing the issues whether subhagama

panchaka is a valid authority or kalpa sutras is a valid one. Subhagama

Panchaka is partly available. Moreover, Agastya had also compiled a work on

Srividya called “Srividya Dipika†and based on this work Sankara wrote

Brahmavidyavilasa. Now, if you ask what is the authority of this work, I would

also challenge what is the authority of Kalpa Sutra. Kalpa Sutra was compiled

by Sumedha Rishi (Sumedhas of Devi Mahatyam fame) from the work of Parasurama

and Parasurama in turn compiled it from Dattatreya Samhita. But, if you

closely observe “Nityosava†of umanandanatha, there are slight variations.

Shri Kameswara Sastry had written “saubhagya shuddhodayah†based on

Nityosava. Shri Bhushananandanatha (descendant of Shri bhaskaraya) was having

this book. I do not know whether he is still alive or not but 15 years back my

gurunatha met him at Narayanpet, Mahaboobnagar district of

Andhra Pradesh. Sri Bhaskara, though was born in Hyderabad established his

pita at Narayanpet. One can still see Rasa Srichakra (mercury sriyantra)

installed by Bhaskara.

 

Now, this hue and cry that Bhaskara was Vamachari was raised by certain people

who were bent upon maligning bhaskara. They are Shri Kalyananda Bharati of

Shringeri Virupaksha Pitam, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, Cherukupalli Jamadagni

Sarma, Pisipati Subramanya Sastry and other “stalwarts†of srividya whose

name I do not want to mention.

 

Shri Kalyananda Bharati, out of his hatred towards Sri Bhaskaraya, composed

“Kalyana Srikala†which is a FLAKY commentary on Lalitha Sahasranama. There

were heated arguments between Shri Kalyanananda Bharati and my distant relative

(distant maternal grandfather) Shri Karra Agnihotra Avadhani regarding the

Vamachara in Saubhagya Bhaskara. Shri Avadhani was one of the greatest srividya

scholars which the 20th century has ever produced. He used to move in the

streets of Amalapuram (EG District) like a lion. Nobody would dare to approach

him for debates and polemics. He was called “prathivaadibhayamkaraâ€. Shri

Avadhani wrote a wonderful commentary on Chidgagana Chandrika. During the

heated discussions, it is said that Shri Bharati did Vaak Sthambhana Prayoga

but it did not work on Avadhani.

 

But one just cannot fail to appreciate “CHANDRIKAAKHYA†and

“JAYAMANGALA†that are like Rice Porridge with saffron and cow ghee. Sri

Chidanandanatha (purvasrama nama Shri Markandeya Sarma) a great Srividyopasaka

who took turiya asrama under the name “Chidananda Saraswathiâ€, who authored

wonderful work on Srividya called “Kaivalyanavaneetha†had these two books.

Shri Sadasivanandanatha (Shri Mudigonda Venkatarama Sastry), who took turiya

asrama under the name Brahmananda Saraswathi, was a Srividyopasaka from Sringeri

lineage had the manuscripts of Chandrikaakhya. Shri Paripoorna Prakasananda

Bharati (Shri Rani Prasada Mahagni Chayanulu), a srividyopasaka and somayaji had

these manuscripts.

 

There are certain names like Koulini, kulayogini, kaulamargatatparasevitha,

savyaapasavyamargastha, kulakundalaya, rahoyagakramaraadhya,

rahastarpanatarpitha, ashtamichandravibhrajatalikasthalashobhitha,

vadanasmaramaangalya gruhatorana chillika …………….. so on in Soubhagya

Bhaskara that were interpreted as per the leftist inclinations.

 

Now, we are ordinary mortals and hence CANNOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO JUDGE whether

they were interpreted in leftist or rightist mode but at the same time one

cannot ignore the sublime pro-sankara doctrine of Vivartavada and Samaya /

Dakshina interpretations in these two works of Chandrikaakhya and Jayamangala.

For eg. The name

 

Ragaswarupapaasdya krodhakaaramkushojwala is taken as one by Vaidyanatha

Dikshitar and he further says that it is not the hands of devi that shines but

the amkusha in the hands that shines. . Similarly,

ashtamichandravibhrajatalikasthalashobhitha has a wonderful interpretation of

antaryaga worship. Ashtamichandra is the moon on the 8th day of both dark and

bright lunar fortnight is without kshaya and vriddhi. So, antaryaga with

contemplation on devi’s phala bhaga confers rudra grandhi bhedana. The name

vadanasmaramaangalya gruhatorana chillika decodes the Shodashakshari Mantra

Kavacha. Narayan Bhatt in his commentary on the name “vakthralakshmiparivaha

chalan minaabha lochana†changes a bit “chalan†to “valanâ€.

Gudagulpha name encodes the Mahapaduka Mantra. Mahalaavanyasevadhih is

Maha+lavanya+sevadhi which is Brahmanandanidhi.

Tarakantitiraskaarinaasabharanabhasura encodes the Kamakalaakshara. Tara is

kuja and sukra grahas. Kuja is Red and Sukra is

White in colour. Red is raktha and white is Sukla Bindu. Mother wearing the

nose studs of red and white colour implies that she is of Misra Bindu Tattva

having Raktha and Sukla. Misra Bindu is the Aham swarupa of Siva.

 

Mithyajagatadhishtana is explained from the stand point of parinamavada by

Bhaskara whereas Shri Dikshitar’s view is from Vivartavada. Chandrasekhara

Bharati approved the 2nd interpretation.

 

Similarly, Koulini, Kulayogini, Kaulamargatatparasevitha, kulakundalaya etc.

names are interpreted keeping in view the Samayachara Path by Shri Dikshitar and

Shri Bhatt.

 

Kulam is interpreted as “meya-matru miti lakshanam kulam†which is

“Jnatru-Jnana-Jneya†and this is triputi. These 3 are called as Kulam.

Amrita is the Jnana Sudha.

 

Shatchakras are also called as “kulamâ€. She enjoys the amrita of this

Kula through Sushumna at Sahasrara.

 

Shri Dikshitar interprets Kulaamritaikarasika as the “one who takes interest

in sva-tarpana of amritaâ€. And amrita is here interpreted as “mantra tattva

and chaitanyaâ€.

 

Akula is interpreted as “Shuddha Jnana Rupaâ€. Moreover, the 6 adhvaas

(shadadhvaas) are also called Kula and they are mantra, pada, varna, tattva,

bhuvana, kala. These 6 are called as Kula. A-kula means she is above these 6

adhvaas ie., shadadhvaateetarupini.

 

Now, the name “kulasamkethapalini†is interpreted by Bhasakara in such a

way that no samayachari can digest it. He says:

 

“Kulaanganaishapyadha Raajaveedhih - Pravishya samketagruhantareshu

Visramya visramya parena pumsa - samgamya samgamya rasam prasuteâ€

 

The Kundalini which is Devi at Mooladhara is the pativrata stri (loyal women)

longing to meet her husband shiva at Sahasrara. In the process, she takes the

path of Raajaveedhih ie., Sushumna Marga. During the course of her journey, she

takes rest at shat chakras and enjoys the rasa anubhava there.

 

To explain this phenomenon, Bhaskara interprets Kundalini as Pativrata (loyal

wife). Shiva at Sahasrara as her Husband. The 6 chakras are Para Purushas

(lovers). Samgamya Samgamya implies that Devi along with her lovers enjoys the

conjugal love.

 

Though it may look poetic in approach, a loyal wife devoted to her husband,

should not be interpreted in this way (extramarital relationship).

 

See how wonderfully, the Dikshitar explains this in Chandrikaakhya:

Kulasamketapalini is Kula dharma Palini ie., it protects one’s varna asrama

dharma.

 

The parampara of Samayachara is :

 

“Prakasarupam Sivam adinatham parambikam samkaram adidevam

Narayanam padmabhuvam vashishtam saktim cha tatputra parasaram cha

Vyasam sukam gaudapadam mahaantam govinda yogindram adhaasya shishyam

Sri sankaracharya madhaasya padmapadam cha hastamalakam cha sishyam

Tam totakam varthikakara manya nasmadgurum santatam anatosmiâ€

 

Unlike

 

“Srinathaadri gurutrayam……..â€

 

Morever, the 32 dikshas which Bhaskara mentioned are neither to be found in

Dakshinachara and Vamachara. Mahapaduka is not in Vamachara. But today,

Vamacharis claim these dikshas to be theirs. It is misra koula.

 

Bhaskara followed Parinamavada and the tantra he followed was “Katyayana

Tantraâ€. Some of his interpretations of sruthi vachanas like “Na kalanjam

bhakshayet†(consumption of onions is prohibited) is a little bit

controversial. Moreover, Bhaskara during his commentary on Tripuropanishad

mentions that Devi has three forms 1) Sthula 2) Sukshma 3) Karana which is in

contrary with Sankara.

 

So, it is upto you to decide whether to taste spicy and hot biryani or

nourishing paayasannam.

 

So, by the time you read my posting, people would be ready with AK-47 rifles

targeted at me. Ha ha ha……………………….

 

With regards,

Sriram

 

 

 

Explore your hobbies and interests. Click here to begin.

 

 

[Guest guest]

You say " Same is the case with mantra sastra and devatas. Pro-vedic is sattvika

and anti-vedic is tamogunaatmaka. " Can you please give me the authority for such

an assertion.

& nbsp;

As far as I am concerned " Eko satya, vipraaH bahudhaa vadanti " . Each follows his

paampara.

& nbsp;

I think these assertions of superiority is a sign of immaturity despite the

great erudition.

 

 

& nbsp;

--- On Tue, 6/10/08, venkata sriram & lt;sriram_sapthasathi & gt;

wrote:

venkata sriram & lt;sriram_sapthasathi & gt;

Bhavanopanishad and Bhaskararaya

 

Tuesday, June 10, 2008, 11:09 AM

Dear Srinivas,

 

Namaste.

 

Apart from Bhaskara and Upanishad Brahma, Shri Appayya Dikshitar had written a

commentary on Bhavanopanishad. I have a copy of it. I can give it to you.

[Guest guest]

Well, if you prefer something " HOT and SPICY " , go ahead. But i have my own

reservations. Tantras endorsed by veda is acceptable otherwise it is abandoned.

 

The vedic rk " Ekam sat viprah bahudhaah vadanti " is the exclamation of Rg

Vedic Seer Dirghatamas. He says " Indram Mitram Varunam Agnim Ahuratho Divyah Sa

Suparno Garutman - Ekam Sat Viprah Bahudha Vadanti Agni Yamam

Matarishwanamaahuh " . The context is entirely different here.

 

My assertions are not out of " immaturity " but out of " pity " that some " vipras "

are propagating " something HOT " which everyone should be aware of.

 

Regards,

sriram

 

sankara menon <kochu1tz wrote:

You say " Same is the case with mantra sastra and devatas. Pro-vedic is

sattvika and anti-vedic is tamogunaatmaka. " Can you please give me the authority

for such an assertion.

& nbsp;

As far as I am concerned " Eko satya, vipraaH bahudhaa vadanti " . Each follows his

paampara.

& nbsp;

I think these assertions of superiority is a sign of immaturity despite the

great erudition.

 

& nbsp;

--- On Tue, 6/10/08, venkata sriram & lt;sriram_sapthasathi & gt;

wrote:

venkata sriram & lt;sriram_sapthasathi & gt;

Bhavanopanishad and Bhaskararaya

 

Tuesday, June 10, 2008, 11:09 AM

Dear Srinivas,

 

Namaste.

 

Apart from Bhaskara and Upanishad Brahma, Shri Appayya Dikshitar had written a

commentary on Bhavanopanishad. I have a copy of it. I can give it to you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From Chandigarh to Chennai - find friends all over India.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Vedic and non-vedic:

 

By vedic if one considers that what is worded in vedas , then & nbsp; most of the

experiences and truths of the world could be considered false. It is almost like

the dogmatic view of many non-Hindu religions.

 

Then what is vedic? Bhavabhuti, a great sanskrit poet gives us a hand: & nbsp;

with poets and sages, the meanings follow their words. They imagine or get

flashes of intuition and try to express them in words. With saints, seers

(drishtas), the words follow the meanings. They experience the Truth or facets

of It first and word their experiences. Hence original revelations are mostly

cryptic. For example, compare the lucidity of rig vedic (a proper translation)

hymns and Upanishadic. & nbsp; It is difficult to reconcile these two at the first

go. There is no standard FAQ for this.

 

There are no status - differences. I don't mean any hierarchical differences

like & nbsp; 'this is superior while other is not'. Rather, I mean the quality of

experience is different in terms of

the inner status of the subject, in this case, the upanishadic sages and rig

vedic seers.

 

If you agree even to a part of this, then you would see many people over the

initial millenia of spiritual experiences - chinese, greek, indian & nbsp; (both

aryan and non-aryan siddhas) - have had " vedic " experiences. They were able to

put them in words, albeit in a cryptic manner. Essentially, the nature -

prakrithi - needs to be in a proper and fully receptive stage for the realms of

mind to expand and touch the Untouchabe, rub the Unmeasurable and bring back the

drops of Truth to be represented in human language. The & nbsp; satwa-timbre of

the human Nature is apt for this.

 

On the other hand, & nbsp; supranatural siddhis and accomplishments as mastered by

Tantras & nbsp; need not follow the same path as the " vedic " Seeing. & nbsp; The

tantras yoke the Powers in

Prakriti to the extent the subject is prepared and purified. & nbsp; They do not

need to follow " vedic " methods of transcending the mental realms or even & nbsp;

try to cross the shrushti to peek at the One that generates and sustains the

Shrushti. Rather, tantras seek the One in this Shrushti itself.

 

Where did it lead? Taking some snippets of history in the past 400 years, we

needed a Ramakrishna, a Chaitanya, and a few other giants to & nbsp; rescue people

from getting disoriented from tantric practices..this is no problem of Tantras,

rather the way human nature works. Compare this with all the technological

innovations we have and how / why we use them. & nbsp; Instead of rejuvenation, as

by the human nature, we ended up

in a degenerative, tamasic cycle where the preponderances of the Prakriti took

over the

initial sparks for seeking the One.

 

No wonder, all the gems of Tantras of the lore needed to be wedded with " vedic "

methods to be reorganized, redefined and repolished.

 

yes, Eko satya, vipraaH bahudhaa vadanti. Many are the descriptions but the

Object needs to be the One. Many are the ways, but the Destination should be the

one. If any of the ways cuts short the quest and journey and puts the traveller

into a tamasic drone, either the ways need to be cleared or the maps redrawn.

 

I believe Sriramji means this. If not, I am taking liberty of the meaning as I

see it.

 

- gopal

 

--- On Tue, 6/10/08, sankara menon & lt;kochu1tz & gt; wrote:

sankara menon & lt;kochu1tz & gt;

Re: Bhavanopanishad and Bhaskararaya

 

Tuesday, June 10, 2008, 9:02 PM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You say " Same is the case with mantra sastra and devatas. Pro-vedic

is sattvika and anti-vedic is tamogunaatmaka. " Can you please give me the

authority for such an assertion.

 

& amp;nbsp;

 

As far as I am concerned " Eko satya, vipraaH bahudhaa vadanti " . Each follows his

paampara.

 

& amp;nbsp;

 

I think these assertions of superiority is a sign of immaturity despite the

great erudition.

 

 

 

& amp;nbsp;

 

--- On Tue, 6/10/08, venkata sriram & amp;lt;sriram_sapthasathi@

grouply.com & amp;gt; wrote:

 

venkata sriram & amp;lt;sriram_sapthasathi@ grouply.com & amp;gt;

 

Bhavanopanishad and Bhaskararaya

 

@ .com

 

Tuesday, June 10, 2008, 11:09 AM

 

Dear Srinivas,

 

 

 

Namaste.

 

 

 

Apart from Bhaskara and Upanishad Brahma, Shri Appayya Dikshitar had written a

commentary on Bhavanopanishad. I have a copy of it. I can give it to you.