Five headed brahma and Three headed Dattatreya

[Guest guest]

Dear Subramanyamji, You may forwrad this email. I will soon post this reply into the group too.Long time since I have given a posting to our Smarthrugaami Datta group.I have cited the references of the books from which this reply has emnated at the appropirate places rather than mentioning it as a bibliography in the end. Brahma has

four faces. But initially he had five. This story is not so common.Please convey to that member that what you had written was correct in every sense. There is the fifth head, as opposed to Brahmâ's normal four, which proposed incest to his daughter, who indignantly cursed him to always speak contrarily or bray like a donkey, whereupon the fifth head always spoke evilly and coarsely. Or once when Shiva visited, Brahmâ's four heads praised him, but the fifth made an evil sound provoking Shiva to cut it off.(There is also another storybwhereby this evil head was lusting satidevi during Shiva's wedding and Shiva cut the head instantly, Subramanyamji) Since his four heads were incapable of lying, Brahmâ had to sprout the fifth head in the form of a she-ass to utter the lie that he had reached the summit of the immeasurable linga. Elsewhere, it is generally gluttonous and characterized by loud malicious laughter. All these traits are synonyms insofar as they signify transgression through

parallel codes like the sexual, linguistic, animal, moral, alimentary and aesthetic. Contrary, nonsensical or obscene speech and cacophonous sounds universally signify transgression, and that other ‘Brahman par excellence’ (Mahâbrâhmana), the obscene, gluttonous, laughing Vidûshaka of the Sanskrit drama, also comically reveals his hidden transgressive function through such ‘disfiguring’ speech, as his very name implies. The donkey, like the dog, represents the impure outcaste in Vedic symbolism as is evidenced in the ritual prescription for the Brahman-slayer to wear the skin of an ass (or dog). And when associated with Brahmâ or a Brahman, it can only signify transgression. The Vidûshaka has a voice resembling that of a donkey and does not hesitate to swear lies by his sacred thread.Though in the ‘Head Cutting’ (Shirash-chedaka) Tantra, Brahmâ's fifth head subsequently receives esoteric Tantric doctrines from his decapitator, and the Vidûshaka himself is depicted in open collaboration with the Kaula preceptor Bhairavânanda, the ‘Case of the Severed Head’ was already a Vedic mystery, just as the Vidûshaka himself has been

derived from Vedic prototypes with the pre-classical initiate (dîkshita) as prime model. (Five headed brahma) All this converges to show that Brahmâ's fifth head itself represents a crucial dimension of transgressive sacrality in the pre-classical Brahmanical sacrifice whose material reality was slowly eliminated from the classical re-workings of the same. Hence Brahmâ's invariable portrayal with only four heads in classical iconography, and the occasional chaste purity of the mythical fifth head corresponding to the purificatory function of the classical consecration (dîkshâ) as a preparation for the sacrifice proper.The transgressive fifth head, however, specifically expresses the values of the pre-classical dîkshita who was charged with evil, impurity and a ‘dangerous sacrality’ during his regression into an embryonic deathly condition before he could be reborn as a Brahman. In his incoherent abusive obscene speech and through many other such traits, the dîkshita belonged to the same type as the impure militant, even criminal, Vrâtya-ascetic, the Vedic predecessor of later ‘shamanizing’ Shaiva ascetics like the Kâpâlikas and (Mahâ-) Pâshupatas, and it has been suggested that the human head beneath the fire-altar is a legacy of this consecrated warrior. Brahmâ was originally the Vedic Prajâpati and his beheading by Bhairava is in fact the later Hindu version of Rudra piercing his victim Prajâpati as the latter, in the form of an antelope, was uniting incestuously with his own daughter. Prajâpati is equated

with the sacrificer (victim, and the sacrifice) and the dîkshita during his embryonic regression wears the black antelope skin conferring the bráhman. On being pierced, Prajâpati or his head became the constellation Mrga-shiras, the ‘Antelope's Head’ (Orion), and so too is Bhairava's appearance celebrated, in his temples, on the eighth day of the month of Mârgashîrsha ‘Head of the Antelope.’ The festival of Bhairavâshtamî probably corresponds to the celebration of the Ekâshtaka at a time and region when the year began with the first (pratipada) lunar day of the dark fortnight of Mârgashirsha, also called agrahâyana, the ‘commencement of the year.’ All these notations reinforce the thesis that Bhairava is in many ways the transposition of the transgressive (royal) dîkshita. The magical powers that the Kâpâlika seeks to attain are themselves symbolized by the Pâshupata missile equated with the Brahmashiras, or ‘Head of Brahmâ,’ that his left hand bears in the form of the skull-bowl to justify his and Shiva's appellation of ‘Kapâlin.’ The implication is that such powers are unleashed by the violation of fundamental taboos symbolized here by (the decapitation of) Brahmâ's fifth-head. In the Mahabharata, the only two heroes to wield this ultimate weapon, to be used only in the most extreme circumstances and never against human enemies, are Arjuna-Indra, the exemplary Hindu king, and Ashvatthâman, who got it from his father Drona-Brhaspati,

the purohita (‘chaplain’) of the gods on earth. Preceptor to both the Pândava-Devas and their Kaurava-Asura cousins, Drona-Brhaspati belonged nevertheless, like his more powerful homologue Shukrâcârya, to the demoniac camp, and yet remained inwardly partial to his favorite pupil Arjuna to whom he finally offered the victorious trophy of his Brahman head. The magical power of transgressive rites feature in the Atharvaveda in which the purohitas specialized, and these Brahmans are credited with the formulation and systematization of the emerging Tantric traditions, so much so that the Atharvaveda "was often claimed as the Vedic source of the Tantric tradition and thus the earliest Tantric text ‘avant la lettre'" (Goudriaan, p.16; cf. p.30; see n.28). In one

Purânic myth, the Angirasas, already called vairûpa in Vedic times, are ridiculed for their deformity, and the likewise ‘deformed’ (virûpa) Vidûshaka is often caricatured as a purohita and pretends to magical powers. Born of a fusion of Rudra, Anger, Lust, Death and other terrible substances, Ashvatthâman is not only a Brahman, but is further the only and inseparable son of Dronâcârya, incarnation of Brhaspati who, even more than Brahmâ, represents the values of the Brahman-priest and purohita. It is the death of ‘Ashvatthâman’ (the elephant) that makes Drona's

decapitation possible, and the terrestrial Rudra's final punishment for misusing the Brahmashiras and his infanticide (bhrûnahatyâ = brahmahatyâ) of the unborn Parikshit is to wander eternally in a condition resembling that of the bhikshâtana-Bhairava. As soon as he is born, Ashvatthâman neighs like a horse and his very name (Ashva-) refers to the horse; and Brahmâ's fifth head was also a horse's head, that which in the Vedic esotericism alone knew the secret of the hidden Agni ‘Fire’ and Soma ‘Mead.’ Since it is the Brahman who wields this power by transgressing, under exceptional circumstances, the very taboos that have made him a Brahman, it is not surprising that

Rudra, the transgressor, is always represented as the son of Brahmâ, born of some impure aspect of the latter like his wrath (as Manyu) or blood .Notwithstanding secondary sectarian elaborations, the hostility between the two, culminating in the sudden parricide, is expressive of the sudden rupture that transgression introduces into the mode of being of the Brahman. Moreover, in conformity with the religion of interdictions, it permits the presentation of the sacrificial beheading as a (mere) punishment for the primordial incest. The ‘sacrilegious’ notations of Brahmâ's fifth head may be multiplied by comparing it to other figures of transgression within Brahmanism itself, but my purpose here is merely to emphasize that the transgressive essence of Bhairava is in many ways bequeathed to him by the very head he decapitates. Otherwise, the glorification of Bhairava in mythological traditions that remain at heart Brahmanical and claim to amplify the Vedic doctrines will remain incomprehensible. Unlike the shûdra Unmatta-Bhairava resolutely opposed to caste-distinctions, the Kâpâlikas (re-) converted by Shankara appear to have been all Brahmans. Epigraphic evidence suggests the existence of Brahman Kâpâlikas specializing in the Atharvaveda, and it is such adepts who must have served as intermediaries between the Brahmanical sacrificial ideology on the one hand and low-caste Kâpâlikas having no access to Vedic texts and resorting entirely to the Bhairavâgamas on the other. Lorenzen (Kâpâlikas, pp.81-2, 189) had sharply differentiated the Supreme Penance of the Kâpâlikas from that of the Pâshupatas, which conforms rather to the Mahâvrata (‘supreme vow’) of Patañjali's Yogasûtra ii.30-31, prescribing the

unconditional practice of the five restraints (yama): non-violence (ahimsâ), truthfulness (satya), non-theft (asteya), chastity (brahmacarya), and non-possessiveness (aparigraha) regardless of status, place, time and occasion, virtues enjoined by later Pâshupata texts like the Pañcârthabhâsya and the Ratnatîkâ, and later cultivated assiduously by their monasticized successors, the Kâlâmukhas, especially in the Deccan area. But a problem remains. Not only is the Pâshupata weapon, in the form of the Brahmashiras, identified by Atharvashiras Upanishadwith the Pâshupata Vow with which the Vedic sages were imbued on Shiva-Bhairava's appearance in the Deodar forest, but there also exists the troubling category of the Mahâpâshupatas, who were alternatively identified with the Pâshupatas, Kâpâlikas and especially the Kâlâmukhas, and yet generally distinguished from all three categories. The true significance of this confusing category lies not so much in its elusive historical determinations but rather in the ambiguity of the term ‘Mahâvrata’ and the (dialectical) continuity between the interdictory pole of

the (nevertheless symbolically transgressive) Pâshupatas and the transgressive pole of the (nevertheless ascetic) Kâpâlika yogins. This intrinsic ambivalence is revealed even in their monastic reorganization as Kâlâmukhas, whose preceptors not only sometimes bore the name Kâlabhairava but even dedicated temples to (Vîrabhadra, Kâlî, and the Kâpâlika-) Bhairava. Tondaimân of Kâñci brought to Tiruvorriyûr "from the banks of the Ganges 500 Brâhmana Mahâvratins and dedicated several images of Kâlî and Bhairava and one of Shiva in the form of a teacher of the Mahâvratins." The Kâlâmukhas were not only mostly erudite Brahman panditas but also were often expert in both Pâshupata and Vedic traditions, so much so that their priest Honnaya is praised in the same verse as a

Mahâvratin, Mahâpâshupata, and a Shrotriya. That a Kâlâmukha inscription invokes Shiva-Lâkulîsa as "the heart of Brahma shining as a stone on which is inscribed the shâsana of the Vedas which extol the abode of Vishvanâtha" (p.114), is hardly surprising when the Pâshupatasûtra is partly based on the (Kâthaka-) Taittirîya Aranyaka (p.182, n.48). Indeed, just before the Kâpâlika is addressed as ‘Mahâpâshupata,’ the ridiculous Pâshupata of the Mattavilâsa is himself addressed, like the laughing Vidûshaka, as "Mahâbrâhmana." Likewise, in Anandarâyamakhin's Vidyâparinayana (IV, after v.32)

the Kâpâlika Somasiddhânta defends his use of wine, meat, etc., prohibited in the (classical) Veda, by affirming "the doctrine of the authoritativeness of the Veda with compliance to the Bhairavâgamas" Though Brahmâ's ritual purity matches the extreme asceticism of Shiva (-Bhairava) and both are defined by an essential transgressive dimension, Brahmâ expresses these values only within the context of the Brahmanical sacrifice and Vedic tradition whereas Rudra expresses them even independently of this context despite his intimate links with the violent, dangerous, transgressive pole of the Vedic sacrifice. It is on this background that the well-known opposition, complementarity and identity of Brahmâ and the five-headed Shiva should be analyzed (O'Flaherty, Asceticism, pp.111-138; see n.18). The Brahmâstra that Arjuna-Indra

receives from the brahmán Drona-Brhaspati (purohita) is no different from the Pâshupatâstra he wins through the favour of the outcaste tribal Kirâta-Shiva; and if Arjuna bears this Brahmashiras like the untouchable Kâpâlika, this is because Bhairava himself inherited his Brahmanicide from the Vedic Indra. Dattatreya who came after Brahma has Three heads as opposed to the four/five heads of Brahma. Almost many gods/goddesses sit in padmasana with a lotus in their hand/hands. Lotus denotes composure,enlightment and the fragrance of the soul. Datatreya was a part of the transgressive sacrality in so much as having dogs to represent vedas which was

unheard of even by His father Atri Maharishi. Dattatreya tried to each men that if they had sahaja there was no need to do anything to prove it. It manifested only by the way one lived. Sukhadev, the great naked Mahatma who expounded the Bhagavad Purana, stood, when a young man, naked in the presence of his father, the sage Vyasa, to be initiated into the Brahmin caste with mantra and sacred thread. This was a moment such as I have just mentioned, when the natural unspoiled boy was to be ushered into a world of concepts, ideas and obligations, and all naturalness would be lost. Indifferent Sukhadeva Sukhadev decided to keep his sahaja. Taking to his heels, he ran from the house and took to the path which wound itself along the side of a river and into the jungle. As he came to the river some young women were bathing naked in the water. They took no notice of Sukhadev and he only glanced and ran on. But Vyasa the father was hot on his tracks, and following the young man to induce him to return. But as Vyasa approached the river, the young women screamed, rushed for their garments and covered themselves as he drew near. Having observed their complete indifference when his naked son ran past, and this modest but demonstrative display at his own approach, Vyasa could not help wondering at the contrast. Vyasa He stopped by the now covered women, and asked for some explanation of such widely different behaviour towards his naked son and his decorously dressed self. One of the women explained: "When your son looks at us he sees only people and is not conscious of male and female. He is just as unconscious of our nakedness as he is of his own, but with you, Maharaj Vyasa it is different." Sukhadev had sahaja, and the women knew it. He knew it, and never lost it. His father never caught up with him and he never returned home. He became one of India's many great saints, not living in any

fixed place, but only in the fullness of the immediate present. The three Sanskrit words Pratibha, Sahaja and Samarasa form part of the Datta-essence. The Tantrik or non-Vedic teachers used the word samarasa in its mundane meaning to suggest higher truth. Samarasa can mean the ecstasy attained in sexual intercourse at the moment of orgasm. Using this, as many other worldly things, to draw an analogy between the moment of sexual bliss and the spiritual bliss of realisation, it was thought men and women

would better understand absolute concepts from the examples of relative life. Going higher, it means the essential unity of all things -- of all existence, the equipoise of equanimity, the supreme bliss of harmony, that which is aesthetically balanced, undifferentiated unity, absolute assimilation, the most perfect unification and the highest consummation of Oneness. To Dattatreya it meant a stage of realisation of the Absolute Truth where there was no longer any distinction to be felt, seen or experienced between the seeker and the Sought. Gorakshnath, who wrote the first texts of the Nathas, explains samarasa as a state of absolute freedom, peace and attainment in the realisation of the Absolute Truth. He placed it on a higher level than samadhi. Samarasa implied the joy and happiness with perfect equanimity and tranquility, maintained after samadhi had finished, and continued in the waking or conscious state. In this sense it is a form of permanent ecstasy and contemplation which the saint maintains at all

times. Zen maintains the same concepts, but nothing comparable with pratibha, sahaja or samarasa are found in any of the Black Dharmas of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Dattatreya aimed at the negation of the thought behind things and ideas because conflict exists, not so much in the things and ideas (such as words), but those meanings with which we associate them. Even a correct meaning becomes devoid of value if it is not apprehended. The simple naturalness of sahaja and the supreme ideal of samarasa, must never be lost in meaningless and petty wrangles between philosophies, concepts and

mere human ideas. Jaya Datta-Mahadeva! Sharanam Sharanam Anasuyaananda vardana! Shreeram Balijepalli subrahmanyam bharathula <datta_gururaya wrote: Namaskar sir! Sir, as I am not having much knowledge on the question asked by him, I am forwarding it to you sir. Pl give reply to my id, sothat I can communicate to him. Expecting early reply... with regards, subrahmanyam.bharathulaNote: forwarded message attached. Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.Thu, 5 Oct 2006 09:04:36 -0700 (PDT)Swarna Venkateswara Swamy <truthseeker123xA small doubtdatta_gururaya Dear Sri Subrahmanyam, Sai Ram. While thanking you for an informative post, I would like to ask you whether Sri Brahma is three headed or with four heads. He is referred to as Chaturmukha and the Vedas came out from His four faces. Sai Ram. Sri Brahma sits in a Padmasana with a rosary. That part could be common to Sri Datta and Sri Brahma. Sai Ram. Swamy you wrote: Dattatreya is usually depicted with four dogs by his side, representing the four vedas, a cow behind him (a la vishNu), a trident in his hand (a la Siva) and three heads (a la brahma). in search of truth and with prayers to Govinda to help reach that goal in this life itself, and with best wishes to you that your goals may be reached,yours sincerely, Want to be your own boss? Learn how on Small Business.

 

 

 

Purity, Powers, Parabrahmam...

 

 

 

 

Click to join Rajarajeshwari_Kalpataru

Want to be your own boss? Learn how on Small Business.

[Guest guest]

Dear Swamy Garu,

 

I have answered your query by stating that Brahma has four heads.

Nowhere is it mentioned that He has three heads. Myabe you have seen

some sculptures where they do not show the fourth head which is

hidden in the back.

 

So, Brahmaji has 4 heads and Dattaji has 3 heads.

 

Saguna and Nirguna are different things. When you say that as a

physicist you can think of Nirguna has a pure white light then it no

more i nirguna. Nirguna means that which is devoid of any guna

(charecteristic) and " white light " too is a guna! The moment you

think guna is formed. Please ponder on these lines. Nirguna is

totally un-comprehendible and immense.

 

This has nothing to do with ypour query except in a metaphorical

sense.

 

For that matter all forms of Datta or brahma are all sagunic

representations of the Nirguna parabrahman.Advaita Vedanta

philosophy says that for human eyes Nirguna Brahman is viewed as

Saguna Brahman, or Brahman with personal attributes, and is commonly

worshipped as Vishnu, Shiva or Devi by Hindus.

 

Dvaita philosophy, however, considers Vishnu to be Nirguna Brahman

and jivas as conditioned by gunas, though not Saguna Brahman.

Ramanuja, Madhva, Caitanya, and all other Vaisnava acharyas differ

strongly with Shankara's doctrine of Saguna Brahman (Brahman with

material adjuncts, upadhi) and his two levels of reality (vyavaharic

and paramarthic) since they, in their opinion, believe that his

views lack support of Vedanta Sutra.

 

According to the Vaishnava acharyas, Ishwar or Supreme Being is

always nirguna in terms of his being free from the influence of the

material gunas, either as indeterminate Brahman, or as Vishnu/Krisna

or any of his avataras. They do not understand any verse in Bhagavad

Gita to describe the jiva as Saguna Brahman. Sri Caitanya says

through the pen of Krishnadasa Kaviraja that Shankara, in asserting

his opinion as to the meaning of the Sutras, has in effect said,

vyasa bhranta, " Vyasa is crazy, therefore let me explain what the

sutras of Vyasa should have said. "

 

The jiva is no doubt identified with the gunas of prakrti (matter)

and in this sense saguna, but the idea that the jiva is Brahman who

has become subject to identification with material nature is another

idea altogether. According to Sri Caitanya the jiva is Brahman in

that it is a particle of a shakti of Brahman. In this sense it is

identified with Brahman, but the jiva is also simultaneously

different from Brahman in that it is only a particle of one of

Brahman's shaktis. The Divine energy (shakti) and the Divine himself

(shaktiman) are both one and different from one another (Achintya

Bheda-Abheda). Thus there exists the possibility of an illusioned

jiva (individual soul), but not that of an illusioned Brahma

 

 

Hope this now answers your query perfectly.

 

Dattam Bhaje!

 

Shreeram Balijepalli

 

Smarthrugaami-Dattavibhavam , Swarna

Venkateswara Swamy <truthseeker123x wrote:

>

> Dear Sri Subrahmanyam garu,

>

> Sai Ram. While thanking you and the Group owner for

> the detailed reply, I must point out that it still

> does not answer whether Brahma is shown anywhere as

> Three headed, like Sri Datta. Though I did not know

> all the details, I am aware that Rudra (Siva) did cut

> off the fifth head of Sri Brhma ji. And that left Him

> with 4 heads. And Sri Datta has 3 heads since He

> represents the Trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and

> Maheswara/Siva. When Sage Atri meditated upon the

> Nirguna Parabrahma, the Trinity appeared to him. On

> being asked to explain, they explain to him that the

> Nirguna Parabrahma cannot manifest by the very nature

> of being Nirguna. So, they, the three, who together

> represent the manifest aspect of Nirguna, appeared to

> him.

>

> To my limited knowledge and from the conditioning of

> my mind as a Physicist, I can think of Nirguna as a

> pure white light and the three primary colors of Red,

> Green and Blue as the Saguna manifestation of Nirguna.

>

> So, I still wonder at the statement that Sri Datta is

> three-headed ala Sri Brahma. Sai Ram.

>

> Swamy

>

> --- Group Owner <para_anuloma wrote:

>

> > Dear Subramanyamji,

> >

> > You may forwrad this email. I will soon post this

> > reply into the group too.Long time since I have

> > given a posting to our Smarthrugaami Datta group.I

> > have cited the references of the books from which

> > this reply has emnated at the appropirate places

> > rather than mentioning it as a bibliography in the

> > end.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Brahma has four faces. But initially he had five.

> > This story is not so common.Please convey to that

> > member that what you had written was correct in

> > every sense.

>

> Message truncated ...

>

> in search of truth and with prayers to Govinda to help reach that

goal in this life itself, and with best wishes to you that your

goals may be reached,

>

> yours sincerely,

>

>

>

>

>

>