[Advaita-l] The heart of Harivamsha

[V Subrahmanian]

These verses are encountered while reading about the 'greatness', mAhAtmya,
of Mahabharata and Harivamsha:

https://sa.wikisource.org/s/1d7d
वेदे रामायणे (चैव) पुण्ये भारते भरतर्षभ ।
आदौ चान्ते च मध्ये च हरिः सर्वत्र गीयते ।। ९५ ।।

Everywhere in the Veda, Ramayana and Mahabharata, Hari is hailed.

https://sa.wikisource.org/s/1dd2
वैशम्पायन उवाच
ब्रह्मविष्णुमहेशानां हरिवंशं जगुर्वपुः ।
शब्दब्रह्ममयं विद्धि हरिवंशं सनातनम् ।। ६ ।।

The Harivamsha (an appendix to the Mahabharata), is the embodiment of
Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesha.

That Hari who is hailed everywhere, is non-different from the Trimurthi-s.
If Hari is different, then the Brahma lakshanas 'Satyam, Jnanam, Anantam'
taught in the Upanishad will not apply to him. How? 'Anantam', Infinite, is
being non-different from everything.  If Brahman is different from anything
else, then it would be subject to the defect of vastu pariccheda and hence
will not qualify to be the Upanshadic Brahman. The 'abhava' of Hari in
Brahma and Rudra and vice versa will be unavoidable rendering Hari
a-pUrNa.

The Vishnu purana teaches that Vishnu is non-different from the Trimurt
is:

सृष्टिस्थित्यन्तकरणीं ब्रह्मविष्णुशिवात्मिकाम् ।
स संज्ञां याति भगवानेक एव जनार्दनः ॥ १,२.६६ ॥

One Janardana Tattva alone, owing to the tri-functions of creation, etc.
gets the name Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva.


जुषन् रजो गुणं तत्र स्वयं विश्वेश्वरो हरिः ।
ब्रह्माभूत्वास्य जगतो विसृष्टौ संप्रवर्तते ॥ १,२.६१ ॥
सृष्टं च पात्यनुयुगं यावत्कल्पविकल्पना ।
सत्त्वभृद्भगवान्विष्णुरप्रमेयपराक्रमः ॥ १,२.६२ ॥
तमोद्रेकी च कल्पान्ते रुद्ररूपी जर्नादनः ।
मैत्रेयाखिलभूतानि भक्षयत्यतिदारूणः ॥ १,२.६३ ॥
भक्षयित्वा च भूतानि जगत्येकार्णवीकृते ।
नागपर्यङ्कशयने शेते च परमेश्वरः ॥ १,२.६४ ॥

The Vishnu Purana, considered a 'sattva' purana, says so. The above verses
very clearly say that (the rajas and tamo gunas detested by Vaishnavas as
never admissible for Vishnu) Vishnu, due to the ascendance of Rajo guna
engages in creation and by the profusion of tamoguna becomes the
annihilator of the creation. Thus, by no means one can say Vishnu is
untouched by these two gunas and is by default only sattva.  But the very
Vishnu purana also says above that even sattva guna is assumed, taken on,
by Vishnu to become the sustainer/maintainer. That Vishnu is truly
nirguna/gunatita is what the above verses imply.

Hence, the classification of Puranas into sattva, etc. based on an imagined
difference across the Trimurtis is against the Veda. The Vayu/prana who is
held to be Jivottama, is created by Rudra as per the Kaivalyopanishad.
Brahma (whose position Vayu is stated to be attained in the future kalpa)
is taught as being created and graced with the Vedic knowledge by Rudra as
per the Shvetashvatara Upanishad. The Atharva Shikha Upanishad says that
the Trimurtis emerge from Shambhu. The Atharva Shira Up. describes the
Vishva Rupa of Rudra.

If it is held that the Shambhu and Rudra in the above cases are none other
than Vishnu, then the question arises as to why those who proclaim that
Hari is Sarvottama have not chosen to say 'Rudra is Sarvottama'? This calls
the lie of their claim 'Rudra and Shambhu' indeed refer to Hari only'.

regards
subbu