[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Re: Fwd: Brahman has no default form; Only contextual form - Varaha Purana

[Raghav Kumar Dwivedula]

On Wed, 1 Mar, 2023, 3:28 pm Raghav Kumar Dwivedula, <
raghavkumar00 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thank you Venkat ji for painstakingly collating all the references.
>
> The only logical necessity for postulating anything special for the forms
> of Ishvara, is that the forms are not karma-janya. There was never a past
> record of karma for Ishvara's forms like Shiva or even avatAras like
> Krishna.
>
> Otherwise these forms are for all 'practical' purposes bhautika.
>
> The other putative reasons don't need any abhautikatva postulate. For
> example
> 1. The mere fact of embodiment in a womb like Krishna
> 2. The experiences of bleeding in war for Rama or Krishna.
> 3. The account of cremation upon leaving the body for Krishna Bhagavan etc.
> 4. Being subject to emotions like weeping for Sita etc
>
> 1,2,3,4 can be explained without any abhautikatva postulate.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 1 Mar, 2023, 2:10 pm Venkatraghavan S, <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Namaste Subbuji,
>>
>> I don't have a strong opinion on the subject, but it appears to me that a
>> mAyAmaya sharIra can also be pratyaksha yogya, if Ishvara so wishes - this
>> pratyaksha yogyatva need not be limited to being an object of the
>> instrument of sight, it may be extended to the other four organs of
>> perception too. Therefore, it is possible for the devotee to touch
>> Ishvara's feet even if they are not bhautika.
>>
>> The intent with saying that the body is mAyAmaya sharIra is not that the
>> vision of the Ishvara is merely a mental / subjective vision of the upAsaka
>> - rather that the body that Ishvara takes up then is made up of mAyA, and
>> therefore is not subject to the physical / biological restrictions of a
>> bhautika sharIra.
>>
>> There are several examples that come up in advaita sharada of this idea:
>>
>> 1) Anandagiri gItAbhAShya upodghAta अंशेनेति । स्वेच्छानिर्मितेन मायामयेन
>> स्वरूपेणेत्यर्थः ।
>> 2) Anandagiri gItAbhAShya TIkA: 4.2
>> यथा लोके कश्चिज्जातो देहवानालक्ष्यते, एवमहमपि मायामाश्रित्यत्या स्ववशया
>> सम्भवामि - जन्मव्यवहारमनुभवामि, तेन मायामयमीश्वरस्य जन्मेत्याह - तां
>> प्रकृतिमित्यादिना ।
>> 3) Anandagiri gItAbhAShya TIkA: 4.9
>> मायामयमीश्वरस्य जन्म, न वास्तवं, तस्यैव च जगत्परिपालनं कर्म, नान्यस्य,
>> इति जानतः श्रेयोऽवाप्तिन्दर्शयन् , विपक्षे प्रत्यवायं सूचयति -
>> तज्जन्मेत्यादिना ।
>> 4) appayya dIkshitendra, nyAyarakshAmaNi 1.1.20
>> रूपवत्त्वञ्च ब्रह्मणोऽपि सम्भवति; सत्यस्य रूपस्य
>> नीरूपशास्त्रविरोधित्वेऽपि मायामयस्य तदविरोधित्वात् । ब्रह्मणि च रूपस्य
>> ‘माया ह्येषा मया सृष्टा यन्मां पश्यसि नारद’ इति वचनानुसारेण
>> मायामयस्यैवाङ्गीकारात् । न च तद्बोधकवचनानामप्रामाण्यप्रसङ्गः ;
>> मायाविदर्शितमायादृष्ट्यनुवादवत् प्रामाण्योपपत्तेः । इह च ‘हिरण्मयः पुरुषो
>> दृश्यते’ ‘यन्मां पश्यसि’ इत्यादौ तथैव दृष्ट्यनुवाददर्शनाच्च । आरम्भणाधिकरणे
>> व्युत्पादयिष्यमाणेन न्यायेन शरीरेऽपि व्यावहारिकप्रामाण्योपपत्तेश्च । न च
>> शरीरं कर्मजन्यमेवेति नियमः ; इह अनन्यथासिद्धलिङ्गावगमितस्य परमेश्वरस्य
>> शरीरसिद्धौ ‘रमणीयचरणा रमणीयां योनिमापद्येरन्’ ‘कपूयचरणाः कपूयां
>> योनिमापद्येरन्’(छा. ५.१०. ७) इत्यादिश्रुतीनामनीश्वरशरीरविषयत्वकल्पनोपपत्तेः
>> । न च सर्वपाप्मोदयश्रुतौ फलमिव, शरीरं कर्मजन्यमिति श्रुतावपि
>> शरीरत्वावच्छेदेन कर्मजन्यत्वे लाघवमित्युपपत्तिस्तात्पर्यलिङ्गमस्तीति
>> तदनुरोधेनैतत्सङ्कोचकल्पनं न युक्तमिति वाच्यम् । श्रुतिदर्शितफलात्
>> पुरुषबुद्धिकल्प्योपपत्तेर्दुर्बलत्वात् । एतेन – परमेश्वरस्य शरीराङ्गीकारे
>> दुःखमपि स्यात् ; ‘न ह वै सशरीरस्य सतः प्रियाप्रिययोरपहतिरस्ति’(छा. ८. १२.
>> १) इति श्रुतेः – इति निरस्तम् । पुण्यपापफलोपभोगार्थकर्मसंपादितस्यैव शरीरस्य
>> तया श्रुत्या दुःखाविनाभावप्रतिपादनात् ।
>> परमेश्वरेणोपासकानुग्रहार्थमिच्छापरिगृहीते शरीरे तदप्रसक्तेः ।
>>
>> What about Anandagiri AchArya in his TIkA to mANDUkya indicatinh that
>> avatAra sharIra can be pAncabhautika? See the context below:
>> मूर्तस्त्रिशूलादिधारी महेश्वरश्चक्रधारी वा परमार्थो भवतीत्यागमिकाः । तदपि
>> भ्रान्तिमात्रम्। अस्मदादिशरीरवत् तस्यापि शरीरस्य पाञ्चभौतिकत्वात्।
>> Here he does admit that Ishvara's body is pAncabhautika, but his intent
>> is to say that the body is not real (paramArtha), so make of it as you will.
>>
>> In any case, I think it can be argued either way, and I don't have strong
>> views on the matter. Presenting both sides of the case - each side can pick
>> whichever argument appeals to them.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Venkatraghavan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 28 Feb 2023, 17:59 V Subrahmanian, <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Venkat ji,
>>>
>>> Thanks for sharing the Vichara sagara pages on the topic.  Upon reading
>>> this, a question arises:
>>>
>>> The author has said: the bodies of avatara purushas like Rama and
>>> Krishna are not bhautika.  They did generate sukha (to the punyavaan jivas)
>>> and duhkha (to the papavaan jivas).  Yet, the very avatara bodies are
>>> themselves not a product of punya or otherwise of Rama and Krishna; the
>>> jivas' punya/papa alone is the cause of the sukha, etc.
>>>
>>> My question is:  In the 13th chapter of the BG, kshetram (prakriti) is
>>> defined as:
>>>
>>> महाभूतान्यहङ्कारो बुद्धिरव्यक्तमेव च ।
>>> इन्द्रियाणि दशैकं च पञ्च चेन्द्रियगोचराः ॥ ५ ॥
>>> इच्छा द्वेषः सुखं दुःखं सङ्घातश्चेतना धृतिः ।
>>> एतत्क्षेत्रं समासेन सविकारमुदाहृतम् ॥ ६ ॥
>>>
>>> Here kshetram is all that is observed, experienced. This consists of the
>>> pancha koshas (including the sense/action organs, manas, buddhi, prana,
>>> sthula shariram, ahankara) and the outside world of shabda, sparsha, etc.
>>> Also, the reactions that the contact of the sense/action organs with the
>>> outside world of sound, etc. These reactions are stated to be sukha,
>>> duhkha, etc. All of this is together called kshetram: prakriti and its
>>> parinaama-s. Kshetrajna, the pure Consciousness is the 'other', distinct
>>> from kshetram.
>>>
>>> Now, if the avatara bodies of Rama and Krishna generates sukha/duhkha to
>>> the ones who saw them during those avataras, there was essentially contact
>>> of the sense..organs of the jivas with those avatara bodies. The gopis had
>>> the sparsha anubhava. So many in those avataras had sparsha anubhava of the
>>> avatara bodies. The bodies then will have to come under shabda, sparsha,
>>> etc. Taking the 13th chapter specification of the kshetram, the avatara
>>> bodies will have to be admitted to be products of prakriti. Only murta
>>> dravyam can be vishaya for chakshus, sparsha, etc.
>>>
>>> In the case of bhaktas who experience the divine bodies of Rama, etc.
>>> long after the avataras have ended their earthly role, the manasa
>>> pratyaksha generates sukha. But even manasa must depend on aindriya
>>> anubhava had before. In this case, the bhakta has seen/read the puranas
>>> account of the rupam of the Lord and that input helps the mano vrittis.
>>> Bhaktas have even visions of the Lord, speak with Him, hug, etc. This is
>>> not purely mental; they see the divine form in front of them, touch, etc.
>>> HH Sri Abhinava Vidyatirtha Swamigal's savikalpa samadhi, etc. anubhavas
>>> have been documented. He leaned forward and touched the feet of Ambal
>>> during one such vision. All these must happen with some material dravya,
>>> even if the vision is subjective. Acharyal has said: if the Lord, during
>>> such a vision, had given a fruit or any other object, that will remain even
>>> after the vision ceases and shall be a proof of the vision.  Such fruit
>>> necessarily is bhautika.
>>>
>>> In the light of the above, how do we reconcile the Vichara sagara
>>> opinion with the kshetram definition? I am only seeking to get
>>> clarification.
>>>
>>> warm regards
>>> subbu
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 7:12 PM Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Namaste Raghav ji,
>>>>
>>>> Please find attached an interesting discussion in the Sanskrit Vichara
>>>> Sagara on the untenability of avatAra sharIra to be bhautika.
>>>> As its a file attachment, it will be rejected by the advaita-l server,
>>>> others can view it by seeing the corresponding message in the advaitin
>>>> google groups: https://groups.google.com/g/advaitin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Venkataraghavan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "advaitin" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te37dKWa6-0-%2BotOtiaMTKk8DTeRYdAtxOgPbdQWMEVF%3DA%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAKk0Te37dKWa6-0-%2BotOtiaMTKk8DTeRYdAtxOgPbdQWMEVF%3DA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>>