153. kAruNya vigrahA

Ravisankar Mayavaram msr at ISC.TAMU.EDU
Sun Nov 1 11:37:04 CST 1998

153. kAruNya vigrahA

SHE whose form is kindness.

karuNa or Compaasion is an attitude of mind. It is expressed
through benign glance, etc. The consequences of the compassion,
such as, granting the desired objects etc., are expressed by
various parts of HER body. Hence, it is proper to call HER as
embodiment of compassion

SHE as brahman is sat-chit-Ananda and indpendent of any act.  But
the through the limitation of mAyA, brahman becomes the efficient
of cause of the jagat (Universe). In that limitation, SHE assumes
a form to grace HER devotees.  If SHE did not take a form, it is
not possible for the mind to imagine the deity, and all worship
with attributes will become an impossibility.  As it is
established by the brahma sUtra "devatAdhikaraNa", where there is
no contradiction, deities illumined by mantra can take different
forms or images. This further supported by authoritative
statments in shruti like "vajra hastaH purandara", which means
"Indra has diamond in his hand" It is mentioned in
devatAdhikaraNa that deities like Indra can assume any form they
like. When the sage medhAtithi called Indra a goat, He assumed
the form of goat and killed medhAtithi.

In kenopaniShad, paradevatA is called haimavati. And it is
established in the commentary of kenopaniShad, paradevatA has a
divine image, "that haimavatI means one having ornaments of Gold
and that SHE is the duaghter of himavAn". Hence, it is explained
that the great ones, the trimurti-s, who are the forms of
Self-luminous awareness, are embodied only to facilitate
meditation, worship, etc. SHE is their ruler. Hence, there is no
ground for atheistic arguments like there is no Ishvara.

AUM kAruNyavigrahAyai namaH

"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
List archives : http://listserv.tamu.edu/archives/advaita-l.html

>From  Sun Nov  1 19:22:15 1998
Message-Id: <SUN.1.NOV.1998.192215.0500.>
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 1998 19:22:15 -0500
Reply-To: ramakris at erols.com
To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
        <ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU>
From: Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <ramakris at EROLS.COM>
Subject: Re: jnAna, bhakti, and karma (was Re: bhakti)
Comments: To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
        <ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Anand Hudli wrote:

Thanks for the interesting articles and sorry for the late response. I
have been busy with many things.

>  The condition being described here is that which follows a
>  feeling of love for God. From this condition, the absorption or
>  dissolution of mind results. The devotee then passes into a
>  trance or samAdhi, which has been confirmed by many great bhaktas.
>  That bhakti can be mixed with jnAna is confirmed by jnAni's such as
>  HH Shri Chandrasekhara Bharati and MadhusUdana SarasvatI, who were
>  great bhaktas.

I have a question about the above. Bhakti can be combined with sannyAsa,
which I can accept. As per the causal chain given by SureshvarAchArya in
the naishhkarmya-siddhi, yoga practice comes after sannyAsa. So worship
of Ishvara is subsumed in that. However in the process of shravaNa,
manana and nididhyAsana, I cannot see how bhakti can be combined with
these three (which is really what can be called GYAna). As per
sha.nkarAcArya in his bhAshhya to kena upanishhad 2.5, which states
brahman is not what people worship (na idaM upAsate), he presents the
pUrvapaxa: vishhNur-Isvara-indraH-prANo vA brahma bhavituM arhati, na tu
Atma loka pratyaya virodhAt, or VishhNu, Ishvara (Lord Siva), Indra or
PrANa, are fit to be called brahman (that's what people worship here),
but not Atma, from contradiction of worldly logic. Then sha.nkara
proceeds to refute it and points out that Atman is indeed brahman, not
what people worship.

Further, in the mANDUkya-kArikA bhAshhya to GK 3.1, gauDapAda clearly
points out that the worship of saguNa brahman is "narrow minded". Here
sha.nkara is quick to point out the same kena verse (2.5) as proof.
Further, even in his upadeshasAharI, the only thing he suggests for his
disciple is parisa.nkhyAna, which does not have anything to devotion.
GYAnis may _seem_ to be bhaktas, but we would have to take it as due to
their prArabdha (or so I have been thinking all this time).
Of course, if we accept the definition of bhakti (by equating it to
absorption in the self, not on conditioned brahman) in the
VivekacUDAmaNi the problem is solved instantaneously. But I Think that's
not what you were saying here.

Clarifications from the thoughts of Sri Chandrashekhara BharatI
Mahaswami and Madhusudana Saraswati would be greatly appreciated.


"bhava shankara deshikame sharaNam"
List archives : http://listserv.tamu.edu/archives/advaita-l.html

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list