The reason why this pAsuram is so enlightening is because it explains why worship of other gods independently is mentioned by Krishna as "avidhi pUrvakaM", in the light of sharIrAtma bhAva. Consider this+
The body is different from the self. A person who does not know this, does various actions to sustain the body. He gains some pleasure through enjoyment of sense objects through the body, but eventually it turns to sorrow, as they are perishable.+
Even these material enjoyments which last for a short time are only enjoyed by the self, but the person does not know it, as he has no knowledge of the self+
In contrast, a person who knows the body is not the self, does not get attached to the fruits of actions. As a result, he becomes a jnAni and his body also shines with the knowledge, becoming tejasvi+
Similarly, the other gods like brahmA, rudra, indra, sUrya etc are the bodies of nArAyaNa who is the self. Considering those gods who are the bodies as independent, is thus equal to dehAtmAnabhimAna - equating the self with the body+
And what happens when body is considered the self? One undertakes actions to please the body, as said previously. So one propitiates each god considering him/her to be supreme. The results are limited, as in the case of the sense enjoyments of the regular dehAtmAbhimAni+
And just as the sensual enjoyment of a dehAtmAbhimAni is by his self only though he doesn't know it, even worship of the other gods independently is enjoyed only by their self, nArAyaNa, though the worshipper doesn't know him+
But if the gods and goddesses are worshipped with knowledge of nArAyaNa as their innerself, they become even more pleased with that worship than they would be if one worshipped them independently.+
Thus, just as the body of one who knows the self glows with jnAna, these gods will become more radiant and bestow more favors on the one who worships them considering their innerself, nArAyaNa. That is why the boons of the gods aided the pANDavAs but were in vain for kauravAs+
Thus, sharIrAtma bhAva is key to understanding what kriShNa means by "avidhi pUrvakaM" in gIta.
This is of course, just something that would interest Vaishnavas or those aspiring to be so.//
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here is the shloka from Udyoga Parva. Karna visualizes the war as bhakti yoga with kriShNa as the object of sacrifice. He summarizes the role of duhshAsana here+
Superficial meaning: When you see the son of Pandu (bhIma) with the blood of duhshAsana roaring in anger and making sounds of victory at the same time, then will the day of the extraction of Soma commence (in this sacrifice of war).+
Despite the fact that duhshAsana was possibly more evil minded than Duryodhana, it is a funny fact that he stands for the tattva of the Vedas from a metaphysical aspect according to Karna in Udyoga Parva+
"duhshAsana" - the command or instruction that is difficult to understand or follow - represents the Vedas. Him torturing Draupadi is like the jIva subject to sorrow due to chasing after the alpa-phalans of the Vedas (traiguNya viShaya veda...gIta 2.45)+
bhIma tearing open his chest for blood - bhIma is meditation on Brahman. The Vedas are aparavidyA and by meditation which is paravidyA, they are "torn open" to reveal the nectar of auspicious attributes which is signified by duhshAsana's blood+
Hanuman makes it clear what upAya he follows in his conversation with bhIma in the MB. bhIma asks him, "Considering you are strong enough to defeat rAvaNa by yourself, why didn't you do so while scouting Lanka for Sita?"
mayA tu nihate tasminrAvaNe lokakaNTake . kIrtirnashyedrAghavasya tata etadupekShitam
[f I had eliminated rAvaNa who is a great obstruction for the worlds, then that fame of “being accessible to all” possessed by rAghava would have disappeared. Hence I spared rAvaNa.]+
"kIrti" means soushIlya or the quality of being accessible to all. If Hanuman had killed rAvaNa by himself, the world would think sIta was not significant enough for bhagavAn to come and kill rAvaNa, that he merely sent a servant to do the task+
"You are won back by me, after conquering the enemy in the battle-field, my dear lady! That which is to be done through human effort, has been accomplished by me."+
The enemy is the wicked mind (rAvaNa). samsAra is the battlefield. Note that Rama says, "that which is to be done by human endeavor (pauruShAt), has been done by me+
garuDa and Adi Seha again embody the two upAyAs. garuDa is "vedAtma" and thus he by being bhagavAn's vehicle signifies bhakti yoga. He uses his strength to carry bhagavAn. Adi Sesha however, like a prapanna, simply becomes whatever is comfortable for bhagavAn+
Since bhakti yoga is the more dominant upAya talked about in the Veda, it makes sense that there are entire sUktAs dedicated to Garuda who showcases his strength, but less mantras on Adi Sesha whose ability is more of a shadow of bhagavAn+
This doesn't mean garuDa is not a prapanna. Both are nitya sUrIs equally endowed with same knowledge and devotion. They merely exist in this way for the benefit of those following the 2 upAyAs+
In comparison to garuDa, praise of adi seSha is relatively less common in the veda.
But he is praised in the name of “Ahirbudhnya” here and there. Here is a mantra from Rg Veda that echoes mudal thiruvandhAdhi of poigai azhwar+
First, the etymology of "Ahirbudhnya" - “The serpent belonging to, ie, existing solely for the sake of bhagavAn who is the ground of all (budhna)”.
Thus, this term is a cognate of “Sesha”+
Shiva also has the name “Ahirbudhnya” – One who belongs to or comes from “Ahirbudhna” - SankarShaNa, the ground (support) of the serpent Adi Sesha. pAncharAtra speaks of Shiva as Ahirbudhnya.
But context determines which "Ahirbudhnya" is being referred to in the Vedas+