Thread by @DefiledGod

In the shAnti parva, there is a unique anecdote identified by vedAnta desikan in shrImad rahasya traya sAra.

bhIShma explains the greatness of pAncharAtra Agama to yudhiShThira as follows+

इदं महोपनिषदं चतुर्वेदसमन्वितम्। सांख्ययोगकृतं तेन पञ्चरात्रानुशब्दितम्॥

[This great secret explains the purport of the four Vedas harmoniously. It is based on the knowledge of the individual self - “सांख्य” & performance of desireless action - “योग” & called “pAncharAtra”]+

Then, he makes a curious statement.

नारायणमुखोदीतं नारदोऽश्रावयत्पुनः. ब्रह्मणः सदने तात यथादृष्टं यथाश्रुतम्

[It was expounded by nArAyaNa & nArada taught it once more in brahmA’s abode, just as he saw (experienced) it and as he heard it from nArAyaNa.]+

Here, note what bhIShma says – nArAyaNa expounded the pAncharAtra first. But it was nArada, who taught it in brahmA’s abode.

Did not brahmA know it himself? Then why did nArada teach it? DharmaputrA asks this question+

एतदाश्चर्यभूतं हि माहात्म्यं तस्य धीमतः । किं वै ब्रह्मा न जानीते यतः शुश्राव नारदात् । पितामहोऽपि भगवांस्तस्माद्देवादनन्तरः । कथं स न विजानीयात्प्रभावममितौजसः+

[YudhiShThira: Was not brahmA aware of the mahAtmya of that omniscient nArAyaNa? Did he have to hear it from nArada? brahmA is the revered pitAmaha, only next to nArAyaNa. Then how was he unaware of that greatness of nArAyaNa, of unlimited splendor as expounded in the Agama?]+

shrI vedAnta desikan, in shrImad rahasya traya sAra, reveals the reason for brahmA having to learn from nArada.

As brahmA taught this vidyA to Indra despite the latter not being qualfied for it (lacking desire for it), brahmA forgot the vidyA & needed to be taught by nArada+

An AchArya must not reveal vidyA to all who seek him; only those who have a desire for vidyA must be taught. Otherwise, the sins of the disciple accrue to the AchArya.

brahmA taught Indra who was unworthy & lost the knowledge. Then, bhagavAn taught brahmA again through nArada+

The irony is, nArada is a disciple of brahmA. Yet, he had to teach his own AchArya!

bhIShma knew that nArada did not want to publicize the fact that he taught his own AchArya, & also did not want to openly speak of the fault of a lokaguru like brahmA+

So bhIShma, instead of saying “nArada taught brahmA”, said “ब्रह्मणः सदने“ - “nArada taught it in the abode of brahmA”, to skirt the issue. Despite this little deception, yudhiShThira was astute enough to pick up on the irregularity!

Now, bhIShma replies to dharmaputrA’s Q+

महाकल्पसहस्राणि महाकल्पशतानि च ।समतीतानि राजेन्द्र सर्गाश्च प्रलयाश्च ह । सर्गस्यादौ स्मृतो ब्रह्माप्रजासर्गकरः प्रभुः ।

[Many 100s and 1000s of kalpAs, creations & dissolutions have passed, King! In the beginning of creation, brahmA, creator of all, is remembered by bhagavAn]+

As he did not want to point out a guru’s lapse, bhIShma first highlights the glory of brahmA as the first-born of nArAyaNa.

जानाति देवप्रवरं भूयश्चातोधिकं नृप । परमात्मानमीशानमात्मनः प्रभवं तथा+

[King! brahmA knows nArAyaNa, that foremost of gods, who is superior to him, the supreme self, the controller of all beings, born by his own will.]+

The beauty of this is, what bhIShma has said is true – brahmA knows bhagavAn’s glory well.

But what he has said, does not rule out the fact that brahmA forgot the particular vidyA of ekAyana shAstra (pAncharAtra).

bhIShma thus subtly hides brahmA’s lapse without lying+

bhIShma now defends nArada saying latter did not teach his own guru

ये त्वन्ये ब्रह्मसदने सिद्धसङ्घाः समागताः । तेभ्यस्तच्छ्रावयामास पुराणं वेदसंमितम्

[nArada taught this ancient knowledge, in accord with the Vedas, to others who came to Brahma's abode, perfected in upAsana]+

This is again perfectly true. nArada did teach it to others. What bhIShma hides here is the fact that brahmA himself had forgotten it – that’s why nArada had to teach it, rather than brahmA himself, in the latter’s abode!+

Another nuance is this – when bhagavAn commanded nArada to teach brahmA, nArada was reluctant to teach his own guru.

So when other interested rishis were assembled in brahmA’s abode, nArada taught the vidyA facing them, while ensuring his guru brahmA could also listen!+

Being an ideal bhakta, nArada could not refuse nArAyaNa’s command to teach brahmA. Being an ideal shishya, he could not directly teach brahmA.

nArada resolved this dilemma by teaching brahmA indirectly in the pretext of teaching others+

This is the unparalleled greatness of nArada – he taught his own teacher. Now, tying up the story – what happened to Indra who despite being unworthy learned this vidyA?

After learning from brahmA, indira was cursed by durvAsa as he disrespected a garland of lakshmI+

The pAncharAtra shAstra is about bhagavad abhigamana and archana, thus by this act, Indra showed he had imbibed none of the knowledge.

Later, bhagavAn comes to his aid, churns the ocean as is well known and restores his wealth+

The story continues in lakshmI tantra, a pAncharAtra Agama. brihaspati advices Indra to go meditate on lakshmI, as her grace is essential for all wealth (worldly + knowledge).

So, Indra now, with adhikAra, learns from shrI about her nature & becomes an expert in this vidyA+

He goes to satya loka after learning from shrI and tells brahmA about it. Then, brahmA teaches others this lakshmI-tantra as well.

That concludes this anecdote. It took the sharp intellect of vedAnta desikan to notice how bhIShma communicated this story in an indirect manner//