A beautiful shloka in paushkara samhita of pAncharAtra on the greatness of the temple forms of bhagavAn. Quoted by shrI vedAnta desikan,
सन्दर्शनातकस्माच्च पुंसां सम्पूतचेतसाम् (?) क्वचना कुबुद्धिश्च कुतर्क निश्चयच्च यः कुहेतुश्च कुभावश्च नास्तिकत्वं लयं व्रजेत्+
सन्दर्शनातकस्माच्च पुंसां सम्पूतचेतसाम् (?) क्वचना कुबुद्धिश्च कुतर्क निश्चयच्च यः कुहेतुश्च कुभावश्च नास्तिकत्वं लयं व्रजेत्+
[If a person even accidentally sees the form of Hari in temples, all of his following sinful thoughts perish – ]
Explaining these "sinful thoughts" below+
Explaining these "sinful thoughts" below+
कुबुद्धि - Incorrect consideration of the body as the self like chArvakas.
कुतर्क - Incorrect inference that the self is what it is not, ie, like claiming it is tainted by prakR^itic guNAs, shUnyatva of buddhists, the arguments of Jains that it has different shapes etc+
कुतर्क - Incorrect inference that the self is what it is not, ie, like claiming it is tainted by prakR^itic guNAs, shUnyatva of buddhists, the arguments of Jains that it has different shapes etc+
निश्चय – Incorrect conclusion of the Vedas thinking there are only 25 tattvAs till the jIvAtma, and there is no Ishvara. These are nirIshvara sAnkhyAs+
Thus far, groups which harbored wrong notions of the nature of the self, or considered the self alone as the highest tattva, were discussed.
Next, groups which admit of an Ishvara superior to the self, but misinterpret the nature of that Ishvara, are addressed+
Next, groups which admit of an Ishvara superior to the self, but misinterpret the nature of that Ishvara, are addressed+
कुहेतु – Those who use incorrect inference to prove the existence of Ishvara – the nyAya-vaisheshikAs.
कुभाव – Those who accept Veda but strip Ishvara of his kalyaNa guNAs to incorrectly claim Brahman is attributeless. “bhAva” means “yoga” or “dhyAna” – a form of conception+
कुभाव – Those who accept Veda but strip Ishvara of his kalyaNa guNAs to incorrectly claim Brahman is attributeless. “bhAva” means “yoga” or “dhyAna” – a form of conception+
नास्तिकत्वं - no conviction in the conclusion of Vedas that Hari is antaryAmin & recipient of all karmas – denotes Shaivas, Shaktas who worship other gods independently.
While many of the above are also nAstikAs, etymological meaning here is not seeing Hari as sarvAntarAtma+
While many of the above are also nAstikAs, etymological meaning here is not seeing Hari as sarvAntarAtma+
The above is interpreted according to guNa ratna kosha of shrI parAshara bhattar. Now, these thoughts are said to vanish if a person even accidentally sees a form of Hari in the temple.
But we do not see this to be the case. Does this apply to barbarians and thieves?+
But we do not see this to be the case. Does this apply to barbarians and thieves?+
Reg the shloka, “one who sees Hari in temples”, it refers to 2 types of people:
1) Those with bhakti to Hari but following a path like advaita
2) Those with “advesha” – buddhists, jains, chArvAkAs, sAnkhyAs, shaivAs, shaktAs etc *if* they neither like nor dislike bhagavAn+
1) Those with bhakti to Hari but following a path like advaita
2) Those with “advesha” – buddhists, jains, chArvAkAs, sAnkhyAs, shaivAs, shaktAs etc *if* they neither like nor dislike bhagavAn+
Thus, these 2 groups of people, upon seeing the form in temples, are *eventually* led to the truth in some births. It would be quicker than it would be if they had never seen him in a temple+
Those who already had knowledge but were temporarily deluded by bad company etc. are corrected too.
But it doesn’t mean vishNu-dveshIs, invading barbarians who sought to destroy temples and others get this benefit by just seeing bhagavAn//
But it doesn’t mean vishNu-dveshIs, invading barbarians who sought to destroy temples and others get this benefit by just seeing bhagavAn//
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
