Best example of this is narasimha avatAra. Hiranyakashipu was always opposing bhagavAn, but he incurred no karma and reigned gloriously as King.

He was not punished even when he harassed prahlAda - because prahlAda did not see his father as a foe, rather only felt pity for him+

https://twitter.com/DefiledGod/status/2009582039591501992

As long as prahlAda didn't see his father as foe, Hari did nothing & just protected prahlAda.

When prahlAdaprayed - "make my father stop committing sin, either by reforming him or removing him from his sinful body" - Hari tried the former, which didn't work & so did the latter+

Here is a little bit of nuance regarding this.

If we say puNya and pApa are due to his pleasure and displeasure, one can then accuse bhagavAn of being the cause of suffering, saying "it is because of your displeasure that pApa is gained, thereby pain and grief exist"+

https://twitter.com/ParamaDharma1/status/2009551055520968973

The answer is - bhagavAn is never displeased when anyone abuses him. There is no punishment in shAstra for viShNu dvesha.

However, he only feels anger/displeasure when his devotees suffer. So if someone abuses him and his devotees feel hurt because of it, he gains pApa+

There is an incident in MB that highlights the greatness of Hanuman. Let us study it today.

In shalya parva, after the battle is concluded, krishna tells arjuna to descend from his chariot as follows+ ततो गाण्डीवधन्वानम् अभ्यभाषत केशवः . स्थितः प्रियहिते नित्यम् अतीव भरतर्षभ

[Keshava, who is always seeking to do what is agreeable for arjuna, told the wielder of the gANDIva…]+

When mahAbali conquered indra, harivamSha says that mahAlakShmI, being the goddess of prosperity, went over to the daityAs, leaving indra who had been cursed by durvAsa to lose his wealth.

Let us study her dialogue with bali+ पद्मोद्यतकरा देवी वरदा सुरमोहिनी . श्रीरुवाच

[The goddess holding a lotus flower in her hands, the bestower of the boon (of bhagavAn), one who enchants the gods, one called श्री, spoke to bali]+

It is said rAma strived to follow sAmAnya dharma which is conducive to upAsana, like pitruvAkya paripAlana etc.

But in reality, rAma demonstrated his independence even when following these dharmas. So, let me explain how he manipulated dharma as per his will+ First, his vow of obeying his father – rAma said he would never disobey his father’s words and hence would go to the forest (न प्रतिज्नाम् अहम् पितुः ~ ayodhya kANDa )

But see rAma’s demeanor when dasharatha announces he would be King+

When bhIma defeated duryodhana, he made the mistake of attributing the victory to himself rather than dedicating it to krishna.

He said “स्वबाहुबलमाश्रित्य प्रबाधामो वयं रिपून्” – “We defeated the foe by the might of our arms”+ Knowing that this was a mistake, but due to affection for his younger brother, yudhiShThira humbly beseeched krishna as follows:

लभतां पाण्डवः कामं धर्मोऽधर्मोऽथवा कृतः . इत्य् उक्ते धर्मराजेन वासुदेवोऽब्रवीद् इदम् कामम् अस्त्व् एवम् इति वै कृच्छ्राद् यदुकुलोद्वहः+

Today, I will explain bhIma’s duel with karNa and his fight with some of duryodhana’s brothers from karNa parva.

When bhIma was fighting karNa, initially he was hurt by karNa’s arrows. As karNa didn’t mean to kill him, he didn’t die. Then, he gets angry (below)+ ततः सायकभिन्नाङ्गः पाण्डवः क्रोधमूर्च्छितः. संरम्भामर्षताम्राक्षः सूतपुत्रवधेप्सया

[Then the son of pANDu, pierced by arrows, lost his senses to anger. Wrathful, intolerant and with red eyes he desired to kill the Suta’s son]+

Since I have explained both the sharaNAgatis in mahAbhArata – draupadI’s and duryodhana’s – let us see what phalAs they obtained.

Just tying up some loose ends in the final thread+ We already know draupadI always relied on her husbands and relatives over krishna.

Because of this, she always lived in fear when usually prapannAs are fearless (सुयोधनभयार्दिताम् ; रक्ष मां कीचकाद् भीतां).+

DRAUPADI’S SURRENDER – PART 4 (CONCLUSION)

As yudhiShThira, bhIma & arjuna failed to answer duryodhana’s question, the Kauravas decided that draupadI remained a slave.

Since she too had forgotten bhagavAn and again depended on her husbands, she was manhandled again+

https://twitter.com/DefiledGod/status/1794955038558953742

ततो दुःशासनस् तूर्णं द्रुपदस्य सुतां बलात्.प्रवेशयितुम् आरब्धः स चाकर्षद् दुरात्मवान्

[Then the sinful minded duHshAsana, quickly began to drag the daughter of drupada (to the slave quarters)]

duHshAsana was afraid to try to disrobe her again, as he had seen she was protected+

DRAUPADI’S SURRENDER – PART 3

We saw that Krishna protected draupadI, giving her clothes when she surrendered to him. But he cannot not kill duHshAsana or duryodhana – as both are under balarAma's protection.

Still, the pANDavAs can kill Duryodhana now+

https://twitter.com/DefiledGod/status/1792781124768543198

If draupadI’s husbands act on her behalf, it would nullify duryodhana’s protection, making him vulnerable.

Yet, paNDavAs did not even think of that – hence, Lokacharya says Krishna wanted to cut off their heads in anger, but spared them to avoid draupadI being widowed!+

DRAUPADI’S SURRENDER – PART 2

We saw that draupadI’s dependence on her husbands was fruitless. Now, duHshAsana tries to disrobe her, she instinctively thinks of Hari and performs sharaNAgati.

Let us look at her stuti to Krishna today, as she finally invokes Hari+

https://twitter.com/DefiledGod/status/1792418293388853266

गोविन्द द्वारकावासिन् कृष्ण गोपीजनप्रिय

[ “Govinda! Resident of dvAraka! Krishna! Beloved of the gopIs”]

गोविन्द- He as a cowherd is accessible (saulabhya) to even the ignorant.

द्वारकावासिन्– He abandoned paramapada to come to dvAraka from affection (vAtsalya) for samsArIs+

DRAUPADI’S SURRENDER – PART 1

Today, we will take a look at whether draupadI’s accusation of krishna was correct – that he did not help her when duHshAsana dragged her by the hair.

This is how that ordeal of hers is described in Sabha parva+ केशेशु कृष्णेषु तदा स कृष्णाम्. कृष्णं च जिष्णुं च हरिं नरं च त्रायाय विक्रोशति याज्ञसेनि

[When duHShAsana was dragging her by her black hair, yAj~naseni was crying out for protection to krishna, jishnu, hari and nara]+

The reason why bhagavad avatArAs are so celebrated is not because bhagavAn just appears and kills the sinners with his power.

Rather, most asuras and daityas have sAdhana like duryodhana or some sukRita. That's why they are able to conquer the devas now and then+ bhagavAn is celebrated in his avatArAs because he subdues these sinners without violating their sAdhana. He ensures their sAdhana is not broken and that they also receive the fruits of their good deeds+

If you notice, both Ramayana and Mahabharata are about two women who sought the refuge of bhagavAn - sIta and draupadI.

Both performed sharaNAgati for their ends. But what is the significance of this?+ Well, the significance is the fact that they are women. As shAstra says,

पुरुषोत्तम: स एव. स्त्री प्रायम् इतरत् सर्वम्

[He (viShNu) alone is puruShottama, all else are strIs by nature]+

As far as the discussion on twitter today about whether the Linga is a phallus or not goes, here's the truth.

Firstly, padma purana confirms it is indeed symbolizing the union of a phallus with a vagina, as it is due to a curse uttered by bhR^igu to mahAdeva+ नारीसंगममत्तोऽसौ यस्मान्मामवमन्यते |
योनिलिंगस्वरूपं वै तस्मात्तस्य भविष्यति

[bhR^igu - "Since you, being engrossed in the company of umA ignored me, you will have the form of yonilinga"]+

Interesting little detail in the mahAbhArata – it is a narrative in which both bhagavAn and bhAgavata get abused in a Sabha.

Krishna was abused by shishupAla in a sabha (Sacrificial area) of yudhiShThira, draupadI was abused by the Kauravas in a sabha (royal court)+ In the case of Krishna, shishupAla tried to deny the greatness of Krishna by saying - राजा जरासंधो महाबलः . योऽनेन युद्धं नेयेष दासोऽयम् इति – “The powerful King jarAsandha, refused to fight with Krishna, saying, “this one is a slave (of kaMsa)”+

A very apt shloka by devarishi narada on the occasion of Shri Rama Navami:

ऋषीणां देवतानां च मानुषाणां च सर्वशः . पृथिव्यां सहवासो ऽभूद् रामे राज्यं प्रशासति (~ droNa parva)

["When rAma ruled his Kingdom, the rishis, gods and men all lived together on the Earth"]+ Note the order – rishis, gods & men. This implies rishis are superior to gods who in turn are superior to ordinary men.

Rishis have high j~nAna & vairAgya; gods have high j~nAna but lesser vairAgya; ordinary humans have less j~nAna & vairAgya+

When proving hari sarvottama in the pAsuram “kANilum uruppolAr” (thirucchanda virutham, credit - @KoyilOrg), thirumazhisai azhwar gives a beautiful explanation of how other gods are not to be worshipped as the supreme being.

Note: Thread not for everyone+ Consider the vAkya- आत्मा वा अरे द्रष्टव्यः श्रोतव्यो मन्तव्यो निदिध्यासितव्यः (~ bR^ihadAraNyaka up.)– “The self is to be seen, heard, thought of & meditated upon”.

Azhwar says this implies that gods other than Brahman should not be seen, heard, thought of or meditated on+

A quality of rAma is that whenever he has a council with his close associates, he listens to what they say, but ultimately makes the decision himself.

For eg: He patiently listened to arguments of bharata, vaShiShTha, jabali etc who tried to convince him to not go to the forest+ In the end, he rejected their arguments and went to the forest anyway.

Likewise, prior to banishing sIta due to rumors among citizens, he summons his brothers and well-wishers, asking for their opinion. Against their opinions, he still decides to banish her+

In the anushAsana parva, pArvati asks mahAdeva - केन कण्ठश् च ते नीलो बर्ह भाति निभः - “Why is your neck blue like the tail of a peacock?”

Shiva gives an interesting answer, in the form of a little known anecdote+ इन्द्रेण च पुरा वज्रं क्षिप्तं श्रीकाङ्क्षिणा मम दग्ध्वा कण्ठं तु तद् यातं तेन श्रीकण्ठता मम

[Shiva - “Once, Indra, desiring my wealth, hurled his vajrAyudha at me. With that weapon my throat was scorched. By that, I have attained the state of having a beautiful (blue) throat”]+

Today, Let us look at why rAma banished sIta. First, we need to understand the AdhyAtmic meaning behind the separation.

In shrI vachana bhUshana vyAkhyAna, mAmunigal explains that her 2nd separation was to highlight her pAratantriyam – quality of existing for bhagavAn's sake+ As she says,

न खल्व् अद्यैव सौमित्रे जीवितं जाह्नवी जले . त्यजेयं राघवम् वंशे तु भर्तुर् मे परिहास्यते (~ uttara kANDa)

[sIta – “lakshmaNa! The progeny I bear cannot stop existing for the sake of rAghava’s lineage. Hence, I did not cast myself into the ganga to end my life.”]+