PDA

View Full Version : Significance of BG 11:8



wundermonk
02 January 2013, 03:53 AM
Greetings friends,

Arjuna yearns to see Krishna in his transcendental form and pleads thus:


O Supreme Lord, how You described Yourself, even so are You. I wish to see Your Lordly form, O Supreme Person. If you think, O Lord, that it can be seen by me, then, O Lord of Yoga, reveal Yourself to me completely.

What more can a devotee ask for? He entreats his Lord to reveal his workings to him.

Krishna grants him his request and replies thus:


But you will not be able to see Me with your own eye. I give you a divine eye. Behold my Lordly Yoga!

Then, Krishna reveals his transcendental form to Arjuna:

http://images.tribe.net/tribe/upload/photo/ea6/1f7/ea61f74e-7849-4cb0-bd96-168ef3304b20

I have my own thoughts on the significance of Krishna endowing Arjuna with "divine eyes". But what do YOU think is the significance of the "divine eye"?

charitra
02 January 2013, 08:11 AM
This is where I draw parallels to the Advaita concept that is encoded in vaishnavaism. By showing the ‘real’ nature of ‘human’Krishna through the cosmic form, none other than Brahman was pulled into the bigger picture by vaishnavites. Hence the dvaitist (dualist) mustn’t get carried away and preach Vishnu as the supreme lord and stop there. The dualist will have to go a step further and also identify the advaita nature or oneness of the Lord. Argument in favor of dualism is thus weakened thanks to viswa rupa.

Krishna’s vishva rupam or cosmic form was unbearably intense and hence Arjuna pleads Krishna to restore his human form. If I can extend my argument further, I would say that since human forms / representations are ‘easier’ on the eye, hindus went ahead and established various prathirupams and put them in their shrines.Visva rupam clearly highlights the adviata nature of Hinduism, supporting the belief that Brahman is the only and all SAT out there. The divine eye is the final stage of a hindu seeker and there is nothing more truth out there to realize beyond this for a hindu. criticism of my take is welcome. Namaste.

philosoraptor
02 January 2013, 10:15 AM
Arjuna needed a divine eye because the Lord's form is a suprasensory entity. But then again, Krishna was there and Arjuna could see him, so why didn't Arjuna need a divine eye for Krishna-darshan? I can think of several points:

1) The realization of Krishna as the vishva-rUpa is in fact, a higher realization than that required to merely interact with Krishna as friend, cousin, and charioteer. By seeing the vishva-rUpa, Arjuna was actually seeing (not merely being told about) the Lord's all-pervasiveness.

2) In addition to that, the verse cements the view of the Lord as an entity with infinite transcedental qualities, rather than a formless entity with no attributes. Obviously, seeing an entity with infinite qualities, countless arms, heads, legs, etc is an overwhelming experience. Hence, Arjuna needed Krishna's grace to do it. It follows from this that in other avatAras, the Lord conceals some of his glories so that He can interact with and be visualized by ordinary people.

3) It's interesting to note that both the puruSha-sukta and the svetAshvatara upaniShad describe a similar form with countless heads, legs, arms, etc This clearly identifies this vishva-rUpa with that puruSha who is upheld as Brahman.

Anirudh
02 January 2013, 12:31 PM
Krishna’s vishva rupam or cosmic form was unbearably intense and hence Arjuna pleads Krishna to restore his human form.
If I can extend my argument further, I would say that since human forms / representations are ‘easier’ on the eye, hindus went ahead and established various prathirupams and put them in their shrines.Visva rupam clearly highlights the adviata nature of Hinduism, supporting the belief that Brahman is the only and all SAT out there. The divine eye is the final stage of a hindu seeker and there is nothing more truth out there to realize beyond this for a hindu. criticism of my take is welcome. Namaste.

Namaste Charitra,

I think the whole passage need to be posted as independent thread. Kindly enlighten us with your understanding and experiences leading to what you considered as an argument in your message.

ShivaFan
02 January 2013, 01:30 PM
Namaste

I am told the BG gives instruction to see viswa rupam, which looks as though thousands of suns are blazing. The size of the prapancha purusha is said as having no beginning, middle or end for the viswa rupa or universal form. We see a description of this universal form as the BG continues. What humans see through their human eyes is imperfect – the eye can only see so far, light bends within the eye and what one sees is modified by light, even by other factors such as sound which can cause the mind to release reactive energies that actually impact what the eyes see, and what the human eyes can see can be modified by the mind itself. But divine eyes are possible – experience is an element of such eyes, the experience of the divine. It starts with experiencing the truth of one’s own existence (soul). Will everyone see the exact same universal form with divine eyes?

The Devas and Devi are referred to as the divine eyes. Also the opening of the eyes is one of the very last steps in the ceremony of Murti establishment in a temple, where in some traditions of this act the priest ritually scrapes or stabs the eye with a golden needle. Devas and Devi can give you divine eyes, in which you can see the future much earlier than others but this does not take away your free will. Even the future can be changed. Divine eyes can help with that. So by being given these divine eyes, in the example of Krishna and Arjun, Arjuna sees the universal form. This may frighten a soul. Because typically a soul is “physically” only in the present even if the mind wanders about in the past and projects into the future. But, with divine eyes, this leads to many things. For example, the very events of Kurukshetra were told to the blind Dhritarashtra by Sanjaya his advisor who was given the blessing of divya chakshu by the sage Vyasa. So at that moment, did he see the universal form? In one way, yes, because in seeing the past, present and future as Sanjaya saw, this is another way of the universal form and not just millions of eyes and heads and forms. For those who are Krishna devotees, we see that for Radha, separation from Her Lord was no longer subject to the will of mental or even spiritual separation but that Krishna would appear when Radha cast Her “divine eyes” upon almost anything. Divine eyes are spiritual doors. The Guru’s eyes are also called divine eyes. What is an eye? An eye is looking at something else, either outward or even inward. To connect, a soul often wants to connect directly by looking at the eyes of what contains that devotion or source to the divinity. Divine eyes are not a moment in time, but just as the universal form can keep growing and are never ending. Divine eyes can become so powerful, they may even be able to emit what some consider fire. What looks out from the eye can in time, even take form as well. That is why form is timeless, no start or end. Some laugh at the idea of the vision which emits from the eyes taking to form such as like fire. Yet, humans do this in the millions and billions all over the world when they cry tears that come from the eyes. The vision coming out from the eye can and does take form. Divine eyes are mostly a gift to you, or the soul. Krishna gave divine eyes. Shiva is called Asuthoshar or easy audience. He seems to easily give divine eyes to devotees. There are many examples. Seeing the universal form is not limited. It is full of fragrance, yes?

Om Namah Sivaya

devotee
02 January 2013, 09:50 PM
Namaste WM,

Vishwa-roopa means "in the form of the universe". Universe cannot be seen by ordinary eyes. Why ? The universe is infinite. Even if the Arjuna's eyes traveled with maximum possible speed i.e. the speed of light .... it was impossible to have the full view of God's Vishva-roopa as the speed of light is too less as compared to vastness of the universe. Moreover, it was not only the universe we know ... but also all those which we don't (like Yakshas's lokas, gandhravas etc.). So, Divine eye is needed.

However, this was still Vishva-roopa only and not Advaita form of God (as in Self-realisation). If we remember, God in the waking state, in His Cosmic form, is called ViraaT ... imo, this form is similar to that.

OM

Kumar_Das
03 January 2013, 06:54 AM
This is where I draw parallels to the Advaita concept that is encoded in vaishnavaism. By showing the ‘real’ nature of ‘human’Krishna through the cosmic form, none other than Brahman was pulled into the bigger picture by vaishnavites. Hence the dvaitist (dualist) mustn’t get carried away and preach Vishnu as the supreme lord and stop there. The dualist will have to go a step further and also identify the advaita nature or oneness of the Lord. Argument in favor of dualism is thus weakened thanks to viswa rupa.

Krishna’s vishva rupam or cosmic form was unbearably intense and hence Arjuna pleads Krishna to restore his human form. If I can extend my argument further, I would say that since human forms / representations are ‘easier’ on the eye, hindus went ahead and established various prathirupams and put them in their shrines.Visva rupam clearly highlights the adviata nature of Hinduism, supporting the belief that Brahman is the only and all SAT out there. The divine eye is the final stage of a hindu seeker and there is nothing more truth out there to realize beyond this for a hindu. criticism of my take is welcome. Namaste.

:confused:

um, do you have Advaitin scholarly backup for these things you said?

Omkara
03 January 2013, 07:45 AM
This is where I draw parallels to the Advaita concept that is encoded in vaishnavaism.



What is this supposed to mean?




Hence the dvaitist (dualist) mustn’t get carried away and preach Vishnu as the supreme lord and stop there.


Why?




The dualist will have to go a step further and also identify the advaita nature or oneness of the Lord.



Why?




Argument in favor of dualism is thus weakened thanks to viswa rupa.



How?




Visva rupam clearly highlights the adviata nature of Hinduism, supporting the belief that Brahman is the only and all SAT out there.



How?

wundermonk
03 January 2013, 07:50 AM
Thanks all for the comments.

In my view the need for a "divine eye" comes from:

(1)If God were to suddenly "appear before us", we would be confused with our limited intellect. This is why, as was pointed out, Arjuna eventually begs Krishna to assume his "normal" form. For e.g. while Krishna reveals his transcendental form, Arjuna - for a while - become omniscient. He is actually able to see the future when he sees the death of the Kauravas.

(2)"Divine eye" stands more generally for perception or experience. That Arjuna was able to "see" Krishna means that it is possible for us to experience God in his fullness in this life itself. No need to wait after death for that.

(3)Ultimately, the greatest wish for a devotee is to know God in His entirety. Nothing less would satisfy a devotee. Nothing short of experiencing God's knowledge itself is what will satisfy a devotee.

satay
03 January 2013, 10:45 AM
namaskar,

To me the 'divine eye' means something that is not physical but internal. I think that Arjuna was suddenly dropped in deep samadhi (as in Yoga). The lord had just finished telling him about Yoga in the previous chapters. IMHO only in deep samadhi nara can 'see' narayana thus divine eye is samadhi.

Of course, the above is just my own opinion as requested by the OP.

Believer
03 January 2013, 12:04 PM
Namaste,

To me the 'divine eye' means something that is not physical but internal. I think that Arjuna was suddenly dropped in deep samadhi (as in Yoga)....... IMHO only in deep samadhi nara can 'see' narayana thus divine eye is samadhi.
Very interesting and thought provoking take on the subject.

In general, we humans are so limited by our physical attributes/faculties that everything we say/see is limited by our own form/limited intelligence.

Pranam.

Arjunesh
03 January 2013, 12:33 PM
namaskar,

To me the 'divine eye' means something that is not physical but internal. I think that Arjuna was suddenly dropped in deep samadhi (as in Yoga). The lord had just finished telling him about Yoga in the previous chapters. IMHO only in deep samadhi nara can 'see' narayana thus divine eye is samadhi.

Of course, the above is just my own opinion as requested by the OP.


Not only your opinion. I thought earlier in samadhi I saw Krishna. But later I expierenced that in samdhi Krishna is able to see me.

satay
03 January 2013, 12:42 PM
namaste,

That's interesting. For me it is not that nara can 'see' krishna it is that he/she can experience him as in vishva rupa. The vishva rupa is in alignment with ramanuja i.e. this vishva is the body of the lord. Again, my own opinion here so take it with salt.


Not only your opinion. I thought earlier in samadhi I saw Krishna. But later I expierenced that in samdhi Krishna is able to see me.

Arjunesh
04 January 2013, 10:08 AM
namaste,

That's interesting. For me it is not that nara can 'see' krishna it is that he/she can experience him as in vishva rupa. The vishva rupa is in alignment with ramanuja i.e. this vishva is the body of the lord. Again, my own opinion here so take it with salt.

Yes, everyone recognizes everything in a different form.

brahman
07 January 2013, 02:27 AM
Greetings friends,

I have my own thoughts on the significance of Krishna endowing Arjuna with "divine eyes". But what do YOU think is the significance of the "divine eye"?




Dear wundermonk,

What is objectively divine evidently presupposes its counterpart, which is the capacity of the subject to recognize divinity.
The divine eye here is the capacity to recognize spiritual values. Mere human eyes are too weak to even see the continuous flow of events in time. They can comprehend only an empirical view of reality consisting of events. A vision of creative becoming is seen only by the yogic eye.
Sanjaya reports that Arjuna saw countless faces and eyes, signifying the infinite range of the multifaceted aspects of the Absolute. What is meant here is not an externalized vision, but an identity which has no inside or outside.

More important event to be noted is , contrary to the normal expectation of the blissful excitement of a vision of God, Arjuna is led to a vision which makes him shudder with dread.

Why is God described as almost like a terrible monster in whose mouth everything finds its final extinction? What is the significance of this awful vision?

The vision described is not of a theological God who can be contrasted with a devil. In an overall picture of the Absolute, the several worlds in which man lives have all to find their respective places. Man lives at once in the past present and the future. His mind is very often haunted by several hypostatic worlds, both of a cosmological and psychological nature. Some of the worlds so real to him when he is in a religious frenzy or mystical exaltation belong to the archetypal imaginations presented in the epics or legendary folklore on which the mind was fed in its formative period.

We cannot make a dichotomy of the good and the bad, life and death, and the bliss and distress. The absolute ceases to be absolute if something else has an existence apart from it. Further, in one sweep in this cosmic vision, the entire range of imagination of mankind through all ages is to be reviewed and presented as a total whole. All that has been projected on the human mind from time to time is gathered here to thrown into the fire of a total cessation, so that nothing will be left to mar the purity of Lord Krishna, the Absolute consciousness described as sat-cit-ananda, existence subsistence and the value of immaculate Bliss.

Is this vision not seeing in the ordinary sense of the term, could it not be taken for a fantasy? Furthermore, Arjuna is asked to see whatever he is desirous of seeing (ca yat anyat iccahsi drashtum 11-7). Is the actualization of wishful thinking really a spiritual experience?

A spiritual experience is like an ascent to the mountaintop. One does not know what is there until one gets there. For this reason the experience begins with fulfillment of what one initially wishes to experience. The element of fantasy cannot be ignored. However this stage changes as one leaves the threshold of preconceived notions. Love:)

jopmala
14 January 2013, 12:23 PM
namaste charita

advaitavada or mayavada says jiva is brahma, jagat is dream , absolute brahma is nirguna nirvishes and nirakar,renounce karma and become samnyasi because karma is the cause of all miseries, only jnan ( advaita jnan) can help us to overcome maya etc etc.

I want to put some questions to you. i) do you think Gita also teaches the above mentioned advaitavada ? ii) do you consider sri krishna as absolute nirguna nirakar nirvishes brahma if not or if yes , why ? iii) do you consider any other tattva left to know even after sri krishna ,as per Gita ? do you consider the manifestations of bhagavan in terms of vishwarupa are just dream and not real ? iv) what is SAT and ASAT to you as far as Gita is concerned ?

charitra
14 January 2013, 03:18 PM
Namaste Jopmala, Anirudh and Omkar,
I have theorized some out of the box concept here, hence the thread has a great chance of getting derailed. I dont want dear WM to get mad at me. So I created headache what I call a separate thread(See link below) to expand my OWN radical theory. Iam not answering specific questions raised by you all esteemed members yet though. I have to wait for rebuttals of my proposals first.
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=10855


namaste charita

advaitavada or mayavada says jiva is brahma, jagat is dream , absolute brahma is nirguna nirvishes and nirakar,renounce karma and become samnyasi because karma is the cause of all miseries, only jnan ( advaita jnan) can help us to overcome maya etc etc.

I want to put some questions to you. i) do you think Gita also teaches the above mentioned advaitavada ? ii) do you consider sri krishna as absolute nirguna nirakar nirvishes brahma if not or if yes , why ? iii) do you consider any other tattva left to know even after sri krishna ,as per Gita ? do you consider the manifestations of bhagavan in terms of vishwarupa are just dream and not real ? iv) what is SAT and ASAT to you as far as Gita is concerned ?

Mana
14 January 2013, 05:06 PM
हरिः ओम्


Namaste All,

Oh what a wonderful thread, my favourite chapter of the Bhagavad gita.

We would be wise, I think, to analyse Kṛṣṇa's use of the name Guḍākeśa in Chapter 11, so as to better grasp the nature of the "divine eye".
Sloka 7 is the last time that Kṛṣṇa calls Arjuna by this name having done so previously.
In this chapter Kṛṣṇa is the divine eye, the eye is the vision its self; the experience.

What does one do with this experience, one changes perception; conquering sleep and ignorance with light and vision.

We might again gain more knowledge as to the nature of this experience of Arjuna's, by considering his words in Chapter 11 sloka 56.
"After seeing your mild human form, O janārdana, I am again my normal self, and my mind has assumed its normal function."
We must be quite careful not to remove the "divine eye" from context; which is to my mind, the manic state of conciousness of Arjuna.
The revelation of the divine mother, an initial awakening; I think samādhi would come later.

Thank you for your thoughts.


praṇāma

mana


ॐ नमः शिवाय