PDA

View Full Version : VishvarUpa Darshna - Chapter 11



devotee
28 November 2015, 08:39 AM
Namaste,

How was it possible ? Some questions worth pondering ....

1. In chapter 11, Lord Krishna shows His VishvarUpa where Arjuna sees the entire universe in Lord Krishna's body. This Rupa of God contains everything and there is nothing beyond this form ... Arjuna is unable to see either the beginning or the end of Lord's VishvarUpa. By definition, God is Infinite ... without beginning and without an end. There is nothing which exists outside God. Now, the question is :

How did Arjuna saw this VishvarUpa ? Arjuna was inside it as the entire world was within that form. Arjuna felt that he was outside, because he was able to see the whole form ... the description given by him in Chapter 11 is not possible if he was inside that form.

2. What is the real form of Krishna ? The form which was visible within the world as a human being or the form which was infinite containing the entire universe ? Was world within Krishna when he was in human form ? If yes, what was outside Him ?

3. Mother Yashoda sees the entire universe within Lord Krishna's mouth when Lord Krishna was a child. Where was Mother Yashoda while seeing this phenomenon ... in outside world where child Lord Krishna was or inside the world which was in the mouth of Lord Krishna ? Or, if world was inside Lord Krishna what was outside Lord Krishna ?

OM

devotee
28 November 2015, 11:37 PM
Namaste,

To correctly understand the above phenomenona, we first have to understand the Real nature of God.

What does Bhagwad Gita says on the form / nature of God ? Let's see these verses :

1. In verse 4.6 of BG God says :

Ajopi san = Ajah (unborn) + api san (in spite of, though) ==> Though Unborn
AvyayAtmA ===> Avyaya + AtmA ==> imperishable/Immutable Self
Prakritim (Nature) + SvAm (my own) + adhishThaya (subjugating) ==> Subjugating my Prakriti (Nature)
SambhavAmi ===> (I) Come into being
AtmamAyayA ===> By means of my own MAyA

Though I am unborn (ajah) imperishable Self and Lord of all beings subjugating my Prakriti (Nature), I (in this form) come into being by means of my own MAyA.

What is the meaning of "Unborn" ? It doesn't only mean "unborn in worldly sense". It actually means, "That which was always there, eternally present." So, there was never a time when God was born or God came into being. Still, during Mahabharata time He was "born" ... as we know from the scripture. Lord Krishna says that it is due to his power of MaYa which He subjugates and that creates the phenomenon of His coming into being (as worldly being).

What is the need of subjugating His own Prakriti here when Prakriti is always subjugated under Him ? This is because usually, Prakriti, has no power to effect God's birth or death as a human being. So, a special effort is needed by God Himself to force MAyA or Prakriti to create His form as desired by Him.

So, in reality, He is unborn ... in reality, He is not as He is perceived as a human being by Arjuna and others ... but He is perceived so by His own power of MAyA which has been forced to act in this manner by God Himself.

Here the question is : God, in reality, is Infinite. By assuming a human form, does He diminish by becoming a finite form ?

That is refuted in the first part of the verse by the word "SannavyayAtmA" ===> He is undecaying / imperishable Self that is ===> He is changeless. So, Infinite, in reality, remains Infinite and still appears in a finite form when such a "divya" (wonderful, shining) phenomenon takes place. Therefore, the finite form that is perceived by Arjuna and others is only apparently so by the power of His own MAyA ... God still remains Infinite, Unborn and changeless.

Why does He do so is stated in Verse 4.7 of BG.

2. Let's see Verse 7.24 and 7.25 of BG :

Avyaktam vyaktimApannam manyante mAm abuddhayah |
Param bhAvam ajAnanto mama avyayam anuttamam || (BG 7.24)

Avyaktam = Unmanifest
Vyaktim (manifest) + Apannam (becoming) ==> become manifest
manyanate ==> (they) think (so)
mAm ==> Me
Abuddhyah ==> The unintelligent people
Param ==> The highest / Ultimate
BhAvam ===> nature
Ajanantah ==> Unaware
Mama ==> My
Avyayam ==> Undecaying / Unchanging /Immutable
Anuttamama ==> excellent and insurmountable

====> The unintelligent people think that my unmanifest (existence) has become manifest unaware of my excellent and insurmountable immutable nature.

What does this verse say ? In essence it says that by the said "apparent worldly" birth, He actually doesn't change ... He remains as He always is. Only the unintelligent people think that his unmanifest existence has become manifest (losing its real nature of being unmanifest). But it is not really so.

How is he able to do so ? He explains in verse 7.25 :

NAham prakAshah sarvasya yogmAyAsamAvritah |
MUDhoyam nAbhijAnAti Loko mAmajamavyayam ||

Na (Not) + aham (I) + Prakashah (visible/perceivable) ==> I am not perceived / visualised
Sarvasya ==> to all
YagmAyA + SamAvritah ===> veiled by YogmAyA
MUDho + ayam ===> This unintelligent world
na + abhijAnAti ===> Does not know
MAm ==> My
Ajam ==> Unborn
Avyayam ===> Unchanging / Undecaying /Imperishable / Immutable

Why doesn't this world perceive His Unborn and Immutable Nature ? Because He is veiled by YogamAyA. YogamAyA (Nature) is the power of Brahman which veils the Reality i.e. Brahman. Brahman doesn't change. It is always unborn and immutable and it is covered under the veil of MAyA and therefore, people don't understand It as It is.

.... Contd in next posts ....

OM

smaranam
28 November 2015, 11:57 PM
Namaste

How did Arjuna saw this VishvarUpa ? Arjuna was inside it as the entire world was within that form. Arjuna felt that he was outside, because he was able to see the whole form ... the description given by him in Chapter 11 is not possible if he was inside that form.
OM
​Why not? :)

Yes Arjun was "outside", but was also "inside"
What BhagvAn shows us is to be seen with the Divya ChakshU , not with human logic. He gives us the capacity to comprehend what it means (kind of like wordless telepathy). By the way I know what you are arriving at.

Shri KRshNa once showed me a form where He disappeared from my side, as if in order to pervade that form just as I turned to ask Him about what He was showing... To me it was 'a' Universal form of BhagvAn -- Vishwa rUpa' which had all deva devata. It was in an on-going context, and meant for a purpose which it served well. There was Dattatreya-in-disguise who kept ever-growing into the All-Devas Vishwa rUpa as soon as I put bhiksha in His jholi on KRshNa's order and KRshNa who pervaded it by disappearing from my side. Neither KRshNa nor Dattatreya were seen afterwards because they were the VishNu in the exact center who also pervaded the whole rUpa.

By your logic, I should have been inside the rupa, because the Deva-Union is all-pervading, everywhere.

To Arjun, a more elaborate Vishwa-rUpa served the purpose in that context -- kaalosmi
To Duryodhan, a different Vishwa-rUpa depicting BhagavAn's all-powerful nature, served that purpose. It is a different story that Duryodhan ignored it -- but Bheeshma Pitamah and the acharyas there were blessed with it.

I want to address your other questions in detail. Will be back later...

devotee
29 November 2015, 02:52 AM
Namaste smarnam,



Yes Arjun was "outside", but was also "inside"
What BhagvAn shows us is to be seen with the Divya ChakshU , not with human logic. He gives us the capacity to comprehend what it means (kind of like wordless telepathy). By the way I know what you are arriving at.

I agree and this is a very important point to be noted in the Vishva-Rupa darshan phenomenon. I will touch upon it from my point of view in my following posts. However, I would like to hear from you how you view this :

Whenever we are unable to explain anything connected to God or His activities, we give a certain power to Him and stop questioning further. Can we logically explain how even with a divya chakshu, anyone can see the way Arjuna sees. Can you explain ?

You have kept the font in the following para in your post so small that you forced this old man to use magnifying glass to be able to read what you have written ! :)

OM

smaranam
29 November 2015, 04:00 PM
Whenever we are unable to explain anything connected to God or His activities, we give a certain power to Him and stop questioning further. Can we logically explain how even with a divya chakshu, anyone can see the way Arjuna sees. Can you explain ?
Namaste Devotee ji

Sorry about the small font.
To me this is simple. That is why I shared my own experience because Arjun is not going to come to HDF to speak for himself.
When the medicant (Dattatreya in disguise) started growing larger and larger at high speed, KRshNa took me to a nearby hill so I could get a better look. It was on Shri KRshNa's behest that I had put the rice grains and fruits in the bhikshuk's jholi after which he started growing.

What I could see was all Devas were in that huge rUpa -- GaNapati, Indra .... BramhA VishNu Mahesh in the center. When I turned to my left to talk to KRshNa , He wasn't there all of a sudden. I understood immediately that this rapidly expanding rUpa was Him!

If the rUpa was a distinct vision KRshNa was showing, He would remain beside me, but he did not.

It was clear from the demostration that this rUpa's expansion was not going to stop. It was my Swami's uttermost kRupA and kindness that showed the ananta - rUpa ! ananta = never-ending.
anAdi-ananta. Beginingless and endless.
How did I know this rUpa was anAdi-ananta?

The answer is simple : you just have to take my word for it!
It was something the Lord conveyed to His devotee who is not obliged to prove it to anyone :)
I understood what He wanted me to -- so the purpose was served.
It also answered doubts and guilt about not thinking about other DevtAs what to speak of worshiping them. They were all contained in Him.
This rUpa was conveying the message of having no end, yet I could see the Deva's faces high up in the endless dark space. (I won't say "sky")

From my own report -- there was nothing that could not be inside that rUpa. Therefore, logically, I had to be a part of it -- as well as the house/ hut. As well as the "hill" where prANanAth left me to turn into this vishaaaal rUpa. Have no issues with that. Of course I was a part of the rUpa "in front of my sUkshma eyes". Exactly like Arjun.

Oh! But how is it that He is back today as Shri KRshNa? Whether dvi-bhuj (2-armed) or chaturbhuj (four-armed) ? And how is it that He turned into little Damodar before I even realized that KArtik had dawned??

See, devotees are not so fond of being the only one around. We need our Lord. Nor do we want to prove anything.
The proof is in the pudding : If You simply insist that You are something impersonal nirAkAr and tell me I am "THAT" I will suffocate, and I have conducted the experiment, and have suffocated. You are a witness to that and had to reveal Your KRshNa-rUpa out of no choice -- again and again. No amount of trickery can make me exist as if there is no one else -- be it via verbal gymnastics, logic gymnastics, theoretical gymnastics, none! What is the use of the samadhi which one enters into and exits 3 hrs later to resume the next day with eyes open but without You!
You think you are doing Your "kartavya" (Divine dharma) by teaching us about this nirAkAr impersonal stuff. You have done that. Now it is our turn --- to say, "OK fine. So what?"

This is what Uddhav learned from Radha and why KRshNa sent Uddhav to VRundAvan.

This is why Shri KRshNa remains bansi bajaiyya Murli-manohar Shankha-Chakra-GadAdhAri GhanashyAm (also says in the same chapter 11 that this saumya (2/4 armed) form of His is ati durlabh! very precious and rarely seen -- be it with eyes, divya chakshU or hRday -- heart),

and this is why He signs --- "eternally yours"

devotee
29 November 2015, 10:47 PM
Namaste Smaranam,

Thanks for sharing your beautiful and blissful experience !

I am slightly busy now but I would like to address one pricking issue in a haste, if you allow me. Your this part of the post reminded me of all those self-proclaimed Vaishnava warriors who want to finish of all Advaitins once for all :


=smaranam]If You simply insist that You are something impersonal nirAkAr and tell me I am "THAT" I will suffocate, and I have conducted the experiment, and have suffocated. You are a witness to that and had to reveal Your KRshNa-rUpa out of no choice -- again and again. No amount of trickery can make me exist as if there is no one else -- be it via verbal gymnastics, logic gymnastics, theoretical gymnastics, none! What is the use of the samadhi which one enters into and exits 3 hrs later to resume the next day with eyes open but without You!
You think you are doing Your "kartavya" (Divine dharma) by teaching us about this nirAkAr impersonal stuff. You have done that. Now it is our turn --- to say, "OK fine. So what?"


I am not here for teaching anyone. I am not a teacher. I have no desire that you or anyone must agree to my posts. Why should that be necessary ? I come here to express myself as I find it correct and I give reasons and proof for what I say. There are many treatises on BG and with varying interpretations ? Were they trying to teach others or did they fight among themselves because their views didn't match those of others ? See, Advaitins are in this world because God wanted them to be there otherwise the whole lot of Advaitins must have been wiped out without a trace ... I hope you agree to this. If you think that we are fools and going to hell for what we feel and do ... let it be so. Do you want to help us by saying hateful words against us ?

The use of terms "verbal gymnastics", "logic gymnastics" and the language used show intolerance (leave aside acceptance) towards any Advaitic proposition.

Have you seen me speaking such a language against you even though my and your views differ quite a lot ? Please search the entire HDF and let me know. Against a few other Vaishnavas, I did sometimes retaliate against their unprovoked attacks ... but you can understand that if someone keeps attacking you, you can't always keep silent.

OM

smaranam
30 November 2015, 07:56 AM
Namaste Smaranam,

Thanks for sharing your beautiful and blissful experience !

I am slightly busy now but I would like to address one pricking issue in a haste, if you allow me. Your this part of the post reminded me of all those self-proclaimed Vaishnava warriors who want to finish of all Advaitins once for all :


I am not here for teaching anyone. I am not a teacher. I have no desire that you or anyone must agree to my posts. Why should that be necessary ? I come here to express myself as I find it correct and I give reasons and proof for what I say. There are many treatises on BG and with varying interpretations ? Were they trying to teach others or did they fight among themselves because their views didn't match those of others ?
Namaste

There has been a big, major misunderstanding !! :)
That paragraph was for KRshNa, my prANanAth! Not for you!
Why would I address you as You with a capital Y and why would I say "You had to reveal Your KRshNa rUpa" ?

If You simply insist that You are something impersonal nirAkAr and tell me I am "THAT" I will suffocate, and I have conducted the experiment, and have suffocated. You are a witness to that and had to reveal Your KRshNa-rUpa out of no choice -- again and again.


I was speaking to my Beloved. Remember this paragraph was titled "The proof is in the pudding" This has been my personal experience, and some of it very recent as well.
I can say this to Him although He knows everything.
KRshNa does not want me to suffocate! I cannot live without Him for too long. This is not some theory from some group but my very personal anubhav.
How does that hurt you ? You are nowhere in the picture.

Why should my honest and truthful personal anubhav affect you? Why should I have to live your way? You are free to live your way, and I do have resepct for your path, I was only saying I cannot tread it.



About the teaching : KRshNa is not only Jagad-Guru but He is my Guru. I was saying this to Him. He teaches these things because He has to keep sama darshana. However He knows very well how His prema bhakta would feel and does not impose a one-size-fits-all solution for everyone. He knows exactly what His devotees want.

My experience is independent of others but is shockingly similar to distinct experiences of others in history -- including the history while KRshNa was here on earth. That is all.

I am not a part of the VaishNav warrior group you have mentioned. In fact they will not consider me as a part of their group. I am not from any group.


See, Advaitins are in this world because God wanted them to be there otherwise the whole lot of Advaitins must have been wiped out without a trace ... I hope you agree to this. If you think that we are fools and going to hell for what we feel and do ... let it be so. Do you want to help us by saying hateful words against us ?
OM
What is all this devotee ji? You are jumping to conclusions on things I NEVER EVER said or meant-- only based on your past experience with some VaishNav warrior groups?

I am sorry that these people gave you wounds and hope they have healed by now or I pray that may those bad memories be wiped out and bring back your peace to practice your sAdhanA freely with abandon.
I am not from any group to think "us Vs them" . There are no such well-defined boundaries in my mind. I am an individual and you are another.

What I am saying is -- there is no question of proving a siddhAnta to others, because I bank heavily on experience and KRshNa's guidance to recognize what bestows peace and happiness and what bestows sorrow or suffocation on me and me alone. I did not speak for others.

If you look closely at my posts I have always maintained that it is about what works for the individual and not about any final declaration of what is the truth ans what is not.



The use of terms "verbal gymnastics", "logic gymnastics" and the language used show intolerance (leave aside acceptance) towards any Advaitic proposition.
It is as if you are saying my anubhav observed over long periods is my crime ? However, I hope the misunderstanding is cleared now

About the word "gymnastics" -- I can use it for emphasis while talking to the Beloved though I was not intending to share that with others.

This was an expression (which makes things clearer in my mind while they were always clear to Him) -- that said "My Dear Lord, I honor Your words more than anything. I have honestly tried the route of others, and suffocated."

Please be assured that I do not wish to cause any pscychological harm to anyone , and have respect for not only you, but for Shankaracharya and his parampara as well.
There are many hitachintaks (well-wishers) even right in my family, who have tried to tell me "KRshNa -- hmmm -- this is all nice . Now you have to become One with Him." What "One with Him" really means is They were waiting for me to give up His association and join their thought process. Which is not going to happen.

devotee
30 November 2015, 06:56 PM
Namaste Smaranam,

I am so sorry for my rant over nothing ! How could I misunderstand you so badly ! Yes, you have a habit of writing in your posts as if you are talking to Him.. I should have remembered that.

Thanks for the clarification. I wish I had any such experience as you had. My father was a Vaishnava and he used to tell me sometimes his similar experiences.

OM

smaranam
30 November 2015, 08:38 PM
I apologize for not making it explicit and assuming a certain understanding.
Something I have to learn and keep in mind. This is the internet.

However, Devoteeji -- not "as if I am talking to Him." I AM talking to Him OR a quote of a past conversation with GhanashyAm
:)

praNAm

anirvan
01 December 2015, 12:34 AM
What I learnedabout any darshan with the blessings of any AVATAR/SIDDHA GURU etc.. is that its a Kripa-initiated temporary Samadhi state,where blessed one has supra-sensorial vision of a LOK or A Tattva or Swaroop as wished by the Guru/Avtar. its after effect stays with the seeker for along time and usually its intention is to create a hunger in the seeker to achieve the stage natuarally by sadhna.

Here the samadhi is savikalpa/sampranjata samadhi,where the seeker/devotee is the witness,.its all inside the seeker"s antahkaran,where he is sakshi,rest is divine entity.

Both advaita and Leela darshan can happen according to the predominant bhava of seekers.

devotee
01 December 2015, 07:10 PM
Namaste Anirvan


What I learnedabout any darshan with the blessings of any AVATAR/SIDDHA GURU etc.. is that its a Kripa-initiated temporary Samadhi state,where blessed one has supra-sensorial vision of a LOK or A Tattva or Swaroop as wished by the Guru/Avtar. its after effect stays with the seeker for along time and usually its intention is to create a hunger in the seekerto achieve on his own with sadhna.

Here the samadhi is savikalpa/samranjata samadhi,where the seeker/devotee is the witness,.its all inside the seeker"s antahkaran,where he is sakshi,rest is divine entity.

Both advaita and Leela darshan can happen according to the predominant bhava of seekers. Both exist there.

Yes. It is God who is the Guru. It is God whose grace makes such vision possible.

OM

devotee
01 December 2015, 07:24 PM
Namaste,

Bhagwad Gita is an ocean filled with wonderful jewels and that keeps surprising me. Let's see some more verses where God has tried to explain His nature and His relationship with the creation :

BG verse 9.4

BG verses 9.4 and 9.5 give us a very strange picture of God.

MayA tatam idam sarvam jagatavyaktamUrtinA |
MatsthAni sarva BhUtAni, n chAham teshvavasthitah || BG 9.4
Na cha matsthAni bhUtAni pashya me yogmeshvaram |
BhUtabhrinna cha bhUtastho mamAtmA bhUtabhAvanah || BG 9.5

This whole universe is pervaded by Me in my unmanifest form. All beings exist in Me but I am not contained in them !

Behold my divine yoga power, nor do the beings are contained in Me. (Though) I am the sustainer and originator of all beings but my Self is not contained in the beings.

"But I am not contained in them" ? Now, this creates confusion. Because in another place, He says, "Aham AtmAn gudAkesha sarvabhUtAshya sthitah" ==> I am the Self in the heart of all beings. How can these two be compatible ? At one place He asserts that He is not contained in the beings and in another He says that He is in the heart of all beings !

This contradiction arises due to our conditioning of mind. We start seeing God as an entity with form and we see this world as a Real entity. God is subtlest among the subtles. He remains untouched by any gross existence in this universe even though He is the core / essence of all things. Therefore, He is the essence of all beings i.e. the Self of all beings (in the heart means at the core / in essence) ... but still He remains untouched by worldly creations (because worldly beings are unreal projections on His reality and He is the Real).

Do all the beings dwell "within Him" ? This is negated in the next verse .. "Na cha matsthAni bhUtAni" ...

The question arises :

In first verse He says, "MatsthAni sarva bhUtAni" (meaning all beings are within me) and just in the next verse He says, "Na cha matsthAni bhUtAni" ?? This appears to be an impossibility and a clear contradiction ! However, whenever Self is described, God is described ... we have seen such seemingly contradictory statements. Why ? Due to our limited capability to comprehend Nature of God.

The first verse simply means, "Existence of all beings is with God as the substratum" i.e. existence of all beings is derived from God alone. The beings have no independent existence in absence of God and that is the meaning of "MatsthAni sarva bhUtAni". In the next verse, any Beings's place in any physical spatial location of God is denied. Why ? Because God remains untouched by the worldly creations.

In the very next verse He gives example of VAyu within the space. VAyu stays within space but space remains untouched by VAyu's presence. Though, this example also doesn't exactly explain True nature of God and beings existence and relationship. It only explains how space remains untouched by VAyu but not the other part of the contradiction.


BG Chapter 10

In this chapter, God has tried to explain how we can visualise Him / where we can see Him. Let's take verse 20 of this chapter :

Aham AtmA gudAkesha sarvabhUtAshaya sthitah |
AhamAdischa madhyam cha bhUtAnAmanta eva cha || BG 10.20

==> I am the Self in the heart of all beings. I am the beginning, the middle and the end of all beings !

This is a very profound teaching. The first part says that He is the essence of all beings. In the second He says that all beings are nothing but Himself to begin with, in the middle and also at the end. What does it mean ? It means that, in reality, every being is none but God Himself in all its states. It is God which starts His journey as a being, It is God which lives the life of a being and it is only God left when the being ends its identity as a being.

The above is resonated in these verses too of the BG :

"Vasudevah sarvam iti"==> All this is but VAsudeva. BG 7.19

UpdrsTAnumantA cha bhartA bhoktA maheshwarah : |
ParmAteti chApyukto dehesmin Purushah parah || 13.22

===> He is updrshTA (i.e uninvolved witness) and the permitter (allows whatever one wants to do), the sustainer, the experiencer (Jeeva) and the great Lord and who is also called the Supreme Self is alone the Supreme Purusha in this body.

Who is the experiencer ? It is Jeeva. Why ? SvetAsvatar Upanishad says : There are two birds very closely related and very much alike on the same tree. One eats the ripe fruits but the other one just watches everything as a spectator.

The tree is the body. Two birds are Jeeva (individual self) and God (Cosmic Self). One experiences the world and the other acts as just the uninvolved witness. But are they really two ? The above verse says that both are One alone.

... Contd. in next posts ....

OM

devotee
11 December 2015, 08:46 AM
Namaste,

Let's revisit the verse BG 13.22 along with a few earlier verses which must be kept in mind as the reference verses for this verse. Verse 13.22 talks about Purusha and it starts with verse 13.19. This Purusha's characteristics are :

a. It is AnAdi i.e. which was never born (verse 13.19)
b. Purusha is enjoyer of happiness and sufferer of sufferings
(Verse 13.20)
c. Purusha due to its association with Prakriti's gunas gets into good/bad yonis in cycles of births. (13.21)
d. Purusha alone is UpdrashTA (uninvolved witness), the permitter, the enjoyer, great God and also the Supreme AtmAn. (13.22)

So, it is God alone which is playing different roles simultaneously. BG verse 10.20 and many other verses endorse this again and again in BG.

What does it mean ? If everything is God, then what about this multitude ? ===> This only means that multitude is not the reality. The reality is not what is perceived by our sense organs.

***************
We must visit the relevant verses of Chapter 11 where VishvarUpa Darshan has been described. This will make things much more clear.

Let's note these things from Chapter 11 of BG :

a. VishvarUpa could be perceived by Arjuna only after getting divya chaksus (Divine eyes). Why was there a need for divya chaksus if it was a scene as we see from our worldly eyes ? Surely this was a scene which was not worldly and therefore couldn't have been seen without eyes blessed with special powers to see through what exactly was going on behind the worldly scene of MahAbhArat war.

Let's keep in mind that Arjuna requested to see the form of God which was complete with his Aishvarya (qualities and power of God). (Verse 11.3).

b. What does Arjuna see ?

i) He doesn't see Lord Krishna with reins of horses of the chariot in his hands. Let's remember that during this phenomenon, the people gathered in Kurukshetra were still seeing Lord Krishna driving the chariot.
ii) He doesn't see God in His somya rUpa as Lord Vishnu smiling with four hands though this is the form which is usually worshiped and recognised by his devotees.
iii) Though all the great warriors were standing to fight, Arjuna sees them running towards the mouths of MahAkAl, the form which Arjuna saw with the divine eyes. He sees sons of DhritrAshTra, Bhishma, Drona, Karna and many other warriors rushing towards fearsome mouths of MahAkAl. He also saw many of them already dead.

Which form of God was Real here ? The form which was driving the chariot ? Or the form of MahAkAl which was perceived by only Divya Chakshus ? or the form of Vishnu with four hands which was shown to Arjuna on request by Lord Krishna ? Or his unmanifest form which pervades the entire universe and which was pervading the entire universe even when VishvarUpa darshan was possible ?

How could these warriors be standing in Kurushetra with their weapons for starting the war and also at the same time entering into the mouth of MahAkAl or looking dead with their heads crushed under the jaws of MahAkAl ? On one hand from worldly eyes, nothing was yet lost, no one had yet died ... nothing else was happening except start of the great war ... and on the other hand, there was no war at all but a totally different picture was there where most of the warriors were dying like moths and entering into dreadful mouths of MahAkAl !

Question arises : What was the reality ? The scene that was perceived by worldly eyes during the war by everyone who didn't have the divine eyes or the scene that Arjuna saw with divine eyes ? As both scenes were perceived simultaneously, which scene was real ? ... Or Reality was something completely different from both the scenes ?

... Contd...

OM

devotee
25 December 2015, 08:18 AM
Namaste,

The questions that arose in Vishva-rupa darshan hinged are on one question, "What was the reality ?" Now this appears an easy question as if we know what "reality" means !

We tend to accept something real if we are able to "know" that thing by "touch", "smell", "sight" etc. Actually, grossness of a thing has been accepted as the ultimate proof of reality. Our mind tends to accept : "If something is gross, it can't be unreal". Is it really so ? What does Bhagwad Gita say on this ?

In Bhagwad Gita chapter 2, Lord Krishna tells us on what is real :

"That which is unreal has no existence and that which is real never becomes non-existent (i.e. the real cannot ever be destroyed)" (BG 2.16)
"Know that to be indestructible by which this all (world's everything) is pervaded. That imperishable cannot be destroyed by anyone" (BG 2.17)
"All bodies of that (real) which is Shariri (i.e. embodied one, which takes form of various bodies) and which is indestructible and indeterminable are destructible." (BG 2.18)

So, what is the test for anything to be real or unreal ?

a) The Real can never be destroyed i.e. it is always present and is indestructible.
b) That Real is one alone (Please mark the singular number used for that which is Real in the verses. That pervades this all "Sarvam idam". (In verse 2.17 Lord uses the term "Sarvam idam" and that means including everything whether living or non-living things")
c) All bodies taken by that "Real" which is the "embodied one" and which is 'indestructible" and "which always is" are destructible.
===> So, all bodies whether those are of the living things or non-living things have two things : One is that pervades them and everything else and the bodies in different form. The one that pervades everything always exists and is Real. The bodies don't always exist because those can be destroyed and therefore as per Verse 2.16 all bodies are unreal.

So, what are those all bodies and what is that Real one which is indestructible and that which takes on all bodies and is called the Shariri or the embodied one ? The bodies include :
a) The bodies of all living things and even non-living things.
b) The bodies of all warriors and even that of Arjuna
c) The body of Krishna whether it was in the form of a human being driving the chariot or the form of Lord Vishnu or the form of MahAkAl.
Why ? Because the verse 2.18 says, "All bodies are destructible" and therefore they all are unreal (because of Verse 2.16).
******************
Now the question arises : Did Lord Krishna show Arjuna anything false ? Was this His grace ? Now, there comes the doctrine of "relative reality". How ? Let's see below :
===> The earth appears to be still even though it is moving at a very high speed around the Sun. What is the Reality ? From absolute point of reference, the earth is never still. However, from my position, it is still and that stillness of the earth is the relative reality.

Similarly, from the absolute point of reference, whatever Arjuna saw was unreal. However, from Arjuna's reference point (who himself is unreal from the absolute reference point), all Kings, bodies of Lord Krishna and the forms of Lord Krishna that he saw were all real (i.e. relatively real).
Now, the question arises, why did Krishna show Arjuna something which was unreal and then say that that "extraordinary seeing" was due to his grace ?? The answer lies in Lord's aim in doing all this :

What was the aim of showing Vishvarupa to Arjuna ? From the beginning of Bhagwad Gita Lord Krishna's aim was to make him do his duty at the time of war. So, he should see the reality behind whatever was happening. That was something which was "more real" than the relative reality seen by Arjuna at the time of war. What does it mean ?

Arjuna thought : He was going to be the killer of all kings, his own brethren, other relatives, his own Guru etc." That was his folly because the real actor was God Himself and not Arjuna. It is God's wish which acts through any agent within Prakriti (or it is Prakriti which does everything as God wishes). It is Prakriti (at the behest of God's wishes) which does everything and therefore, Arjuna was not the doer. The verse which says this is :"All actions are performed by Gunas of Prakriti in all respect. The being deluded by Ahamkaar thinks that he is the doer" (BG 3.27)

The above teaching has been repeated by Lord Krishna in other places too in BG. However, "seeing is believing". And therefore, Lord Krishna showed Arjuna who the real doer was in the form of Vishvarupa which was MahAkAl. It was that MahAkAl which was destroying all the kings and Arjuna's brethren and Arjuna was just a tool of the real doer.

Was it grace of God or not ? It surely was ! How could he ever believe that he was not the killer but it was Lord Krishna Himself in the form of MahAkAl ? Could he ever be deluded into believing that he is the doer of any action after seeing what he saw ? No. Because he saw with his own eyes that he was not the real killer. That was His grace !

OM