vishNu tattva vinirNaya - Question Bank
1. Why do we perform salutations to vishNu at the beginning of any text?
This can be understood from the point of view of two people
1. The Author
2. The Reader
For the author, it is said that saluting vishNu removes all obstacles in completing the work and also makes the work well read.
For the reader, it removes the obstacles in listening till the end of the work.
2. How do we come to know that these benefits arise from salutations to vishNu?
We come to know it from the practice of the learned.
3. But, how can practice of the learned be a reason to believe?
The practice of the learned will not be without the back up of an authority. Therefore, we infer that there is a Vedic passage 'samApti kAmaH mangalamAcharet.h' - One desiring the successful completion of his work should perform salutations to vishNu.
4. But, there is no such passage in the Vedas.
True, this passage does not occur in the available Vedas. There are many more vedas, which are lost to posterity. We only have a small portion of the vedic literature available to us. It is said that there are innumerable vedas - anantA vai vedAH
5. Why would Sri Madhvacharya perform salutations to vishNu? Do you mean he also has the fear of obstacles?
No. Sri Madhvacharya being the incarnation of the blemishless Vayu, is free from all obstacles. But, he salutes vishNu for a different purpose.
6. What is the purpose then?
Firstly, he salutes because it is his very nature to always salute vishNu.
Secondly, it is to teach his disciples, that they should do such salutations to ward off any obstacles.
6. What is a prakarana?
A prakarana is a text which is related to a portion of Shastra and achieves the objective of Shastra in some way.
7. What words were used by Sri Madhvacharya to suggest that the salutations he performed are not for the fear of obstacles?
Acharya says - sadA vande - I always salute - this suggests to us the salutations were not made out of fear of obstacles. But it his nature to always salute vishNu.
8. What is the prerequisite for us to salute someone?
We should know about his personality. Then only it will be appropriate to salute him.
9. How do we come to know about the personality?
It is through his identifying attributes(unique characteristics). They are also called as laxaNa's.
10. What are the identifying attributes (unique characteristics) of Visnu?
He is free from all blemishes and full of asupisious qualities. (No other person has such attributes in the entire universe)
11. Are these the only attributes?
No, by the way of saying that he is free from blemishes, he is known to have infinite attributes such as not being dependent on any one, not being second to any one etc.
By way of saying that he is full of auspicious attributes, he is known to have infinite attributes such as complete bliss, complete knowledge etc.
12. What is the significance of using the word 'Ashesha'?
It is to suggest that vishNu has infinite attributes.
13. Why did Acharya say 'sadgunam' instead of 'gunam'?
Some treat pain as also one of the gunas. If he were to say only 'asheshagunam' then vishNu may be attributed to have pain. This is not true. So, to avoid such interpretation Acharya has used the word 'sad' - which means good attributes. As pain is not counted as good attribute, one cannot attribute this to vishNu. There is one more possible explanation to this. By qualifying the word gunam with sat, Acharya is stating that the attributes of vishNu are not created. They are eternal.
14. It is impossible for someone to have infinite good attributes?
No, it is definitely possible. As vishNu is superior to even Kshara (ones whose bodies are perishable) and akshara(ones whose bodies are not perishable) i.e the individual souls and laxmi, who themselves are known to have uncountable attributees, we come to know there is every possibility for vishNu to have inifinite attributes.
15. How do we know that vishNu is having these attributes and that one should not doubt about his infinite attributes?
This can be known from the sadAgamAs. He is known from the sadAgamas as being different and special from others.
16.But people who saw vishNu in his avataras saw him as suffering from pain? Is this not a proof to say that he is also subjected to pain?
vishNu is invisible. So, we necessarily depend on Vëdas to introduce us about vishNu. After knowing from the Vëdas that Rama etc is an incarnation of Vishu, we have to say that He has sorrow. But the Vedas, which introduce Him, clearly say that He has no sorrow even in his incarnations. Our perception contradicting this Vëdic statement is like a fool cutting the same branch of a tree on which he is standing. Therefore, as we cannot know about vishNu by any other means we have no other option than to accept the Vedas as authority in His case and agree that He is free from sorrow.
17. But what about the perception of the people?
Many sadAgamaAs answer this question. They say, vishNu, though free from sorrow, acts as if He has sorrow to mislead idiots like Ravana. Actually He does not have any sorrow. The intelligent should conclude thus from the Vëdic authority'. Therefore, the perception of the people is not valid in this case.
18. If the perception of the people was invalid, why would sage vAlmiki depict rAma to have sorrow?
It is true that Rama cried in search of Sita like a common man and people have seen him cry. Therefore, sage Valmiki has narrated the story of Rama correctly. But the true fact is that Rama did not cry out of sorrow but he was only enacting sorrow in order to deceive the demons. This is the conclusion one would arrive at, after a careful study of the entire scriptures.
19. But texts like pAsupata Agama speak about sorrow of vishNu. What do you have to say about them?
The AgamAs such as pAsupata were written to mislead ineligible persons. They are not sadAgamAs. Therefore one should not conclude that vishNu has sorrow from such texts.
If a person is asked about a cow, he can show how a cow looks like by pointing towards it by grabbing its horns or ears. But, viShnu is invisible. So, Agamas do not tell about viShnu by pointing towards him as in the case of the cow. But, they only tell about viShnu through his laxaNas. Therefore we need to know the laxaNa of viShnu.
21. You have said that the verse sadAgamaikavij~neyaM specifies the pramAna through which viShnu is known. Later you say that nArAyaNa is known only through his laxaNa. If nArAyaNa is known only through his laxaNa, what is the need for stating the pramANa (vedas)?
It is true that nArAyaNa is known only through His laxaNa. But without the knowledge of the laxaNa itself we cannot know about nArAyaNa. Thus we need to know about the laxaNa by some means (pramANa). The pramAna by which we know about the laxaNa are the sadAgamAs (vedas etc). Hence the prAmAna to know that laxaNa is stated in the verse sadAgamaikavij~neyaM (known only through vedas) - thus.
22. You have said that the verse samatItaxarAxaraM tells us that the laxaNa mentioned in the verse nirdoShAsheShasadguNaM is possible in nArAyANa. Why is it required to talk about the possibilty of a laxaNa?
There are indeed certain cases in which a thing known from a valid pramANa is also rejected because of its impossibility. For eg. it is superficially known from the vedas that waters speak, trees speak etc. But this is rejected on the grounds of impossibility. Similarly, the stated laxaNAs of nArAyaNa such as aNutva(automicity), mahatva(majesty) known from the vedic statement (aNoraNIyAn mahatomahIyAn) are mutually contradictory and hence seem to be impossible to simultaneously exist in nArAyaNa. Hence, there is a need to clear this doubt. Therefore we need to state that the mentioned laxaNas are definitely possible in nArAyaNa. This is done by stating samatItaxarAxaraM (nArAyaNa is unlike kshara and akshara. He is vilaxaNa (different). Hence common rules don't apply to him. Therefore, he may even have such seemingly contradictory attributes)
23. You have said that ma~Ngala is required to be performed at the beginning of a work for its successful completion. But there are certain works which have not successfully completed inspite of performing ma~Ngala. Also some works have successfully completed even without the performance of ma~Ngala. So, it is not correct to say that the performance of ma~Ngala is required for successful completion of a work?
In those cases where there is no successful completion even after performing the ma~Ngala, it is because of the lack of devotion, belief, interest etc. And in those cases where there was a successful completion even without the performance of ma~Ngala, it is because of another reason such as merits accrued in past births etc.
na hi bahusAdhanasAdhye kArye kenacit siddhe tadaheturaheturbhavati
A hetu(cause) does not cease to be one just because the kArya(effect) is caused by another cause when the effect may be caused by more than one number of causes.
For eg. assume that there are two routes A & B to reach Badari. Just because a group chose route A to reach Badari does not mean that route B does not lead to Badari.
Similarly, just because the successful completion is achieved in some cases by another reason such as merits accrued in the past births does not mean that ma~Ngala is not a cause of successful completion.
Read More...
The case for apaurusheyatva