Dear Bhagavatas:Here is an interestin interpretation of the term "Shoonya" to denote the Lord, occuring in Sri VishNu Sahasranaamam, appearing in a sister list. Hope you will enjoy reading.
Dasoham Anbil Ramaswamy ====================================================
From: bindinganavale suresh <suresh_b_n@xxxx> Reply-To: tiruvengadam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: tiruvengadam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: Re: [t'vengadam] "shoonyah": "Lord Zero" of the Vishnu-SahasranamamDate: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 08:36:20 -0700 (PDT) Dear Sri Sudarshan, That was a nice article.Really thought provoking.I would like to share my thoughts and add more information about this topic with you and other members of this group. In the 6th chapter of Chandogya upanishad,known popularly as the sad vidya,Udalaka teaches his son svetaketu about Brahman in the state of cause and effect.Uddalaka teaches his son the concept of tat tvam asi through different approaches.In one such approach he arrives at this nama "shoonyah" i.e Zero or Nothing and equates it with Brahman. The teaching of Uddalaka to svetaketu about this approach is as follows :- Uddalaka first asks his son to get a particular fruit called "Nyagrodha" from a tree.His son gets the same.Uddalaka now asks him to open the fruit,svetaketu does the same.Uddalaka now asks his son what he sees in the fruit,his son replies that he sees some seeds. Uddalaka asks him to break one of them, svetaketu does the same. Uddalaka finally asks him what he sees now. Svetaketu relies that he sees "nothing" i.e shoonyah.From this uddalaka concludes his teaching that justas the big tree (from which his son had fetched a fruit) had come out of "nothing i.e shoonyah" ,likewise the entire creation with all its contents has come out of "nothing" and this "Nothing" is none other than the One Brahman without a second. Now,how is this possible? , it might be a matter of common human experience what svetaketu had seen when he broke the seed to see nothing,but how does this point to Brahman?. This is where the earlier lesson of Uddalaka helps,he had said to his son," Dear boy, In the begining all this was Brahman himself known as existence. Some say that all these came out of non-existence,but how can existence which is self proved come out of non-existence i.e void ?,therefore it is to be concluded that Brahman,the only existence is the cause of all we see and experience". It is through the above teaching we have to understand the subtle truth that Brahman is the real cause but known as "shoonyah" when we view him from our common experience as svetaketu did. Sri Krishnaarpanamasthu Suresh B.N. --- "M.K.Sudarshan" <sampathkumar_2000@xxxx> wrote: > > > Dear friends, > > One of the 'nAmA-s' in the Sahasranamam that I'm > always intrigued by > is the name "shoonyah" given to Vishnu and as it > apppears in shlOka > no: 79 -- > > suvarna-varna hEmAngO varAngas-chandanAngadI > veeraha vishamah shoonyO > grutAshI-rachala-chalah > > The Sanskrit word "soonya" means "zero", "nullity", > "cipher", > "emptiness". > > It would strike anyone as extremely odd that the > Sahasranamam should > choose to call Lord Vishnu as 'Zero'! You can > understand God being > called "ekah", the One Supreme Being. The essence of > all monistic > theism lies in the belief that God is One (the > Upanishad says, > "sayaschAyam pUrUshE; yaschAsAvA'dityE; sa ekah"). > > You can understand too God being addressed as > "anantah", the > Infinite, as in the Sahasranamam stanza--- > > kAma devah kAmapAlah kaamI kAntah krutAgamah > anirdEshyavapu-vishnur-vIrO' anantah > dhananjayah (stanza 70) > > Since God is Immeasurable it seems plainly alright > to name Him > "anantah", the Infinite. But how is one to explain > hailing the > Almighty as 'shoonyah', the Cipher? > > There is a view that "If Infinity is immeasurable, > so is Zero". > Mathematically speaking, one could define 'zero' to > be > 'anti-infinity'. If 'Infinity' is immeasurable > plenitude, 'Zero' is > immeasurable emptiness. If you were to imagine, say, > an interminable > series of values, from zero to infinity, floating > somewhere out there > in endless space, then, surely, Zero would be at one > end of it while > Infinity would be found at the other end... > wherever, that is, the > two ends may be found, if at all. And if you reflect > upon it deeply, > that would make out 'Zero' and 'Infinity' to be two > sides of the same > un-graspable coin. > > By the same logic, you might say the Sanskrit > "anantah" and "shoonya" > might seem antonymous but in reality they mean the > same thing. > Hailing God Almighty as 'Lord Infinity' is hence no > different from > hailing Him 'Lord Zero'. > > Incredible logic notwithstanding, we know for a fact > however that the > 'Infinite' and the 'Cipher' are never really the > same thing. None of > us would be willing to exchange one for the other if > it came to a > real choice between the two. If I go up, for > instance, to a venerable > 'achArya' or 'guru' and prostrate at his feet, I > would expect him to > shower his benediction upon me saying, "May you be > blessed in life, > my son, with God's infinite Grace!". If instead the > man were to say, > "May God's zero grace be thine in life!", the > blessing would stand > transformed into a vicious curse, wouldn't it? > > ******* > > So then, why is God, who is Infinite Being, being > called "shoonya", a > Zero -- the very opposite of infinity? The > traditional commentators > of the Vishnu-Sahasranamam offer us some explanation > in their > respective "bhAshyA-s". > > Let's take up Adi Sankara's "sahasranamam bhAshyA" > first. > > In his commentary, Sri Sankara (6th CE) explains > "shoonya" as an apt > 'nAmA' for God, the Supreme Brahman, who is > "nirguNa" -- i.e. the > Being who is totally devoid of any qualities or > attributes. In other > words, according to Sankara's school of metaphysics, > God is "guNa > shoonyan". > > According to this explanation, God transcends all > attributes. His > qualities like omnipotence, omniscience etc. only > serve to help us in > ascertaining His reality but they do not 'per se' > define Him. The > truth of God's existence cannot be grasped by us > with reference to > His qualities or 'guNA' alone, says Sankara. Brahman > is to be > apprehended as an Absolute Being who stands far > apart from and quite > beyond any of His infinitely ("anantah") great > qualities -- i.e. He > is 'nirguNa-brahman', a Being without qualities, a > Being with 'zero' > qualities. Hence it is fit to call Him "shoonyah". > > Let's turn to the other explanation found in the > commentary of Sri > Parashara Bhattar (11th CE) on the Vishnu > Sahasranamam titled > "bhagavadh-guNa-darpaNam". > > Bhattar explains "shoonyah" in the typical way of > the school of > VisishtAdvaita theology. According to this school, > God is the Supreme > Abode of all auspicious attributes. The Almighty is > full of > innumerable good qualities like "gnyAna", "bala", > "aiswarya", > "vIrya", "shakti" and "tejas". In VisishtAdvaita, > God is > "ananta-kalyANa-guna-gaNaan" (to use a famous > expression of Sri > RamanujAchArya) -- i.e. Brahman is Being with > infinite number of > happy and wholesome attributes. The theology next > states that God, by > corollary, is also totally devoid of inauspicious, > un-wholesome or > negative qualities. > > According to Bhattar, in so far as, Brahman is > replete with > infinitely good attributes, He is to be known as > "anantah". And in so > far as He is absolutely bereft of defective > qualities, He is to be > known as the God of "zero-defects" -- in other > words, He is > "shoonyah". > > From a purely theological standpoint both > explanations above are > equally valid and wholly satisfying (depending, of > course, upon > which school of Vedanta -- Sankara's or Ramanuja's > -- one is > predisposed towards). All the same, for one who is > not steeped in the > various nuances and niceties of Vedantic theology, > (especially for > one who cannot really appreciate the technical > difference between the > metaphysical "nirguNa-" and "savisesha-" Brahman), > the explanations > of AdiSankara and Parashara Bhattar for "shoonya" > might only seem to > resemble the case of the proverbial bottle that got > described as > "half-empty" by one and "half-full" by another. > > --------------- > > Even leaving theological considerations aside, one > can still regard > Zero to be a remarkably apt 'nAma' for the Almighty. > Common knowledge > of the world around us reveals how all-powerful the > concept of Zero, > "shoonya", truly is. When we look at the history of > Zero, we realize > why 'shoonya' is almighty indeed! > > Until about 1500 years ago nobody in the world > outside India could > count numbers beyond 9 without enormous difficulty. > The entire > === message truncated === __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com Namo VenkateshAya namah: To Post a message, send it to: tiruvengadam@xxxxxxxxxxxTo Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: tiruvengadam-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
_________________________________________________________________MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
srirangasri-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |