Bhaghawan’s boundary definable?

Updated on May 12, 2020 in General
22 on March 24, 2018

Adiyean has this doubt:
If Bhaghawan’s boundary is not definable ( limitless or no boundry) then how the boundaries of Leela Viboothi ( this universe) is defined as 1/4 ( one fourth of) Nithya Viboothi?

We cannot define with some numbers as it is undefinable meaning Bhawan’s roopam is undefinable ( varaiyarukka mudiyatu) and hence His place as well??
For instance, if we define the whole as 1 unit ( both 3/4 Nithya Viboothi and 1/4 Leela Viboothi) then it implies that it is definable as if there are other places apart from these two.

Ramanuja Dhasan.

 
  • Liked by
  • vikraminside
Reply
1 on March 24, 2018

Namaskaaram Swamy

Adiyen believe Devarir give reference from Purusha Suktham. “Padosya Vishva Boothani Tripadasyam Rtm Divi”, which means, “What ever has appeared is only 1/4th of His glory. Remaining 3/4 remains with Himself in heaven”.

The same Purusha Sukta starts as, “Sahasra Seersha Purushaha Sahasraksha Sahasrapade”. This means, Lord has 1000 heads, 1000 eyes and 1000 feet. Now, does it mean someone has measured and concluded that He has only 1000 of each? Here, Sahasra should be taken as infinite. But, we humans are not capable of understanding infinity and always look for measures. So, Vedas try to give some measures only for purpose of understanding by us.

Similarly, 1/4 and 3/4 should be just to make us understand the difference. The real meaning is, “compared to His real glory, the whole universe is very negligible”.

Kenopanishad says, “Brahmam cannot be completely comprehended” because, if He can be comprehended, He would not be infinite. On contrary, Brahmam is infinite and hence these values of measure are only for our understanding.

Let us take for example, a person tries to explain what is an ocean to a kid. Say, the kid has not seen ocean so far. How would he explain? He may say, ocean has large amount of water. The kid will then ask, “how large will it be?” He may say, “it covers the whole world”. The kid may ask, “then how big the world is?” This has no end.

Now, let us assume the kid has seen a lake in their village. If the elder one says, “ocean will be several thousand times bigger than this lake”, the kid can get some imagination and understanding. Isn’t it?

We don’t know even 1/4 of glory of God completely. Yet, we know this 1/4 itself is very big and infinite. If we say, what is yet not seen is 3/4 bigger than this 1/4 glory, then how big would be the glory of Lord?

Sarvam Shri Krishnaarpanamastu!

on March 25, 2018

Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha

Swami, that KomalSrini2000 question is right. Both Purusha Sukhtham and NArAyanA sukhtham has sahasra referring to Purusha Sriman NArAyanA and yes the 1000 is for our reference as we cannot define infinite.

Velukkudi Swamy also used to say 1000 heads means 2000 eyes it should be and 2000 legs but it’s not the case.

While question author’s question makes sense how did we define mathematically 3/4 (when 4 is not constant) or 1/4 (When 4 is not constant)

How did we divide infinity?

Excellent question acoording to adiyen’s opinion and my Velukkudi Swamy has to answer this

Any errors please forgive adiyen
It came in the flow…

Dasanudasan

Show more replies
  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
7 on March 25, 2018

Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha

Excellent question Swami
“then how the boundaries of Leela Viboothi ( this universe) is defined as 1/4 ( one fourth of) Nithya Viboothi?”
Dasanudasan

on April 2, 2018

 

Namaskaram

Some useful examples are discussed by Bhaktas in another thread which might be relevant for this topic

https://www.kinchit.org/dharma-sandeha/thread/are-athmas-countable/

Another thought is mathematically proof

let us define a Set of all integer numbers (X)  as set A (it is infinite in size)

let us define three functions f g h which maps (x) to y , z  and w by  y=f(x), z=g(x) and w=h (x)

not let us define  set B = {(y),(z) and (w)}

Now Set B is also infinite but is three times bigger than set A.

So it is possible to find ratio between two infinite entities..

Also since Lord is infinite , he can comprehend infinity as well, so his words as vedas can comprehend the ratio of material world to spiritual world.
That is how I would assume and accept.

adiyen

 

on April 5, 2018

Dear Bhahavathaas,
What Adiyean can conclude is that with the little spiritual Ghana or the knowledge or wisdom gained from our this world Science or Maths, it is not possible even to try to imagine or derive it.
It is some thing like how you cannot spot distant stars using a home- made small telescope. You need a very powerful and structurally (well experimented)made telescope to spot it- like the British or Nasa . How much effort these scientists had to put in to make such a powerful telescope that also cannot spot stars or planets beyond a limited distance.

In that case, how we ( at least Adiyean) can try to query the supreme system that is very Much and very well beyond the ambit of our knowledge or wisdom!!??.

Its like playing toy games by children. Yes, of course, we are all His children.
So enjoy playing the guessing games.

on April 5, 2018

Dear Bhakta

Rightly said we cannot comprehend with our little maths and science.

That is why i concluded in my earlier post as 

“Also since Lord is infinite , he can comprehend infinity as well, so his words as vedas can comprehend the ratio of material world to spiritual world.
That is how I would assume and accept.”

However since the discussion of infinity and debate on the fact given by  vedas arose, i thought it may have to be  replied in the same language that is why tired to give an example which involves infinite sets but still have definite ratio.

But definitely best way is to accept vedas with faith as not all aspects can be comprehended by our maths or physics tools.

adiyen

 

 

on April 5, 2018

Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha

“Another thought is mathematically proof

let us define a Set of all integer numbers (X) as set A (it is infinite in size)

let us define three functions f g h which maps (x) to y , z and w by y=f(x), z=g(x) and w=h (x)

not let us define set B = {(y),(z) and (w)}

Now Set B is also infinite but is three times bigger than set A.

So it is possible to find ratio between two infinite entities..” –

TheriyAma kEtutEn SwAmi mannichukOngO 🙂
Indha vilaiyAttukku adiyen varalai

Dasanudasan

on April 5, 2018

Adiyenukku indha definitionEy thappu nu thOndradhu

“let us define a Set of all integer numbers (X) as set A (it is infinite in size)”

AdhAn infinite Aachey eppudi set prikka mudiyum?

Idhula innoru infinity Vera

Adiyen mathsla semma weak because pAdhilerndhu lerndhu aarambippa but question logically correct nu nenaikaren

A set of ten apples in a basket
A set of infinite apples in a basket?

Can a basket hold infinity? How big that basket will be? There can be no set based on infinity is adiyen’s observation

Dasanudasan

on April 5, 2018

Namskaram
Swamy I looked up your question in relevant set theory…but they do define infinite set…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_set

Adiyen

on April 6, 2018

Then they are wrong Swami. We don’t need to accept Wikipedia. Adiyen won’t accept certain things till adiyen is completely convinced. Adiyen also request devar to think in those lines. English kaaran soldrathu ellAmey right nu artham illai

Definition of set :
“In mathematics, a set is a collection of distinct objects, considered as an object in its own right”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_(mathematics)

Set theory is a branch of mathematical logic that studies sets, which informally are collections of objects.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_theory

So according to their own definition they cannot collect infinity by any means. So set theory on infinity is wrong.
Adiyenai kshamikkanum adhiga prasangi thanama pesitten (ivlo dhan dasanoda logic)

Dasanudasan

Show more replies
  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
4 on April 27, 2020

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha,

Namaskaram Komal Srinivasan Swami,

For devareer’s initial question, “…………..If Bhaghawan’s boundary is not definable ( limitless or no boundry) then how the boundaries of Leela Viboothi ( this universe) is defined as 1/4 ( one fourth of) Nithya Viboothi?………….”,

Velukkudi Sri Krishnan Swami’s has graced answer in Enpani #1724 லீலா விபூதியை விட வைகுந்தம் மும்மடங்கா?

Adiyen (ElayaAlwar) Srinivasa (DhoddayAcharyar) Dasan

on April 27, 2020

Srimate Ramanujaya Namaha,

Dhanyosmi swami,  I am amazed on how you back track the old thread 1 year old and link to Swami’s Enpani. Do you search using key word to locate this thread?

For summary of those who may come to this thread in future and have difficulty of accessing the enpani audio here is a summary of Sri Velukkudi Swami’s answer.

“The ration 1/4 and 3/4th are for representational purposes only to give an order of magnitude, not exact nos. Both are actually infinite. (Nitya vibhuti world has no upper end and leela vibhuthi has no lower bound)”

Adiyen

 

 

 

on April 28, 2020

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha,

 

Nandri Sivanand (enpanifan) swami for the abhimaanam.

 

In short,
Basically yes & no. SEARCH definitely helps only to Locate certain things that were REMEMBERED in the past. As far as how certain things were remembered is to due to Acharya ThiruvAdi Bhalam/Guru-Bhakthi and not due to adiyen’s efforts.

 

In long,
Devareer’s very same question was asked by Ragesh Swami in the past as in below thread when Adiyen posted Velukkudi Swami’s recent Enpani 1634 on to a question that was almost 3.5yrs old, and adiyen provided detailed 7 types of answers to Ragesh Swami of which Adiyen follow only one type as Acharya ThiruvAdi Bhalam/Guru-Bhakthi.

https://www.kinchit.org/dharma-sandeha/thread/how-vedas-are-apourusheyamnot-created-by-anyone/

 

Adiyen (ElayaAlwar) Srinivasa (DhoddayAcharyar) Dasan

Adiyen swami 🙏🏻😊
Adiyen was thinking “I also asked the same question “ and then devareer itself mentioned here.
Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan 🙂

on May 1, 2020

Adiyen Charamavathi Dasan

Show more replies
  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
0 on April 29, 2020

En question mummadangu nu yen sollanum?

Sahasrasheerusha purusha: thousands of heads) oksy no 2 thousand legs okay

Adhukku “many times” nu solli irukkalamey why did it give numerical interpretations?

  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
2 on May 1, 2020

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha,

Namaskaram Vikram Swami & Komal Srinivasan Swami,

With Acharya ThiruvAdi Bhalam and Sri Velukkudi Swami’s Aasirvadham, adiyen will share based on some research as to why Nithya Vibhoothi (Spiritual world) is referred 3/4th and Leela Vibhoothi (Material world) is referred as 1/4th though it is understood and agreeed by all BhagavAtas that SriVaikuntam is LImiteless and cannot be measured, then why it is not said as “many times bigger”, why inform a particular numeric like 3/4 & 1/4, why it is not 2/3 & 1/3 etc…. so on…… The reason as follows,

 

For this we have to deep divine in Upanishad’s other vaakyams and other Veda Sutrams, which adiyen did some research with With Acharya ThiruvAdi Bhalam and Sri Velukkudi Swami’s Aasirvadham. So adiyen request Velukkudi Swami to confirm if adiyen’s explanation is correct.

Brahmam “Supreme ParamAthma’s” Every things in Vedas/Upanishads are Primarily divided in  to FOUR QUARTERS,  though there could more sub divisions based on these primary four divisions, like ONE FOOT (Padha) of Brahmam is subdivided into four quarters

‘1) East, West, North, South is One Foot (Padha)  of Brahmam comprising of these four quarters is called as Prakasavat (shining).

‘2) Earth, Sky, Divine, Ocean, is One Foot (Padha) of Brahmam comprising of these four quarters is called as Anantavat (endless).

‘3) Fire, Sun, Moon, Lightning is One Foot (Padha) of Brahmam comprising of these four quarters is called as Jyotishmat (luminous).

‘4) Four Quarters of Yugas : Krita, Tretha, Dwapara, Kali is One Foot (Padha) of Brahmam comprising of these four quarters

‘5) Four Quarters of Vedas : Rig, Sama, Yajur, Atharva is One Foot (Padha) of Brahmam comprising of these four quarters

‘6) etc…

‘7) etc….

‘8) so on.

 

Now, the next question that will arise is, where it is said in Upanishad about Brahmam’s ONE Foot (Padha) is to be considered as FOUR Quarters for each entities..?

For this we have to refer Chandogya Upanishad sutram 24,

jyotis-caranabhidhanat

jyotih-of the jyotih; carana-of the feet; abhidhanat– because of the mention.

Now, the question that will pop-up again is how jyothi can have feet?. So, we have to understand jyothi here means “PARA-BRAHMAM (Supreme Sriman NarayanA)“. The pure reason is because, the UPANISHAD’s ONLY TALKS ABOUT BRAHMAM and NO ONE ELSE.

 

After this basic understanding of the Four Quarters of Brahmam’s ONE Foot description, we need to refer back to Sri Velukkudi Swami’s Enpani #1724 slokam from Chandogya Upanishad 

तावानस्य महिमा ततो ज्यायांश्च पूरुषः । पादोऽस्य सर्वा भूतानि त्रिपादस्यामृतं दिवीति

tāvān-asya mahimā tato jyāyāṃśca pūruṣaḥ | pādah-asya sarvā bhootāni tri-pād asyāmṛtaṃ divīti 

Tāvān, like this;

asya mahimā, its glory;

tataḥ jyāyān ca puruṣaḥ, that [i.e., the glory] of the puruṣa [i.e., Brahman, who fills the whole world] is still greater;

pādaḥ-asya sarvā [i.e., sarvāṇi] bhootāni, all things constitute one quarter foot of him;

tri-pād asya, [the remaining] three quarters of HIS feet;

amṛtam divi, are like nectar in Spiritual world. 

Overall meaning,

“The Supreme Personality of Godhead “PARA-BRAHMAM “is full of glory and opulence. His one foot quarter (1/4th) is all material elements (Prakrutha prakruthi/Achit’s) and all living entities (BhaddAthmas/Chits), and His three feet quarters (3/4th மும்மடங்க்கு ) are the eternal spiritual world (Aprakrutha prakruthi, NithyAthmas, MukAthmas).”

So when Supreme Brahmam’s One Foot (4 quarter’s) itself is not definable, HOW can we define the whole Brahmam. HE IS Anantavat (ENDLESS). That’s what Swami said in crisp in Enpani #1724 with breakdown meaning as said above. Hence, other limits like 2/3rd etc….is not used to define, because of the other MANY references seen with 4 Quarters on other entities of Brahmam’s One Foot correlating Yugas, DIrections etc…..

Adiyen (ElayaAlwar) Srinivasa (DhoddayacharyAr) Dasan.

on May 3, 2020

Super ElayaAlwar Swamy
Adiyen daAasya dandavat paraNAmam
Terrific, adiyen made you to do research by asking a foolish question and insted of me doing research just asked as if adiyen ought to get an answer , adiyen evlo muttAl thanam kuduthu vechavan madhiri kelvi kettuten
How foolish I am
Please forgive

Adiyen have similar doubts on “Ettraikkum Ezhu Ezhu piravikkum”

Press Reporter: Swamy 7* 7 = 49 births?
Andavan Swamyin answer to press reporter:

“Adhu yen ovvovru ezhu piravikkum nu irukka kudaathu?”

So my counter question
Why 7?

“Ettraikkum

on May 3, 2020

Srimate Ramanujaye Namaha!

Namskaaram Vikram swami, You are continuing on with your bouncers! Interesting question on this why “7”.. I don’t recollect the answer, but I think Velukkudi swami has answered in some upanyasam/enapni audio.

Also this number seven has been referred in multiple works like thirukkural etc..This link here has some references about this. and their discussion..not sure of the authenticity of logic/reasoning..https://tamilandvedas.com/tag/seven-births/

One possible reason i see form the above link is that there are 7 major types of births for a jeeva, that may be a reason..

1.Devas: 
2.Human beings
3.Animals
4.Birds
5.Reptiles
6.Fishes and other marine animals
7.Plant kingdom

 

Adiyen

Show more replies
  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
0 on May 3, 2020

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha,

 

Nandri Vikram Swami for devareer’s Pious understanding due to devareer’s Acharya Krupai and Velukkudi Swami’s Anugraham.

 

As adiyen informed above, Adiyen is still waiting for Sri Velukkudi Swami’s Review/Approval about adiyen’s reaseacrh from online with Acharya ThiruvAdi Bhalam and Velukkudi Swami’s Aasirvadham.

 

Like how most of devotees are WFH (Work From Home), Velukkudi Swami is also KFT (Kainkaryam From Thirumaligai), so adiyen believe, Swami should have some amount of time to review/approve, unless Swami doesn’t want to do it.

 

Adiyen (ElayaAlwar) Srinivasa (DhoddayacharyAr) Dasan.

 

  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
0 on May 5, 2020

Dhanyosmi to both EnPaniFan and ElayaAlwar Swamy anandha bashpam
Evlo miss pannittom

Poiyum poiyum indha uppu peradha work pannindrukkom

Perumala pathi therinjukkama vittutom

Azhugai varudhu

Let this sathsangam continue

Jai SriRam
Jai Sri Velukkudi Krishnan Swamy
Jai Acharya
Jai Hanuman

Dasanudasan

  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel
0 on May 12, 2020

Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha,

Kotana Koti DhandavAt Pranaamam Velukkudi Swami Thiruvadigalukku.

Makes sense Swami Enpani #1739, about Purana incidents to be referred and understood from slokas and meanings written below slokas either from books or online. Based on that Adiyen referred some verses from upanishsdahs from online for the question “SriVaikuntam is LImiteless and cannot be measured, then why it is not said as “many times bigger”, why inform a particular numeric like 3/4 & 1/4, why it is not 2/3 & 1/3 etc…. so on…”

Can devareer review of the above verses that Adiyen mentioned from couple of sources reflect the correct answer as to why only 3/4th and 1/4 the numeric is used to mention SriVaikuntam and Samsaram, why not other numerics.

Adiyen (ElayaAlwar) Srinivasa (DhoddayAcharyar) Dasan

  • Liked by
Reply
Cancel