2020-07-23 at 1:36 pm #9548
When I read description of Banasura or Sharsarjuna having 1000 arms, it seems impossible from a biological (vaikhari) stand-point. Considering that matter is a property of space, it seems to me that two arms are in vaikhari space while remaining arms must be in madhyama dimension, for 1000 arms to be a feasible reality that is a boon and not punishment (no one would want 1000 arms in vaikhari space assuming it was feasible in the first place).
Does the below excerpt from your blog post titled “Absolute and Relative Space” justify this theory of working senses spanning over madhyama and vaikhari dimensions in case of Banasura and Kartaviryarjuna?
“Some living being can have their “body” stretched over upper parts of the universal tree, while others have their body confined to the lower parts of the tree. Their bodies may also be stretched over different extents on the material tree, some larger and others smaller.“
2020-07-23 at 4:48 pm #9549
The primordial element called ‘sense’ is an infinite dimensional space. Each dimension in this space is a different type of qualitative ability. Within a particular type of species, these abilities are limited, so the infinite dimensional space is reduced to a fewer dimensional space. For example, with your hands you can swim, write, cook, drive, punch, etc. Some people have versatile hands, some people don’t. But in the human body, these abilities manifest one by one.
In the body of God, all the abilities can manifest simultaneously. So, He is said to have an infinite number of hands. Sometimes the hands are specialized in some ability. For example, Lord Visnu holds different implements in different hands. He displays four hands, which means that He can do four different activities at the same time. The type of things you can do by our hands, is a different issue than the number of things you can do simultaneously with your hands.
The meaning of a body being stretched over upper parts of the tree is that their hands can do different kinds of things. For example, you can hold a ball in your hand, but you cannot say that I have a society in my grip. Different kinds of hands can hold different kinds of things.
The relativity of space means that the definition of gross and subtle is not absolute. Brahma has hands and legs, but he also has a mind and intelligence. His hands and legs are not like our hands and legs, and yet he has hands and legs. What is subtle for you is gross for someone else, and vice versa. However, everyone will have something gross and something subtle.
When it is said that someone has many hands, it means that they can do many things at once. It doesn’t mean always that they can do different types of things. You would be considered versatile if you could do ten things simultaneously. But you may be doing the same type of things that others are doing with two hands. Having many hands means doing many things at once.
When the senses are capable of many things at once, then many organs appear. If you have such capable senses then you will acquire a body where you can do many things in parallel. It also needs a more agile mind which can coordinate all these hands simultaneously.
2020-07-24 at 2:05 pm #9550
Thank-you very much for this insightful post. Having many hands means doing many things of the same type makes sense. For instance Banasura is described as playing 500 drums one occasion and shooting through 500 bows on another occasion using his 1000 arms, which are all same type of activities at any given type. From what I understood, this suggests that his arms are stretched over a larger extent on the same node.
In case of Vishnu, He is manifesting different paraphernalia (for different abilities) in each of His arms suggesting His arms span across the nodes. When a sense spans across nodes, it seems that the versatility can still manifest in each of these nodes.
If space types are limited to para, pasyanti, madhyama and vaikhari, how come there are infinite dimensions? It seems these dimensions are based on versatility of abilities, and not based on subtlety or grossness of matter as expressed by the space types para, pasyanti, madhyama and vaikhari. Please let me know if I am missing something.
- This reply was modified 2 weeks ago by Radhananda Dasa.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.