6

In the Anushasana Parva of the Mahabharata, just like in the Shanti Parva, Bhishma gives advice to Yudishthira and concerning how to be a good king and how to be good person, while he is lying on a bed of arrows after the end of the Kurukshetra war. In this chapter, Bhishma describes the various worlds people can attain in the afterlife, by telling the following story. There was once a pious Brahmana named Gautama, who raised an orphan elephant after its mother died. One day Indra decided to test Gautama by taking the form of a king, who seized the elephant and tried to take it away. Gautama protested, saying that whichever world the king would go to when he died, Gautama would follow him there and take back the elephant!

In the course of the dialogue, Gautama mentions the various worlds you can attain in the afterlife. Basically Gautama says something like "If you go to this world, I'll go there and get the elephant back." Then the king says "I will surely attain a higher region than that", so Gautama mentions an even higher world, and so on. The regions Gauatama mentions from lowest to highest are: the world of Yama god of death; Mandakini the region of Kubera god of wealth; the peak of Mount Meru; the forest of Narada; the land of the Uttarakurus; the world of Chandra the moon god; the world of Surya the sun god; the world of Varuna the ocean god; the world of Indra; the world of the Prajapatis; Goloka the world of cows; and Brahmaloka the world of Brahma. And then Gautama mentions a world even higher than those:

There where the foremost of Rathantaras is sung, where altars are strewn with the sacred Kusa blades, for the performance of Pundarika sacrifices, there where Soma-drinking Brahmanas go on vehicles drawn by excellent steeds, proceeding even thither I shall force thee to yield up this elephant.

Rathantara is the name of a hymn in the Sama Veda. But my question is, what is the world being described here? Is it a description Vishnu's abode of Vaikuntha? The reason I ask is that in the Vishnu Sahasranama, Vishnu is described as Trisama, or the one who is praised by three Sama hymns, and I think one of the three is Rathanthara. Are there any descriptions of Pundarika Yagnas (lotus sacrifices) being done in Vaikuntha?

P.S. Not to keep you in suspense, Gautama eventually realized the king was Indra, and then Indra took Gautama and the elephant to Devaloka.

Keshav Srinivasan
  • 98,014
  • 18
  • 293
  • 853
  • 3
    There might be a higher loka in a purana, but in the Upanishads there is no loka higher than Brahmaloka. – Swami Vishwananda Apr 29 '15 at 06:05
  • 1
    @SwamiVishwananda Well, there might be a distinction being made between the world of the four-headed god Brahma, and the world of Brahman. – Keshav Srinivasan Apr 29 '15 at 08:23
  • 6
    There is no world of Brahman. There is only Brahman. – Swami Vishwananda Apr 29 '15 at 08:29
  • 1
    @SwamiVishwananda Well, I understand you're an Advaitin, but even in Advaita can't there be a world of Saguna Brahman or Ishwara (whom I would refer to as Sriman Narayana)? – Keshav Srinivasan Apr 29 '15 at 08:31
  • 1
    Anything is possible for God. Who am I to say? There may be a loka that is eternal where final liberation for a soul is being in the eternal presence of the Personal God. Ramakrishna Paramahamsa even made reference to it. All I am saying is that it is not supported by Sruti. – Swami Vishwananda Apr 29 '15 at 08:40
  • 1
    @SwamiVishwananda Well, are there explicit statements in the Upanishads that the "Brahmaloka" which is the highest world is the same as the world where the four-headed god Brahma lives? – Keshav Srinivasan Apr 29 '15 at 09:40
  • 2
    @SwamiVishwananda Prapathaka 8 Khanda 5 of the Chandogya Upanishad describes Brahmaloka, but makes no mention of the four-headed god Brahma. Chapter 1 of the Kaushitaki Upanishad calls Prajapati a mere door-keeper in Brahmaloka. Are there other Upanishads that specifically say that Brahmaloka is ruled by the four-headed god Brahma? – Keshav Srinivasan May 04 '15 at 20:47
  • Yes, there are. Let me look them up. I will give you some references. – Swami Vishwananda May 05 '15 at 04:31
  • First, Prajapati is used to denote both Hiranyagarbha and Viraj/Brahma. See Sanakra's commentary on Brihadaranyaka U. (I. iv. 1.). Now Brahmaloka is the abode of Brahma. But what is seen in Brahmaloka is Brahman. See Sri-Bhasya (1.3.12) and also the equivalent in Sankara commentary on the Brahma-Sutra (1.3.13) – Swami Vishwananda May 05 '15 at 06:06
  • @SwamiVishwananda I'm confused. Who is Hiranyagarbha? I thought Hiranyagarbha was just a name of Brahma, since Brahma was born from a golden seed that came out of Vishnu's navel. Also, the Sri Bhashya citation you gave me says "the Brahma-world spoken of as the abode of the seeing devotee cannot be the perishable world of Brahmâ Katurmukha." – Keshav Srinivasan May 05 '15 at 13:56
  • 1
    @SwamiVishwananda By the way, I just posted a question about another aspect of that Kaushitaki Upanishad chapter I mentioned: http://hinduism.stackexchange.com/q/7186/36 – Keshav Srinivasan May 06 '15 at 14:16
  • 1
    Nikhilananda says in his intro to his translation of the Upanishads: "With reference to the gross upadhi, Brahman is called Virat; with reference to the subtle upadhi, Hiranyagarbha or Prajpati; and with reference to the causal upadhi, Sutrama or Prana. But, as already been stated, all these terms are often interchanged in the earlier Vedanta books." Indeed, Swami Vivekananda says (Complete Works III, p 399-400): "There are many technical phrases in the Upanishads difficult to understand. For instance, take the word Vata; many times it means air and many times motion, and often people... – Swami Vishwananda May 08 '15 at 07:14
  • 1
    ...confuse one with the other. And in III, p 233 "Coming to our commentators again, we find another difficulty. The Advaitic commentator, whenever an Advaitic text comes, preserves it just as it is; but the same commentator, as soon as a dualistic text presents itself, tortures it if he can, and brings the most queer meaning out of it. Sometimes the 'Unborn' becomes a 'goat', such are the wonderful changes effected. To suit the commentator, 'Aja' the Unborn is explained as 'Aja' [diacritical mark over the last a] a she goat. In the same way..the texts are handled by the dualistic commentators. – Swami Vishwananda May 08 '15 at 07:23
  • 2
    One cannot think of these names or references as being absolute in their meanings with the same meaning across all Upanishads, one has to read the context of the particular Upanishad to understand what a given name and word implies in a particular context. If Sanskrit had absolute meanings, there would not be the wealth of interpretations and Bhashyas. – Swami Vishwananda May 08 '15 at 07:30
  • "the Brahma-world spoken of as the abode of the seeing devotee cannot be the perishable world of Brahmâ Katurmukha." - In my Sri Bhasya I do not see this interpretation of Ramanuja's commentary. – Swami Vishwananda May 08 '15 at 07:38
  • Vana Parva of Mahabharat mentions Pundarika sacrifice in relation to ascending to the region of Vishnu. "There in that tirtha should one perform his ablutions, for by this he acquireth the merit of the Pundarika sacrifice and ascendeth also to the region of Vishnu." – MathGod Jan 09 '19 at 21:41

0 Answers0