Lord Narasimha

[Guest guest]

Dear Friends,

Me and my friend visited SingaperumaL koil and were discussing about the story

of Lord Narasimha, he was asking how can a GOD be so barbaric in removing and

wearing the liver of dead iranyakasibu. He was telling that Lord Rama asked to

perform last rites to vali and Ravana after their death but why narasimha alone

who is also a avatar of lord vishnu can do this to a dead person. I could not

answer him. Can any learned member help me?

Thanks,

Srinath

[Guest guest]

Sri Ramanujaya Namah:

Sri Nigamahanta Desikaya Namah:

Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Paramatmane parabrahmane namah:

 

 

Dear Srinath,

 

The lord apperaed in such a fierce form , bcoz of

iranyakashiphu's own varams. and also the lord killed

him in such a fiercy way , only to let us know, how

much he cared for his devotees, the lord is known as

shantaswaroopa ,( the one who never gets wild) inspite

of this , he took this specific avataram only to

indicate that he is always and ever on this devotees

side.

 

more over as the vedas indicate( purnam adah, purnam

idham.......) he is purnam , there is no lack in this

attitudes or guna's. so there is no need to question ,

why the lord had taken to such a fierce form .

 

Sri:

Sridhar

 

--- Srinath Venkatakrishnan

<srinath_venkatakrishnan wrote:

> Dear Friends,

> Me and my friend visited SingaperumaL koil and were

> discussing about the story of Lord Narasimha, he

> was asking how can a GOD be so barbaric in removing

> and wearing the liver of dead iranyakasibu. He was

> telling that Lord Rama asked to perform last rites

> to vali and Ravana after their death but why

> narasimha alone who is also a avatar of lord vishnu

> can do this to a dead person. I could not answer

> him. Can any learned member help me?

> Thanks,

> Srinath

>

>

 

Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more

http://taxes./

[Guest guest]

respectd bhagavathas

the question raised by sriman srinath in not on the

fearful avatar. he questions why lord narasimha

adonrned the intestines (not liver)which appears to

barbaric. ( rowdies used to say kudali uruvi

maalaiyaakap pOttuk koLvEn)

 

with regards

parakaalan

 

 

> --- Srinath Venkatakrishnan

> <srinath_venkatakrishnan wrote:

> > Dear Friends,

> > Me and my friend visited SingaperumaL koil and

> were

> > discussing about the story of Lord Narasimha, he

> > was asking how can a GOD be so barbaric in

> removing

> > and wearing the liver of dead iranyakasibu. He was

> > telling that Lord Rama asked to perform last rites

> > to vali and Ravana after their death but why

> > narasimha alone who is also a avatar of lord

> vishnu

> > can do this to a dead person. I could not answer

> > him. Can any learned member help me?

> > Thanks,

> > Srinath

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Sridhar,

My question was different. Let me rephrase it. In general, Death has to be

honoured". That is what Lord Rama showed us during Vali and Ravana's death. But

only in this avataram, why he acted this way of wearing the intestines of a dead

person? If you say that he was so caring for his bhaktha (here it is prahlada),

why he did not give moksha to prahlada? I think that i have presented the

question properly.

Thanks,

Srinath

"sridhar .S" <sree101275 wrote:Sri Ramanujaya Namah:

Sri Nigamahanta Desikaya Namah:

Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Paramatmane parabrahmane namah:

 

 

Dear Srinath,

 

The lord apperaed in such a fierce form , bcoz of

iranyakashiphu's own varams. and also the lord killed

him in such a fiercy way , only to let us know, how

much he cared for his devotees, the lord is known as

shantaswaroopa ,( the one who never gets wild) inspite

of this , he took this specific avataram only to

indicate that he is always and ever on this devotees

side.

 

more over as the vedas indicate( purnam adah, purnam

idham.......) he is purnam , there is no lack in this

attitudes or guna's. so there is no need to question ,

why the lord had taken to such a fierce form .

 

Sri:

Sridhar

 

Your use of is subject to

 

 

Catch all the cricket action. Download Score tracker

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Sir,

 

Greetings. I discussed your question with my guru. He says that the world

sees us the way we look at the world and the same holds good Hiranyakasipu.

To Hiranya, his bitter enemy were the devas and Narayanan. In controrary

Prhalada was an ardent devotee of Sriman Narayana. In political situation he

was also apprehensive whether with alliance with the Devas Prahalada will

over throw him. In order to over come his fears he sought a very tricky boon

that he should not be killed in the morning or in the noon. Neither by man

or by a beast. Neith inside nor outside. Prahalada believed that the Lord

existed everywhere and in every form. In this case Lord Narayana proved

right to both a Bhagavatha and an Asura. He fullfiled the desire of both.

 

It is our mind which looks at the Lord the way we want. I believe that this

is one of the reasons for some many devatas in Hinduism

 

I hope that this answer is of some relevance

 

Thanks and Regards

Sangeetha

 

 

 

-

Srinath Venkatakrishnan <srinath_venkatakrishnan

<bhakti-list>

February 09, 2003 2:54 PM

Lord Narasimha

[Guest guest]

respected bhagavathas

saprema savinaya pranams

miss/mrs sangeetha had replied the question without

understanding the crux of the question

 

1, there is no dispute why lord narasimha killed

hiranya.

 

after killing his why lord narasimha wore his (

hiranya's)intestines as a haram overhis chest?

 

one who raised this question had already rephrased

 

adiyen earnestly expecting a fitting response

 

i beg to remain

parakaalan

 

 

 

Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more

http://taxes./

[Guest guest]

Dear Srinath,

 

The lord did not give prahlada moksha, bcoz he wanted

to set prahlada as an example to other asuras, he

wanted the other asuras also to follow the path of

devotion and get their life enhanced, ( here the lord

clearly shows his karuna bhavam towards the other

ignorant asura's).

 

Thanks

Sridhar.S

 

--- Srinath Venkatakrishnan

<srinath_venkatakrishnan wrote:

> Dear Sridhar,

> My question was different. Let me rephrase it. In

> general, Death has to be honoured". That is what

> Lord Rama showed us during Vali and Ravana's death.

> But only in this avataram, why he acted this way of

> wearing the intestines of a dead person? If you say

> that he was so caring for his bhaktha (here it is

> prahlada), why he did not give moksha to prahlada? I

> think that i have presented the question properly.

> Thanks,

> Srinath

 

 

Web Hosting - establish your business online

http://webhosting.

[Guest guest]

Dear Srinath,

Another wave of thought came to me during my japam today, I am sure HE gave it

to me, I just wanted to share!

HiraNyakaSipu was an asura in real sense in 'that' birth, but he was a vishNu

bhakta originally. After being cursed, both jaya and vijaya repented for their

misconduct and lord assured them of their original jobs after three births! All

HE wanted was just one good deed from HiraNyakaSipu, HE garlanded himself (being

an alankara priya) with the intestine removed from mangled body of

HiraNyakaSipu, even though he was under tremendous fury. It was as if

HiraNyakaSipu himself garlanded Sri narahari. Would HiraNyakaSipu do it if he

were to be alive?

aDiyEn Sri rangapriya dAsan,

Shrinath Iyengar

"sridhar .S" <sree101275 wrote:Dear Srinath,

 

The lord did not give prahlada moksha, bcoz he wanted

to set prahlada as an example to other asuras, he

wanted the other asuras also to follow the path of

devotion and get their life enhanced, ( here the lord

clearly shows his karuna bhavam towards the other

ignorant asura's).

 

Thanks

Sridhar.S

[Guest guest]

adiyenathu vanakkangaL

prahlada is not a ciranjiivi ( aswththama bali vyasa hanuman caiva vibishana

krupa parasuramaSca saptha EthE cirajiivina:)

the question raised by srinath was why did lordnarasimha wore the intestines of

hiranya kasipu over his chest is kept untouched

adiyen begs to remain

parankucan

 

"sridhar .S" <sree101275 wrote:Dear Srinath,

 

The lord did not give prahlada moksha, bcoz he wanted

to set prahlada as an example to other asuras, he

wanted the other asuras also to follow the path of

devotion and get their life enhanced, ( here the lord

clearly shows his karuna bhavam towards the other

ignorant asura's).

 

Thanks

Sridhar.S

 

 

 

Web Hosting - establish your business online

 

 

[Guest guest]

saprema pavinaya pranams

 

your mail has created another doubt.

having accepted to be the enemies of lord vishnu in

three births they took the birth of hiranyaksha and

hiranya kasiby ( first set ) ravana - kumbakarna (

second set ) sisupala and thantha vakra in the third

set.

 

while the lord face his enemies ravan and kumba karn

in ramavathar and sisupala and thantha vakra in

krishna avatar why had to take two avatars for

hiranyaksha and hiranya kasibu ( varaha and narasimha)

 

with regards

parakaalan

 

--- shrinath mk <mk_shrinath wrote:

> Dear Srinath,

> Another wave of thought came to me during my japam

> today, I am sure HE gave it to me, I just wanted to

> share!

> Thanks

> Sridhar.S

>

 

 

Web Hosting - establish your business online

http://webhosting.

[Guest guest]

Dear Shrinath,

Is he crying to have appreciations from people? that too in these ways???Cannot

be. That goes against his gunas. Instead if he had changed the mind of

hiranyakasibu and made him realise, that could have been a better than

garlanding himself with enemy's intestines that too after he died. Being

alankara priya as you said, can he do alankaram for himself doing anything??I

think we are missing some point here. I have floated this question to some

acharyas and Scholars at chennai and expecting a reply. I strongly beleive that

there should be a GREAT tatvam behind this act in this great avataram.

Thanks,

Srinath

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Parakaalan,

Following comes to my mind as an answer, please padron me if I am not clear.

Lord took these avataras under different circumstances and at different times

too. One could not wait for the other as there was a long time gap. Lord took

Varaha avararam to protect Bhudevi from captivity of HiranyaakShan. She called

for help. So per lord's statement " paritraNam sAdHoonam......" he took that

avataram to protect dharma. Varaha being a very strong animal to excavate any

thing burried, it was an apt form to take to rescue Bhudevi burried deep in muds

below the sea.

In case of Narasimha avaratam, Parhaladan did not call for help. Lord took the

most complicated avataram to make his bhakta's words about omnipresense of god

come true.

dAsan-Shrinath

 

V Kamban <parakaalan wrote:

saprema pavinaya pranams

 

...................

while the lord face his enemies ravan and kumba karn

in ramavathar and sisupala and thantha vakra in

krishna avatar why had to take two avatars for

hiranyaksha and hiranya kasibu ( varaha and narasimha)

 

with regards

parakaalan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Web Hosting - establish your business online

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Srinath,

Our lord is also called guNa sAgara because each of HIS infinite kalyaNa gunNas

is like an ocean. All we know by mercies of our acharyas is a synopsis of them.

One need to comtemplate and meditate on HIS guNas peacefully to understand at

least a fraction about HIS guNas. aDiyen thinks you have done the right thing-

by asking our acharyas to help understand HIS actions. I pray HIM to provide an

acceptable answer to you soon!

dAsan-Shrinath

Srinath Venkatakrishnan <srinath_venkatakrishnan wrote:Dear

Shrinath,

Is he crying to have appreciations from people? that too in these ways???Cannot

be. That goes against his gunas.

.............

I have floated this question to some acharyas and Scholars at chennai and

expecting a reply. I strongly beleive that there should be a GREAT tatvam behind

this act in this great avataram.

Thanks,

Srinath

 

 

 

-----------------------------

- SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -

To Post a message, send it to: bhakti-list

Group Home: bhakti-list

Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/

 

 

Your use of is subject to

 

 

 

 

 

 

Web Hosting - establish your business online

 

 

[Guest guest]

Sri:

SrimathE Ramanujaya Namaha:

AzhwAr emperumAnAr jeeyar thiruvadigalE Saranam

 

Dear Sri Srinath and group

 

I have not followed all the posts on this thread, please forgive me

for any repetion or errors.

 

I may not have a direct answer to the question about the 'intestine',

but...

 

There are 15 different puranas that talk about the Narasimha avataram

with varying degrees of details. One thing that is common is the way

Hiranyakasipu and his sons (except Sri Prahalad) is destroyed. What is

not that obvious is the quality and the power of destruction Narasimha

avatara brings when compared to the other avataras. I cannot reproduce

the exact translation, but the entire army of Hiranyakashibu is

destroyed within seconds. This scene is completely uniqe to this

avatara only.

 

If you read the myths of Lord Shiva and others, none of their

destructions would come close to the speed, power and the enormity of

the the Narasimha avatara.

 

This avatar, in my opinion, brings out two important qualities of

Sriman Narayana, which were not completely brought out in the earlier

avataras.

 

1. Given the speed and enormity, our Lord here shows that only HE has

the power the destroy evil, in an nano-second (so to speak)

 

2. We see in this avatara the concept of total surrender by a Vishnu

bhakta (Sri Prahalad ) who is a normal person (at that time). This

quality gets more pronounced in subsequent avataras.

 

One could take this avatara as a bridge between the stage where Lord

protected the devas and thier properties (such as Vedas or Potion) and

where HE showers HIS protection to his bhaktas.

 

On the topic of wearing the 'intestine' as a garland, can there be any

connection between the Ahamkara and the body part? Could it be that it

refer to the destruction of the Ahamkara of HiranyaKasibu or the

unequivocal establishment of the LOrd's Ahamkara or both?

 

Just some of my thoughts on the topic.

 

adiyEn

Venkatesh Elayavilli

[Guest guest]

respected bhagavathas

 

adiyen would like to pen down my opinion on this. some

times we say that the lord is " avaaptha samastha kaaman".

In some other context we say that the lord is alankara

pirya:. are these not contras?

 

with regards

parakaalan

[Guest guest]

Dear Srinath,

 

I have heard from Vainkuta vaasi Mukkur SriLakshmi Narashimacharya,

that the Lord tears open Hiranyakasipu to see whether he has some

love/intention to surrender towards the Lords hidden in some corner of

his heart. Though the Lord knows hiranyakasipu doesn't He is showing

us that He always gives us a chance before punishing. Hence this act

of His even more establishes His Kaarunyam.

adiyen

lakshmi

 

bhakti-list, Srinath Venkatakrishnan

<srinath_venkatakrishnan> wrote:

> Dear Friends,

> Me and my friend visited SingaperumaL koil and were discussing

about the story of Lord Narasimha, he was asking how can a GOD be so

barbaric in removing and wearing the liver of dead iranyakasibu. He

was telling that Lord Rama asked to perform last rites to vali and

Ravana after their death but why narasimha alone who is also a avatar

of lord vishnu can do this to a dead person. I could not answer him.

Can any learned member help me?

> Thanks,

> Srinath

[Guest guest]

Saprema pranams

 

In tamil the word kari stand for black and witness.

Thondaradip podi azwar takes this second meaning and

composed

ULLaththE uRaiyum maalai uLLuvaan uNarvonRillaak

KaLLaththEn naanum thondaayth thondukkE kOlam pUndEn

uLuvaar uLLiRRellaam udanirunthu aRithi enRu

VeLikp pOy ennuL naanE vilavaRac ciriththittEnE

 

The lord need not tear him to know the intention of

hiranyakasipu. More over the question raised by one of

the members was about wearing the intestines over his

chest.

 

With regards

parakaalan

 

 

 

> Dear Srinath,

>

> I have heard from Vainkuta vaasi Mukkur SriLakshmi

> Narashimacharya,

> that the Lord tears open Hiranyakasipu to see

> whether he has some

> love/intention to surrender towards the Lords hidden

> in some corner of

> his heart. Though the Lord knows hiranyakasipu

> doesn't He is showing

> us that He always gives us a chance before

> punishing. Hence this act

> of His even more establishes His Kaarunyam.

> adiyen

> lakshmi

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Smt Lakshmi,

One of the friends already posted this quoting Mukkur swami. I wrote to him the

following.

Did the lord not confirm before taking the avatar about the character of

Hiranyakasivbu? Do you mean to say that he decided to eliminate him after coming

as a NARA SIMHAM by keeping the hand on his chest. Highly illogical...!!

 

Kindly answer this.

Thanks,

Srinath

[Guest guest]

Sri:

SrimathE Ramanujaya Nama:

AzhwAr emperumAnAr jeeyar thiruvadigalE Saranam

 

bhakti-list, V Kamban <parakaalan> wrote:

> respectd bhagavathas

> the question raised by sriman srinath in not on the

> fearful avatar. he questions why lord narasimha

> adonrned the intestines (not liver)which appears to

> barbaric.

 

 

It appears that the part of the the Narasimha Avatar where

Hiranyakasibu's intestine is ripped out and worn as a garland by our

Lord is referred to only in Vishnu puranam as a path for

Hiranyakasibu's moksham (based on BG?). This is based on the request

made by Prahalad after Hiranyakasibu is killed. Experts who have read

the vishnu purana can shed more light on this.

 

However, other puranas such as Kurma, Padma, Vayu, Matsaya do not

seem to refer to this particular act when dealing with the avatara.

Infact, I think Kurma (or is it Brahmanda?) purana gives a different

account about Prahalad's nature. It says that Prahalad (who is the

eldest son of Hirnyakasibu and much older) lead an army to fight Lord

Narasimha, but chages his mind once he realises that the man-lion form

is none other than Lord Vishnu and becomes a bhakta. Also, Vishnu

purana is the only one sort of implies that Prahalad gets mokasham

when he is pushed from a cliff. Other puranas do not refer to this.

 

In addition, kurma purana connects the dots between Narasimha avatar

and Vamana avatar, saying Bali is the grandson of Prahalad and is

cursed by the later when Bali boasts to him, after defeating Indra,

his army can defeat Lord Vishnu. The curse was that His rule will

colapse at the hands of Lord Vishnu.

 

Now comming to the nature of Hirnyakasibu, looks like he is the only

asura who actually tried to become Lord Narayana (i.e. trying to gain

HIS power for destruction). Hence this ferocioius nature of the

avatara, unlike the others. In fact there are lot of common aspects to

Bali and Hirnyakasibu, in that they both ruled all 3 worlds, but thats

where the common thread stops. Bali was much more benevolent ruler and

all the puranas generally praise his rule, unlike that of

Hiranyakasibu. Also, when Lord Thiruvikrama reaches Bali and requests

the three steps of land, he acknowledges even after objections by Sage

Sukran (?). It appears that Bali was prepared for his end. However,

in the case of Hirnyakasibu he was in denial.

 

So one has to take the reason for Narasimha avatara for what it is:

 

1. HE is the only one who can become the destroyer, not, Siva, not

Indra or any other Asura.

 

2. HE will protect HIS bhaktas at any cost.

 

To specifically answer the question on the reason for the removal of

intestine and the scene following, it is probably a puranic

demonstration of the development of the Lords qualities: Starting from

RgVeda where Lord Vishnu is generally identified as the One who comes

to the rescue of Indra, to the early puranas where Lord's avataras are

brought out in details, culminating with the Vishnu Purana which bring

out qualities including the extreme compasion the Lord showers on

bhaktas (as well as the asuras who surrender to HIM).

 

This is based on some basic/limited understanding of the puranas on my

part.

 

adiyEn

Venkatesh Elayavilli

http://www.srivaishnava.org

[Guest guest]

Srimathe RAmanuajaya Namaha

 

NOTE: This is what I thought of and hence, does not necessarily

reflect the ideas of our purvacharyas.

 

According to Ramanuja Sampradayam, all the sentients/insentients are

created by lord for his happiness, i.e his expectation is that they

must serve him out of their will and not by order. Hiranyakashibu was

one amongst those, who didn't want to serve him, rather, was trying

to stop other bhagavathas from serving the lord. And we know the rest

of the story regarding how Narasimha avataram took place etc. When

lord finally killed him, he did that with his own hands. One must

remember that according to our sampradayam, anyone who is killed by

the lord gets the moksham. Ravana, kumbakarna , vali and others did

get the moksham. But, in hiranya's case, it was by the hands of the

lord. So, my thought was that:

 

a) The avataram that he took i.e the beast/man form - hence tearing

one off is not questionable. This justification is for others.

 

b) For those who are seeking the real intention of the lord - the

lord could have thought as follows: HE created this Hiranyan, only to

serve HIM. But, Hiranyan ended up troubling others. Now HE has killed

Hiranya who is getting the moksham. To justify the moksham that is

being given to him(by the very sankalpam of the lord), the lord

wanted to find out how HE could use his body to serve HIM for some

purpose(the idea behind the creation was to serve him and hence this

needs to be justified). Just after the death, Hiranya's soul(having

attained the realization) would have regretted that the body it was

attached to was of no use for the God. So, the lord would have tried

to grab something out of him which is the intestine and would have

found that it could be used as a garland. This would have made the

hiranyan's soul happy, because, the soul would have felt that, the

body that it was attached to was of some use to the lord.

 

c) The lord came as an avatar and he had every right to do whatever

he wants. This cannot be questioned as a "barbarian act" etc.

 

Why Intestine?? Good question. Two important things are good in us.

One is the mind, that can think about good things and can distinguish

the good and bad for the atman, and this mind is an attribute of the

atman. The other one is the intestine, that does good to the body and

that could distinguish what is good and what is bad for the body. In

case of Hiranyan, once the atman was detached from the body, mind

becomes out of question. The remaining is the body in which the thing

that does most of the good is the intestine. And hence, this was

picked up by the Lord and worn as a garland.

 

Once again, it might be silly and very much questionable, but, it is

something that came up in my mind. I apologize for any

mistakes/silliness.

 

Yatheendra Pravanam Vandhe RAMYA Jamataram Munim

 

Adiyen RAmanuja Dasan,

Lakshmi Narasimhan