What is the difference between Narayan and Maha-Vishnu?

[kanishta 0]

It seems that they are often referred to inter-changeably, but what is the difference between the two?

 

thanks!

Haribol

[gHari 0]

 

From Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.16.37p

 

The Brahma-saMhitA (5.48) says:

 

yasyaika-nizvasita-kAlam athAvalambya

jIvanti loma-vilajA jagad-aNDa-nAthAH

viSNur mahAn sa iha yasya kalA-vizeSo

govindam Adi-puruSaM tam ahaM bhajAmi

 

The origin of the material creation is MahA-ViSNu, who lies in the Causal Ocean. While He sleeps in that ocean, millions of universes are generated as He exhales, and they are all annihilated when He inhales. This MahA-ViSNu is a plenary portion of a portion of ViSNu, Govinda (yasya kalA-vizeSaH). The word kalA refers to a plenary portion of a plenary portion. From KRSNa, or Govinda, comes BalarAma; from BalarAma comes SaGkarSaNa; from SaGkarSaNa, NArAyaNa; from NArAyaNa, the second SaGkarSaNa; from the second SaGkarSaNa, MahA-ViSNu; from MahA-ViSNu, GarbhodakazAyI ViSNu; and from GarbhodakazAyI ViSNu, KSIrodakazAyI ViSNu. KSIrodakazAyI ViSNu controls every universe. This gives an idea of the meaning of ananta, unlimited.

[Ash 0]

what does "plenary portion" mean, exactly??

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Technically Maha Vishnu usually refers to the first of the three Purusha incarnations, who is lying on the causal ocean (karana udaka) in yoga nidra. He is alone, without Lakshmi or other associates. As he breathes out, unlimited universes manifest from the pores of His skin. I think everyone has seen the pictures in the Bhagavatam.

 

Narayana on the other hand can refer to either a specific expansion as shown by gHari above, or to any form of Vishnu.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Plenary means endowed with all the powers of the original.

[Ash 0]

so, plenary "portion" means a part of all the powers of the original???

[kanishta 0]

Ash....the "plenary" issue is a bit more complex than that, and i myself dont fully understand it. From a Sidhanta point of view, any "portion" of Brahman, or of the Supreme, MUST also be equal to the Supreme. Now how this equality is explained differs between the various philosophical schools. An expansion of that which is "purna" MUST be also "purna" (or "complete").

 

gHari - that sequence that His Divine Grace has given us in the purport to SB 6.16.37, is this sequence given by Lord Caitanya? if not, in which shastra is it referenced from?

thanks

Haribol

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Plenary portion indicates that the Lord has expanded, but the expansion contains all of the unlimited powers of the original form of the Lord. In the material world when you take something out of another thing, the values change, but in the Lord's case everything remains full and complete.

[gokulkr 1]

 

Technically Maha Vishnu usually refers to the first of the three Purusha incarnations, who is lying on the causal ocean (karana udaka) in yoga nidra. He is alone, without Lakshmi or other associates. As he breathes out, unlimited universes manifest from the pores of His skin. I think everyone has seen the pictures in the Bhagavatam.

 

Narayana on the other hand can refer to either a specific expansion as shown by gHari above, or to any form of Vishnu.

Tasya shikhaya madhye paramathma vyavasthitha,

Sa brahma sa shiva sa hari sendra sokshara parama swaraat. - ("Narayana Suktha" from Yajur Veda Taittreya Samhita)

 

In the center of the flame lives the all-pervasive God.

Who is Brahma,

Who is Shiva,

Who is Vishnu,

Who is Indra,

Who is perennial and ever living,

And He is the greatest emperor.

Thus from above verse of "Narayana Shuktha" it is seen that Vishnu is a form of Lord Narayana. Vishnu is shown as one of Adityas in all four Vedas, whereas Lord Narayana is shown as "Supreme Brahman".

 

Note : Lord Narayana incarnated as Nara-Narayana. In Dwapara yuga, Nara-Narayana reincarnated as Arjuna-Krishna.

 

Hare Krishna

Om Namo Venkatesha

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

That verse is speaking in regards to the trimurti who control the three gunas, and then other lower devas. There are other forms of Vishnu beyond that.

[shiva 0]

Brahma Samhita 5.46

 

"The light of one candle being communicated to other candles, although it burns separately in them, is the same in its quality. I adore the primeval Lord Govinda who exhibits Himself equally in the same mobile manner in His various manifestations."

 

Plenary can mean different things but in this context it kind of means duplicate. The basic idea is that God is a single all pervading all powerful person. God exists everywhere and everything is comprised of God and everything is being conducted by the will and energy of God. The various "plenary expansions" of the Lord are all that same single all pervading person. Whether it is Narayana, Maha Vishnu, Krishna, etc, there is one all pervading entity and they are all that person. The analogy of the candle is given because if one candle is used to light other candles then those other candle flames can be considered to be the same fire as the original flame, although they may appear to be different because they are different candles. So even though the plenary expansions of the Lord are numerous and look different and are engaged in different activities still they are all the same all pervading Lord.

[shiva 0]

Here is another way to look at it using the analogy of a computer virtual reality simulation. In a virtual reality environment everything you see is comprised of pixels which are being controlled by the person controlling the computer. We can call that person and the computer he is controlling the god of the virtual reality world. The rest of the participants who are interacting in that virutal reality world cannot control the game nor can they do anything without the permission of the person controlling the game i.e they cannot create more then one identity for themselves, they cannot change what the controller of the game wishes to do. The person controlling the virtual reality can do as he likes. In essence the entire virtual reality environment is an extension of his will and desire. He can create as many identities for himself as he likes, he can shape the environment to his liking, he can do anything because the controlling computer is in control of every single pixel in the game.

 

In the same way we exist within a virtual world comprised of God. Just like the virtual bodies in the computer virtual world are comprised of the computer's pixels, our bodies and souls and minds are comprised of God. God can create as many identities for him/her self as desired with varied forms and personalities within this virtual world we live in. Everything exists within and is comprised of God just like everything in a computer virtual reality environment is comprised of the computer's pixels. The difference is that the computer and the controller of the computer are two different things. The computer is the substance of the virtual world and the controller is different from the computer. Whereas in the real world God is both the controller and the substance of everything.

 

In reality God is everything and everything is part of God. Plenary expansion is a name given to an aspect of God to help us understand what God is. It's not that God "expands" like a cell dividing. The reason the concept of "expansion" is used is because we are being taught that the various forms of the Lord do not all display the same personality and do not engage in the same activities. There is an "original" from whence the rest have all "expanded" from in the sense of there are differences in the amount and type of God's personal characteristics which are being displayed by the various forms of God. Krishna is considered to be the original male personality from whence all the rest have expanded from. This is because Krishna displays God's male personality in full. The rest of the male forms of God display less of God's personality even though they are all the same all pervading God as Krishna.

 

The story of Prahlada is meant to teach us that God is fully present everywhere. The demon king Hiranyakasipu was angry at Prahlada's belief in God and asked him that "If Vishnu is omnipresent then is he in this pillar?" Prahlada answered yes. Hiranyakasipu then tried to prove him wrong by smashing the pillar. At that point Narasinghadeva the half man half lion incarnation of Vishnu appeared out of the pillar and destroyed Hiranyakasipu's disbelief in the omnipresence of the Lord.

[gokulkr 1]

 

That verse is speaking in regards to the trimurti who control the three gunas, and then other lower devas. There are other forms of Vishnu beyond that.

Of course, five forms of Lord Narayana are : Aniruddha, Prathyumna, Sangarsana, Vasudeva & Narayana.

 

My doubt is : why Vishnu is referred as just one of Adityas in four vedas ? Also in Bhagavath Gita, Lord Krishna says that " Among Adityas, I am Vishnu" . It is said that there are twelve Adityas and Lord Visnu is youngest among them. So Vishnu referred just as a Aditya in Vedas & Gita is disturbing me. Please reply to this.

 

If Vishnu is one of the Adithya, then how Vaishnavas equating Vishnu & Lord Narayana as One ?

[shiva 0]

 

Of course, five forms of Lord Narayana are : Aniruddha, Prathyumna, Sangarsana, Vasudeva & Narayana.

 

My doubt is : why Vishnu is referred as just one of Adityas in four vedas ? Also in Bhagavath Gita, Lord Krishna says that " Among Adityas, I am Vishnu" . It is said that there are twelve Adityas and Lord Visnu is youngest among them. So Vishnu referred just as a Aditya in Vedas & Gita is disturbing me. Please reply to this.

 

If Vishnu is one of the Adithya, then how Vaishnavas equating Vishnu & Lord Narayana as One ?

The youngest son of Aditi was Lord Vamanadeva who is one of the Dasavatars. Krishna is just "one of the Yadavas" yet still God. If you accept the Vedic literature then it is made clear that the various Vishnu's are all one and the same supreme lord as Krishna, Narayana, Ramachandra, Vamanadeva etc. Not all knowledge is presented in detail in the Vedic Samhitas. That is why we have the smriti i.e Puranas, Itihasas etc. Much or most of the Vedic samhitas are allegorical in nature which is why the smriti is needed.

[Guest guest]

 

My doubt is : why Vishnu is referred as just one of Adityas in four vedas ? Also in Bhagavath Gita, Lord Krishna says that " Among Adityas, I am Vishnu" . It is said that there are twelve Adityas and Lord Visnu is youngest among them. So Vishnu referred just as a Aditya in Vedas & Gita is disturbing me. Please reply to this.

 

If Vishnu is one of the Adithya, then how Vaishnavas equating Vishnu & Lord Narayana as One ?

A very good question. It was Sri Ramanuja who referred to Vishnu and Krishna mainly as Narayana. You need to look into his reasons or explanations to how he equated them as one. I'm not sure if the word Narayana is in the Vedas but I know Vishnu is.

 

You can also ask how Shankar or Shiva is one of eleven Rudras. When we are told that Shiva is a god, Rudra is a god and both shiva and rudra are the same god. If that is so how can Rudra be a single god when there are eleven of them? Who are the other ten Rudras?

 

It appears that maybe neither of them were the supreme God in the Vedas, but later became the supreme god in Vaishnavism and Sahivism.

[Avinash 0]

 

Technically Maha Vishnu usually refers to the first of the three Purusha incarnations, who is lying on the causal ocean (karana udaka) in yoga nidra. He is alone, without Lakshmi or other associates. As he breathes out, unlimited universes manifest from the pores of His skin. I think everyone has seen the pictures in the Bhagavatam.

What is the form of Mahavishnu? I mean how many heads, feet, hands does He have? In Bhagavatam, I read about a Purusha incarnation who has thousands of heads, feet etc. Is He Garbhodakshayi Visnu?

You have written that Maha Visnu is completely alone. Does it mean that even Adi Shesha is not with Him? I was under impression that Adi Shesha was with all forms of Visnu.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Here is a picture:

 

http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=1095&stc=1&d=1145540635

 

 

As He breathes out, all the universes come out from the pores of his skin, and when He breathes in, all the universes are destroyed. He is also known by the name Karanodakashayi Vishnu because He sleeps on the Karana ocean.

 

I will try to post a better picture later.

[Avinash 0]

I saw that picture earlier. I thought that perhaps it was a simplified representation. As the picture shows, Maha Visnu has one head and four hands. As you mentioned earlier, He is completely alone. I thought Adi Shesha was with Him. But now I stand corrected.

 

Garbhodakshayi Vinsu is the one from Whom Brahma comes. Is Garbodakshayi Visnu the Purusha incarnation having thousands of heads, feet etc.? Is He with Adi Shesha? Is He with Laxmi?

[gokulkr 1]

I have found the answer to the question that "why Vishnu is referred as just one of Adityas in four vedas & Gita?"

 

Actually there are two vishnus in vedas. One is An Aditya. More Hymns in Vedas are sung to Aditya-Vishnu than the other one.

 

Another Vishnu is referred as "one of the trinity" ie., Maha-Vishnu. Maha-Vishnu appears in "Narayana Shukta" & "Vishnu Suktha" of Krishna-Yajur-Veda. Since an Aditya cant be one of the trinity, it is clear that "Maha-Vishnu" is different from "Aditya-Vishnu".

 

The above view is supported in Vishnu-Purana also. In Chapter describing Surya-Mandala (in Vishnu-Purana), there is reference of "Aditya-Vishnu". Vishnu (the Aditya) is clearly referred as youngest of 12 Adityas. Also it is specified that Maha-Vishnu is the source-energy for all the 12 Adityas (including Aditya-Vishnu). Also in Vishnu-Purana its stated that Lord Narayana himself took form of "Lord Maha-Vishnu" (one of the trnities) to sustain the universe, as no other can do it. So Lord Maha-Vishnu & Lord Narayana are one.

 

I salute to Holy Parasura muni & Lord Veda Vyasa (since due to them "Vishnu-Purana" is presented to the mankind) for clarifying my doubt.

 

Hare Krishna

Om Namo Venkatesha

[Avinash 0]

In the picture I did not see Ananta Shesha. So, I thought that Ananta Shesha is not with Maha Vishnu. But I have read in some places (including the book 'Krsna') that Maha Vishnu lies on Ananta Shesha. Is this correct or does the book say something else?

 

Is Ananta Shesha (or any of his forms) present with other forms of Vishnu?