5

As per this QnA, anyone killed by the Supreme Lord achieves Moksha. Then why is it that the cursed Jīvātman of Jaya & Vijaya (the door keepers of God Vishnu's Vaikuntha) had to be re-born not once, twice, but thrice (that too, as far as I can guess, it's is for this Kalpa only)?

Even, if we factor-in the fact about the fulfillment of the curse, then too, the events might be repeating almost with the same basic details in some next Kalpas. Moreover, if we say that the events although repeat in a same manner, however, the material body will still remain same in all cycles but the jeevataman that's inside being a different-new one. By that logic, considering that the door-keepers are Nitya Suris (as per this source), and hence, their jivataman cannot change as per definition. So even after being re-born and killed by the Supreme Lord in some Kalpa cycle, they'll be re-born as demons in next cycles. So, that kind of becomes a paradox, as per my understanding. They're effectively not achieving Moksha (even after getting slayed by the Supreme Lord) but are re-born in this sāṃsārika world, again and again.

In that sense, both, Jaya & Vijaya will be re-born as demons afresh, and killed by the Supreme Lord in his various incarnations, yet again and again, in a never ending eternal kāla-chakra cycle? Same arguments may be extended to the case of Kālanemi as well, who was killed by Lord Vishnu & reborn again as Kaṃsa.

So, dosen't that invalidates the very idea portrayed in the verses of Srimad Bhagvatam?

Furthermore, using the above case, can one, also conclude that thus, the state of Moksha is not a permanent state but is rather, unequivocally a subject to be changed with new days of Brahma i.e., the Kalpas, i.e., Moksha may last only for a Kalpa or a couple of Kalpas or maybe in some cases some Mahakalpas, but not permanent?



EDIT:

The following questions, as I also have linked them in my present question, are used as arguments to build up on my argument regarding Moksha via the Supreme God, they in no way clarify my doubt, they are just to clarify the doubts of the readers (including me), so a better answer maybe begotten. THESE QUESTIONS ARE MY ARGUMENTS ITSELF AND NOT WHAT I'M ACTUALLY ASKING.

  1. Do same events repeat in every Yuga?
  2. Does "Free Will" really exist, even if universe repeats itself in perfect pattern?
  3. Does following line states Brahma repeats same incidents everyday?
  4. Is Moksha a permanent state?
13
  • 1
    Very interesting observation. I believe that the Jaya Vijaya who were cursed belong to Karya Vaikuntha (Shvetadvipa), which is within out Brahmanda, and not Paramapadam, which is above all Brahmandas.
    – Surya
    Mar 23 at 7:05
  • 1
    you've to also consider the fact that Sanakadi Rishis were visiting Vishnuloka, and Vaikuntha is not a place which you can visit whenever, but Shvetadvipa is. But yes, one has to check on the doorkeeper thing.
    – Surya
    Mar 23 at 7:14
  • 1
    Moksha is permanent. Death at the hands of God does not mean one will get Moksha.
    – Pinakin
    Mar 23 at 7:28
  • 1
    Putana didnt get any Curse to be born 4 times like the Gatekeepers. Still she also merged in Krishna. So anyone who gets killed or even hates Lord reaches Adobe of Vishnu says Bhagavata. Once they get moksha its permanent. I dont know if I could help you bro. Mar 23 at 8:57
  • 1
    Nice Q..i too had similar doubt, didn't find any well known figure who got permanent moksha.. for well known figures we find their reincarnations instead of moksha.. wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/brahma-sutras/d/doc78300.html says that Moksha is not permanent until someone has a divine mission to complete..
    – YDS
    Mar 23 at 10:25
1

The Moksha obtained by Vidvesa-Bhakti is permanent. It takes three births to attain moksha through this method because of the specifics of the curse. Also vidvesa-Bhakti is not applicable for ordinary men and is of academic interest only.

The first is the Bhagavata idea of Vidvesha-bhakti or communion through confrontation. Such a conception is not found in the Sutras of early Bhakti theoreticians, nor is it looked upon with favor even by later writers on Bhakti like Madhusudana and Rupa Goswami. All theoreticians consider that only absorption resulting from a sense of Anukulya (favorableness) in the object of love can be the genesis of devotion. It is not possible to have 'favorableness' in respect of a dreaded enemy with whom one is in confrontation. Besides, whatever the Bhagavata may say, it had no application in the life of ordinary men. In the Bhagavata narrative this attitude of confrontation is represented in the case of some Titanic souls like Hiranyakasipu, Ravana, etc. They were once servants of God, but due to their haughtiness they were cursed by some great sages that they would lose their heavenly status and become embodied in worlds of sin and strife. They were, however, to regain their status after spending three successive lives in hatred of, and in confrontation with God. In each of these births they were to be killed in battle by the Lord Incarnate, and that would purify them and restore them to their original condition.

Prologue of Srimad Bhagavata translated by Swami Tapasyananda

1
  • This does not resolve the apparent contradictions brought to light by OP. It is a mere restatement of the Srimad Bhagvata's stance, on the authority of the SB. Are there any commentaries which address the points raised by OP?
    – chhatra
    Mar 23 at 18:27
0

There is Sri Vaikunta (Paramapada), and there is Karya Vaikunta, a branch like TTD Devasthanam, which is where Jaya/Vijaya and SanatKumaras incident happens.

I have heard this in upanyasa/pravachan, and also found this link:
https://ramanuja.org/sri/BhaktiListArchives/Article?p=jun2000/0035.html

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .