aprakruta QA

Answers By Shri Kesava Rao Tadipatri

In this excerpt, we will deal with some of the concepts like aprAkRuta, atIndriya, anAdinitya,etc and some of the tatvas in that backdrop.

At the very outset, we have to note the following two important things.

1. The same word can refer to different things. We have to be aware of these and determine based on the context. 2. What exactly are the definitions and concepts. they are very important in trying to understand these.

For ex, satva, rajas and tamas can refer to svabhAva guNas or they can refer to prakruti gunas. The names are same but they refer to different things.This is like Aniruddha refers to the Lord and also Pradyumna's son(who is in 10th kaksha). How do we know what these terms refer to? That will be based on the context.

When the guna karma vibhAga is done and it is mentioned that Vayu is SSSS, Rudra is SSST, etc. Here it refers to svAbhAvika guNa only. When sRushTi is explained, the parts of satva guNa and rajo guna and tamo guna are referred. These are Prakruti guNas.

Now proceeding to the questions and answers -

Q1. What is the difference between AtIndriya and AprAkRuta?

A1. To understand the difference between atIndriya and aprAkRuta, we have to understand what the terms mean and how they apply.

atIndriya is beyond the reach of prAkruta indriyas. Immediately a consequent question arises. PrAkruta indriyas of whom? Similarly another approach is atIndriya is beyond pratyaksha. Immediately a consequent question arises. PratyakSha of whom? Thus atIndriya becomes a subjective term. Also it is contextual. For ex, when we hear svarga is atIndriya, the assumption is that the ordinary humans are meant here.

If we make a global definition - "if an entity is not indiyagochara for even MukhyaprANa and Brahma, then it is atIndriya" - then that is global definition. This is prakruta indriyas of all the observers. That means in global case, when a particular entity is beyond the prAkRuta indriyas of humans, one should not jump into the conclusion that it is atIndriya (in global sense). It can be gochara to prAkruta indriyas of gods.

Otoh, aprakruta is not relative to a particular person or particular kind of beings. Thus though these two terms are related, one needs to be conceived wrt owner of indriyas and the other is not. Yet, we take into account of all the beings with prAkruta indriyas and exclude all for atIndriya (when Global is meant).

Let us define prAkruta and aprAkruta -

prAkruta is that which is related to prakruti. That means it is prakruti nirmita and prAkruta indriya gochara. atIndriya is not prakruta indriyagochara.

Here prAkruta indriyas are eyes(chakshu), nose(ghrAna), ears(shravana), tongue(rasana) and skin (sparsha) and also manas (mind).

Caution has to be exercised that the limitation of these indriyas for one person or category of people should not be taken as atIndriya For ex, bacteria isnot visible to naked eye. But it can be seen by microscope. the sthUla dehas of devatas (in their mula rUpa) cannot be seen even by microscope by ordinary humans, but they can be seen by other devatas or some special humans. Thus the sthUla dehas of devatas are prAkruta only.

Conceptually the atIndriya are defined wrt indriyas (also it can be subjective or global) and aprAkruta is defined wrt prakruti and it is always global.

That is the big caveat here.

Q2. Is every aprAkRuta entity atIndriya?

If it is not, it means that there are some aprAkRuta which are not atIndriya. What is the example?

A2. Every aprAkRuta entity has to be atIndriya. Why? If it is not atInriya, that means, it is indriyagochara. That means it is prAkRuta.

That conflicts original position that it is aprAkRuta.

Q3. Is every atIndriya entity aprAkRuta? If it is not, it means that there are some atIndriya which are not aprAkRuta. What is the example?

A3. This is a bit tricky. MulaprakRuti is prAkRuta only. Saying that "mUlaprakRuti" is aprAkRuta is not right. Also, there are pramANas that Sri KK mentioned, which explicitly say that. They are blocked from even Rujus and hence it is called "avyakta"(unmanifest). There are no pramanas,which explicitly mention that Rujus have access to entire MulaprakRuti. So, this MulaprakRuti can be taken as atIndriya that is not aprAkRuta.Thus this gives answer to 4 also.

Q4. In particular, is mUlaprakRuti aprAkRuta or not? Is it atIndriya or not?

A4. MulaprakRuti is prAkRuta, not aprAkRuta. It is atIndriya, not prAkRuta indriya gochara. In the verse "aprAkRutam surairvandyam ...", this is describing the Lord. The Lord is aprAkRuta and worshiped by the gods. he in the name of VaikUNtha pervades vaikUNtha and so, the verses describe both vaikNTha loka and also the Lord. Note other adjectives like "krIDantam ramayA sArdham", and words like "keshavam".

Q5. Satva, Rajas and Tamas - Are they atIndriya or indriyagochara? Are the aprAkRuta or prAkRuta?

A5. This is where a clarification is needed. There is Satva, Rajas and Tamas that are svAbhAvika.

SvAbhAvika/chetanAtmaka/chidAtmaka Satva, Rajas and Tamas are atIndriya and aprAkRuta.

There is jaDAtmaka Satva, Rajas and Tamas - these are prAkRuta. Again these are of two kinds -

5-1 The ones that remain as avyakta and not brought to SrushTi - These are atIndriya.

5-2 The ones that are made vyakta and brought to SrushTi - These are yathAyogya Indriya-gochara (meaning for some it is atIndriya and for some not).

Q6. Similar to Q5, but prefix with shuddha like shuddhasatva.

A6. Answer is also similar. However some elaborations may be desirable. When we hear "Vayudevaru shuddha Satvikaru", we are referring to the svAbhAvika guNas, which are aprAkRuta.The shuddha satva that is used in mukta sthAna is prAkruta only. Even if Shuddha Rajas and Shuddha tamasare not brought to SrushTi, one can conceive their being in avyakta form in MulaprakRuti. Just because Lakshmi is abhimAni of Mulaprakruti, oneshould not think that MulaprakRuti is chetanAtmaka. If such approach is taken, one may argue Brahma is abhimAni of Mahattatva and Brahma is chetana and so Mahattatva is chetanAtmaka!! It can't be.

The differentiation of chit prakRuti and achitprakRuti is quite elaborate in Acharya's commentaries for Gita verses 7-4 to 7-7.

Chit pRakRuti is Lakshmi and she is para. achitprakRuti is jaDAtmaka and forms upAdAna kAraNa in "prabhava(or creation)".

Also look at the BhAshya of Gita 2-16.

asadrUpa jaDa prakRuti is not visible to sthUlajnAna and is atisUkShma and so avyakta. It is kAraNa and the created(known as sadrUpa) is kArya. That is why it is said that "sat" is born out of "asat". Both refer to prakRuti only and both are jaDa only and both are prAkRuta only. One is kAraNa and other kArya.

Q7. Has anAdinityatva any relevance to atIndriyatva or aprAkRutatva? In other words, can one say "X is anAdinitya implies that X is aprAkRuta or vice versa (X is aprAkRuta implies that X is anAdinitya" or "X is anAdinitya implies that X is atIndriya or vice versa(X is atIndriya implies that X is anAdinitya" ?

A7. Now this must have gotten easier. anAdinitya need not imply aprAkRutatva. MulaprakRuti anAdinitya, but not aprAkRuta.

But aprAkRutatva implies anAdinityatva.

anAdinityatva need not imply atIndriyatva (global). dravya is anAdinitya, but not atIndriya (global).

kAla is anAdinitya and we can experience it. There are some which are pravAhataH nitya (like bhUtAkAsha). If we take avyAkrutAkAsha, it is anAdinitya, prAkruta, indriyAtIta. atIndriyatva (global) implies anAdinityatva.

Q8. Have sruShTi or shraShTutva, laya or layatva any relevance in all this?

A8. This is kind of corollary of Q7. If something is created(sRuShTa), it is sAdi and not anAdi. If something has laya, it is not kAlataH ananta, it has nAsha. If something is anAdi, it is kAlataH ananta and vice versa.

Some may get a doubt - Linga deha is anAdi, but linga bhanga happens. Note that it is Linga Bhanga. Linga deha is removed. Matter can neither be created nor destroyed. This universe is created and destroyed - how? It is brought out from mUla prakRuti and put back there.

Note the Bhagavata verse

"janmAdyasya yato.anvayAditaratashchartheShvabhijnassvarAT...

tejovArimRudAM yathA vinimayo yatra trisargo..."

The jaDa sRuShTi is vinimaya or transformation only. It is changing from one form to another.

Q9. a-kArAdi varna svaras prAkRuta or aprAkRuta? Quote: Definitely mUla prakRiti is NOT just aprAkRita. If you observe clearly on one side it has aprAkRita such as -a kaaraadi svara-s, pada samuchchaya-s, shuddha satva , shuddha tamo gunA-s etc, OTOH, it also comprises the heaps of satva and tamo guNa-s which are prAkRita and used during sRiShTi. rajo guNa is formed / gets united during sRiShTi and praLaya. Unquote.

A9. MulaprakRuti is not aprAkRuta as mentioned earlier. a kaaraadi svara-s, pada samuchchaya-s, shuddha satva , shuddha tamo gunA-s etc are all prAkRuta only. Only ChidAtmaka or chetanAtmaka entities are aprAkRuta.One of the root causes for our confusion is our inability to comprehend aprAkRutatva. This is available only thru shaastras. We can only use Agama pramAna or anupramANa based on Agama pramANa. Thus when we say that Lord is nIlavarNa, that nIla varNa is aprAkRuta as against the prAkRuta nIla varNa that we are aware of. Thus many of the prAkruta entities that we know like beauty, knowledge, etc have both aprkAkRuta (chetanAtmaka and prAkRuta(jaDAtmaka). But for entities like akArAdi varNas, they are just prAkRuta. The Lord is sarva shabda vAchya. He Himself is not shabda.The following three questions are kind of related or inter-linked and so will answer them together.

Q10. are God's ayudhas like chakra svarUpAtmaka or jaDa ? are they aprAkRuta or prAkRuta?

Q11. If God's chakra is made of shuddha sattva then it implies God has shudda satva as building blocks. How is that possible?

Q12. The following quote

Quote: In order to comply with svagata bheda vivarjita concept one is then bound to agree to the conclusion that each shudda satva is God himself. Do you agree to such conclusion? If not, then which contributing factors are you ready to give up? That the Lord is not svagata bheda vivarjita or his ayudha is made of shuddha sattva? Unquote.

A10,11,12.

Where the chakra is there, There are multiple things. Before proceeding, let me give an example. Imagine a glass prism and light in it. The space occupied by the prism, the light and the prism itself are all in the same space. at the same time. Similarly, where the chakra is there, Lord Himself in the form of chakra is there. In the same place, LakShmyAtmaka chakra is there. In the same place, jaDAtmaka chakra is there. LakShmi is also there in another form as abhiimani of that jada chakra.Then in the same place, the abhimAni devata of chakra is there. They are different from one another - LordHimself, LakShmi, chakra and chakra abhimAni devata. The Lord in the form of chakra is non-different from Lord Himself, but different from other 3.Lakshmi is different from other 3 and so on. For the jada chakra to function, the chakra abhimAni devata, that devata antargata LaKshmi, Lakshmi antargata Hari play their roles as per the ichCha of the Lord. The shuddha satva is jaDa only and different from other 3 and so no issues. The Lord's form Himself as chakra is non- different from Lord and so no issue with svagata-bheda-vivarjitatva.

Q13. Quote:

The translator has wrongly given in his notes that - "ee vivaksheyinda sRiShTiyalli upayogisalpaDada shuddha satva shuddha tamo guNagaLannu

aprAkRita guNagaLemdu vyavaharisabahudu" It is his opinion not found in 17-17,18,19. Wrong interpretation!

Unquote.

Is this right? If not, how should that be?

A13. I think the translator is trying to use that "asadrUpa" prakRuti that was mentioned in Gita verse 2-16.

Probably the author intended to use "prakRuti" as sadrUpa prakRuti. In that case aprAkRuta is "asadrUpa prakRuti". But the usage of "AprAkRita eMdu vyavaharisabahudu" may be confusing to the readers. The safe bet would have been to use some other words. It is obvious that the translator was also not probably comfortable with that usage and so went "hazy", by using "bahudu".

Q14. Quote: In my limited understanding this aprakruta shuddha sattva completely violates the svagata bheda vivarjita. So which one do we accept? Its got to be one or the other. It is hard to do samanvaya. Hence in terms of these aspects - credibility authenticity parampara and aptatva, sarvamula is the obvious choice .Unquote.

What is the understanding? Is samanvaya not possible? Do we have to choose among credibility authenticity parampara and aptatva, sarvamula ?

A14. Though this is already answered, additional stress will reinforce. Shuddha sattva is prAkRuta only. It is different from the Lord. Svagatabheda vivarjitatva is in tact.

Q15. Proof by contradiction is only to refute something? Can we use contradiction to prove something?

A15. It can be both ways. Reductio ad absurdam is one such approach only. Suppose there is statement S1. To refute S1, proceed with the assumption that S1 is true. If we end up in contradiction, then S1 is refuted. To establish S1, proceed that S1 is false. If we end up in contradiction, then S1 is proved.

Q16. are the following prAkRuta or aprAkRuta?

"shrIbhagadalli iruva aramanegalige naasha illa. adu hEge prAkRita aguttade? "

"varna galige nasha ideya? adu prakrutavo aprakrutavo?"

"kala pravaha prakrutavo aprakrutavo? adakke nasha ideya?"

A16. nAshakku prAkrutakku sambaMdhavu hIge.

16-1. nAsha implies prAkRuta.

16-2. "nAsha illa" need not imply aprAkRuta. (mUlaprakRuti)

16-3. prAkRuta need not imply nAsha. (mUlaprakruti)

16-4. aprAkRuta implies "nAsha illa".

Q17. How to categorize, each entity of muulaprakRiti under prAkRita and a-prAkRita?

A17. This is like asking How many are "pancha pANDavas". The prefix of MUla will not take away the prAkRutatva as mUla is not really a negating prefix,but only a specializing prefix.

Q18. How to categorize, each entity of muulaprakRiti under chit and a-chit?

A18. It is a-chit only. LakShmi is called chit prakRuti and she is the controlling deity of MUlaprakRuti.

Q19. if daityas have no existence after sthula deha,why there are so many avaranas?

A19. Neither the purpose of daityas is to create avaraNas, nor the purpose of avaraNas is to give some place for daityas. daityas are chetanas andAvaraNas are jaDas. It just so happens that daityas have capability to go upto sthUla deha, where the sAdhana happens for sthUladehadharis as well as daityas. Casting off the avaraNas is needed for final mukti.

Q20. linga deha is made of 16 kalas, whether they are prakruta or aprakruta? If aprakruta why it has nasha,if prakruta why can't tatwika devatas or daityas enter just like other things made of these prakruta things.

A20. Linga deha and its kalAs are all prAkRuta only. Linga deha itself does not have nAsha. All of them keep floating in Viraja. Even those who do not do Viraja snAna, the Linga dehas are cast off and they float there. Numbering question 21 and adding following questions(22 to 24).

Q21. When we say ananta or Anantya, we mean that it is time-wise endless - kAlataH ananta. Then if we want to indicate space-wise, we say deshataH ananta. When we say anaadi or anaaditva, we mean that it is time-wise beginningless - kAlataH anaadi. However it is not normally heard to indicate space-wise - we dont say deshataH anaadi. Is 'deshataH anaadi/anaaditva' a valid meaningful statement. If it is, why and how? What is an example for that. If it is not, why it is not?

A21. Will elaborate a bit. kAla is uni-dimensional thing. It can be represented with a line. So, it is easy to think of Aditva or anAditva and anatatva and anantatva for time.Space or objects occupying space or 3 dimensional things and so their Aditva is not very meaningful. For limited objects, rather than saying Aditva, dimensions are thought of. However, when deshataH anantatva is mentioned, it also implies deshataH anAditva.

Though there is no need to say deshataH anAditva, when deshataH anantatva is mentioned, to emphasize the grandeur or enormousness, the absence of 'Adi' is also mentioned along with the absence of "anta". This gives emphasis and expresses wonder.We don't normally see this in tarka.

One example was given by Sri KK

Quote:

nAntaM na madhyaM na punastavA.adiM pashyAmi vishveshvara vishvarUpa || Gita 11.16.

Saying something is deshataH anAdi is a gauNa prayoga of saying something doesn't have a boundary.

unquote.

Q22. We hear about nitya, anitya and also nityAnitya. We have some understanding as to how the same entity can be nityaanitya. Similarly can we say some entities can be prAkruta-aprAkruta? If yes/no, how and why?

A22. When kAla is mentioned as nitya-anitya, we refer to kAla as one continuous entity, it is nitya in suKShma form. The segments of kAla are anitya.So, we are not referring to the same entity as such, but two entities that can be differentiated. If similar argument is to be made here, only one way it can be done that chit prakRuti LakShmi is aprakRuta and mUla prakRuti is prAkRuta.

Q23. Seeing various questions, we notice one of the things as follows.

There are substances/padarthas/tatvas/entities that we are looking at - like - Mulaprakruti, satva, rajas, tamas, the things in Shribhaga (like palaces, etc), the special bodies, muktas take, manastatva, ahankara tatva, Mahattatva, etc., linga deha(and its kalas), aniruddha deha, shuddha satva, shuddha rajas, shuddha tamas, akaaraadi varnas, etc

There are conditions/properties - like - saaditva, anaaditva, deshataH/kaalataH saantya, deshataH/kaalataH anantya, naasha(destruction)/vinashyatva (destructiblity), prAkrutatva, aprAkrutatva, nityatva, anityatva, etc.

At least two questions pop up in our minds (Quite a few already mentioned) -

23. BhutAkAsha is prAkruta. What about avyakrutAkAsha? Is it prAkruta or aprAkruta?

Both are prAkRuta only.

FOLLOW-UP Q&A

KT: Quote

What do u mean by mukthas entering into sushupta state during maha pralaya ( Separate doubt) ? Are these mukthas referred to one who are yet to enter the Vaikunta ? Or is it that mukthas already in Vaikunta enter sushupta ?

unquote.

KT: Firstly All the aprAkRuta entities are beyond pratyakSha and hard to conceive for people like us. So, the shaastras give examples from prAkRuta entities only to give some indication of what the concept is. For aprAkRuta, it is almost impossible to give perfect example.One such is - In prAkRuta entities, the reflecting medium and reflection are diffetent. Acharya says that in cae of aprAkRuta, that is possible - like Jiva is itself reflecting medium(upAdhi) and reflection(pratibimba)

A reasonable example is like a rainbow, where it alsomost seems that there is no separate upAdhi. However even there little drops of moisture are upAdhi and rainbow is the pratibimba.

With that background, all the examples need to be taken only to drive a concept.

An aprAkRuta entity example itself may drive the concept even better. Will come to that in a minute.

The roopas can be taken similar to rays of light that the rays come from the source of light and so the Roopas come from the Mula Rupa.

Now take the example of any human. The Jiva is in the body. It is ANu mAtra. We move our fingers, toes, hands, legs tongue, etc. Does the Jiva really travel to those parts and make them move? Each cell in our body has life. Do you think there are actually many Jivas(Not talking about tatvAbhimAni devatas here) in the body or do you think that Jiva travels to those parts? Both are not true. It is also not the case that Jiva expands to all those parts. We can conceive that the Jiva has prakAsha vyApti. It stays where ever it is and does all those.

The niramsha Jivas can only do that much prakAsha vyApti - doing activities within one body. The sAmsha Jivas can do the same across many bodies. That is what is referred to in shaastras as "kAyavyUha".

That is one kind of vyApti for sAmsha Jivas.

The tatvAbhimAni devatas do one thing, that is even different. They enter thru their prakAsha into various creatures to obey the command of the Lord to instigate the creatures perform the activities that they are assigned to. In these cases, the tatvAbhimAni devatas have no abhimAna for those dehas. (Just a note - Brahma and Vayu do not have abhimAna for the bodies that they perform sAdhana as the indwellers of their bodies).

In case of YudhisThira and Vidura - yes Yama was there in his Mula Rupa and only prakAsha vyApti in avatAras. That is why they are also called amshas.

That is why what ever Arjuna does, Indra knows, but Arjuna does not know all that Indra does. In Mahabharata tAtaparya NirNaya, Acharya mentions the how the capabilities of devatas in various yugas function regarding avatAras. (see verse 22-274 22-275, the numbers may vary across versions)

"sarve guNA AvRutA mAnuShatve yugAnusArAnmUlarUpAnusArAt |

kramAt surANAm bhAgato vyaktarUpA AdAnato AdAnato vyaktimAyAntyurUNAM |..."

(When devatas are incarnating as humans, their qualities are concealed according to yugas and according to MularUpas. Uttamadevatas can draw occasionally qualities from MularUpa.)

I think in case of DhritarAshtra, you are referring to "kali puruSha".

Similarly, KalipuruSha is there in his MularUpa. His amsha comes thru retus of Dhritarashtra and travel to Gandhari and gets born as Duryodhana.

When a person moves finger or tow, we say that the person moved finger or tow, but the Jiva is only aNu mAtra. Did the Jiva travel to finger or tow? No, but still we say that the Jiva did it thru the body. Similarly for Devatas like Vayu, try to imagine that their prakAsha spreads thru this BrahmANda. In fact the uttama devatas have pervasion outside BrahmANda as well.

Okay, convinced...you are trying to say that for both as abhimanatwa and avathara, the devathe will not be there but rather his prakaasha/vaapti will be present and devathe will be staying in his own world....Is this true for Mukhyapraana who carries a soul and lord after death........Is it that the prakaasha vyaapti (same as lamp) carrying a soul and lord ?

KT: The following is to rule out that the muktas are in suShupti during mahA pralaya.

dR^iShTvA sa chetanagaNAn jaThare shayAnAn...tathaikShat" - 1-4 in MBTN....

(Having seen the sleeping chetana gaNa in His stomach, Lord Narayana, the personification of bliss, saw the contemplating muktas liberated from samsAra and also the sAmsArika Jivas starting from sajjIva-s startin from Rudra and below, adhamaJivas upto Kali and madhyama Jivas in suShupti(deep sleep) the way they were.)

By explicitly saying that muktas were engaged in meditation, their being in suShupti is ruled out.

The word "brahmAdi" is to be taken as "atadguNasamvijnAna bahuvrIhi" - those having Brahma as Adi - Rudra and below ones.

Certainly MukhyaprANa also has prakAshavyApti, while carrying soul and the Lord after death. The prakAsha vyApti is similar to lamp. (not same). The lamp is jaDa. It has no knowledge. MukhyaprANa has full knowledge of what he is doing. Also forgot to mention in the other post - MukhyaprANa is known as pratibhAta parAvara as he is not in suShupti even during MahA pralaya.

Fine, that means mukthas do not go to deep sleep state but go to meditation.....agreed.....and got convinced with Mukhyapraana concept too....And finally what are the matters found in andhatamasu and nithya samsaara ? Are they jada apart from/other than moola prakruti ?

I really appreciate your patience sir, You have thrown light on such queries, with proofs and logic's smile emoticon

KT: It is to be noted that there is lot of information available about muktas and also Sri Vadirajaru wrote a gratntha by name "VaikuNTha varNana".

However not a lot of information is available about Andhatamas and NityasamsAri lokas. There is a tendency to think that just as shuddha satva is there in VaikuNtha, there will be shuddha tamas in andhatamas and shuddha rajas in nitya samsAri lokas. As far as I know, there is no such information available. Without pramANa, assuming will be just svakapola kalpita (pure imagination).

Another reason for not elaborating may be it is very pleasing to know and read about Mukti. Why read elaborately about andhatamas and nityasamsAri lokas?

Also when one reads Acharya's Bhashya for Brahmasutras, the person will know why andhatamas is not described in detail.

Pointer : Acharya's Bhashya for 3-1-19 to 3-1-23

For 3-23, acharya says -

"mahatamastridhA proktamUrdhvaM madhyaM tathA.adharam |

shravaNAdeva mUrChAdiradharasya yato bhavet |

tasmAnna vistareNaitatkathyate rAjasattama" iti Kaurme

"Andha tamas is three types - upper, middle and lower.

By listening about Adhara, etc itself, one may swoon, etc

Oh great king, for that reason, this will not be explained in detail."

Also, for mukta Jivas, following things apply -

1. AptakAmatva (They get what ever they desire for, but the thing to be noted is that they have reached their own perfection and so will never desire for improper things.)

2. They have svarUpa Ananda AvirbhAva.

3. They have the capacity to take jaDa bodies like we wear shirts without ever getting attached to them.

So, though the bliss is inherent, for the expression of bliss, the Lord has given entities made of shuddha satva.

For andha tamas and nitya samsaris, there is no Aptakamatva. So, the Lord does not give any thing to them.

One can find information about these in Mahabharata, PurANas, Sutra Bhashya as mentioned above) and Sri Hari Vayu stuti (verse 11 and 13 describe andhatamas and verse 12 describes NityasamsAris and again verse 16 summarizes both), etc

Could you kindly elaborate more on Santanikaloka and Andhatamas?

I think there should be a much more detailed description of Santanikaloka than what is given by Sri Kesava Rao Tadipatriji .Also , there is a belief that is going around that the description of Andhatamas is very graphic and my doubt is whether apart from Acharya Madhwa, has anybody read about this graphic description? Hari Vayu stuti gives little information on both these lokas

I mean is there any description of these lokas by other Rijus like Sri Vadiraja Mahan, Sri Vijayendra Swami etc?

Please also let me know where to get more information on Santanikalokas .I understand "Puranjana" is the governing deity for that loka.

KT: Surely, there is lot more information about andhamtamas and sAntAnika lokas. It is not practical to give all the information here. I Will elaborate a bit here.

Narakas are 2 types - anitya narakas and nitya narakas.

Nitya narakas are TAmisra and Andha tAmisra. There are totally 28 narakas.

Among them, two are eternal - TAmisra and Andha tAmisra, five are known as Mahanarakas(These are anitya) - Raurava, mahAraurava, Vahni, VaitaraNi, KumbhIpAka. The rest 21 are also anitya narakas. After visiting anityanarakas, the Jivas return to samsAra, just as after visiting svarga, the Jivas return to samsAra / Earth.

"kShINe puNye martya lokaM vishanti".

UpalakShaNatyA - "kShINe pApe martya lokaM vishanti" (from anitya naraka).

However, one must note that the gods(devatas) never have naraka yAtana(one must not get confused with YudhishThira's naraka darashana).

Mokshayogya manushya Jivas, during samsAra will visit svarga, naraka and bhUmi, but eventually(after linga bhanga) go to mukti. Nitya samsAris, during samsAra will visit svarga, naraka and bhUmi, but eventually(after linga bhanga) may continue to circle these three worlds are may go to "sAntAnika lokas", which is a symbolic name. These Jivas are always restless and experience a mixture of joy and sorrow at the same time. There is not much description about these sAntAnika lokas, as they are not really providers of any thing. Some times the name "sAntAnika lokas" is used to describe "santaru iruva lokagaLu". In that usage they are not meant to describe "nitya samsAri lokas". So, please do not get carried away by the name too much. We have to go by the context. Even when these nitya samsAris are staying in sAntAnika lokas, their experience(svarUpA anubhava) is a mixture of joy and sorrow. When they are restlessly circling the three worlds, their "svarUpagata sukha duHkha mishratva" remains the same as per the yogyata of the Jiva.

There are five types of avidya - tama, moha, mahAmOha, tAmisra, andhatAmisra.

The first three lead to anitya narakas and last two lead to nityanaraka.

The nitya naraka(andham tamas) is further divided into upper, middle and lower ones. There is no sukha at all there.

In Brahmasutras, 3rd adhyAya, 1st pAda describes initially the anitya narakas and then nitya narakas.

The Bhagavata, 5th skandha gives the list of these 28 narakas and describes them in the 24th adhyAya in quite a bit of detail.

Adhogati is of three kinds -

tiryak (being born as lowers form of animals, yatanA (getting torture either in this world or in anitya hells, and tamas (eternal hells).

Among these third one is further divided into Urdhva, Madhya and adhara.

"tiryakShu narake chaiva sukhalesho vidhIyate | nAmdhetamasi magnAnAm sukhalesho.api kashchana".

For being in "tiryak" state and anitya naraka, a little joy is possible.

In andhatamas not even a trace of joy.