Guest guest Posted October 2, 1995 Report Share Posted October 2, 1995 THis following included message contains some references with questionable appropriateness to an acharya of visistadvaita, Azaghiasinger. I would request the netters on this group to follow some protocol when addressing a sanyasi - which ever faction or sect or religion that sanyasi belongs to. coming to the point of ishwara and god issue, Swamy azhagia singer definitely has a point. One has to go deeper into the authoritative texts such as prasthana trayas to evaluate impartially the terminology such as "ishwaraishaana", "mahadeva" etc. since this subject is very vast. One might read a complete chapter on it in SMS chari's book vaishnavism. or Filloziat's "varadaraja panchasat" where with detailed shruti and smrithi references the issue has been resolved. in this network the very same topic has been discussed in earlier conversations. the essence is that the term "Narayana" denotes the ultimate as per the shastras. Vyasa's quote might be helpful to us here - " alodya sarva shasthraani vicharya cha muhur muhuhu. idamekam sunishpannam dhyeyo narayanaha sadaa" - which means " after contemplating on all the shastras and re examining it several often one thing stands out clear (for humanity)- one should always meditate on "narayana". Acharya Vedanta desika goes into great details in "Rahasya traya sara" reasoning out that even terms such as "vishnu", "vasudeva" etc. are not as emphatic and rigorous in denoting the ultimate as much as the term "Narayana" denotes. By the way even terms such as "Rudra", "Sambhu" etc. does denote the ultimate in the upanishads such as svetasvetara and atharva shika upanishads respectively. it depends on the context. But in vishnu saharsa nama - "ishvara uvaacha" denotes to parvati pati siva only (spouse of parvati) ( note the term manorame in srirama rama rameti rame raame manorame, means (my beloved) which is usually used by a husband to wife, atleast in our respectable smritis!!). and ishwara is according to mythology and shastras a "created entity" ie. not the "primal cause". siva or ishwara was created by "4 faced bramha" who is the first born. by a rule, created entity is not the ultimate according to shastras. Even Sankaracharya accepts this issue. One has to read up details regarding these in texts from any of these acharyas. please refer to FYI on this issue for details. ----- Begin Included Message ----- >From krish Mon Oct 2 09:09:23 1995 krish <krish Mon, 2 Oct 1995 07:41:21 -0400 prapatti Re: Isvaran Mr. Algiya Singer seems to be twisting, a right he certainly possesses. Easwara replies Parvathis's querry. Now Parvathi need not be Easwara's consort, per Singar. One cannot understand the concern of Vishnu or Iswara. This is starting to be like my Christian friend's statement about the only truth and only God. For every Vaishnava Statement about Vishnu, there is a corresponding one about Shiva. Whether there is a grain of truth, depends on the devotee! ----- End Included Message ----- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.