Advaitham,Theology of vedas,Smartas,vaishanavas,Sri vaishnavas

[Guest guest]

My "aneka koti prmanas to all sri vaishnavas again"

 

The correct translation of the term visishtadhvaitham in english is "pan orgal

monism"

 

the term visishtadhvaitham is derived(i donot have a basic knowledge of sanskrit

though) like this visisthasya + advaitham = visistadhvaitham.

 

so are we adhvaithins then?? yes we are 'cos according to shruthis one who

appreciates difference will never get moksha and he'll always be on samsara

cycle.

 

so the real purport of shruthis is "adhvaitham" and now we call ourselves

"visishtadhvaithins" so how are we going to justify??

 

yes of course the purport of shruthis is advaitham not dvaitham. is it pure

pure advaitham as shri adhi shankara says?? no it is not our we are adhvaithins

basically with the adjective visithasya..

 

what shri adhi shankara (as we all know ) talks is nirvisesha advaitham and

what shri bashyakara talks about is savisesha advaitham not pure advaitham (pure

pure consciousness , jeeva bramha identity and iykiyam as shri adhishankara

says)

 

our dharshanam followed as per the sayings of dheva perumal(shri athigirinathan

perarulalan varadharajan) "dharshanam bedha evacha" is bedha dharshanam.

 

yes it is dvaitham but not as per dvaithins (or dualists).

 

what shri anandha theertha talks about is something non dependency of souls and

bramhan and shri bashyakara talks about is dependency...

 

how do we justify the above???

 

it is like light and luminousity they are different concepts but there exists

a permenant relation which can never be negated and they are cognised together

always..(this is a vague comparison though)

 

it is the sarira athma bhavam prakara prakari bhavam etc...

 

the term sarira again needs a very big explanation as the other vedhanthins

say that it has dhoshas...(fallacy) which will come as a seperate mesg..

 

to simply say it is the body soul relation ship which is our "pradhana

prathithanthram" that which is not found in other schools of thought...

 

and i request other shrivaishnavaites to give more inputs and clarifications

mean while to the list...

 

********************************************************************************

theology.... smarthas....sri vaishnavas

********************************************************************************

 

if any one calls himself as vedanthin he can never refute "narayana's"

supremecy for it is very obvious and crystal clear.. so the vedas if at all we

say that it talks about any religion it is vaishnavism and all those who call

themselves as "vedhanthins" is none but vaishnavas..

 

remember no vedanthin argues on supremecy of "shri narayana" but they argue

only on whether it is dvaitham/advaitham.

 

and ofcourse as emphatically and irrefutably (and the same strengthened by

thoopal kulamani swami desika) it is "visisttadhwaitham" which balances both...

 

one who follows shruthis and smrithis is called a smartha as we all follow

shruthis and smrithis we are smarthas too.

 

and now what is the diff between vaishnavaite and shri vaishnavite??

 

the verse in purusha suktha identifies narayana like this

 

"hrischathe laksmischapthnuyo" so the concept of shri finds an importnat place

in our "sampradhayam".

 

and our's is bramadhvaitham....

 

just a minute just a minute dont the shruthis talk about only one

paramathma???

 

yes sir!!!! accepted.

 

it is not two entirely altogether different brahmans we are talking about

.... we are talking about the status as shri who participates in each thing like

srishti stithi smaharam etc...along with narayana...

 

so they are inseperable ......

 

she is always seen with him all the avartharas (para,vyuha,archa,vibhava

antharyami)

 

and for whatever the state of shri is in shrivaishnavism it is somehow

accepted unanimously by all shrivaishnavaites ( unlike other vaishnavaites) the

importance of shri....

 

( for more details and arguments which are very complicated and which doesnt

seem to end at all i shall try and give the gist of this concept of shri)

 

and again i reqest all the srivaishnavas in the list to give more details and

clarifications mean while

 

 

regs

venkataraghavadhasan

[Guest guest]

At 10:53 AM 6/13/98 -0500, venkat wrote:

> My "aneka koti prmanas to all sri vaishnavas again"

>

> The correct translation of the term visishtadhvaitham in english is "pan

orgal

>monism"

>

>the term visishtadhvaitham is derived(i donot have a basic knowledge of

sanskrit

>though) like this visisthasya + advaitham = visistadhvaitham.

>

> so are we adhvaithins then?? yes we are 'cos according to shruthis one who

>appreciates difference will never get moksha and he'll always be on samsara

>cycle.

>

> so the real purport of shruthis is "adhvaitham" and now we call ourselves

>"visishtadhvaithins" so how are we going to justify??

>

> yes of course the purport of shruthis is advaitham not dvaitham. is it

pure

>pure advaitham as shri adhi shankara says?? no it is not our we are

adhvaithins

>basically with the adjective visithasya..

>

> what shri adhi shankara (as we all know ) talks is nirvisesha advaitham

and

>what shri bashyakara talks about is savisesha advaitham not pure advaitham

(pure

>pure consciousness , jeeva bramha identity and iykiyam as shri adhishankara

>says)

>

> our dharshanam followed as per the sayings of dheva perumal(shri

athigirinathan

>perarulalan varadharajan) "dharshanam bedha evacha" is bedha dharshanam.

>

> yes it is dvaitham but not as per dvaithins (or dualists).

>

> what shri anandha theertha talks about is something non dependency of

souls and

>bramhan and shri bashyakara talks about is dependency...

 

 

SRI ANANDA TIRTHA DOES ACCEPT DEPENDENCY OF SOULS. VISHNU IS ONLY

INDEPENDENT; ALL ELSE IS DEPENDENT ACCORDING TO HIS DOCTRINE. FURTHER, IT

IS THE SARIRA-SARIRI BHAVA & JAGAT ABHINNA NIMITTA UPADANA KARANA &

PRAPATTI AS AS LAGHU-UPAYA WHICH HE DOES NOT AGREE WITH (THERE ARE OTHER

DIFFERENCES,... WHICH I HAVE AVOIDED FOR BREVITY)

 

ADIYEN KRISHNA

 

> how do we justify the above???

>

> it is like light and luminousity they are different concepts but there

exists

>a permenant relation which can never be negated and they are cognised

together

>always..(this is a vague comparison though)

>

> it is the sarira athma bhavam prakara prakari bhavam etc...

>

> the term sarira again needs a very big explanation as the other

vedhanthins

>say that it has dhoshas...(fallacy) which will come as a seperate mesg..

>

> to simply say it is the body soul relation ship which is our "pradhana

>prathithanthram" that which is not found in other schools of thought...

>

> and i request other shrivaishnavaites to give more inputs and

clarifications

>mean while to the list...

>

>***************************************************************************

*****

> theology.... smarthas....sri vaishnavas

>***************************************************************************

*****

>

> if any one calls himself as vedanthin he can never refute "narayana's"

>supremecy for it is very obvious and crystal clear.. so the vedas if at

all we

>say that it talks about any religion it is vaishnavism and all those who

call

>themselves as "vedhanthins" is none but vaishnavas..

>

> remember no vedanthin argues on supremecy of "shri narayana" but they

argue

>only on whether it is dvaitham/advaitham.

>

> and ofcourse as emphatically and irrefutably (and the same strengthened

by

>thoopal kulamani swami desika) it is "visisttadhwaitham" which balances

both...

>

> one who follows shruthis and smrithis is called a smartha as we all follow

>shruthis and smrithis we are smarthas too.

>

> and now what is the diff between vaishnavaite and shri vaishnavite??

>

> the verse in purusha suktha identifies narayana like this

>

> "hrischathe laksmischapthnuyo" so the concept of shri finds an importnat

place

>in our "sampradhayam".

>

> and our's is bramadhvaitham....

>

> just a minute just a minute dont the shruthis talk about only one

>paramathma???

>

> yes sir!!!! accepted.

>

> it is not two entirely altogether different brahmans we are talking

about

>... we are talking about the status as shri who participates in each thing

like

>srishti stithi smaharam etc...along with narayana...

>

> so they are inseperable ......

>

> she is always seen with him all the avartharas (para,vyuha,archa,vibhava

> antharyami)

>

> and for whatever the state of shri is in shrivaishnavism it is somehow

>accepted unanimously by all shrivaishnavaites ( unlike other

vaishnavaites) the

>importance of shri....

>

> ( for more details and arguments which are very complicated and which

doesnt

>seem to end at all i shall try and give the gist of this concept of shri)

>

> and again i reqest all the srivaishnavas in the list to give more

details and

>clarifications mean while

>

>

> regs

> venkataraghavadhasan

>

>

>

>

>

>