Digest bhakti.v003.n066

[Guest guest]

JS,

Elders say Lakshmi is Concept and not a figure.

Raghu RD

 

================================================================================\

=

 

Balaraman Sriram wrote:

> Dear Sri Mani

>

> With ref to the recent posting on Sri Ramanuja Siddhantham, I have the

> following doubts:

>

> >Sriman naaraayaNA is the Para Brahman (God). Equal in every

> >respect to Him is "Sri" (Lakshmi). This means that Lakshmi is also full

> >of unlimited auspicious qualities and is omnipresent (i.e. exists

> >everywhere or vibhu). These two are the ParamaatmAs

>

> How can there be two paramatmAs ?. So far I understood that

> Sriman Narayana is the

> only God and everyone else are lesser than him.

 

The operative word here is "SrIman" nArAyaNa. nArAyaNa with

Sri constitutes the Godhead. They are inseparable, as the rays

of light are from the source of the light. And at the same time,

according to the SAstra, SrImad azhagiya singar says, they are

both Infinite.

 

This is naturally a difficult concept to understand, and I

must admit I also share some of your confusion. I do not

fully understand this issue and its complexities. SrI

and nArAyaNa are inseparable, and are spoken of in the

SAstras as being equal; therefore they are both Infinite.

I am not sure, however, if one can claim that SrI and nArAyaNa

are two aspects of God and therefore naturally fully Infinite.

I believe Vedanta Desika controverts this position in his

catuh-SlokI-bhAshya.

 

There is also significant debate among Sri Vaishnavas about

the nature of "Sri", and whether or not the Goddess is Infinite

in Her essential nature, like nArAyaNa. The topics have been

debated in the time of Vedanta Desika himself. Desika took

the position expressed by SrImad azhagiya singar in the

previous post. Others, notably nAyanAr AccAn piLLai, son

of "vyAkhyAna cakravarti" periyavAccaan piLLai, took the

position that the Goddess is a finite self. Each side

quotes from SAstra and has its own philosophical details

to wrangle through.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 8/26/98 12:58:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time, bhakti-

errors writes:

 

<< I do not know how many vaikuNThas there are. Does it really

<< There is only one actual vaikuNTha that is true to

its meaning. I surmise that this place is called vaikuNTha

because it is an "image" of the actual state, meant for the

purpose described above. Where can I find more information on this ? >>

 

Touch thy heart and find Vaikuntam there; there's no greater Vaikuntam than

that..Iruppidam TiruVenkadam, say the Shastras..That is also the SriKshetra!

Humbly yours

Srikshetra