Digest bhakti.v003.n381

[Guest guest]

> Sri Raamajayam

 

Personally Adiyen is of the same view expressed by Mani. Vedic meaning appeals

more

than Puranaas. This is quite true if someone reads the meanings of Rig Veda,

where

every Deva is considered of a Saatvic Nature and only in the Puranaas they are

considered to be of Tri Gunaas(Sathva, Rajas, Tamas). Thus there are several

verses dedicated to Agni and Indra for humans to enlighten themselves with Para

Jnanam to achieve Prapatthi in Sriman Naarayanan.

 

Also for quite a few years, I have personally tried to understand why Sri

Vaishnavites do not go to non-Sri Vaishnavite temples. I heard several

arguments

ranging from "Sriman Narayanan is Parathvam", so no need to worship Anya

Devathaas

who are not subservient to lord. In other cases some had use Puraanic examples

of

where Anya Devathaas had resorted to jealous acts against Sriman Narayana and

they

are thus not worthy of our worship. On careful analysis of our Nithya

karmas(like

Santhya Vandhanam, Yajnas, Homam etc, where we still invoke prayers to Anya

Devathaas), we specifically worship the other Devas/Devathaas and not the

Antharyami

Sriman Naarayanan in them, "like Rudra Daivatyam Vrushabavahanaam" in

Maadhyanika

Sandhya. Of course Parathvam is Sriman Naarayanan, and all the Parabhakthi,

Paragnana, Prapatthi, we seek comes from this merciful Parabrahmam of Sriman

Naarayanan, even if we seek it from other Gods/Demi-Gods(words from the Geetha).

So

I was even more confused why we do not worship a Shiva Linga, or Ganesha in

their

idol form.

 

One answer I think is, that it is the form of worship, which is the precondition

for

a Sri Vaishnavite to worship, and whereever the idol is adorned with ash or

skull,

the God is not worshipped. That is the main reason, even Narasimha is not seen

as

Moolavar as "Hiranya Vakshasthali", but as Ugraha Naarasimhan, at the most. Is

this

assumption right? I expect some enlightenment mainly by Pramaanas/ Sri

Vaishnavite

Poorvacharyas views on this topic.

 

Adiyen,

 

Sudarsan

> In short, if you think that taking the Puranas literally in every

> aspect is satisfying and convincing, go ahead. I am not going to

> challenge you. In the same vein, I reserve the right to reconcile

> conflicts my own way, and I believe I am being fully faithful to

> Vedantic principles. My words are addressed to people who are trying

> to make a similar reconciliation.

>

> rAmAnuja dAsan,

> Mani

>

[Guest guest]

 

Sudarsan Parthasarathy [sMTP:nihitha]

Friday, May 21, 1999 9:03 AM

bhakti

Re: Digest bhakti.v003.n381

> Sri Raamajayam

Also for quite a few years, I have personally tried to understand why Sri

Vaishnavites do not go to non-Sri Vaishnavite temples. I heard several

arguments

ranging from "Sriman Narayanan is Parathvam", so no need to worship Anya

Devathaas

who are not subservient to lord. In other cases some had use Puraanic

examples of

where Anya Devathaas had resorted to jealous acts against Sriman Narayana

and they

are thus not worthy of our worship. On careful analysis of our Nithya

karmas(like

Santhya Vandhanam, Yajnas, Homam etc, where we still invoke prayers to Anya

Devathaas), we specifically worship the other Devas/Devathaas and not the

Antharyami

Sriman Naarayanan in them, "like Rudra Daivatyam Vrushabavahanaam" in

Maadhyanika

Sandhya.

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

 

[Krishna Kalale]

Dear sri sudarshan,

 

I would like to know where in madhyanhika does this mantra comes - Rudra

Daivatyam Vrushabavahanaam?

 

to my knowledge such a mantra does not exist. If it does some "shaivite

vadyaar" might have brought that up, since sandhyavandanam is pretty

flexible and different versions exist.

 

I do know that in shraddha mantras other devatas are brought up. Vedartha

samgraha and even nirukti which is common to all vedantic systems clears up

that those words of anyadevatas basically directly or through antaryami

denote srimannarayana. Even sayana bhasya agrees with this. Hence there

is no controversy.

 

I really dont understand what is meant by this sentence written by you :

""

sudarshan wrote:

Of course Parathvam is Sriman Naarayanan, and all the Parabhakthi,

Paragnana, Prapatthi, we seek comes from this merciful Parabrahmam of

Sriman

Naarayanan, even if we seek it from other Gods/Demi-Gods(words from the

Geetha)

 

[Krishna Kalale] ( where is this in bhagavad gita? and what exactly is

the meaning of the original verses of bhagavad gita?

.

[Krishna Kalale]

 

[Krishna Kalale] Sudarshan wrote:

I was even more confused why we do not worship a Shiva Linga, or Ganesha in

their

idol form.

 

[Krishna Kalale] I think this issue has been dealt with several times in

the bhakti archives and I am sure [Krishna Kalale] one can find those

easily [Krishna Kalale]

"