Vedic deities

[Guest guest]

Sri Sudarsan Parthsarathy wrote:

> Personally Adiyen is of the same view expressed by Mani.

 

Dear Sudarsan,

 

I am certainly not endorsing in any way worship of deities other

than the Parabrahman Sriman Narayana. Based on the comments in

your article, it appears to me that you have not properly

appreciated the Visishtadvaita approach to Vedic worship.

All these topics are discussed in detail in the Vedarthasangraha

of Ramanuja and Srimad Rahasya Traya Saaram of Vedanta Desika.

 

First and foremost, the Vedic deities such as Indra, Mitra,

Varuna represent "posts" or "offices". A person who has a

balance of merit ("good karma") is placed in one of these posts

by Sriman Narayana as a reward, much as human birth itself is a

reward. While the posts themselves are thought to be eternal, as

they represent principles mentioned in the Vedas, the

personalities occupying the posts are not.

 

Hence, Indra is the presiding deity of rain and thunder, among

other things. Mitra and Varuna are solar deities who are closely

related and often identified. Varuna is also associated with

water. Usha is the deity of dawn, and so on.

 

When the Vedic mantras address the deities, they do so in a

twofold manner:

 

a) They are addressed to the personalities occupying the posts

 

AND

 

b) More significantly, these prayers are addressed to the

Absolute Self, the Paramapurusha who actually empowers and

moves all the deities. The deities are viewed as modes

(prakAras) of the Absolute who presides as their inner

controller (antaryAmin).

 

So when using a Vedic mantra in your daily and occasional duties,

depending on your mental attitude, you are either addressing a

subsidiary power or the ultimate power. The Sri Vaishnava

philosophy is to solely use mantras to worship the latter,

because the Absolute is the true entity behind everything.

 

This understanding of the mantras comes from the Vedas

themselves. The Rg Veda, in a hymn addressed to Vishnu, says

that "all these other deities are merely your limbs" (angA anyAni

devatA). This expression is repeated in the Taittiriya

Upanishad. The Purusha Sukta, which occurs in the tenth mandala

of the Rg Veda, says that the various deities spring forth from

the self-sacrifice of the universal Purusha. This same Purusha

is described as Narayana in the Taittiriya Aranyaka. The

Brhadaranyaka Upanishad declares that out of fear of Brahman (the

Absolute), the sun rises, the wind blows, etc. In another

section, the same Upanishad reduces the millions of Vedic gods

down to one principle, Brahman.

 

Western scholars use the term "henotheism" to describe the poetry

of the Vedas. Henotheism means taking a particular deity and

treating it as if it were the greatest, and then moving to

another deity and doing the same. This only presents part of the

story. Certainly the Vedic hymns move from one deity to another

and lavishly heap praise upon each one. But the Vedas are

operating under the axiom that Brahman is the ultimate principle

which manifests itself as these deities; it is therefore to Brahman

ultimately that the prayers are addressed.

 

This is further explained in the first chapter of Brahma-Sutras,

in indra-prANAdhikaraNa.

> 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.

 

The nitya-karmas are all dedicated solely to Sriman Narayana, or

at least they should be for a Sri Vaishnava. In your sankalpa,

do you not say "Sri bhagavad AjnyA, Sriman nArAyaNa prItyartham"

or some variant? This should be followed by a sAttvika tyAga

which once again declares that the entire act and all its fruits

are for God alone, and no one else. If any names are used in the

course of the worship, the idea is that these names signify only

Narayana, who is defined to be the Absolute.

 

Let's take the example of sandhyAvandana. There are two main

parts to this ritual, the arghya-pradAna and the gAyatrI-mantra

japa. During the arghya-pradAna, the 'devata' is paramAtmA

savitA, the Supreme Self Sriman Narayana as seen as the power

within the sun. During gAyatrI-japa, once again the same

paramAtmA savitA is the object of meditation. During the

upasthAnam Narayana within the sun is addressed as Mitra, Surya,

or Varuna. (I am not familiar with your line "rudra daivatyam..."

As far as I know this is not part of any Sri Vaishnava

sandhyAvandanam; in any case, it may also be possible to

understand that line in a conformant way). This is further

clarified by the smRti sloka we recite after the upasthAnam,

"dhyeyaH sadA savitRmaNDala-madhya-vartI nArAyaNa...", which

guides us to meditate on Narayana as residing within the orb of

the sun.

 

In homas, typically if any other deity's name is used, Sri

Vaishnavas say "[other deity] antaryAmine samarpayAmi", and are

advised to think only of Narayana and nothing else.

 

Sri Desika explains in 'Varadaraja Panchaasat' how the words

Brahma, Sankara, Indra, Atma, Sarva, etc., refer only to the

Highest Self Narayana and not to any lower entity:

 

brahmeti Sankara itIndra iti svarAD iti

Atmeti sarvam iti sarva carAcarAtman |

hastISa! Sarva-vacasAm avasAna sImAm

tvAm sarvakAraNamuSanty anapAya vAcah ||

> 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. ... So I was even

> more confused why we do not worship a Shiva Linga, or Ganesha

> in their idol form.

 

It is not just a matter of "no need"; it is a violation of our

faith in God to go pursue goals elsewhere. The Sri Vaishnava is

supposed to have "mahA-viSvAsa", or supreme faith, that God alone

will do the needful. It is intellectually dishonest to claim to

have faith in God and worship anything else (money, cars, stones,

humans, Parvati, Ganapati, etc.), apart from the conception that

God is the inner controller of all of these.

 

Also remember that our sole purpose in life is to glorify the

innermost Self, who is none other than Narayana. This can only be

done if we take our 'seshatva' seriously.

 

This is explained in great detail by Vedanta Desika in the

paradevatA-pAramArthyAdhikAram of Srimad Rahasya Traya Saaram.

> 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).

 

And such worship, according to the Gita, 'avidhipUrvakam', i.e.,

not recommended by Krishna. The 'yuktatamo', the best of yogis,

is the one who exclusively worships Krishna alone (6.47). What

the Gita says is that anything you seek is given by Narayana

alone; so why resort to anyone else?

 

namaH paramapurushAya,

Mani

[Guest guest]

Sri Sudarsan Parthasarathy wrote:

> Adiyen's intention is not keep on asking elementary questions,

> but develop a deeper understanding on this topic from

> Bhagavathaas like Devarir. Please forgive me for committing

> Apachaarams.

 

Dear Sri Sudarsan,

 

You are asking very good questions and they are not

easy to answer. I will reply to best of my ability,

and I ask others to do so as well.

 

First of all, and this is general advice to everyone,

we are all friends -- there is no need to apologize

for asking questions, and please don't think you are

committing apachArams by doing so. We need not be

worried about this on our mailing list.

 

I think you have distilled your doubt down to this:

> But still why should we even seek a Post Office or

> address their name, and think of Sriman Naarayanan,

> when we can directly invoke our Supreme/Compassionate

> Sriman Naarayanan. Mantra Ratnam, Dvayam and

> Charama Slokam should be sufficient, and other

> Shruthi's relevant to Nitya Karmas containing only

> reference to Sriman Naarayanan should be practiced.

 

This is an excellent question. However, I think it is

based on a faulty premise. You are making the

assumption that the various names we use -- Siva,

Gayatri, Indra, Rudra, Sudarsan, Mani, etc. -- refer

to entities other than the paramAtmA Sriman Narayana.

 

In truth, all names, though they conventionally

denote different individuals or objects, in reality

only refer to the Supreme Self (paramAtmA). Since

all things are simply modes of the Self, insofar as

they constitute His body and are controlled by Him,

all names truly refer directly to the Self and

nothing else, since the Self is what imparts reality

to these other things. This is the position of

Ramanuja. Just as when we say "Sudarsan", we

conventionally refer to your body, but we actually

refer to your unique selfhood, those who are

acquainted with Vedanta know that "Sudarsan" is just

another reference to the Supreme Self, since it is He

in reality who pervades your very essence.

 

This is how we appreciate the fact that the Supreme

Self manifests itself as all the various powers of

nature and as creation itself. This immanence of God

is described by Arjuna in the Gita, among many texts:

 

sarvam samAnoshi tato'si sarvaH |

 

You pervade everything, therefore you are everything!

 

The very pervasiveness of the Self is the reason that

all names refer truly to the Self.

 

This principle is clarified by Nammalvar in many

paasurams. I will cite one here and request others

to supply more:

 

thida visumbu, eri, vaLi, neer, nilam ivai misai

padar poruL muzhuvadhum aay avai avai thoRum,

udal misai uyirena karandhu, engum parandhuLan

sudarmiku suruthiyuL ivaiyunda suranE.

 

Being the vast sky, fire, air, water, and fire,

Being all things made of these,

Hidden within, he pervades, like life in a body,

He is the God of the glorious Vedas.

 

(tvm 1.1.7)

 

This establishes that all things *are* the Self

because of His pervasion. Now, using this principle,

look at the hymns of the Vedas. All the various

names used refer to manifestations of the Self alone,

so all names only refer to Narayana. Whether we refer

to Gayatri, Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Surya, or Savitr,

or on a more mundane level, Sudarsan, or Mani, we are

truly referring only to Narayana. (This is also the

only way of making sense of Nammalvar's exclaiming

"muniyE, naanmukanE, mukkaNNappA", all in the same

breath).

 

So, we are not using a "different" post office -- we

only need realize that all names address only One

Entity, the Supreme Self, Narayana.

 

Let's specifically apply this to sandhyAvandanam. [*]

As explained before, sandhyAvandanam is a form of

Vedic worship, in which the sun and the gayatri

mantram are used for meditation. Are we worshipping

entities other than the Self? Only if *we* think

so. The true Vedantin will see all things as

referring to the Self, so his worship will be

different.

 

Based on the principles above, the true Vedantin

realizes that in no way can he worship the sun, or

gayatri, by themselves, as different from the Supreme

Self. (He also has no *need* to do so, but this is a

separate issue). Desika clarifies this, citing a

sloka from the Mahabharata:

 

ye yajanti pitRRn devAn brAhmaNAn sahutASanAn

sarvabhUtAntarAtmAnam vishNum eva yajanti

 

Those who worship the ancestors, the gods,

brahmins, or the fires, in truth only worship

Vishnu, who is the inner Self of all things.

 

(Santi Parva 355.41, quoted

in RTS, kRta-kRtya-adhikAram)

 

This is a beautiful sloka, because it encapsulates

all the above principles in a single statement. In

all worship, who is really worshipped? "vishNum eva",

Vishnu alone. Why? Because He is "sarvabhUta

antarAtmAnam", the Self of All. Whether it is a

SrAddham (devasam), nitya-karma, or homa, the

Vedantin performs these because they are the command

of the Lord, and realizes that such worship is

directed only to Him. Those untutored in Vedanta

think that they worship independent beings, without

realizing that the Self of all, Vishnu, is the actual

recipient of all worship.

 

So, when you say,

> Mantra Ratnam, Dvayam and Charama Slokam should be

> sufficient, and other Shruthi's relevant to Nitya

> Karmas containing only reference to Sriman

> Naarayanan should be practiced.

 

I hope you now can see how this question fades off

into irrelevancy, since nitya-karmas already refer

directly to Sriman Narayana. You just have to turn

your mind in that direction. We practice them as

kainkaryam because it is ordained that we do so. The

question of sufficiency should also not arise;

nitya-karmas (or any other worship) should not be

done to achieve results.

 

Now, it is my turn to apologize. I did further

research, and the slokas you cited in your previous

post are indeed part of the gAyatrI dhyAnam for some

Sri Vaishnavas. Sri Gopala Desikan of Tirukkudandai

(18th century, munitraya sampradaya founder) cites

these in his "Ahnikam" (manual of worship):

 

prAtar dhyAyAmi gAyatrIm, ravimaNDala-madhyagAm

Rg-vedam uccArayantIm raktavarNAm kumArikAm

akshamAlAkarAm brahmadevatyAm hamsavAhanAm

 

madhyandine tu sAvitrIm ravimaNDalamadhyagAm

yajur-vedam vyAharantIm SvetAm SulakarAm SivAm

yuvatim rudradevatyAm dhyAyAmi vRshavAhanAm

 

sAyam sarasvatIm SyAmAm ravimaNDalamdhyagAm

sAma-vedam vyAharantIm cakrAyudhadharAm SubhAm

dhyAyAmi vishNudevatyAm vRddhAm garuDavAhanAm

 

(These are not part of the sandhyAvandana krama, as

taught to me by my father, so I was ignorant of them.)

 

Basically, Gayatri Devi is pictured as sitting within

the sun at each time of the day. In the morning, she

is pictured as the consort of Brahma, a girl of

reddish color reciting the Rg Veda. At noon, she is

called "sAvitrI" and is seen as the consort of Rudra,

a young woman of white color reciting the Yajur Veda.

In the evening, she is called "sarasvatI", and is

seen as the consort of Vishnu, an old woman of dark

color reciting the Sama Veda. By the way, these are

all slokas from smRti texts, not Veda mantras.

 

These slokas are typical of serious meditational

practice. Clearly, Gayatri is pictured as growing

through the day and associated with Brahma, Siva, and

Vishnu at various times for meditational purposes. I

can't say more than this; more knowledgable scholars

in India should be consulted.

 

However, I am certain that even these slokas, if one

wishes to recite them, have to be understood with the

idea that Gayatri Devi is a manifestation of the

Supreme Self based on the principles explained above.

 

I suppose the basic conclusion is this: all names and

forms -- Siva, Brahma, Gayatri, Sarasvati, Ganapati,

Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Sudarsan, Mani, stone, tree,

etc., find their philosophical and emotional

conclusion in the Supreme Self, who is known by the

proper name Narayana.

 

Mani

 

[*] It should be understood that among the many Vedic

rituals, Sri Vaishnavas perform only the "AjnA

karmas", those that the Lord has commanded. We do not

do any Vedic ritual for our own benefit (the

so-called "kAmya karmas"), so we eschew yajnas and

the like which others may do for personal gain.

[Guest guest]

SrI Lakshminrusimha ParabrahmaNE namaha

SrI Lakshminrusimha divya pAdukA sEvaka SrIvaNN-

SatakOpa SrI nArAyaNa yateendra mahAdESikAya namaha

 

Dear Sri Sudarsan (of Singapore),

namO nArAyaNA.

 

The question by Sri Sudarsan is certainly a very

important one and Sri Mani has very well clarified

many a things based on granthams like vEdArtha

Sangraha, Srimad Rahasya Traya sAram (SRTS). In this

context, adiyEn would like to just share few things

which were learnt from Sri U.Ve. KarunAkaran swAmi.

 

In SRTS, SwAmi dESikan cites this fundamental

knowledge arising from the study (ie. proper

understanding) of sAstrAs "Those who have a

discriminating intelligence, never worship either

Brahma, or rudra, or any of other (demi)gods, for

the fruit of their worship is very limited "

( MahabhArata: Santiparva 350.36). We SriVaishnavAs

know this fact very well. But, in certain nitya and

naimittika karmAs which we have to certainly perform,

(eg: SandhyAvandanam) it seems as if one is instructed

to worship anya dEvatAs. In this context, Sri Mani wrote:

> In truth, all names, though they conventionally

> denote different individuals or objects, in reality

> only refer to the Supreme Self (paramAtmA).

 

This is a very important teaching of vEdAnta (*), which

one has to bear in mind especially while performing

nitya and naimittika karmAs.

 

(*) :In the Brahma sUtrAs, BAdarAyanar makes this point

in the VaiSvAnara adhikaraNa.

--

 

Infact, swAmi dESikan specifically raises this

pUrvapaksham ( :-), all possible doubts are

mercifully forethought by our thoopul piLLai) in the 24th

adhikaraNam of SRTS, which discusses about the nature of

sAdhyOpAya :

 

pUrvapaksham (in essence) : Rites prescribed according to

VarNA and Ashrama dharmAs, and bhakti yOga are inconsistent

with exclusive devotion to SrIman nArAyaNA. This is because

varNAshrama dharmAs involve the mediatorship of other

dEvatAs (like Indra, agni, SUrya etc). Thus,

paramaikAntins should shun them. Also, since bhakti

yOga(upAsana) has varNAshrama dharmAs as its angA, bhakti

yOga also has to be shunned (ie. only prapatti has to

be adopted).

 

SiddhAntam (in essence) : This objection can arise only

because of the lack of clear understanding of the conclusion

arrived at in such treatises as SrI BAshya. In Brahma vidyAs

(upAsanas) such as Pratardana vidya and Madhu vidya, it is

_clearly_ stated that a mumukshu should meditate upon the

Supreme Self having Indra and other deities as His body (**).

BAshyakArar has declared/established that, during the

performance of VarNAshrama dharmAs, the object of worship

is only the Supreme Self (SrIman nArAyaNA), who has the

respective deities as His body. Thus, ParamaikAntitvam is

not lost when one performs nitya and naimittika karmAs

with sAthvIka tyAgam and the knowledge that the anyA dEvatAs

are attributed of PerumAL and words such as agni, indra,

rudra etc directly denote SrIman nArAyaNA, the Supreme Self.

ParamaikAntitvam gets lost in the following cases :

 

(i) the worship of anya-dEvatAs (during nitya and naimittika

karmAs), as though they are independent of SrIman

nArAyaNA.

 

(ii) Worshipping/having some connection with anya-dEvatAs(for

certain specific fruits), when they are not at all

concerned with nitya and naimittika karmAs.

 

Thus, bhakti yOga, which has varNAshrama dharma as its

anga is not inconsistent with paramaikAntitvam.

------------------

(**): In pratardana vidya, the body of Lord Indra has to be

meditated upon, with nArAyaNA as the antaryAmi. It is important

to note that, the yOgi who adopts this brahma vidyA is not

actually worshipping Lord Indra, though that dEvata is related

in a way to this brahma vidyA. Since the sAstrAs prescibe the

nature of brahma vidya to be like that, one has to follow it

as it is, if he wishes to adopt it as a sAdhyOpAya. It also

doesn't come under anya dEvatA worship since it is the antaryAmi

nArAyaNA who is concentrated upon. Here, the antaryAmi refers to

nArAyaNA who is pervading inside the body of Lord Indra. nArAyaNA

is infact the supporter and controller of Lord Indra. Thus, in

this upAsana, SrIman nArAyaNA, qualified by the body of Lord

Indra is meditated upon. Similarly, there is another Brahma vidya

in which the body of Lord Shiva has to be meditated upon, with

SrIman nArAyaNA as the antaryAmi.

 

 

But, these brahma vidya are different from other brahma vidyAs

in which the divya mangaLa vigraha of PerumAL itself is

meditated upon (ofcourse PerumAL is the antaryAmi in

His divya mangaLa vigraha)- PerumAL qualified by His divine

body is the object of meditation here. It is also to be noted

that, there are various other specific attributes that needs

to be meditated upon, while adopting a particular upAsana.

Those things can be understood from SriBashyam. The above

discussion on the things to be remembered while performing

upAsanAs, is restricted with the "context" of this posting.

----------------------------

It is established in vEdAnta that, as far as a

mumukshu/paramaikAntin is concerned, while he is either

adopting certain upAsana Or performing nitya - naimittika

karmAs, he has to perform the meditation/worship to only

SrIman nArAyaNA, with the required knowledge as discussed

above. Ofcourse, the option to perform exclusive worship

to anya dEvatAs in these circumstances is very much there -

It is adopted by those who are not paramaikAntins/mumukshus;

they will get certain fruit of that worship accoringly.

---------------------------

 

The next question is: "Why to take such a circuitous route

of meditating upon the body of an anya dEvata with the

antaryAmi as srIman nArAyaNA, while performing either

upAsana Or performing nitya-naimittika karmAs ?? "

 

It is because, sAstrAs says so. It is sAstrAs which

stipulates, whether a certain act is either "right" or

"wrong". When sAstrAs (bhagavad Aj~nA : divine command of

SrIman nArAyaNA) say that a particular act of worship /

meditation is in such and a way and has to be adopted by

a mumukshu/paramaikAntin in that way, it is perfectly a

valid thing. A mumukshu can't think on his own that such

a stipulation by sAstrAs is contradictory to his

goal/nature. It is infact "questioning/revolting against"

the very command of his/her own master - SrIman nArAyaNA.

------

 

The next question is: " Can one then go to a anya dEvata

temple and worship say Lord Shiva, with the thinking that

nArAyaNA is the antaryAmi ? It seems as if it is perfectly

valid, since such a view is adopted even in a Brahma

vidya. "

 

One can't perform such a worship - It is against the

nature of a paramaikAntin/mumukshu. The answer is again

based on the fact that, it is sAstrAs, which dictates an

act to be either "right" or "wrong". sAstrAs never

prescribe a mumukshu to perform such a worship. There

are many pramAnams for that (refer SRTS). Infact, a

mumukshu is proscribed (ie. forbidden) from performing

such worship. The point is that, what is applicable

while performing an upAsanA, can't be applied out of the

way to some other thing, according to one's own whims and

fancies. For instance, during yEkAdasi, when the BrAhmana

bhOjanam (for srAddham ie.devasam) is performed by those

brAhmanAs, they don't incur any sin. This is because

sAstrAs says so. Applying this to one's own convenience,

one can't claim that one can eat rice during an yEkAdasi,

and not incur any sin, if it is a marriage dinner on that

day. This is again because, sAstrAs doesn't say like that.

 

For a mumukshu/paramaikAntin to either worship or meditate

on PerumAL, he has to follow the sAstrAs as to how to do

it. He can't select his own way of worship etc. sAstrAs

are the only guide.

 

He also can't have some pre-concieved notion that worshipping

PerumAL through Divya prabandham, nAma sankeertanam, rahasya

mantrams and going to His temples are the only valid way

to worship Him, since it is directly geared towards PerumAL.

If one understands vEdAnta properly, it is again crystal

clear for him/her that worshipping PerumAL during the nitya-

naimittika karmAs, yaj~nAs etc are also perfectly valid and

directly geared towards PerumAL. Only the required

understanding of the sAstrAs is needed to perceive it

clearly.

-------------------

 

Some pointers regarding the avoidance of the temples

of anya dEvata (in addition to what has been stated above) :

 

a. anya dEvata temples follow the AgamAs ( like Saiva,

SAkta ) which are inconsistent with the teachings of vEdAs.

Only pAncarAtra and VaikhAnasa AgamAs are based on vEdAs.

BAdarAyanar establishes this in Brahma sUtrAs.

 

sUtra (2.2.35), pasupatya adhikaraNa : "patyurasAman~jasyAt"

(ie. the doctrine of pasupati <Lord Shiva is the supreme,

etc> is to be disregarded, because of its absurdity). Thus,

as a follower of vEdAs, one can't take up a worship

which is opposed to vEdAnta - one can't entertain such

a worship also. Anything which is opposed to vEdAs has

to be rejected. The Saiva, sAkta AgamAs follow the

doctrine of pasupata religion or its variant => vEdAntins

has to shun such temples.

 

b. Those who don't know about such conclusions of vEdAnta,

say, "Those who go to all the temples, irrespective of

the deity/AgamAs followed are more _religiously tolerant_

than SriVaishnavAs". First of all, we shall leave the fact

that such a claim has no basis from sAstrAs - which

dictates something to be right or wrong or religiously

tolerant etc. Even when viewed in a general sense,

Sri VaishnavAs are the utmost religiously tolerant ones.

SriVaishnavAs certainly have great reverence for, say,

Lord Shiva. But, according to Saiva AgamAs, a portrait

of an incident (according to Saiva purAnAs) that VarAha

PerumAL and Brahma tried to measure the height of Shiva etc,

and how Shiva later did some minor "sikshai" (small

punishment) to PerumAL etc is to be present in the backside

of the sannidhi (while performing the pradakshanam, this

will be invariably seen). In front of the MeenAkshi amman

temple, big portraits/sculptures with Lord Shiva beating,

kicking etc PerumAL in all His incarnations ( matsya,

kUrma, varAha, nrusimha........) are present. But, in the

divya dEsams, not even a single sculpture will be there,

which will trouble the heart of even a staunch devotee

of Lord Shiva, even when SrIman nArAyaNA is the Supreme

Lord. Is it not obvious as to who is more religiously

tolerant ? Do they expect SriVaishnavAs to visit their

temples, when the very PerumAL, who is most dear to

their hearts is insulted in various ways, with

various sculptures signifying it ? Who can call himself/

herself a stauch devotee of SrIman nArAyaNA and

simultaneously go and witness such insults imparted to

Him ? This obviously adds to the reasoning of

SriVaishnavAs shunning anya dEvata temples (politely;

not with enimity etc; let them have their own worship,

celebrations etc; we needn't disturb them).

----------------------

 

Lord Shiva is glorified as a great Vaishnava in many a

places in scriptures. SwAmi dESikan also glorifies

Lord Shiva accordingly. But, we also don't know, which

Lord shivA it refers to( Shiva is a post ; the story told

in the purAnAs may pertain to some Shiva of the past ; we

can't be sure that the present Lord ShivA is the one told

in the sAstrAs etc). There are various other issues as

well.

 

But, if we have to pay the respects to Lord Shiva as a

Vaishnava, again we need to resort to sAstrAs. It boils

down to this : If Lord Shiva comes in front of us, with

all the Srivaishnava symbols like "UrdhvapuNdram" etc,

then only we have to prostrate etc (Lord Shiva is in the

bhAgavatha goshti now). If Lord Shiva, even while

personally appearing in front of us, is not presenting

himself as an "adiyAr (devotee) of SrIman nArAyaNA" (by

the respective SriVaishnava attires), paramaikAntins

should not prostrate to Lord Shiva. To just understand this

better : Even while one's father is fully fit to be

prostrated, one can't prostrate to him, if he is having

yaj~nopavItham around his ears; One can't prostrate his

own mother when she is in her menstruation cycle.

------

 

Lets now move onto the SandhyAvandanam issue.

 

Sri Mani wrote :

> Basically, Gayatri Devi is pictured as sitting within

> the sun at each time of the day. In the morning, she

> is pictured as the consort of Brahma, a girl of

> reddish color reciting the Rg Veda. At noon, she is

> called "sAvitrI" and is seen as the consort of Rudra,

> a young woman of white color reciting the Yajur Veda.

> In the evening, she is called "sarasvatI", and is

> seen as the consort of Vishnu, an old woman of dark

> color reciting the Sama Veda. By the way, these are

> all slokas from smRti texts, not Veda mantras.

>

> These slokas are typical of serious meditational

> practice. Clearly, Gayatri is pictured as growing

> through the day and associated with Brahma, Siva, and

> Vishnu at various times for meditational purposes. I

> can't say more than this; more knowledgable scholars

> in India should be consulted.

>

> However, I am certain that even these slokas, if one

> wishes to recite them, have to be understood with the

> idea that Gayatri Devi is a manifestation of the

> Supreme Self based on the principles explained above.

 

As discussed previously, we can meditate upon the form of

gAyatri dEvi with nArAyaNA being the antaryAmi. Here, the

jIvAtmA gAyatri dEvi residing inside that body is not

concentrated upon => no anya dEvata worship is performed.

This is a valid meditation since it has been prescribed so

for SandhyAvandanam, which is a must to be performed by

a dvija, as per the commands of SrIman nArAyaNA. But, we

can also perform the whole sandhyAvandanam directly

meditating upon say Lakshminrusimhan Or VeerarAghavan OR

SrInivAsan Or NamperumAL OR Kutti KrishNan etc, with

appropriate understanding of the mantrAs/slokas.

 

 

AzhwAr,yemperumAnAr,dESikan,Azhagiyasingar thiruvadigaLE SaraNam

 

adiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan

ananthapadmanAbha dAsan

krishNArpaNam