Sri Vishnupuranam etc

[Guest guest]

Sri Harikrishna Wrote:

>If you are talking about 10.60.35, then I argue that

>you have misunderstood

 

No.Adiyen is talking about Sk VIII Ch 8 of Sri BH

where the subject matter of Sri VP I.9, i.e.,

Sri Lakshmi Swayamvaram is treated.

 

Let us take just two minutes to have a look at both

of these accounts-

 

In Sri VP IMMEDIATELY after her appearance Piratti

heads for her rightful place-"yayau vakhshasthalam

harEh".Then she smiles on Indra who gets his property

back and who immediately chants the famous Sri Stuti.

Sri ParASarar then sums up with a glowing account

of the Divine Couple,their eternal togetherness,

and their Mithuna SEshitvam towards all beings.

 

In the Sri BH account,immediately Sri is born all

those present covet her-"tasyAm chakruh spruhAm

sarve sa-surAsura-mAnvAh".then there is a sort of

Swayamvara,and in 4 stanzas she considers the merits

of all beings past and present and finally settles

on Hari,but He is absorbed in Himself.In stanza 23

the decision is given in favour of Mukunda who is

described as "NirapEksham Ipsitam".The great

commentator Sridhara swamin explains thus,"Ayam

bhAvah.Yadyapi swayam AtmArAmatvEna anya nirapEkshah

tathApi etc.."..She's saying that even though Hari

being immersed in Himself doesn't require anybody,

still if I go to Him He may not reject me just as He

would not reject the Good Things which seek refuge

in Him.I'm satisfied with that much alone.I'll make

myself blessed by serving Him.

 

Our own Sri ViSishtAdvaita commentator Sri VirarAghava

also doesn't add anything to this and he also employs

the same word NirapEksha.

 

Compare this cold,matter of fact description of the

union of the Divine couple with the encomiums poured

on PirATTi by Sri ParASara in the identical context.

Is aDiyEn still being accused of misleading in saying

that there ia fundamentally different approach in

both these great books?

 

ADiyEn is using the word "cold" here in re Sri Suka

deliberately.Sri Suka by nature is NOT a cold person.

There are hundreds of instances in Sri BH where while

speaking about the Lord's KalyANa GuNas he has

horripilation,goes into ecstasy and has to be

literally

brought back to earth by ParIkshit to continue the

narrative.such a person seems to be strangely unmoved

and adapts a documentary style of narration re

this supreme moment.

 

Le aDiyen use this opportunity to say something about

aDiyEn's exposure to Sri BH. For more than 20 years

aDiyEn was so hooked on to sri BH that the text was

always within reach wherever aDiyen went and to say

without exaggeration aDiyen could quote chapter and

verse from it.Then aDiyen got acquainted with our

SampradAyam and at first it was a great shock to find

that none of our Great AchAryas seemed to care for

this divine book at all.So aDiyen tried to find out

why,and asked everyone and finally resolved the

problem

into certain conclusions which aDiyen expressed

earlier

in this column.That in no way takes away aDiyen's

pleasure in rereading those lovely descriptions even

to this day.But at the same time aDiyEn also feels

that one's own preferences should not be allowed to

cloud what are plain facts.

 

Sri EmberumAnAr TiruvaDigaLE SaraNam!

 

aDiyEn

BHARAT

 

 

__________

 

Get your free @.co.uk address at http://mail..co.uk

or your free @.ie address at http://mail..ie

[Guest guest]

Bharat Asur <asurbharat

> No.Adiyen is talking about Sk VIII Ch 8 of Sri BH

> where the subject matter of Sri VP I.9, i.e.,

> Sri Lakshmi Swayamvaram is treated.

 

OK, as long as we are clear on the point that Lakshmi or any other

Lakshmi-tattva (such as Rukmini) is NOT equated to a lowly woman of the

three gunas in the Bhaagavatam. There is no evidence that the Bhaagavatam

gives Lakshmi anything less than the highest respect.

> In Sri VP IMMEDIATELY after her appearance Piratti

> heads for her rightful place-"yayau vakhshasthalam

> harEh".Then she smiles on Indra who gets his property

> back and who immediately chants the famous Sri Stuti.

> Sri ParASarar then sums up with a glowing account

> of the Divine Couple,their eternal togetherness,

> and their Mithuna SEshitvam towards all beings.

>

> In the Sri BH account,immediately Sri is born all

> those present covet her-"tasyAm chakruh spruhAm

> sarve sa-surAsura-mAnvAh".then there is a sort of

> Swayamvara,and in 4 stanzas she considers the merits

> of all beings past and present and finally settles

> on Hari,but He is absorbed in Himself.In stanza 23

> the decision is given in favour of Mukunda who is

> described as "NirapEksham Ipsitam".The great

> Compare this cold,matter of fact description of the

> union of the Divine couple with the encomiums poured

> on PirATTi by Sri ParASara in the identical context.

> Is aDiyEn still being accused of misleading in saying

> that there ia fundamentally different approach in

> both these great books?

 

Yes, I believe so. Different Puraanas sometimes contain different accounts

of the same historical events, not because they are necessarily

contradictory but because different aspects of the story are emphasized at

different times. In Bhaagavatam 8th skandha, chapter 8, in the Lakshmi

svayamvara where She ponders over the unsuitability of any devata other than

Vishnu to be Her husband is just to glorify Vishnu's supremacy over the

other devatas. There is no fault at all in Vyaasa's treatment of the subject

matter. And it certainly is not for us to compare different Puraanas based

on their relative ability or inability to meet up with our expectations.

 

As far as I know, everyone accepts Bhaagavatam to be in the sattvik class of

Puraanas, as is confirmed in the Padma Puraana itself. While I have seen

much hinting among some list members as to the presumed authorship

controversy, I have yet to see any Sri Vaishnava acharyas openly reject it

as anything other than the authentic work of Vyaasa. And since this is what

the Bhaagavatam itself acknowledges, I personally would not presume to find

fault with anything written therein.

 

regards,

 

HKS