Fwd: [pA'ncarAtra - An Overview - Part 7.]

[Guest guest]

Dear Bhakta-s:

 

I received the following comments from SrI M. S. Hari, which I am

sharing with you all because I consider these valuable comments. I

also understand that SrI Hari is putting together a detailed

description of the SrI pA'ncarAtra Agama, and I am looking forward to

learning from his write-ups.

 

-dAsan kRshNamAcAryan

 

 

--- "M.S.HARI Madabhushi Sarangarajan Hari" <mshari wrote:

> 14 Dec 00 23:15:12 SGT

> M.S.HARI Madabhushi Sarangarajan Hari <mshari

> Narasimhan Krishnamachari <champakam, mshari

> Re: [pA'ncarAtra - An Overview - Part 7.]

>

> Dear SrI Narasimhan Krishnamachari <champakam

>

> Your explanation in English on "The viSAkha-yUpa or the brahma-yUpa"

> was nice. I enjoyed reading it. But I have a small suggestion here:

>

> >The concept of the vyUha emanations from para-vAsudeva is related to

> >the pillar of light resplendently located in SrI vaikuNTham, and

> said

> >to be assumed by the Deity for the purpose of meditation by the

> yogi-s.

> >The pillar has four nodes, each facing one of the four principal

> >directions. The topmost node is altogether bright light,

> representing

> >vyUha-vAsudeva. Nothing is discernible at this level except Pure

> >Effulgence.

>

> This is fine. But you may add some points that this "except Pure

> Effulgence" in vyUha-vAsudeva is not in any way connected with

> "nirviSEsha chin mAtram" concept of gaudapAdiya/SAnkara matham.

> Because, there is a possiblity for begginners to mistake

> "except pure effulgence" - "effulgence" - can be taken to mean

> jngyAna and "except pure" may be taken for "nirviSEsha".

>

>

> >LakshmI-tantra also identifies samkarshaNa with the individual soul,

> >pradyumna with individual awareness (buddhi), and aniruddha with the

> >sense of ego (ahamkAra). The idea is that sankarshNa provides the

> >foundation for all the individual souls, pradyumna enters into the

> >souls, seizes hold of the faculty of awareness and distinguishes

> >between the subjective and objective frames of reference, and

> aniruddha

> >projects the world of multiplicity and differentiations.

>

> This is fine. But I suggest that you may highlight the tarka-pAdam

> here with specific references to the uthpathyasambhavAdhikaraNam

> in the Brahma sUtra's avirOdha-adyAyam.

>

> ......

>

> Thanks & Regards

> M.S.HARI RAmAnuja DAsan (mshari)

>

>

> __________________

> Get free email and a permanent address at

http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1

 

 

 

 

Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.

/

[Guest guest]

Dear Devotees:

 

I meant to post the attached in the list, but it went only to SrI Hari

the first time I sent it out. I am now submitting it for the general

readership.

 

-dAsan kRshNamAcAryan

 

--- Narasimhan Krishnamachari <champakam wrote:

> Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:04:24 -0800 (PST)

> Narasimhan Krishnamachari <champakam

> Re: [pA'ncarAtra - An Overview - Part 7.]

> "M.S.HARI Madabhushi Sarangarajan Hari" <mshari

>

> SrI Hari:

>

> Thanks for your comments, which I have included in another posting.

> I

> took the liberty to share your comments on the write-up in the list,

> since I thought it will benefit the readership.

>

> Of and on, I had given the background of why I am submitting these

> write-ups on SrI pA'ncarAtra, but your note gives me another

> opportunity to clarify the background. So, instead of responding to

> you in private mail, I am taking the liberty to give the reasons and

> backgrond for the write-ups in the list, so that I have had another

> chance to clarify the background to the rest of the members.

>

> I belong to the SrImad ANDavan ASramam. I have the personal

> blessings

> of tirukkuDanthai SrI KaNNan svAmigaL, to which I attribute anything

> I

> am able to do by way of kaimkaryam. I also have the personal

> blessings

> of SrI agnihotram rAmAnuja tAtAchAriar, who I know is a controversial

> figure in the SrI vaishNava circles. The current write-ups are not

> part of what I learned from kAalakshepam, but more to fill a need

> that

> I had: I had a lack of understanding of the two SrIvaishNava

> Agama-s,

> and so I took a modest step at reviewing a lot of existing literature

> and posted my summary for those who might benefit from it. A lot of

> it

> comes from the book by SrI rAmachandra Rao of Kalpataru Research

> Academy. So my write-up is not original work in any sense, nor is it

> a

> reflection of any specific school or AcArya. I consider this a

> "review" article, using the scentific parlance to which I am somewhat

> exposed. This does not represent any one school of thought, but is a

> collection of different views expressed by different people. At some

> stage earlier, I had shared with the list members the references from

> which I am drawing the information. I had also invited additional

> comments and remarks from the readership, because this was the spirit

> with which I started posting the item, namely, that others will share

> their knowledge as I post these, and I will benefit from this

> feedback.

>

> I sincerely appreciate the feedback you provided through the personal

> mail, and I look forward to guidance and advice from others as well.

> I

> also look forward to your detailed write-up on the pA'ncarAtra Agama,

> and if possible, on the vaikhAnasa Agama as well.

>

> -dAsan kRshNamAcAryan

>

>

>

>

> Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.

> /

>

 

 

 

 

Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.

/