Answers to Sri Visu

[Guest guest]

Dear Visu

 

I request you NOT to read this mail and grasp what is converyed with any

"OPEN" mind. Because such type of mindset would lead only to erroneous

conclusions.

 

But pray please read the same with a mindset that orients towards the Saastharas

and Vedas.

 

If you feel that I have made any "Grab it from thin air and quote" kind of

comments or statements please correct me.

 

Period

 

The term Vishnu cannot mean any one else but Sriman Naaryaana with

whatever rules of grammar one can use.

 

True that Vishnu is chanted alon with few lesser devathas..and that he has been

said he is a

companion of Indra. etc etc.

 

Now the questions is .. Is he equated with lesser devathas explictly or

implcitly??

and to conclude to say he is a lesser deity or devatha??.

 

The same Rig vedam says Agni is the lowest of all devas and Vishnu is

the highest. and that for all the yagna the yagna purushan(Ultimately

the offering goes to him) is Vishnu.

 

The term Vishnu means Srava Vyaapi..

 

As space (aagaaasam) is also prevades (does indwell though) would you

equate aakasm with Vishnu??

 

Sarva vyaabithvam is one of Kalyaana Gunaam of Para Bramhan...

 

Period..

The following few sentance/ paras may be out of context nevertheless it

is important know and I must quote this.But if you go through the same you will

know

what significance it has in this context

 

*****

Veda Kutrushtis tried to equate/identify the term Naarayaanan with

other lesser dieties and as Paaninis Grammar failed them they couldnt

succeed.

 

(But now to slightly counter this difficulty they have a new "Paatam" in

Naraayana Soktham Instead of chanting "Sa Bramha Sa Siva Sendhra

Sokshara parama Swarat" they include Sa Hari which is not even found in

earlier editions of Saayana Baashyam)

 

(Note eveone does chant it as Sa -Indhra unlike Sa Bramha Sa Siva but

Sendhra)

 

If chanted with Sa Hari it differntiates between Naaryana and Hari.

 

*****

 

The term Naraayana couldnt mean any one other than Vishnu and that to as

the vedas clearly "Hrischathey Laksmhi Chaptnyow"(Or does anyone have a

different Paatam??)

 

Please let us not confuse with Linear Algebra or Abstratct Algebra

coordinate geomtery and dimensions and Parathvam here.

 

"Parabramham Yukthiglaalum Anumaanathinaalum Saadhikapaduvadhu alla."

 

"Sassthraa thinaal Mattumaey SaadhikaPaduvadhu"..

 

Contextual,textual meaning and Verbatim yes indeed can be different.

 

Which is why people couldnt try to use Naraayana for any other lesser

devathaas.(But introduced a "Sthree Lingam" for the same viz "Naarayanee" to

support their spurious claim??)

 

"Tad Vishno Paramam padham Sadhaa pashayanthi Soorayaha"..[Padhaam here

according to Most prevelant baashyams would mean Staahanam" which clearly

Indicates

the paratvam of Vishnu.]

 

Vishnoo ....Paramaey Padahey..... Madhva Utsaha would refer to Soma

juice (note that soma juice isnt the one that is misuderstood as an

intoxicating juice)..

 

Valli (as found in Ananda Valli in Taitria Upanishadh) signifies Creeper.

Soma is stated as Bramhananda Rasa in Rig Veda.

 

(The whole of Rig Veda 9th Madlala is full of praise of such a Soma Juice).

and read the Tait.Upanisadh Statement it says "Raso Vai Saha" and also Bramhan

is described

as "AanandaMaya". Dont you see any comaprison between these two Vedic

Statements??.

 

The same Smahitha itself declares Soma is available only at "heights"

and only the adventerous can have him."

 

The Rig Samhitha says "Him whom Bramhans call soma no one can(ordinarily) drink"

 

The Aitreya and Taitriya Bramhana declares that Soma flourished "at the third

foot of the lord"

 

So now does it answer the question and confusions about "Third Step of The lord"

and what

is referred as Soma Juice here?

 

Please understand that in Vedas refer Para Brahman with various terms.

It even refers to "Matter/Prakruthi" as "Kaarana vasthu".. so what approach

must one take to conclude the karana Vashtu?? ??

 

In Kausthiki (Samhitha?) Pradharthna Vidya Indra says he is the only one to be

meditated upon to attain

Moksha..

 

Look at Madhu Vidya here vasus adhithyas and Rudras are praised.

 

In Atharva sira upansihadh Rudra is mentioned as the highest.

 

So who could be Para Bramhan.??

 

No where in Vedas Naraayana or Vishnu or Vasudeva is chanted or equated or

identifed as

anything lesser than that of Para Bramhna or Kaarana vasthu.

 

Though the term Indra or Rudra or Prakruthi have been referred to as

Supreme being.. at the same time they have also been referred to as a

lesser devathas and that they are born owing to Karma. There are "Utbathi

Vaakyaams"(Sentances that show/mention origin for all such devatas.

 

How will you reconcile such statements??

 

As Mani quoted Siva Indra can mean anyone.(Roodi meaning or Yowkeeka

meaning decide which "plane or dimension" to choose )

 

But for brevity sake I am not going in to the details of the same..

 

But .. how come all vedanthis take the same "plane" to conlude on who

the "Para barmhan".. ?? Were they not aware of any other "planes" or dimensions

or they

though this is the only one "plane" or one "dimension"??....

 

(Including always misquoted by people who claim to be his own followers ....Sri

Addhi Sankraachaarya

who never ever would have thought or thought about any other deities as

para barhman(that can be Savisesha Bramhan/ Or Vyaavharika Bramhan)other than

Sriman Naaryaana)

 

So now think if it is one deva who is the highest..Or all the devas are the

highest??

 

[Dont think about the notorious "Shanmatha Sthaabanam" which

Adi Sankaraas followers claim to be established By Aaacharya hismelf]

 

For which Purusa Sooktham gives a clear cut answer.. (Till now people havent

laid their dirty hands there)

 

Sarva Vyaabithvam Parathvam are one of the few distinct Qualities of

Para Bramhan who with no doubt can be anyone other than Naaryana.

 

In strictest sense as according to you it looks as if it is true that

the terms Vishnu and Naarayana can mean the same if we take only the

textual meaning ...dont you see them as "Sarva Vyaapithvam" as a

charctrestic of Para Bramhan and So the devatha who prevades everything

[as in Anthar Bahischa That Sarvam Vyaapyaa Naraayna Stithaa to put an

end to the confusion if Vishnu could mean "space" which also prevades]

is called Vishnu and who is also Naarayaana (or the other way around))

 

Let us understand that Vedas take a round about method while referring

to Para Bramhan and at last clearly with no doubts mentions who the

para barhma could be.

 

[And Our Aruli Cheyalgal Clearly indicates and show us who could be Para Bramhan

with no doubt]

 

Isnt he identified as the one whose consorts are Bhoomi Neela and Lakshmi??

 

Purushothaman means the first among all purushas the formeost among all

purushas .. How can this be any one other than Para Bramhan and that too

equated to an "achethana" ??

 

I believe and understand that Maharishi Patanjili doesnt belong to any

Vaideeka Mathams and his Yoga Sutras are definately not in tune with

Vedantham or Vaideekam and have been refuted by Vedathins.

 

This problem has been discused with so many with so many times with so many

people for so

many years so many decades and and few centuries.. and if it is Bagavaath

Sankalpam that it has to be

perennial... we are all helpless. (Bagavan here and always means SriMan

Narayana)(Roodi or Youwkeegam

please decide again)

 

Before I would end (or may be continue depending on your answer) ....

please Sri Visu I request you to quote from Sri Desikan's works and

Shree Baashyaakara to substantiate your claim that Shre eDesikan intoduced this

concept.

 

Please spare them they need not be played with.

 

regards

K.S.Venkataraaghavan

 

P:S:- What does the term "Visu"(Vishwanathan) mean..whom does it

indicate ??? what does the name mean?

 

I will give you a small analogy how meaning of names are inferred.

 

My father's name is SriSylaRagaavchaar. One of the respected gentlemen here in

IIT Madras asked me..

Sri Saylathula Raaghavnaa?? (Srisylam is famous Siva templein A.P).

for which I humbly answered that "the term SriSylam could only mean Thiru Mala

ie Tirupathi.

(Roodi?? Yowkegam which plane??)

 

The name "Venkata Subramanyam could also mean "Venkatthil Irukum Nandraaga

Thudhika Padum Devan"

 

Subramnyam means "the one who is being well praised" ..

 

Swaminathan would also mean our DevaNathan or Devarajan or devaperumal.

 

Do we need more mappings??

[Guest guest]

Respected All,

Aprops to discussion in the group between God's names

Vishnu Vs Narayana, I wish to add the views of Swami

Pillai Lokachar(SPL) who explained why the the Term

"Vishnu" is more preferred by Poorvacharyas as against

other Names.

 

 

In Vishnu Gayatri, we have three Vyapaka Mantras

namely,(as pointed out by Sri Mani in the earlier

mail)

 

a. Narayanan

b. Vasudevan

c. Vishnu

 

Out of the 3 Vyapaka Mantras, the Name 'Narayana' is

considered supreme.

 

The reasons attributed by SPL are:

 

 

1. Other Two Vyapaka Mantras(viz, vasudevan,Vishnu)

have two drawbacks.

 

a. Apoorthi-Incompleteness .

 

The term Vishnu is Incomplete in one sense that it

explains only his

Vyapthi(omni presence) but not his Kalyana gunas

Similarly, The term Vasudevan implies that everything

in Him(Sarvam Vasathi) . it however, does not describe

his Kalyana Gunas.

 

b. Achista Parigraham- the other two mantras are

supported by advaitis who have not comprehended

God's real nature and hence it anothor drawback.

 

 

 

As against these, Narayana saptham brings in God's

Svarupam, Roopam and also His Kalyana Guanas. And

hence this name was supported by Alwars, Acharyas and

Rishis

 

 

Dasan

 

KM.Narayanan

 

 

 

Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site

http://webhosting./

[Guest guest]

Dear Friends,

 

Sri Venkat and Sri Shreyas have mentioned the Rg Veda

statement 'Of all deities, Agni is the lowest and Vishnu the highest',

and this has been offered as proof from the Rg Veda of

Vishnu's supremacy.

 

The relative superiority or inferiority of the deities,

however, is probably not the intention of this statement.

The ancient Vedic scholar Yaska writes:

 

The deities are threefold -- so say the Vedic etymologists.

Agni is located on the earth, Vayu and Indra in the

intermediate sky, and Surya in the high heavens.

Because of their greatness there are many names for

each of these. Or, it is because of their manifold

function. [Nirukta 7.2]

 

( tisraH eva devatAH -- iti nairuktAH. agniH pRthivIsthAnaH

vAyur vA indro vA antarikshasthAnaH, sUryo dyusthAnaH. tAsAm

mahAbhAgyAt ekaikasyAH api bahUni nAmadheyAni bhavanti.

api vA karmapRthaktvAt. )

 

Recall that Vishnu in the traditional grouping is one of the

Adityas, and therefore one of the solar deities, and can be

classified with Surya for this purpose.

 

The Rg Veda vakya in question appears to simply be referring

to the location of the deities in their physical manifestations.

Agni is lowest by virtue of being physically nearest to us, since

he is the one in our presence who carries Vedic offerings to the

other deities. Vishnu is the one who is the highest, by

virtue of being associated with the sun who occupies the

zenith in the sky during the midday. Vishnu also is the

highest through the Vedic description of him as having the highest

place ('tad vishNoH paramam padam').

 

Now there may be a deep spiritual meaning to all of this,

no doubt, but on the face of it this Veda vakya is not

intelligible in such a manner without the Upanishads and

supporting literature providing context for such an

understanding. Which is why I believe Bhagavad Ramanuja

and other acharyas did not use such statements as evidence

to support such an argument.

 

adiyen ramanuja dasan,

Mani