meaning of pranavam

[Guest guest]

Shrimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

 

Dear Shri Balaji,

 

Krishna paramatma says he is VISHNU amongst adityas because, Vishnu

means, wide-strided(Vishnu rurukramaha). Sun's(aditya) rays are

pretty much all pervading. But even if we have all the suns together,

they are no much for Vishnu who is all pervading in in those places

where the sun rays cannot enter. Like OM NAMO NARAYANAYA, we have OM

NAMO VISHNAVE NAMAHA, and also OM NAMO BHAGAVATHE VASUDEVAYA. Vishnu

is not an anyadevata who derives power from OM. The supreme, i.e the

lord Shriman Narayanan manifests himself in FIVE forms that are PARA,

VYUHA, VIBHAVA, ANTHARYAMI and ARCHAI. Vishnu is one of these five

forms. Yoga means many things and has to be understood based on the

context. Yoga means "one's own effort / power" towards doing a thing.

When Krishna says he manifests his Vishwaroopam through yogam, it

means, with his infinitely uncomprehensible power he does it. It does

not mean the "yogic power" that we humans think and talk about. Every

kind of yoga leads a different result. And usually this result is

also called as yoga. Yoga also means union. There are so many

meanings that I may not know of.

> ramavatar is quite facinating because in that rama behaves like any

> other human being

a) When Rama took his Bow and charged towards the Ocean, the Ocean

king came out and bowed before him. If Rama were normal human being

why would this happen?

b) Rama sanctioned Moksham to Jadayu - if he acted as normal human

being he could not have done.

c) When he fired the brahmastram on the crow(jayanthan), no one from

all the 7 worlds could protect that crow and it came back and fell on

his feet. Is this a human act?

There are a lot more... What we might want to see is the difference

between Rama and Krishna Avatarams. In Rama avataram, the goal was

different and Rama did not want to show himself as paramatma all the

time and limited himself. Moreover Ravana had requested a boon from

brahma that he can't be killed by any devas or devatas. So, Rama had

to behave mostly like a human being in order to kill Ravana. In

krishna avataram, his goal was completely different. In fact he even

had his divya ayudhams the Shanka and Chakra pretty much all the

times.

 

Kindly pardon for my mistakes if any.

 

Yatheendra Pravanam Vandhe RAMYA Jamataram Munim

 

Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,

Lakshmi Narasimhan

bhakti-list, "balajiv_54" <balajiv_54>

wrote:

> sir,

>

> i accept all the views expressed.iam also convinced that narayana

is

> the parabrahmam and the supreme god. but in that case there is no

> need for krishna, who is an avatar of vishnu to say that ' IAM

> VISHNU' AMONG ADITYAS. he could have said i am narayana. also he

says

> to arjuna that he is showing him the vishvaroopam because of his

> yogic power and not because he is an avatar of vishnu. in the same

> geeta krishna says the yoghis can see him in the real form.when he

> spoke to arjuna in geeta, krishna spoke as narayana the parabrahma

> and not as vishnu.there were many avatars of vishnu. in that

> ramavatar is quite facinating because in that rama behaves like any

> other human being.he did not behave like an avatar.he was an ideal

> and noble king who ruled the kingdom.if rama was narayana then

where

> is the requirement of he having to get the help of other devatas in

> his fight against ravana.

> by all this my point of arguement is narayana is the parabrahmam

and

> is represented by the 'ohm'. all other devatas including vishnu are

> anyadevatas who derive their power from ohm. that is why we call

> narayana as om namo narayana. no one calls vishnu as om vishnu.

>

> i dont know if iam right or wrong please parden me.

>

> balaji

[Guest guest]

friends,

 

iam grateful for such a large replies for the meaning. it is not easy

to answer this.i conclude with the following. many may not accept but

i am still to learn on this,pl forgive me.

 

As per our philosophies the letter ohm represents the basis of all

creations. It also denotes the jivatma in every human being. By

constantly reciting this an individual can realize the self and

thereby the parabrahmam which is the paramatma. This is the ultimiate

goal of all human being borne in this world because of various karmas

of previous births.

 

In bhagavad gita which is the bible for all hindu philosophies there

are many slokhas which clearely denote this parabrahmam. Firstly the

questions asked by arjuna and the answers given by Krishna need to be

looked at closely. In many slokhas the lord says he is

Vishnu,shankara,vyasa etc. If he were Vishnu himself and parabrahmam

then he would not have said that he is Vishnu. This all means the

teachings are from a third force which has to be parabrahmam. Or lord

Krishna said all this by his yogic power by which he showed arjuna

the vishvaroopa of parabrahmam. In gita Krishna speaks throughout as

god himself ie parabrahmam.

 

Also in Vishnu sahasranamam, which is part of mahabarata, bhishma

resites slokas to the question of yudhistar. In answer to the quiery

who is extolled as god, bhishma says-the god of all gods is narayana.

 

 

In that case when recited or meditated the pranavam leads to where?

It may lead to the formless eternally pure free and existence

absolute.since everything has its ground in Brahman, for the purpose

of meditation the sound AUM has come to be regarded as Brahman.

 

The omkhara sound is sustained by itself in a timeless continuum. It

is indicative of Brahman and Self.

 

AUM is the bow, the Atman the arrow and Brahman its target. It is to

be hit by a man who is self-collected; and then, as the arrow

(becomes one with the target), he will become one with Brahman.

 

 

 

when i was reading a book i came to know the meaning of pranavam.

it says the letter ohm does not represent any particular god,but it

represent parabrahmam.this does not have any form,eventhough we call

it as narayana and worship it.we have given the narayana, the vishnu

roopam ie with four arms,sanghu,chakra,gadha and lotus flower.that is

what i was trying to say.the parabrahmam actually is satchidananda

narayanan,who does not have any form.since it will be difficult for

common man to worship a deity with out any form we adopted the vishnu

swaroopam.the same way shiva devotees worship shivan and others.

 

in avudayar kovil(old thiruperundurai) the siva temple does not have

any idol,but just a peetam,for which all worship is

done.manikavachgar has sung songs in praise of this god which is sung

as thirupalliyezuchi on margazhi by all saiva devotees.

 

in kerala near ochira(near kollam) there is not even a temple,just a

open space for which all pujas are done. this is called ochira

parabrahmam.

 

to think of god with out form will require very high level of

devotion.but it is not impossible as many people have done it.

 

regards

 

balaji

[Guest guest]

Respected Sri Balaji,

 

You wrote,

 

"iam grateful for such a large replies for the meaning. it is not easy

> to answer this.I conclude with the following."

 

 

Unquote

----------

 

At first discussions groups such as this atr insufficient to conclude any

meanings of Pranavam;. Lists such as this are only useful in healthy

deliberations and not 'conclusions'.

 

You mentioned about Sri Bhagavat Gita.

After God revealed his virta purusha form, Arjuna addresses Lord

specifically as

" Vishnu'. Verse 24, chapter 11 and not as a formless God.

 

 

Further,. it is dangerous to understand struti vakyams and meanings in

Prastana thrayam in just reading books written by so called modern writers.

If you live in India, I would encourage you to go to a genuine acharya and

learn the inner meanings of Pranavam or teachings of Gita under his Lotus

feet. That is the reason the commentaries on these by later acharyas were

called as 'Rahasya grantas'

 

 

A careful and holistic approach to Struti vakyams and prastana thrayam (Sri

Gita, Upanishads and Brahma sutra) would reveal that Lord had forms and

also attributes. In fact formlessness is one of the attributes of Lord.

 

I am sure this reply is not sufficient in proving this. You may need to

refer to an acharya and learn from his lotus feet before reaching any

conclusion.

 

I do not mean to say that Struti vakyams 'never talks' about formlessness.

In fact many places in Struti and

Bhagavata Puranas, talks about 'nirvisesha Brahman'.

 

With reference to Visishta advaita of Ramanuja, the The whole prakriti,

sentient and insentient are parts of Lord (refer Druva Struti in Sri Vishnu

puranam and verbatim meanings in Bhagavat Gita verses in chapter 11 in

Viswaroopa Darshana yogam.)

 

Sri Sankra, contrary to popular theory that he believed in 'Formless' Lord,

was always been Great Vasinava and upasaka of a 'form' lord. If you refer to

his works and Sankara

Bhasyas, it is very clear that he was a great devotee of Lord.

 

Even hagiological accounts in his life such as threat to has life etc,

proves that he prayed to a Nrishmha who in turn saved him for danger.

 

Even acharyas who came in his disciplinic succession such as 'Narayana

bhaatathri or Vidyaranya who adored Vijaya Nagar empire, were great

Bhagavatas. A close analysis of Narayaneeyam would bring out miles of

information of Lord's Roopam.

 

 

With respects

 

Regards

KM Narayanan