[sri ramanuja] Please clarify my doubts (Narayana as Paramathma)

[Guest guest]

Dear Senthil,

 

Thank you very much to spend your time to enlighten me.

 

Yes, I got the answers to all of my doubtm, and now my ignorance

is removed.

 

I got the answer for even Bhagavata Shlokas, where Shiva was

praised during churning of milk ocean (Those prasings were by

Devathas and just to make him ready for swallowing the poison, and

whatever the Puranic statemnt contradicts with Shruthi is not the

valid truth.)

 

And I came to know that Rudra is also a jeeva (his sinful birth

stated by Sathapatha Brahmana and many other Upanishads cleared

that .)

 

There are many quotes in Upanishds which reveal Narayana as

paramAtma (and the NArAyaNa can't be associated with any other deity

other than Lakshmi pathy as per Panini grammar, this is enough to

refute all other vadaas).

 

Bhallaveya Shrthi is very clear that mentions all names are

primarily belong to Vishnu , so wherever Shruthi explains Brahman

with other names(Rudra,Shamhu,Shiva,Indra,Hiranyagarbha etc.,) those

refer to Narayan only, otherwise nobody can interpret the Vedas

without contradictions.

 

Purusha Suktham is very clear that mentions "HrEschatE ,

LakshmIscha patnyaow" (Parama purusha has wives Bhoodevi and Lakshmi

devi ).

 

And there are no.of Upanishad vakyAs to prove Sreeman Narayana's

paratvam without any doubt.

 

"yasya tathA kapyAsam pudarIkamEvamakshiNI" , it clearly tells that

Paramtma has the two(AkshinI is in dviteeya samasam) beutiful lotus

like eyes (which proves Brahman is not Rudra who has three eyes

("tryaksha soola pAnih"), not Brahma who has four heads and 8 eyes .

 

Narayana is "apahatapApmA divyo deva Eko Narayana" , who has no sins

(no karma), where as Rudra is "anapahatpApma" , clearly tells Rudra

is also under Karma bondage like any other jeeva. (so he is not even

avtara of Narayana).

 

Thanks for your help.

 

Adiyen.

Kannan

 

ramanuja, senthil b <b_senthil2002 wrote:

>

> Dear bhagavathAs,

>

> adiyEn will try to prove that Sriman Narayanan

> is parantattvam by using paasurams from

> Thirumazhisai Alwar who is best to condemn

> all other sAshtrAs.

>

> adiyEn will now try to give some pasurams which

> conforms the supremeness, parantattvam of Sriman

> Narayanan.

>

> 1)In pasuram 53: (nAnmugam thiruvanthAthi)

>

> "...................- pollAtha

> thEvaraith thEvarallAraith thiruvillAth

> thEvaraith thErElmin thEvu."

>

> In the above pasuram, Alwar states that, he wont

> consider others as "dEvar" or "deivam", because

> they dont have any sampandham with Sri Devi Naachiyar.

>

> The person who had sampandham with Sri Mahalaksmi

> is none other than Sriman Narayanan, is considered

> to be "deivam" or "dEvar". Others including

> "brahma-rudrAdhigal" aren't considered as

> "deivam or dEvar".

>

> Now, the saivites starts refusing Alwar by saying

> that, "You state that, only Narayanan is deivam,

> others aren't. Then the sAshtrAs says that, your

> lord is one of person who born along with Indran as

> UpEndran during Vaama Avataram, and one among

> trimurtis "brahma-vishnu-rudran". Then the dosha's

> for the brahma-rudrAdhi's wont comes to your lord

> also? Because, vishnu is also one dEvar among the

> brahma-rudrAdhi's."

>

> To this question, now Thirumazhisai Alwar refutes

> clearly in his 54 Pasuram in nAnmugam thiruvanthAthi.

>

> 2.paasuram 54

>

> "thEvarAi niRkumath-thEvum ath-thEvaril

> moovarAi niRkum muthupunarppum – yaavarAi

> niRkindrathellAm nedumAlen rOrAthAr

> karginRa thellAm kadai."

>

> The alwar says that "even though HE born as brother

> to Indran and stood as one dEvar among trimurti's,

> it is true that HE is antharyAmi to brhama-rudhrAdhi's

> which is explained by Vishnu Puraanam as

>

> "srushtisdhithyanthakaranIm brahmavishnusivAthmikAm |

> sa samj~nam yaathi bhagavAnEga Eva janArthdhana: ||

> "

> [Vishnu Puranam 1.2-66 ]

>

> muthpunarppum – old avathAram of Sriman Narayanan;

> muthu – old ; punarppu – sankalpam ;

> It means that it's an avataram due to HIS sankalpam.

> Not like others as due to their karmam, they took

> birth

> which is stated in Purusha Sooktam as follows:

>

> "thripAthUrdhva udhaith purusha: padhOsyEhAbhavAth

> puna:"

> [Purusha Sooktam]

>

> Even in Gita Lord Krishna says that HE took birth due

> to HIS sankalpa roopa gna~nam. "sambhavAmyAthmamAyayA"

>

> Eventhough HE stood one among trimUrti's, HE is none

> other than avatAram of Parama Purushan Sriman

> Narayanan.

>

> In next word - "yaavarAi nirkinrathellAm" -alwar

> proves

> that as a Parantattvam, HE stood to withhold all the

> chethanAs' and sarva pathArthangal like dEvar,

> manushyar, thiryak, sthAvaram, etc., Apart from HIM,

> emperuman is in all other things which is different

> from HIS roopam, qualities, etc., through "vyApakam"

> HE gives roopam, naamam to all those things which

> different from HIM. HE only born as Upendran, Vishnu

> among trimurti's.

>

> 1.thEvarAi niRkumath-thEvum – born as Upendran,

> brother to Indran during Vaamana Avataram

>

> 2.moovarAi niRkum muthupunarppum – old avataram of

> Sriman Narayanan as Vishnu among trimurti's

>

> 3.yaavarAi niRkindrathellAm – all other things which

>

> got its saththai, roopam, naamam, et.c,

>

> 4.nedumAlE -- all the above are only Sriman

> Narayanan, sarvEshwaran, paramporul;

>

> Even though HE stood as one thEvar among Indran,

> eventhough HE is one among trimurti's, ---- HE is none

>

> other than the sarvEshwaran Sriman Narayanan, who

> withstands in all chethanAchEshtithangal to provide

> saththai, roopam, naamam etc.,

>

> 5. enrOrAthAr karginRa thellAm kadai -- If you don't

> know this, then what you have learned so far is waste.

>

>

> Thus through the above paasuram, Thirumazhisai alwar

> clearly proves the parantattvam of Sriman Narayanan

> even though HE stood as thEvar one among trimurti's.

>

> This paasuram is to CONDEMN those, who think that

> HE is one among trimurti's and equivalent to others.

>

> adiyEn,

> senthil.b

>

> Note: Suggestions and comments are Welcome!!!!!

>

>

>

> >

> > \--- kannan_mukundam <kannan_mukundam

> > wrote:

> >

> > > Adiyen all Bhagavatas,

> > >

> > > I heard comments from some Shaivaties that ..in

> > > Bhagavata

> > > purana..while churning the milk ocean..when

> > Halahala

> > > appeared..all

> > > devatas along with Vishnu went to Shiva and prayed

> > > Shiva as follows:

> > >

> > > 29. O lord, the five important Vedic mantras are

> > > represented by your

> > > five faces, from which the thirty-eight most

> > > celebrated Vedic mantras

> > > have been generated. Your Lordship, Lord Siva, you

> > > are self-

> > > illuminated. You are directly situated as the

> > > supreme truth, known as

> > > Paramatma.

> > >

> > > 31. O Lord Girisa, since the impersonal Brahman

> > > effulgence is

> > > transcendental to the material modes of goodness,

> > > passion and

> > > ignorance, the various directors of this material

> > > world certainly

> > > cannot appreciate it or even know where it is. It

> > is

> > > not

> > > understandable even to Lord Brahma, Lord Visnu or

> > > the King of heaven,

> > > Mahendra.

> > >

> > >

> > > And also they claimed that Vishnu also born from

> > > Soma , they

> > > provided some Rigvedic mantras:

> > >

> > > sómaH pavate janitaá matiinaáM janitaá divó

> > janitaá

> > > pRthivyaáH

> > > janitaágnér janitaá suúryasya janiténdrasya

> > janitótá

> > > víSNoH

> > >

> > > 9.096.05 The Soma flows, the father of holy hymns,

> > > the father of

> > > heaven, the father of the earth, the father of

> > Agni,

> > > the father of

> > > the sun, the fatherwho begot Indra and Vis.n.u.

> > >

> > > They are claiming Shiva is supreme being, please

> > > let me know any of

> > > you that how can I refute these people who are

> > > decreasing Narayana's

> > > supremacy and they making there is some one else

> > > partvam then

> > > Narayana .

> > >

> > > I am eagerly waiting for your replies..

> > >

> > > Adiyen

> > > Kannan.M

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> ________

> > India Answers: Share what you know. Learn

> > something new

> > http://in.answers./

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

> ________

> India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new

> http://in.answers./

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Swamin:

 

your thanks are due to HIM only, not to adiyEn. Adiyen

is poor in sampradhAyam knowledge and jn~aanam.

Adiyen always prays for HIS krupA and HIS bhaagavada

sampandham.

 

senthil.b

 

 

--- pratyagatma <kannan_mukundam (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote:

 

> Dear Senthil,

>

> Thank you very much to spend your time to

> enlighten me.

>

> Yes, I got the answers to all of my doubtm, and

> now my ignorance

> is removed.

>

> I got the answer for even Bhagavata Shlokas,

> where Shiva was

> praised during churning of milk ocean (Those

> prasings were by

> Devathas and just to make him ready for swallowing

> the poison, and

> whatever the Puranic statemnt contradicts with

> Shruthi is not the

> valid truth.)

>

> And I came to know that Rudra is also a jeeva (his

> sinful birth

> stated by Sathapatha Brahmana and many other

> Upanishads cleared

> that .)

>

> There are many quotes in Upanishds which reveal

> Narayana as

> paramAtma (and the NArAyaNa can't be associated with

> any other deity

> other than Lakshmi pathy as per Panini grammar, this

> is enough to

> refute all other vadaas).

>

> Bhallaveya Shrthi is very clear that mentions all

> names are

> primarily belong to Vishnu , so wherever Shruthi

> explains Brahman

> with other

> names(Rudra,Shamhu,Shiva,Indra,Hiranyagarbha etc.,)

> those

> refer to Narayan only, otherwise nobody can

> interpret the Vedas

> without contradictions.

>

> Purusha Suktham is very clear that mentions

> "HrEschatE ,

> LakshmIscha patnyaow" (Parama purusha has wives

> Bhoodevi and Lakshmi

> devi ).

>

> And there are no.of Upanishad vakyAs to prove

> Sreeman Narayana's

> paratvam without any doubt.

>

> "yasya tathA kapyAsam pudarIkamEvamakshiNI" , it

> clearly tells that

> Paramtma has the two(AkshinI is in dviteeya samasam)

> beutiful lotus

> like eyes (which proves Brahman is not Rudra who has

> three eyes

> ("tryaksha soola pAnih"), not Brahma who has four

> heads and 8 eyes .

>

> Narayana is "apahatapApmA divyo deva Eko Narayana"

> , who has no sins

> (no karma), where as Rudra is "anapahatpApma" ,

> clearly tells Rudra

> is also under Karma bondage like any other jeeva.

> (so he is not even

> avtara of Narayana).

>

> Thanks for your help.

>

> Adiyen.

> Kannan

>

>

>

> ramanuja, senthil b

> <b_senthil2002 wrote:

> >

> > Dear bhagavathAs,

> >

> > adiyEn will try to prove that Sriman Narayanan

> > is parantattvam by using paasurams from

> > Thirumazhisai Alwar who is best to condemn

> > all other sAshtrAs.

> >

> > adiyEn will now try to give some pasurams which

> > conforms the supremeness, parantattvam of Sriman

> > Narayanan.

> >

> > 1)In pasuram 53: (nAnmugam thiruvanthAthi)

> >

> > "...................- pollAtha

> > thEvaraith thEvarallAraith thiruvillAth

> > thEvaraith thErElmin thEvu."

> >

> > In the above pasuram, Alwar states that, he wont

> > consider others as "dEvar" or "deivam", because

> > they dont have any sampandham with Sri Devi

> Naachiyar.

> >

> > The person who had sampandham with Sri Mahalaksmi

> > is none other than Sriman Narayanan, is considered

> > to be "deivam" or "dEvar". Others including

> > "brahma-rudrAdhigal" aren't considered as

> > "deivam or dEvar".

> >

> > Now, the saivites starts refusing Alwar by saying

> > that, "You state that, only Narayanan is deivam,

> > others aren't. Then the sAshtrAs says that, your

> > lord is one of person who born along with Indran

> as

> > UpEndran during Vaama Avataram, and one among

> > trimurtis "brahma-vishnu-rudran". Then the dosha's

> > for the brahma-rudrAdhi's wont comes to your lord

> > also? Because, vishnu is also one dEvar among the

> > brahma-rudrAdhi's."

> >

> > To this question, now Thirumazhisai Alwar refutes

> > clearly in his 54 Pasuram in nAnmugam

> thiruvanthAthi.

> >

> > 2.paasuram 54

> >

> > "thEvarAi niRkumath-thEvum ath-thEvaril

> > moovarAi niRkum muthupunarppum – yaavarAi

> > niRkindrathellAm nedumAlen rOrAthAr

> > karginRa thellAm kadai."

> >

> > The alwar says that "even though HE born as

> brother

> > to Indran and stood as one dEvar among trimurti's,

> > it is true that HE is antharyAmi to

> brhama-rudhrAdhi's

> > which is explained by Vishnu Puraanam as

> >

> > "srushtisdhithyanthakaranIm

> brahmavishnusivAthmikAm |

> > sa samj~nam yaathi bhagavAnEga Eva janArthdhana:

> ||

> > "

> > [Vishnu Puranam 1.2-66

> ]

> >

> > muthpunarppum – old avathAram of Sriman Narayanan;

> > muthu – old ; punarppu – sankalpam ;

> > It means that it's an avataram due to HIS

> sankalpam.

> > Not like others as due to their karmam, they took

> > birth

> > which is stated in Purusha Sooktam as follows:

> >

> > "thripAthUrdhva udhaith purusha: padhOsyEhAbhavAth

>

> > puna:"

> > [Purusha Sooktam]

> >

> > Even in Gita Lord Krishna says that HE took birth

> due

> > to HIS sankalpa roopa gna~nam.

> "sambhavAmyAthmamAyayA"

> >

> > Eventhough HE stood one among trimUrti's, HE is

> none

> > other than avatAram of Parama Purushan Sriman

> > Narayanan.

> >

> > In next word - "yaavarAi nirkinrathellAm" -alwar

> > proves

> > that as a Parantattvam, HE stood to withhold all

> the

> > chethanAs' and sarva pathArthangal like dEvar,

> > manushyar, thiryak, sthAvaram, etc., Apart from

> HIM,

> > emperuman is in all other things which is

> different

> > from HIS roopam, qualities, etc., through

> "vyApakam"

> > HE gives roopam, naamam to all those things which

> > different from HIM. HE only born as Upendran,

> Vishnu

> > among trimurti's.

> >

> > 1.thEvarAi niRkumath-thEvum – born as Upendran,

>

> > brother to Indran during Vaamana Avataram

> >

> > 2.moovarAi niRkum muthupunarppum – old avataram of

>

> > Sriman Narayanan as Vishnu among trimurti's

> >

> > 3.yaavarAi niRkindrathellAm – all other things

> which

> >

> > got its saththai, roopam, naamam, et.c,

> >

> > 4.nedumAlE -- all the above are only Sriman

> > Narayanan, sarvEshwaran, paramporul;

> >

>

=== message truncated ===

 

 

 

________

India Answers: Share what you know. Learn something new

http://in.answers./