Query on Paratvam- response ...

[Guest guest]

, ONE can also refer to the book

A DIALOGUE ON HINDUISM by OPPILIAPPAN KOIL

GOPALA DESIKACHARIAR SWAMY-----BOOK is available in

SRINRISIMHAPRIYA OFFICE, 30 VENKATESA AGRAHARAM,

MYLAPORE, CHENNAI- 600 004 PH 24611540 COST Rs 50/-

[available in ENGLISH and TAMIL]

for all your doubts

 

HARE RAAMA HARE RAAMA RAAMA RAAMA HARE HARE

HARE KRISHNA HARE KRISHNA KRISHNA KRISHNA HARE HARE

--- On Sun, 20/7/08, Madhavakkannan V <srivaishnavan wrote:

Madhavakkannan V <srivaishnavan Query on Paratvam- response ... , acharya , nama-singapore , parakalamatham , oppiliappan , bakthi-indonesia Date: Sunday, 20 July, 2008, 7:39 PM

 

 

SrI:SrImathE GopalaDear Sri MuraliYou may find this most apt for clarifying your doubt on the query on ParatvamIn the Vedarthasangraha, Sri Ramanuja explains how Sriyah Pati(Sriman Narayanan) alone is the Supreme Being described inthe Vedas and Vedanta. The Vedas declare the nature ofthe Supreme Truth in many ways.Sometimes them call It Brahman (the great and gloriousessence); other times they call It Sat (Being); still othertimes they call It Purusha, other times Vishnu, Rudra, Atma,Paramaatma, etc. How are we to reconcile all these variousnames? surely they all refer to one Supreme, as the Vedas declarethatthere is only one Supreme Cause -- ekam evaadvitIyam. Fortunately, the Vedas themselves offer areconciliation ofall these names, containedin the various Upanishads and even in the text of the Veda proper.In the Purusha Sukta, found in all four Vedas,

theSupreme Brahman is described as the Being who existseverywhere. At the end of this glorious Sukta, thePurusha is described: hrISca te lakshmISca patnyauHe who has Hri (Bhudevi) and Lakshmi as His eternalconsorts or attributes. similarly, in the Chhandogya Upanishad, we have thedescription of the Supreme Person as ``tasya yathakapyaasam pundarikam eva akshini'' -- His eyes havethe beauty of the petals of a lotus, just unfoldingunder the rays of the sun and crowning a rich stalk.In all religious literature, only Vishnu is addressedas the ``lotus-eyed one''.There are even more direct Veda vaakyas. For example,in the Rig Veda, we see tad viSNOh paramam padam, sadaapaSyanti sUrayah-- the enlightened seers always perceive the supreme abode of Vishnu, a reference to the nitya suris. A similar reference is found in the Katha Upanishad.The Taittiriya

Aranyaka explicitly reconciles allthe various names of the Supreme found in the Vedasand encompasses them all under the term``Narayana''in the Narayana Sukta. Taking note of the terms Sat, Brahman, Atma, Akshara, all found in the Upanishads,the Sukta goes on to declare viSvam naaraayaNam devamAll is Narayana.and sa brahmA sa SivaH sendraH sO 'ksharaH paramaH svaraaTNarayana is Brahma, Siva, Indra, the Imperishable, theSupreme Independent.these two vaakyas clearly enunciate the principle that the concept of Narayana encompasses all other deities.Even otherwise, the etymological meaning ofthe word Narayana has perhaps the deepest philosophicalsignificance of any name of God, over and above even the terms Vishnu Siva, Brahma, Indra, etc. The latter terms respectively mean ``pure'',``great'', and ``king'',and are applicable to any number of things,

includingthe individual self. However, Narayana means ``That in which all creatures rest'', which by implicationcan only refer to the Supreme.It is true that the Vedas themselves often praise other gods. However, usually these are in the context of the Vedic sacrifice, which is not the highest essenceof Vedic teaching. When it comes to the purely philosophical portions, it is quite clear that thepersonality to which the vaakyas refer is onlyNarayana.Of course, we should not ignore the Bhagavad Gita, considered by all Vedic acharyas as the essence of theVedas.With this immense Vedic tradition behind them,it is a wonder that some people call Sri Vaishnavasclosed-minded for choosing to worship only Narayanan!This is not to say that the other forms ofworship, be it Saivism, worship of Devi, Christianity,etc., are devoid of significance! Rather, we canonly say

that they are not as firmly rooted in Vedic tradition as is the concept of Narayana. Naturally, Truth can be found outside the text of the Vedas, lending authority to the various different creeds that exist. The only point being made here is that the Vedas andDivya Prabandham describe the Ultimate Truth as Narayanaand sanction worship of God conceived in those terms.Aswe would have noted, even Sankaracharya consideredusd the name Narayana when referring to God. Many stotrasare ascribed to him when he may or may not have authored.However, in his undisputed authentic works, such as hiscommentaries on the Upanishads, Gita, and Brahma-sutras,he invariably refers to Narayana as the Supreme Essence.His immediate disciples do the same. Trust this clarifies.RegardsNamo narayanadAsan [The above is an extract from the archives as written by Sri Mani Varadarajan from USA, few years

ago for the same query.- Thanks to him for his permission]

Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now

[Guest guest]

Dear Mr.Madhavakkannan V,

I would like to make one important correction in this article of yours.Nowhere in the Vedas the term SIVA was used to refer to Lord Siva.The Term Siva came to be used to refer to Lord RUDRA only after the advent of Naayanmaars who founded Sivaism.The term Siva in Vedas was used as a mere word in Sanskrit which means Auspiciousness and especially in PurushaSuktha the term Siva means One who is auspicious (refers to Parabrahman Lord NAARAAYANA) in the verse quoted by you.The Saivaas may similarly claim that the term Naaraayana does not mean LORD Naaraayana of Vaishnavism and only refers to Lord Siva.But, MAHARSHI PAANINI in his ASHTAADHYAAYI explains: For (eg:) soorpasya nakaa iti

soorpaNkaa meaning One who has long nails, refers to only SoorpanaNakaa the sister of RaavaNaa and not anyone.Because from Soorpasya naaka we get Soorpanakaa and Soorpananakaa refers to anyone having long nails but In SoorpaNakaa we have Na and not na which specifically refers to the sister of RavaNa.Similarly, Naaraanaam ayanam yasya sah ithi NaaraayaNah

here it refers to LORD SRIMAN NaaraayaNah because in Naaraanaam ayanam yasya shha iti Naaraayanah it refers to anyone but in NaarayaNah the letter is Na and not na which specifically refers to LORD SRIMAN NaaraayaNah.The name NaaraayaNa means ONE WHO IS IN ALL and IN WHOM EVERYTHING IS.Hence, Maharshi Paanini has clearly established that LORD NAARAYANA is the Supreme BRAHMAN.

B.C.VENKATAKRISHNAN.

Madhavakkannan V <srivaishnavan Query on Paratvam- response ... , acharya , nama-singapore , parakalamatham , oppiliappan , bakthi-indonesia Date: Sunday, July 20, 2008, 7:39 PM

 

 

SrI:SrImathE GopalaDear Sri MuraliYou may find this most apt for clarifying your doubt on the query on ParatvamIn the Vedarthasangraha, Sri Ramanuja explains how Sriyah Pati(Sriman Narayanan) alone is the Supreme Being described inthe Vedas and Vedanta. The Vedas declare the nature ofthe Supreme Truth in many ways.Sometimes them call It Brahman (the great and gloriousessence); other times they call It Sat (Being); still othertimes they call It Purusha, other times Vishnu, Rudra, Atma,Paramaatma, etc. How are we to reconcile all these variousnames? surely they all refer to one Supreme, as the Vedas declarethatthere is only one Supreme Cause -- ekam evaadvitIyam. Fortunately, the Vedas themselves offer areconciliation ofall these names, containedin the various Upanishads and even in the text of the Veda proper.In the Purusha Sukta, found in all four Vedas,

theSupreme Brahman is described as the Being who existseverywhere. At the end of this glorious Sukta, thePurusha is described: hrISca te lakshmISca patnyauHe who has Hri (Bhudevi) and Lakshmi as His eternalconsorts or attributes. similarly, in the Chhandogya Upanishad, we have thedescription of the Supreme Person as ``tasya yathakapyaasam pundarikam eva akshini'' -- His eyes havethe beauty of the petals of a lotus, just unfoldingunder the rays of the sun and crowning a rich stalk.In all religious literature, only Vishnu is addressedas the ``lotus-eyed one''.There are even more direct Veda vaakyas. For example,in the Rig Veda, we see tad viSNOh paramam padam, sadaapaSyanti sUrayah-- the enlightened seers always perceive the supreme abode of Vishnu, a reference to the nitya suris. A similar reference is found in the Katha Upanishad.The Taittiriya

Aranyaka explicitly reconciles allthe various names of the Supreme found in the Vedasand encompasses them all under the term``Narayana''in the Narayana Sukta. Taking note of the terms Sat, Brahman, Atma, Akshara, all found in the Upanishads,the Sukta goes on to declare viSvam naaraayaNam devamAll is Narayana.and sa brahmA sa SivaH sendraH sO 'ksharaH paramaH svaraaTNarayana is Brahma, Siva, Indra, the Imperishable, theSupreme Independent.these two vaakyas clearly enunciate the principle that the concept of Narayana encompasses all other deities.Even otherwise, the etymological meaning ofthe word Narayana has perhaps the deepest philosophicalsignificance of any name of God, over and above even the terms Vishnu Siva, Brahma, Indra, etc. The latter terms respectively mean ``pure'',``great'', and ``king'',and are applicable to any number of things,

includingthe individual self. However, Narayana means ``That in which all creatures rest'', which by implicationcan only refer to the Supreme.It is true that the Vedas themselves often praise other gods. However, usually these are in the context of the Vedic sacrifice, which is not the highest essenceof Vedic teaching. When it comes to the purely philosophical portions, it is quite clear that thepersonality to which the vaakyas refer is onlyNarayana.Of course, we should not ignore the Bhagavad Gita, considered by all Vedic acharyas as the essence of theVedas.With this immense Vedic tradition behind them,it is a wonder that some people call Sri Vaishnavasclosed-minded for choosing to worship only Narayanan!This is not to say that the other forms ofworship, be it Saivism, worship of Devi, Christianity,etc., are devoid of significance! Rather, we canonly say

that they are not as firmly rooted in Vedic tradition as is the concept of Narayana. Naturally, Truth can be found outside the text of the Vedas, lending authority to the various different creeds that exist. The only point being made here is that the Vedas andDivya Prabandham describe the Ultimate Truth as Narayanaand sanction worship of God conceived in those terms.Aswe would have noted, even Sankaracharya consideredusd the name Narayana when referring to God. Many stotrasare ascribed to him when he may or may not have authored.However, in his undisputed authentic works, such as hiscommentaries on the Upanishads, Gita, and Brahma-sutras,he invariably refers to Narayana as the Supreme Essence.His immediate disciples do the same. Trust this clarifies.RegardsNamo narayanadAsan [The above is an extract from the archives as written by Sri Mani Varadarajan from USA, few years

ago for the same query.- Thanks to him for his permission]