Guest guest Posted November 21, 2000 Report Share Posted November 21, 2000 > > M.S.HARI Madabhushi Sarangarajan Hari [mshari] > Tuesday, November 21, 2000 5:50 PM > > On a recent debate! > > > The thathva-sAra-slokam quoted in this mail has many > viSEshArhtams. What is written here is just the outline of the > slokArtha. If time permits, I will elaborate more on this with hundreds > of sruthi-smruthi-pramANams. It is a delight to read your article written. adiyEn hopes Sriman Narayana will give you the time very soon to write more about the tatvasAra slokam of Sri Nadadur ammAl you have quoted. Thank you, -- adiyEn ramanuja dasan srimad azhagiya singar thiruvadigaLE saraNam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2000 Report Share Posted November 21, 2000 Dear Hari I truly enjoyed your explanation, Its simply wonderful and so indepth and easy to understand and well explained. I wish I could have participated in your arguments to hear the other's points, but I am glad I didn't coz this explanation explains your indepth knowledge and gave a clear cut meaning to every aspect of that Supreme Lord Sriman Narayana. Well here is something I really appreciate you bringing it out " SrI VaishNavas should neither do anya-dEvatha-nindanam nor anya-dEvatha-vandanam. If dEvathAntara-sambandam is present in a SrI VaishNava, then he never gets mumukshuthvam and he is not at all a SrI VaishNava " . Quiet often some to my knowledge think that its ok to have Ganapthy worship and still claim to be vaishnavas, but in reality they are making a fool out of themselves and not getting anywhere. I am really glad to see someone point out the inner meaning of true vaishnavism. Well please do keep up the these postings and hope many more read them and share the knowledge. Once again it's a pleasure to read your article. Sincerely. Krishna --- " M.S.HARI Madabhushi Sarangarajan Hari " <mshari wrote: > Dear Members, > > I had a long debate with few people after I had > answered a question > in an email discussion group regarding VishNu > parathvam. Those people > where mostly from smArtha and saiva backgrounds. Of > course, both > these traditions in their original form seldom have > relations as far > as philosophy is concerned. I wanted to share the > gist of my arguments, > which finally made them to withdraw their arguments > totally. It is > as given below: > > Kastvam thathva-vidasmi vasthu-paramam > kim-tharhi-vishNu: katham > ThathvEdampara thaithtrIyakamuka-triyyantha > sandarSanAth | > anyAstharhigira: katham guNavaSAth athrAha-rudra: > katham > thath drushtyA kathamudbhavathyavatharath > yanyathkatham nIyathAm || > > This is a masterpiece verse from SrImath > VAthsya-varada-guru's > Tathva-sAra-grantham (nadAthUr ammAL) > > This verse is in a form of dialogue - question and > answer. This > slokA's artham was the base for the vAda-prativAdam. > > > The questions and answers in this sloka are: > > Question: > ========================== > Who are you? > > Answer: > ========================== > I am thathva-vid - he who has realized the truth - > aSEsha-chit-achit-prakAram-brahmaikamEva-thathvam - > thathvam nArAyaNa: para: > > The opponent without understanding the purport of > the above answer, > again questions: > > Question: > ========================== > But who is that unparalleled and unsurpassed > " para-thathvam " ? > > Answer: > ========================== > VishNu (SrIman NArAyaNa:) is the para-thathvam - the > one and > only God. > > Question: > ========================== > How do you say that? > > Answer: > ========================== > As the apowrushEya vEda explains the para-thathvam > in thaithtrIya > nArAyaNAnuvAkam and in such innumerable upanishad > vAkyAs, > VishNu-parathvam gets clearly and irrefutably > established. > > Question: > ========================== > What you say seems to be prejudiced. If it is so, > why then " Indra " , > " Siva " etc are mentioned in the VEda as upAsya and > jagath-kAraNa? > > Answer: > ========================== > " Indra: " is a common noun derived from the dhAthu > " ithi paramaiSvaryE " > which generally means " one who > governs/rules/controls " and " Siva " is > a common noun meaning " auspicious " . These qualities > are > naturally applicable to VishNu and therefore in such > contexts (upAsya, > jagath-kArANa), these general terms can only denote > LakshmI Pathi: - > purushOththama: denoted by the particular noun > " NArAyaNa: " . The > chAga-paSu-nyAya is applied here. > Ref: http://sriramanujar.tripod.com/tutorial/6.html > http://sriramanujar.tripod.com/tutorial/7.html > http://sriramanujar.tripod.com/tutorial/8.html > > Question: > ========================== > Though this is quite convincing, what about those > passages in the > VEda where Rudra himself has declared his supremacy? > Will it not > contradict your previous substantiation? > > Answer: > ========================== > No where in the VEda, such contradiction will arise. > Rudra has not > declared his supremacy but has spoken so because of > his thatva-jgnyAna > obtained through the study of SAstra > " SAstra-drushtyA thu upadESa: > vAmaDevavath " that he is the body of VishNu and > VishNu is the soul - > antaryAmi. He has declared the supremacy of VishNu > who is the antaryAmi > of all jIvAthmAs and achit. As Rudra had realized > his > Seshatva-pAratantriyams, he being a jIvAthman, with > tatva-jgnyAna, > declared the paramAthmA's supremacy. Therefore the > para-thatvam is > VishNu. Absolutely this point gets established in > the Sruthi. > Ref: > /message/Visistadvaita_Shree_Vaishnava_Shree/87 > > > Question: > ========================== > Of course, this is convincing. No counter-argument > can be made now. > But there is one more doubt in this context. Has not > the Sruthi > declared the birth of BrahmA, VishNu, Rudra and all > such dEvathAs? How > can VishNu, who is born, be understood as > para-thatva and jagath-kAraNa? > > Answer: > ========================== > The birth of VishNu is not " birth " but it is > avathAram. BrahmA, Siva > etc are born because of their karma like us. But > VishNu incarnates > (avathAram) as per his own will (sankalpa-ichchA) > (ajAyamAnO bhahudhA > vijAyatE in Sruthi confirms this). Therefore this > doubt also gets > cleared. VishNu is the unparalleled and unsurpassed > entity - > para-thathvam. (avathArasya sathyathvam > ajahathswaswabhAvathA | > Sudhda-satvamayathvam cha swEchchAmAthra-nidAnathA > || dharma-glAnow > samudaya: sAdhu-samrakshaNArthathA | ithi > janmarahasyam yO vEththi nAsya > punarbhava: || (nAsya punarbhava: palasruthi should > not be > misunderstood here with respect to the > sAdyOpAya-anushtAnams). > > The portions of rAjasa-tAmasa purANams which > contradicts the Sruthi > are rejected by vaidikas. > > ==================================================== > The > tri-mUrthi-sAmya-iykya-uththIrNa-vyakthyanthara-vAdams > are rejected > and refuted in this thathva-sAra-sloka. > ==================================================== > > SwAmy SrIman NigamAntha mahA DESika has beautifully > conveyed the > same meaning as follows (SrImath Rahasyatraya sAram, > > para-dEvatha-pAramArhthyAdhikAram) > > Aathmaikyam dEvataikyam trikasamadhigathA tulyaikyam > trayANA > manyatraiSvaryamithyAdyanipuNapaNithIrAdriyanthE na > santha: | > triyyantairEkakaNtaisthadanuguNa-manu-vyAsa-mukhyOkthibhiScha > > SrImAn-nArAyaNO na: pathirakhilatanurmukthidO > muktha-bhOgya: || > > anya-dEvatha-upAsana is to be totally avoided for > SrI VaishNavas. > When this is told, many mistake it for nindanam of > anya-dEvathas. > SrI VaishNavas should neither do > anya-dEvatha-nindanam nor > anya-dEvatha-vandanam. If dEvathAntara-sambandam is > present in a > SrI VaishNava, then he never gets mumukshuthvam and > he is not at all > a SrI VaishNava. > para-dEvatha-pAramArhthyAdhikAram in SrImath > Rahasyatraya sAram is the > best medicine for the disease named > dEvathAntara-sambandam. The key > points of this chapter can be found in elaborate > form in > nAn-mukan-tiruvandAdi of SrI Tiru-malizai-AzwAr. > > The thathva-sAra-slokam quoted in this mail has many > > viSEshArhtams. What is written here is just the > outline of the > slokArtha. If time permits, I will elaborate more on > this with hundreds > of sruthi-smruthi-pramANams. > > ==================================================== > " satyam satyam punassatyamudhdrutya bhujamuchyathE > VEdAchSAstram param nAsthi na daivam kESavAthparam " > ==================================================== > > Thanks & Regards > M.S.HARI RAmAnuja DAsan. > > __________________ > Get free email and a permanent address at > http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 > > Srimate Sri Laksminrisimha Divya Paduka Sevaka > Srivan Satakopa Sri Narayana Yatindra Mahadesikaya > Nama: > Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. / Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2000 Report Share Posted November 21, 2000 Dear Members, I had a long debate with few people after I had answered a question in an email discussion group regarding VishNu parathvam. Those people where mostly from smArtha and saiva backgrounds. Of course, both these traditions in their original form seldom have relations as far as philosophy is concerned. I wanted to share the gist of my arguments, which finally made them to withdraw their arguments totally. It is as given below: Kastvam thathva-vidasmi vasthu-paramam kim-tharhi-vishNu: katham ThathvEdampara thaithtrIyakamuka-triyyantha sandarSanAth | anyAstharhigira: katham guNavaSAth athrAha-rudra: katham thath drushtyA kathamudbhavathyavatharath yanyathkatham nIyathAm || This is a masterpiece verse from SrImath VAthsya-varada-guru's Tathva-sAra-grantham (nadAthUr ammAL) This verse is in a form of dialogue - question and answer. This slokA's artham was the base for the vAda-prativAdam. The questions and answers in this sloka are: Question: ========================== Who are you? Answer: ========================== I am thathva-vid - he who has realized the truth - aSEsha-chit-achit-prakAram-brahmaikamEva-thathvam - thathvam nArAyaNa: para: The opponent without understanding the purport of the above answer, again questions: Question: ========================== But who is that unparalleled and unsurpassed " para-thathvam " ? Answer: ========================== VishNu (SrIman NArAyaNa:) is the para-thathvam - the one and only God. Question: ========================== How do you say that? Answer: ========================== As the apowrushEya vEda explains the para-thathvam in thaithtrIya nArAyaNAnuvAkam and in such innumerable upanishad vAkyAs, VishNu-parathvam gets clearly and irrefutably established. Question: ========================== What you say seems to be prejudiced. If it is so, why then " Indra " , " Siva " etc are mentioned in the VEda as upAsya and jagath-kAraNa? Answer: ========================== " Indra: " is a common noun derived from the dhAthu " ithi paramaiSvaryE " which generally means " one who governs/rules/controls " and " Siva " is a common noun meaning " auspicious " . These qualities are naturally applicable to VishNu and therefore in such contexts (upAsya, jagath-kArANa), these general terms can only denote LakshmI Pathi: - purushOththama: denoted by the particular noun " NArAyaNa: " . The chAga-paSu-nyAya is applied here. Ref: http://sriramanujar.tripod.com/tutorial/6.html http://sriramanujar.tripod.com/tutorial/7.html http://sriramanujar.tripod.com/tutorial/8.html Question: ========================== Though this is quite convincing, what about those passages in the VEda where Rudra himself has declared his supremacy? Will it not contradict your previous substantiation? Answer: ========================== No where in the VEda, such contradiction will arise. Rudra has not declared his supremacy but has spoken so because of his thatva-jgnyAna obtained through the study of SAstra " SAstra-drushtyA thu upadESa: vAmaDevavath " that he is the body of VishNu and VishNu is the soul - antaryAmi. He has declared the supremacy of VishNu who is the antaryAmi of all jIvAthmAs and achit. As Rudra had realized his Seshatva-pAratantriyams, he being a jIvAthman, with tatva-jgnyAna, declared the paramAthmA's supremacy. Therefore the para-thatvam is VishNu. Absolutely this point gets established in the Sruthi. Ref: /message/Visistadvaita_Shree_Vaishnava_Shree/87 Question: ========================== Of course, this is convincing. No counter-argument can be made now. But there is one more doubt in this context. Has not the Sruthi declared the birth of BrahmA, VishNu, Rudra and all such dEvathAs? How can VishNu, who is born, be understood as para-thatva and jagath-kAraNa? Answer: ========================== The birth of VishNu is not " birth " but it is avathAram. BrahmA, Siva etc are born because of their karma like us. But VishNu incarnates (avathAram) as per his own will (sankalpa-ichchA) (ajAyamAnO bhahudhA vijAyatE in Sruthi confirms this). Therefore this doubt also gets cleared. VishNu is the unparalleled and unsurpassed entity - para-thathvam. (avathArasya sathyathvam ajahathswaswabhAvathA | Sudhda-satvamayathvam cha swEchchAmAthra-nidAnathA || dharma-glAnow samudaya: sAdhu-samrakshaNArthathA | ithi janmarahasyam yO vEththi nAsya punarbhava: || (nAsya punarbhava: palasruthi should not be misunderstood here with respect to the sAdyOpAya-anushtAnams). The portions of rAjasa-tAmasa purANams which contradicts the Sruthi are rejected by vaidikas. ==================================================== The tri-mUrthi-sAmya-iykya-uththIrNa-vyakthyanthara-vAdams are rejected and refuted in this thathva-sAra-sloka. ==================================================== SwAmy SrIman NigamAntha mahA DESika has beautifully conveyed the same meaning as follows (SrImath Rahasyatraya sAram, para-dEvatha-pAramArhthyAdhikAram) Aathmaikyam dEvataikyam trikasamadhigathA tulyaikyam trayANA manyatraiSvaryamithyAdyanipuNapaNithIrAdriyanthE na santha: | triyyantairEkakaNtaisthadanuguNa-manu-vyAsa-mukhyOkthibhiScha SrImAn-nArAyaNO na: pathirakhilatanurmukthidO muktha-bhOgya: || anya-dEvatha-upAsana is to be totally avoided for SrI VaishNavas. When this is told, many mistake it for nindanam of anya-dEvathas. SrI VaishNavas should neither do anya-dEvatha-nindanam nor anya-dEvatha-vandanam. If dEvathAntara-sambandam is present in a SrI VaishNava, then he never gets mumukshuthvam and he is not at all a SrI VaishNava. para-dEvatha-pAramArhthyAdhikAram in SrImath Rahasyatraya sAram is the best medicine for the disease named dEvathAntara-sambandam. The key points of this chapter can be found in elaborate form in nAn-mukan-tiruvandAdi of SrI Tiru-malizai-AzwAr. The thathva-sAra-slokam quoted in this mail has many viSEshArhtams. What is written here is just the outline of the slokArtha. If time permits, I will elaborate more on this with hundreds of sruthi-smruthi-pramANams. ==================================================== " satyam satyam punassatyamudhdrutya bhujamuchyathE VEdAchSAstram param nAsthi na daivam kESavAthparam " ==================================================== Thanks & Regards M.S.HARI RAmAnuja DAsan. __________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.