You are here: SriPedia - Oppiliappan - Archives - Jul 2008

Oppiliappan List Archive: Message 00129 Jul 2008

 
Jul 2008 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


SrI:
SrImathE Gopala
Dear Sri Murali
 
You may find this most apt for clarifying your doubt on the query on Paratvam

In the Vedarthasangraha, Sri Ramanuja explains how Sriyah Pati
(Sriman Narayanan) alone is the Supreme Being described in
the Vedas and Vedanta.  The Vedas declare the nature of
the Supreme Truth in many ways.

Sometimes them call It Brahman (the great and glorious
essence); other times they call It Sat (Being); still other
times they call It Purusha, other times Vishnu, Rudra, Atma,
Paramaatma, etc.  How are we to reconcile all these various
names? 

surely they all refer to one Supreme, as the Vedas declare
thatthere is only one Supreme Cause -- ekam eva
advitIyam.  Fortunately, the Vedas themselves offer a
reconciliation ofall these names, contained
in the various Upanishads and even in the text of the 
Veda proper.

In the Purusha Sukta, found in all four Vedas, the
Supreme Brahman is described as the Being who exists
everywhere.  At the end of this glorious Sukta, the
Purusha is described: 

hrISca te lakshmISca patnyau

He who has Hri (Bhudevi) and Lakshmi as His eternal
consorts or attributes. 

similarly, in the Chhandogya Upanishad, we have the
description of the Supreme Person as ``tasya yatha
kapyaasam pundarikam eva akshini'' -- His eyes have
the beauty of the petals of a lotus, just unfolding
under the rays of the sun and crowning a rich stalk.
In all religious literature, only Vishnu is addressed
as the ``lotus-eyed one''.

There are even more direct Veda vaakyas.  For example,
in the Rig Veda, we see tad viSNOh paramam padam, sadaa
paSyanti 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 all
the various names of the Supreme found in the Vedas
and 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 devam

All is Narayana.

and 
sa brahmA sa SivaH sendraH sO 'ksharaH paramaH svaraaT

Narayana is Brahma, Siva, Indra, the Imperishable, the
Supreme Independent.

these two vaakyas clearly enunciate the principle that 
the concept of Narayana encompasses all other deities.
Even otherwise, the etymological meaning of
the word Narayana has perhaps the deepest philosophical
significance 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, including
the individual self. However, Narayana means ``That in 
which all creatures rest'', which by implication
can 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 essence
of Vedic teaching.  When it comes to the purely 
philosophical portions, it is quite clear that the
personality to which the vaakyas refer is only
Narayana.

Of course, we should not ignore the Bhagavad Gita, 
considered by all Vedic acharyas as the essence of the
Vedas.

With this immense Vedic tradition behind them,
it is a wonder that some people call Sri Vaishnavas
closed-minded for choosing to worship only Narayanan!

This is not to say that the other forms of
worship, be it Saivism, worship of Devi, Christianity,
etc., are devoid of significance! Rather, we can
only 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 and
Divya Prabandham describe the Ultimate Truth as Narayana
and sanction worship of God conceived in those terms.

Aswe would have noted, even Sankaracharya considered
usd the name Narayana when referring to God.  Many stotras
are ascribed to him when he may or may not have authored.
However, in his undisputed authentic works, such as his
commentaries 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.
Regards
Namo narayana
dAsan 

[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]




      

------------------------------------

Oppiliappan Koil Varadachari Sadagopan
http://www.sadagopan.org Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Oppiliappan/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Oppiliappan/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:Oppiliappan-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    mailto:Oppiliappan-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Oppiliappan-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
oppiliappan-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list