Dear Sri Ram & Lakshmi Narasimhan, Thank you for your considered responses, which point to pragmatic approaches to the position of Vedas in our tradition. (a) We are in trouble only if we treat "Narayana" is different from Rudra, Brahma, Devi, Ganapathy etc. etc. If we consider that the "supreme" is one with different names, all the contradictions would be solved. (b) Vishnu paratvam is completely a subjective view of us (Sri Vaishnavas) of the vedas. #(b) is a bold stance to take!! #(a), painting a "tolerant hindu" picture, seems to contradict our traditional view on Narayana and other devatas (sorry if I am mistaken). My understanding is Narayana is "supreme" as well as "different from other devatas". All other devatas derive their powers form the inner controller Narayana alone and he alone is capable of giving "mukti". Let me make my motives clear before I post any further. Call it paranoia, but I feel that our "Indian" religions are under assault from proselytizing ones (by this I am including Vaishnava, shaiva, shakta, buddhism, jainism, sikhism, 'animism' - everything). Other non-religious factors like "dravidian movement" in tamil nadu, portraying anything brahmin/sanskrit is anti-thesis to dravidian/tamil. Members might remember organized physical abuses on brahmins during 60s-70s. There is a subtle malignation of "Hinduism" in our history text books. A brahmin is sombody to be ridiculed in tamil movies. (NOTE: I am not making the mistake of equating "Shri vaishnavam" belonging to "brahmins alone" or anything. However most of the masses do not see it that way.) Our children in this generation are exposed to these instead of our traditional values. The subtle brainwashing is successful to such an extant that, our children feel ashamed to associate themselves with hinduism (constant hammering of caste discrimination, exploitative brahmins in school text books, movies, tv serials etc. etc). We can escape most of the criticisms by claiming "we aren't hindus, we are Shri Vaishnavas". I feel this is a dangerous passive position to take. I feel that we have to come to terms with the assaults we are facing. What is the fundamental requirement on our part in this scenario? I feel a thorough understanding of our traditional values - a knowledge of our roots. This means our most fundamental root - the Vedas. All my questions were framed in this context. Regards, Kasturi Rangan .K --- In ramanuja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Lakshmi Narasimhan" <nrusimhan@xxxx> wrote: > Srimathe Ramanujaya Namaha > This is an excellent point. Thanks to Shriram Swamin. It has already > been figured out by our ancenstors(including the dvaita, advaita and > vishistadvaita and certain other philosophers), that, per > vedas, "Narayana Parambrahma, tatvan Narayana para:" i.e Narayana > is "the" shabda that best describes the brahmam. As Shriram Swamin > had mentioned, the problem arises when we debate on "who" is the > supreme. It is a simple fact, that we miss all the while, in most of > our discussions.
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |