You are here: SriPedia - SriRangaSri - Archives - Aug 2004

SriRangaSri List Archive: Message 00042 Aug 2004

 
Aug 2004 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


SrI:

Let me answer ur queries.

> 
> 1.  Do dvaithins deny parts of vedas?  

****
Dvaithis discard Abedha sruthi, Advaithis dicard Bedha
sruthi. Visishtadvaithin gives consistent
interpretation for both with the help of ghataka
sruthi. So Visishtadvaithin does not discard any part
of vedam. It is simple logic if u say one part of
vedam is wrong then why can't the part that u have
accepted be wrong? or why can't the entire vedas be
wrong? so if u discard any part u are not different
from a atheist. But Still Vedanta desikan has
commented that MAdhvam is closest (when compared to
advaitham) to ours though obviously has lot of
difference. 




> 2. While you have clarified on smrithi being
> pramanas of vedas, I want to
> know where Upanishads stand.

Upanishads are vedantam. It is so called as there is
nothing superior than this to be learnt and is final
conclusion of the entire vedas. It is no doubt
apourusheya. It has "svaram" unlike man/god made
slokas. 
Yes, Upanishads, most of them, are like conversation
between an acharyan and sishya but that is just to
show that Brahma vidya has to be learnt from an
acharya in that traditional manner in which it goes in
the upanishads. It beautifully instructs the mode of
learning this superior education. This is Uttamoor
swami's explanation in his "Upanishad saram".


> 3.  You have referred Rudra's kainkaryam to Narayana
> through propogation of
> paasupatamatam.  Can you please elaborate on the
> same as to what is
> paasupatamatam and also the events behind apacharam
> to gautama maharshi.
> 

*****

Paasupatamatam considers Shiva as the Paramatma. It is
BhAhya matam( not vedic). I do not know exactly the
story behind the apacharam behind gautama maharishi.
Also I find it irrelevant. Mind always refuses to
learn/remember irrelevant things :))


> 4.    What is mohana saastra pravachanam.  Is it a
> sloka?  On who this is
> recited?
> 
******
NO! No! No! Mohana saastra pravachanam  means
spreading/teaching siddhantam that is against
vedantam.
they are usually called bhAhya siddhantam and kudrusti
siddantam.


> 5.  Can you let me know on Shiva's authorisation of
> Mantrarajapada stotram
> and his surrendering.  Is this mentioned in smritis?
> 

it is not in smrithis. Have a dekko at this beautiful
slokam thats starts with "eshwarua uvacha" in
www.prapatti.com





> 6.  Coming to Adishankara, as far as I read texts on
> him, he has glorified
> all gods, travelling from south to north, and
> Bhajagovindam is a part of his
> various works.  His siddhantham as we know is
> advaitha, which denounces
> saguna brahman and glorifies nirguna brahman. If he
> has glorified Narayana,
> at the same time, he also glorified others - shiva,
> shanmukha, durga etc.
> Unlike other Jagadgurus - Sri Ramanuja, Sri
> Madhwacharya he has glorified
> all gods and then finally said - sarvam kalvidam
> brahma.  I want to know
> exactly where he says that Parabrahman is indeed
> only Narayana.  He might
> have said "Narayana paro vyakthath" which Sri
> Prabhupada quotes in his work,
> but he said many things on other devathas.

****
refer "Dialogue on Hinduism book". I have read this
there. The author quotes Swami Desikan mentioning this
in his work. I have not exactly read desikan's words
on this. As u say adi sankara has composed slokams on
all the anyadevathas he stumbled upon!




> 
> 
> Finally I am asking these just to gain knowledge but
> not for anything else.
> Being a Krishnabhaktha I don't have any doubts about
> what Sri Ramanuja, Sri
> Madhwa, Sri Vedantha Desika, Sri Raghavendra
> Theertha say and when they say
> Vishnu is the Supreme, that's it.

***

I have been stressing  all the time that these are
subtle points that needs to be learnt only
traditonally under the feet of a sadacharya. These are
rahasyas and unless it is learnt in detail it won't be
clear. Only a sadacharya can help. Otherwise it will
be total waste of time. Reading emails and trying to
learn subtle issues will fetch nothing. Result of such
practice would be just exponential magnification of
present doubts and confusion. In our tradition
students do not ask doubt first. They sit near the
acharyans feet and hear what they say ardently and
after conclusion of the kalaksehpam find that there is
no scope for any doubts to arise as the acharyan has
showered them with details pregnant with amazing
clarity and consistency.

Aravind G.





> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aravind Gopalan [mailto:balaji_gop@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2004 8:39 AM
> To: Rajaram Venkataramani
> Cc: srirangasri@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [SriRangaSri] Re:
> 
> 
> SrI:
> 
> Answers to Srivenkataramani's questions.
> 
> For other members : for continuity , pls read my
> previous email titled "Swami Desikan's view on
> chanting rudram Ref: Re [SriRangaSri] chanting
> Rudram......"
> 
> 1) Yes, Rudram is chanted by srivaishnavas , as
> explained ELABORATELY in my previous two emails. Why
> only rudram? All vedic bhagams including karma
> kandam
> is recited by srivaishnava's as glory of sriman
> narayana! there is no question about that. there is
> no
> part of vedam thats is discarded by Bhagavad
> Ramanuja
> sishyas unlike Advaithis and dvaithis.
> 
> 
> 2) Sandilya smriti is NOT vedas. Vedas are sruthis.
> Smrithis are explanations of great maharishis based
> on
> their conclusion on vedas. They are accepted as
> pramana by all the schools of vedanta.
> 
> Rudra's temple was equated to dead body because of
> its
> ill effects for a paramaikanthi. Paramaikanti is
> jnani! He should not be deviated from his sole
> objective that is sriman narayana. Association with
> anyadevatha will always turn one towards samsaram
> only. These are NOT just conclusions of 
> srivaishanva
> acharyas but by great Maharishis who were unbiased.
> This  was also explained in detail by Sri Krishna in
> Srimad Bhagavad Gita. This is was not told to bring
> disgrace to Rudra. It is a fact that was explanied.
> Even the mohana saastra pravachanam of Rudra is to
> disuade those who did apacharam to goutama
> maharishi.
> He started propagating paasupatamatam to disuade
> them.
> Due to their dreadful karma many people also started
> to follow the same. So this is done by Rudra as a
> kainkaryam to sriman narayana. Punishing assura
> prakruthis is a kainkaryam given to him by sriman
> narayana!
> 
> Still Siva as "Ahirbudhya" has refrained from mohana
> saastra pravachanam and beautifully explaines the
> Paratvam of sriman Narayana and that he is the only
> person to be worshipped and surrendered. This he
> explains in his elaborate and most beautiful
> "Ahirbudhya samhitai". Swami Desikan glorifies this
> samhitai to a great extent. Infact in moolamantra
> adhikaram to explain a particular padam swami
> desikan
> quoted ahibudya samhitai extensively.
> 
> It is well known that Mantrarajapada stotram was
> authored by shiva where he glorifies and surrenders
> unto sriman narayana.
> 
> The paratvam of sriman Narayana was not questioned
> by
> Adi sankara.
> A paramaikanti knows what he should do. Mere
> "kaanthis"  need not worry about them. Also knowing
> why a paramaikanti has such an acharam will give
> nothing to non-paramaikanti and non- ekanthis.
> 
> Anway, let us conclude this topic and move on. There
> won't be much return in learning thro' web! sri rama
> told " Sookshma: parama durjnaya:". These doubts are
> to be learnt from a srivaishnava sadacharyan by
> obediently prostrating to him and requesting him to
> explain the same.
> 
> 
> All the best!
> 
> Aravind G.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- Rajaram Venkataramani <v_raja_ram@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> 
> > Sri Aravind -
> >
> > Thanks for the post and the nice explanation
> > provided by Sri U. Ve. S. Swami. Do Sri Vaishnavas
> > actually chant Rudram as a glorification of Sriman
> > Narayana ?  If not, why not ?
> >
> > Where in Vedas does Sandilya Smrti occur ? Is
> there
> > any explanation provided why this smrti considers
> > Siva's temple to be as impure as a dead body ?
> >
> > Best Regards
> > Rajaram V.
> > Aravind Gopalan <balaji_gop@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > SrimathE Nigamantha Mahadesikaya Nama:
> >
> > SrimathE Sundara Sowmyanarayanaya Mahadesikaya
> Nama:
> >
> 
=== message truncated ===



                
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/VkWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    SriRangaSri-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
srirangasri-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list