SrI: SrImatE rAmAnujAya namaH namO nArAyaNa! Dear SrI Narender, > Is it not that the word "Idol" represents ideation? > Perhaps, you should go to the Latin root for the word > to extract the real meaning (jest like we go to the > Sanskrit root for our words) then perhaps you will be > able to conclude if we couyld use it to denote God (I > accept only one God Lord Sriman Narayana). I feel that > there is everything wrong in using the word "IDOL." SrI Anbil has already provided the dictionary meanings. There is nothing wrong to use that word as such by those who communicate in English. But, as pointed out by SrI RAma RAmAnujAchArya of Australia and SrI Jai-Simman, there are many serious implications of using that term for a larger audience. > Yes, in the age of Kali yuga, when a majority of the > so called Sri Vaishnavas are clebrating the mid night > of January first (Christian New Year) as their own New > Year, and celebrating the Christian Millianeium as > their own sending Christian Millianium greetings to > one another (even on the internet), I guess God could > be reduced to that of an "IDOL." I don't understand as to what this means. But be straightforward and open of what you want to convey Or accuse someone.You will then get the appropriate reply from the concerned persons for sure. > Do you go to a respected Swami and call him "He Guy?" Your objection is not valid since Idol is a good English equivalent only. The reason why we have to resort to other terms like Icon is another issue. Your question should rather be "Do you address a respected SwAmi as Master" ?. Well, when the communication is in English, there is no harm in it. By the way, I prefer Sanskrit terms like archa-avatAram, SwAmi, AchArya etc in my English articles/communication. > Are you saying that the Archa Murthy in my home is not > God or does not have the same power. I understand that you are referring to a mUrthi which has not undergone mantra-pratishTa. In that case, there is no doubt that it is not an archA-avatAra mUrti. >Isopanishad > declares: "Purnam Ada Purnamidam..." The Archa Murthy > has the same power as in the Nitya Vibhoothi. Whatever you have quoted is only a ShAnti-PATam recited before ISAvAsyOpanishad and not a mantra belonging to it. It deals with the DivyAtma-Swaroopam - the PoorNatvam of PerumAL. Ofcourse when He descends as an avatAram, His PoorNatvam etc does not change and He is non-different from Para-VAsudEva. >When he > descends, he descds with all his power. How about a > guy > who does not have a moorthy in the house or he is > travelling, and he has only a photo calender. Suppose, > he does arch to that form. Do you think that God does > not accept that archa? BhagavAn accepts it ofcourse. But as SAstra's injunction and even by Lord's own divine commands through PAn~carAtra SAstra, Bhagavad-ArAdhana has to be done to either a SAlagrAma Or a mUrti which has undergone Aagama based mantra-pratishTa (ie.archA-avatAram). This is what BhagavAn expects out of His devotee. To those who lovingly perform AarAdhana to pictures/photos, mere metalic representation of Him etc, He will certainly guide them to reach the standards as expected by Him. ----- By the way, I don't want to start a thread as to Whether usage of the word "God" to address "SrIman NArAyaNa" as done around five times by you in this posting is rather insulting to BhagavAn since the Sanskrit word "BhagavAn" has six salient features pertaining to SrIman NArAyaNa alone and address Him directly, as said by Sage ParASara in SrI VishNu PurANa. aDiyEn rAmAnuja dAsan, anantapadmanAbhan.
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia |
srirangasri-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To subscribe to the list |