You are here: Sri Vaishnava Home Page : Bhakti List : Archives : July 2001

Re: Digest Number 363

From: Srimahavishnu Vinjamuri (s.vinjamuri_at_mailcity.com)
Date: Mon Jul 09 2001 - 05:14:29 PDT

 
--



>
>Message: 6
>   Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 11:19:52 -0400
>   From: tik@ma.ultranet.com
>Subject: Re: agniravamo...
>
>Namaskaaram.
>
>That any particular Deva/Devata is supreme appears in many 
>places in the Samhita mantras for many Devas/Devataas. 
>Typically, a Rik devoted to a Deva/Devataa declares THAT 
>Deva/Devataa as supreme. Ancient Nyaaya shaastrakaaras have 
>justified this by invoking "nahinindaa nyaaya" - that One is 
>Supreme does not mean a degradation of any other. When a 
>devotee or aspirant sees Truth through his/her chosen 
>naama-roopa, he/she is free to praise and surrender to That 
>chosen One. This is buttressed by the well-quoted Rik of 
>meaning something like: Sat (the fundamental unmanifest 
>substratum) is One, the knowers of the Vedas speak (of It) 
>as agni, yamam, maatarishwaan...
>
>This in no way is like the Semitic tradition of condemning 
>anything other than the chosen one.


In my opinion, it is not "nahi nindA nyAyam" but soemthing else. suppose
we call a rich man as king, does it mean he is the ruler of the country? this is also like that only.
another thing is BhagavAn Himself is praised in vEdas as antaryAmI of all devas. vedas speak of several demi-gods, but not of several purushottamas/nArAyaNas/antaryAmIs. in vedas, that fundamnetal substratum is addressed as masculine and is characterised by Sriyahpatitvam, nArAyaNa Sabda vAchyatvam etc.

people are free to praise and surrender to whatever form they wish and that does not mean it is ultimate.

regards
Vishnu



--------------------------------------------------------------
           - SrImate rAmAnujAya namaH -
To Post a message, send it to:   bhakti-list@yahoogroups.com
Archives: http://ramanuja.org/sv/bhakti/archives/
 

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