tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8685390517890816599.post901133673452010296..comments2024-03-26T13:00:38.287+05:30Comments on Narayanastra – Defending Vaishnavism as the supreme Vedic position: Sri Rudra Gita (Varaha Purana)Humble Bhagavata Bandhuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01932475050150832871noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8685390517890816599.post-65429857095821008012015-06-26T17:13:19.444+05:302015-06-26T17:13:19.444+05:30Please note that this blog is not for discussing g...Please note that this blog is not for discussing general topics like differences of varNa, jAti, rSis, etc. Only discussions related to the topic will be allowed.<br /><br />Your question is infused with a mix-up of modern day appellations and hence we recommend you refer the appropriate traditional sources to clarify your doubts. All I will say now is this - rSis can come from all castes and births like manuShya, deva, etc except those ineligible to learn the veda. Secondly, wearing of matted locks is itself not unvedic in certain conditions, but it becomes so in combination with the practices sanctioned by the Saiva agamas and as a distinctive feature of the pAshupatas.<br /><br />No more questions on general topics. I hope you take the time to read the FAQ where we have stated we do not entertain such queries.Humble Bhagavata Bandhuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01932475050150832871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8685390517890816599.post-67245876257881152892015-06-26T11:35:17.550+05:302015-06-26T11:35:17.550+05:30Nice post, though lengthy. Almost understood it. ...Nice post, though lengthy. Almost understood it. <br />And, what makes RSIs different from brahmaNAs ? These days we see RSIs being depicted with long grown hairs tied at the top or at the side in a 'kudumi/shikha' like fashion, whereas brahmaNAs shave their heads, retaining only the shikha. Also since you mentioned growing hairs with matted locks is unvedic, like the pASupatAs, are these depictions true ?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12016858001397014513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8685390517890816599.post-68915518848526248592015-05-10T14:55:49.350+05:302015-05-10T14:55:49.350+05:30finally read whole post once...makes many things c...finally read whole post once...makes many things clear..Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02664923033139581637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8685390517890816599.post-32600539131885266012015-05-05T16:52:38.239+05:302015-05-05T16:52:38.239+05:30thanks for straining urself to answer my ques....t...thanks for straining urself to answer my ques....trying to understand it..Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02664923033139581637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8685390517890816599.post-38109333860242711932015-05-05T13:28:11.420+05:302015-05-05T13:28:11.420+05:30An addendum to HBB's post:
Understand the ana...An addendum to HBB's post:<br /><br />Understand the analogy here. Gold is transformed into bracelet. Gold Bracelet, Gold Earrings etc are simply different states of gold. The gold has assumed different names and forms such as earring, bracelet, etc for certain practical applications. So, the lump of gold is the Cause, while the gold bracelets, earrings, etc are Effects. In addition, it cannot be said that the earring, bracelet, etc are unreal and mere names - for they have arisen by a real modification of Gold and Gold which is existent in these conditions of earring, bracelet.<br /><br />Similarly, Brahman prior to creation, who has as his body all the undifferentiated sentients and insentients (devoid of name and form) is the Cause, like the lump of Gold. After creation, Brahman itself, who has as his body the differentiated names and forms of deva, manushya, etc becomes the effects like gold bracelets, earrings etc. By the body-self relationship, when it is said "Brahman" is the Cause, it implies Brahman with his undifferentiated body which is the subtle form of Universe. Similarly, when it is said "deva", "manushya" are the effects, the names like "deva" etc denote only Brahman, the inner self. Names which denote the body, denote the self in its ultimate analysis, and when the self is denoted, it always includes the body which is an inseparable attribute. This is "sAmAnAdhikaraNyam".<br /><br />Just as bracelets etc are names assigned to Gold based on the real states or conditions assumed by Gold, so does Brahman who had subtle forms as his body, now gets designated names like "deva", "manushya" based on his real states or conditions as the inner self of these various gross forms.<br /><br />So, "tat tvam asi" - "tat" refers to the Causal Brahman who had the Universe in subtle, undifferentiated state as his body, much like a lump of gold. "tvam" refers to Brahman who has the gross state of svetaketu as his body. The cause is the same as the effect. Knowing a lump of gold, all made of gold is known. Knowing that Brahman which has the undifferentiated Universe as his body, all effects, ie, Brahman having gross forms, is known.<br /><br />Just as gold as a lump or as an earring is unchanged in its essential nature, similarly is Brahman unaffected by changes to his body.Aaryamaanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8685390517890816599.post-31619109416847739672015-05-05T12:27:44.154+05:302015-05-05T12:27:44.154+05:30Saivas say that Siva is the creator of the univers...Saivas say that Siva is the creator of the universe, and fashions it out of shakti like a potter fashions a pot out of mud. Here, the mud is the upAdAna kAraNa (material cause) and Siva is the nimitta kAraNa (efficient cause). This is unacceptable for Vedanta as per Srivaishnavism. Vedantins say that the upAdAna and nimitta kAraNa are both Brahman. The creator is Brahman (Lord Vishnu) and the creation is in Brahman. There is are two shlokas in Vishnu Purana which proclaim this:<br /><br />kaṭakamukuṭakarṇikādibhedaiḥ kanakam abhedam apīṣyate yathaikam /<br />surapaśumanujādikalpanābhir harir akhilābhir udīryate tathaikaḥ // ViP_3,7.16 //<br />kṣitijalaparamāṇavo 'nilānte punar api yānti yathaikatāṃ dharitryāḥ /<br />surapaśumanujādayas tathānte guṇakaluṣeṇa sanātanena tena // ViP_3,7.17 //<br /><br />(rough translation): "As gold is one substance still, however diversified as bracelets, tiaras, or earrings, so Hari is one and the same, although modified in the forms of gods, animals, and man. As the drops of water, raised by wind from the earth, sink into the earth again when the wind subsides, so the varieties of gods, men, and animals, which have been detached by the agitation of the qualities, are reunited, when that disturbance ceases, with the eternal."<br /><br />Humble Bhagavata Bandhuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01932475050150832871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8685390517890816599.post-66660314975957453532015-05-05T12:26:32.717+05:302015-05-05T12:26:32.717+05:30Saivas do not accept Ishvara as the material cause...Saivas do not accept Ishvara as the material cause of the Universe. <br /><br />Material causality means different things in advaita and visishtadvaita. I shall explain as per Vishishtadvaita since the article was written from that view.<br /><br />As per Vishishtadvaita, it is explained thus - since everything is the body of Brahman, creation involves a change of state for Brahman - prior to creation, he was in the state of having subtle forms as his body, after creation, he now is in the state of having gross forms as his body. Since there is a change of the body of Brahman, it means he is the material cause. However, Brahman in his own nature is unchanged and unaffected by changes to his body as he is devoid of karma and his association with the universe as his body is by his will and not by karmic results. So, material causality does not violate sruti passages declaring him to be unchanged.<br /><br />Hope this explains.<br />Aaryamaanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8685390517890816599.post-36848661863251464822015-05-04T16:26:07.182+05:302015-05-04T16:26:07.182+05:30''non-acceptance of iSvara as the upAdAna ...''non-acceptance of iSvara as the upAdAna kAraNam''....can u please explain this in clear english....Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02664923033139581637noreply@blogger.com