BLOG STATUS: Suspended indefinitely starting 18 Jan 2020. See journal page for details.
Last new article published: 18 Jan 2020, "Ishvara Gita: Chapters 1-11": Read here

Subscribe to updates here.

A note to our readers

As most people can see, this blog is aimed at establishing that the parabrahman of the vedanta is none other than the Lord of Lakshmi, Srinivasa, otherwise known as Vishnu, Vasudeva and Narayana and that the ultimate purushartham of the Vedanta is to serve him and his devotees.

Obviously, some people who worship devas other than Vishnu are bound to judge this blog as professing enemity towards them. Considering that some of the comments in this blog are somewhat acerbic, it is possible that this has certainly been a resentment inducing factor, particularly among Shaivas and Shaktas.

Some of the accusations aimed by frustrated people at Vaishnavas are as follows – 1) We are shiva dvEshIs, 2) At a time when Sanatana Dharma is under attack by Abrahamic religions, we are unnecessarily bickering with our fellow hindus, 3) We are intolerant and close minded, etc.

Let us address this one by one. Firstly, we have the utmost respect for Mahadeva, who is a devotee of Vishnu (vaishnavam yatha sambhuh, jnanam icchet sankarath). He obtained his knowledge from Hayagriva and teaches the sanat kumaras, rishis, devas about Vishnu along with his consort Uma, as evidenced in the Kenopanishad itself. That being the case, we would never hate him, but respect him greatly. However, this respect is different from tall claims equating shiva to Narayana or placing him higher than Narayana (who alone is Parabrahman). So, we are only establishing the truth of the Vaidika marga – that Shiva is NOT parabrahman, that Narayana ALONE is parabrahman and that Shiva is a devotee of Vishnu. So, we are not Shiva dveshis. Saying that he is a jiva does him no insult. After all, the likes of Valmiki, Vyasa and Narada are also jivas and are they not revered?

Secondly, we accept that all sects of what is known as Hinduism today need to unite against our common enemies. But that doesn’t mean we compromise on the truth. We will spare nothing to protect the truth of the Vedas that it is Sriya Pathi who is Parabrahman. But at the same time, we will definitely unite with Shaivas for social and political causes – and have done so in the past. For instance, just because we are Vaishnavas and oppose the concept of Shiva as parabrahman does not mean we don’t support a Government for India led by pro-Hindutva parties, even though a majority of them were ”all gods are the same” type of followers! And just because we say that Shaiva agamas and hence, Shiva temples are unvedic does not mean we will not help if a Shiva temple requires some monetary assistance, or if there is a transgression of Shaiva Agamas in Shiva temples by atheist pseudo-secular pro-Christian/Islam governments/groups. Notable vaishnava kings like Krishnadevaraya have donated generously to Shiva temples. From the standpoint of vaidika dhanam, it is our duty to help Shaivas and live in harmony.  But this also does not involve compromising our stand on the Vedic truths.

Even today, Sri Ramanuja’s tradition gives honor to any Madhva guru or a Shankaracharya if they visit our sri vaishnava temples and vice versa. The same goes for Shaivas and Shaktas. The difference is only philosophical, there is no personal or social or political animosity.

Lastly, those who call us close-minded have no claim because they say this without pramanas. There is a negative perception about monotheism because of the spread of certain Abrahamic religions like Islam. Let us clarify. Monotheism without a stand in the Vedas is rabid, intolerant and nonsensical. The monotheism of the Vedas is a fact, on the other hand, and allows us to co-exist with other sects, nAstika and Astika, with all quarrels restricted to philosophical speculation and not conversion by sword.  Also, those who say we are close-minded are themselves close-minded as they refuse to acknowledge our views as valid!

From a social and heritage standpoint, we also are proud of the great traditions of Shavism, Shaktam and even for that matter avaidika religions like Buddhism, Jainism, etc and acknowledge that these traditions are superior in intellect to foreign religions. But we are more prouder that the ultimate truth, ie, Vedanta,  which is synonymous with Vaishnavism, is the matham we have been blessed to be born in by Sri Lakshmi Narayana and Sri Ramanuja . Thus, this blog is aimed to show that this Vaishnava Vedanta is the crest-jewel that towers like the Himalaya above all the other traditions propagated by various personalities.

We hope this clarifies everything for some undoubtedly frustrated readers.

Important information about posting comments: We would like the readers to note following guidelines while posting comments. If you violate them, it is possible that the comment will be rejected and hence you may risk wasting your effort and time invested in writing the comment.

  1. All readers: All comments, criticisms, and appreciations are welcome, but do not post comments that are off-topic.
  2. All readers: No personal attacks against anyone. Please maintain decorum while commenting. However, you are free to say that the opinions,words, or statements are "foolish", "idiotic", etc.
  3. Vaishnavas, aspiring Vaishnavas, Vishnu devotees, and Hindus in general:
    1. Please do not treat this blog as a one-stop solution for your general queries about Vaishnavism. We will not entertain general queries that are unrelated to this blog's theme and/or individual articles.
    2. We will also not entertain requests to counter the arguments/attacks of non-Hindus, such as (but not limited to) the alleged condemnation of 'idol worship' in the Vedas or the alleged non-Hindu origin of Vegetarianism because Sri Rama ate meat, etc.
    3. Again, comments must be related to the articles/published comments and not off-topic.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the authors (Humble Bhagavata Bandhu and Aaryamaa) are based on their own careful reading of Vedic scriptures and the works of Vaishnava pUrvAchAryas. We do not claim that our work is flawless and welcome corrections, suggestions, and feedback from all. Reader comments should also be treated that way, unless the readers specifically identify themselves in a verifiable manner. We request readers not to judge AcAryas (preceptors) of any sampradAya based on reader comments.