Shrimathe Ramanujaya Namaha

Dear Shri Balaji,

Krishna paramatma says he is VISHNU amongst adityas because, Vishnu
means, wide-strided(Vishnu rurukramaha). Sun's(aditya) rays are
pretty much all pervading. But even if we have all the suns together,
they are no much for Vishnu who is all pervading in in those places
where the sun rays cannot enter. Like OM NAMO NARAYANAYA, we have OM
NAMO VISHNAVE NAMAHA, and also OM NAMO BHAGAVATHE VASUDEVAYA. Vishnu
is not an anyadevata who derives power from OM. The supreme, i.e the
lord Shriman Narayanan manifests himself in FIVE forms that are PARA,
VYUHA, VIBHAVA, ANTHARYAMI and ARCHAI. Vishnu is one of these five
forms. Yoga means many things and has to be understood based on the
context. Yoga means "one's own effort / power" towards doing a thing.
When Krishna says he manifests his Vishwaroopam through yogam, it
means, with his infinitely uncomprehensible power he does it. It does
not mean the "yogic power" that we humans think and talk about. Every
kind of yoga leads a different result. And usually this result is
also called as yoga. Yoga also means union. There are so many
meanings that I may not know of.

> ramavatar is quite facinating because in that rama behaves like any
> other human being
a) When Rama took his Bow and charged towards the Ocean, the Ocean
king came out and bowed before him. If Rama were normal human being
why would this happen?
b) Rama sanctioned Moksham to Jadayu - if he acted as normal human
being he could not have done.
c) When he fired the brahmastram on the crow(jayanthan), no one from
all the 7 worlds could protect that crow and it came back and fell on
his feet. Is this a human act?
There are a lot more... What we might want to see is the difference
between Rama and Krishna Avatarams. In Rama avataram, the goal was
different and Rama did not want to show himself as paramatma all the
time and limited himself. Moreover Ravana had requested a boon from
brahma that he can't be killed by any devas or devatas. So, Rama had
to behave mostly like a human being in order to kill Ravana. In
krishna avataram, his goal was completely different. In fact he even
had his divya ayudhams the Shanka and Chakra pretty much all the
times.

Kindly pardon for my mistakes if any.

Yatheendra Pravanam Vandhe RAMYA Jamataram Munim

Adiyen Ramanuja Dasan,
Lakshmi Narasimhan
--- In bhakti-list (AT) yahoogroups (DOT) com, "balajiv_54" <balajiv_54@y...>
wrote:
> sir,
>
> i accept all the views expressed.iam also convinced that narayana
is
> the parabrahmam and the supreme god. but in that case there is no
> need for krishna, who is an avatar of vishnu to say that ' IAM
> VISHNU' AMONG ADITYAS. he could have said i am narayana. also he
says
> to arjuna that he is showing him the vishvaroopam because of his
> yogic power and not because he is an avatar of vishnu. in the same
> geeta krishna says the yoghis can see him in the real form.when he
> spoke to arjuna in geeta, krishna spoke as narayana the parabrahma
> and not as vishnu.there were many avatars of vishnu. in that
> ramavatar is quite facinating because in that rama behaves like any
> other human being.he did not behave like an avatar.he was an ideal
> and noble king who ruled the kingdom.if rama was narayana then
where
> is the requirement of he having to get the help of other devatas in
> his fight against ravana.
> by all this my point of arguement is narayana is the parabrahmam
and
> is represented by the 'ohm'. all other devatas including vishnu are
> anyadevatas who derive their power from ohm. that is why we call
> narayana as om namo narayana. no one calls vishnu as om vishnu.
>
> i dont know if iam right or wrong please parden me.
>
> balaji

friends,

iam grateful for such a large replies for the meaning. it is not easy
to answer this.i conclude with the following. many may not accept but
i am still to learn on this,pl forgive me.

As per our philosophies the letter ohm represents the basis of all
creations. It also denotes the jivatma in every human being. By
constantly reciting this an individual can realize the self and
thereby the parabrahmam which is the paramatma. This is the ultimiate
goal of all human being borne in this world because of various karmas
of previous births.

In bhagavad gita which is the bible for all hindu philosophies there
are many slokhas which clearely denote this parabrahmam. Firstly the
questions asked by arjuna and the answers given by Krishna need to be
looked at closely. In many slokhas the lord says he is
Vishnu,shankara,vyasa etc. If he were Vishnu himself and parabrahmam
then he would not have said that he is Vishnu. This all means the
teachings are from a third force which has to be parabrahmam. Or lord
Krishna said all this by his yogic power by which he showed arjuna
the vishvaroopa of parabrahmam. In gita Krishna speaks throughout as
god himself ie parabrahmam.

Also in Vishnu sahasranamam, which is part of mahabarata, bhishma
resites slokas to the question of yudhistar. In answer to the quiery
who is extolled as god, bhishma says-the god of all gods is narayana.


In that case when recited or meditated the pranavam leads to where?
It may lead to the formless eternally pure free and existence
absolute.since everything has its ground in Brahman, for the purpose
of meditation the sound AUM has come to be regarded as Brahman.

The omkhara sound is sustained by itself in a timeless continuum. It
is indicative of Brahman and Self.

AUM is the bow, the Atman the arrow and Brahman its target. It is to
be hit by a man who is self-collected; and then, as the arrow
(becomes one with the target), he will become one with Brahman.



when i was reading a book i came to know the meaning of pranavam.
it says the letter ohm does not represent any particular god,but it
represent parabrahmam.this does not have any form,eventhough we call
it as narayana and worship it.we have given the narayana, the vishnu
roopam ie with four arms,sanghu,chakra,gadha and lotus flower.that is
what i was trying to say.the parabrahmam actually is satchidananda
narayanan,who does not have any form.since it will be difficult for
common man to worship a deity with out any form we adopted the vishnu
swaroopam.the same way shiva devotees worship shivan and others.

in avudayar kovil(old thiruperundurai) the siva temple does not have
any idol,but just a peetam,for which all worship is
done.manikavachgar has sung songs in praise of this god which is sung
as thirupalliyezuchi on margazhi by all saiva devotees.

in kerala near ochira(near kollam) there is not even a temple,just a
open space for which all pujas are done. this is called ochira
parabrahmam.

to think of god with out form will require very high level of
devotion.but it is not impossible as many people have done it.

regards

balaji

Respected Sri Balaji,

You wrote,

"iam grateful for such a large replies for the meaning. it is not easy
> to answer this.I conclude with the following."


Unquote
----------

At first discussions groups such as this atr insufficient to conclude any
meanings of Pranavam;. Lists such as this are only useful in healthy
deliberations and not 'conclusions'.

You mentioned about Sri Bhagavat Gita.
After God revealed his virta purusha form, Arjuna addresses Lord
specifically as
" Vishnu'. Verse 24, chapter 11 and not as a formless God.


Further,. it is dangerous to understand struti vakyams and meanings in
Prastana thrayam in just reading books written by so called modern writers.
If you live in India, I would encourage you to go to a genuine acharya and
learn the inner meanings of Pranavam or teachings of Gita under his Lotus
feet. That is the reason the commentaries on these by later acharyas were
called as 'Rahasya grantas'


A careful and holistic approach to Struti vakyams and prastana thrayam (Sri
Gita, Upanishads and Brahma sutra) would reveal that Lord had forms and
also attributes. In fact formlessness is one of the attributes of Lord.

I am sure this reply is not sufficient in proving this. You may need to
refer to an acharya and learn from his lotus feet before reaching any
conclusion.

I do not mean to say that Struti vakyams 'never talks' about formlessness.
In fact many places in Struti and
Bhagavata Puranas, talks about 'nirvisesha Brahman'.

With reference to Visishta advaita of Ramanuja, the The whole prakriti,
sentient and insentient are parts of Lord (refer Druva Struti in Sri Vishnu
puranam and verbatim meanings in Bhagavat Gita verses in chapter 11 in
Viswaroopa Darshana yogam.)

Sri Sankra, contrary to popular theory that he believed in 'Formless' Lord,
was always been Great Vasinava and upasaka of a 'form' lord. If you refer to
his works and Sankara
Bhasyas, it is very clear that he was a great devotee of Lord.

Even hagiological accounts in his life such as threat to has life etc,
proves that he prayed to a Nrishmha who in turn saved him for danger.

Even acharyas who came in his disciplinic succession such as 'Narayana
bhaatathri or Vidyaranya who adored Vijaya Nagar empire, were great
Bhagavatas. A close analysis of Narayaneeyam would bring out miles of
information of Lord's Roopam.


With respects

Regards
KM Narayanan