mahakala

Your above explanation is based on Gaudiya Siddhanta who have their own authoritative scriptures, which are not accepted by Hindus.

You are entitled t o your opinion. FYI , Mahadevan is one of the world's foremost experts on the Indus script, who is more authoritative on this subject than you. This is what he says

You dont follow the discussion do you ? My point - where is the scriptural evidence to prove Sri Vaishnavas worship the opulent Personality of Lord Narayana ? No sri vaishnava Jeeyars or scholars have questioned the authenticity of Swami Narayan'a alliance to Sri Sampradayam. So whats your problem ? Before one takes on the task to critic Swami Narayan sampradaya, first one should examine one's own sampradayam's authenticity. That is - how strictly it follows the siddhanta expounded by its purva acharyas. hari om tat sat YRD

. Thats a LIE /images/graemlins/grin.gif hari om tat sat YRD

Are you threathening me ? My first post was not directed to him but he chose to answer hence I hold him responsible for his comments. The onus is on him to response to my genuine queries and you dont be his spokes person I have mention earlier my authority is based on visistadvaita. Now you go and check the visistadvaita explanation. hari om tat sat YRD

You have confirmed your position, thanks I will question your signature if it misrepresents the TRUTH hari om tat sat YRD

I dismiss your comment as mayavadi speculation I asked for the precise references - and now you are posing it back to me Why did you bring IT up in the first place, when it has no relevance to this thread ? hari om tat sat YRD

"Lokesa Visnu ENTERED the virat-rupa. That would obviously imply Him being separate from it, at least in the sense of origin" I am asking for a authoritative commentary on the position of the virat rupa's position, not your speculation. In case you want to know - I follow visistadvaita "Varnashrama - the difference between "Aryan" and "barbarian" Who are the barbarians you are referring to and where is this definition of varna and shrama stated in the scriptures ? hari om tat sat YRD

" Yes the form of the lord as the virat rupa is not eternal. Also yes loka-isa is of the material world, not the spirtual world " ______ Are you a mayavadi ? Quote me the authoritative pramana to support your claim - virat rupa is not eternal ? Thanks Hari Om Tat Sat YRD

gHari asked "If not authorative, then what are they?" I am not here to educate you, on the valid pramanas of the vedanta system. Hari Om Tat Sat YRD

gHari 1) Only the gaudiyas and some other minor sects accept Puranas as authoritative. 2) Lord Shiva's response should be read in context to Parvathy's query paarvaty uvaacha kenopaayena laghunaa vishhNor naama sahasrakam paThyate panDitair nityam shrotum-ichchhaam-yaham prabho Parvati said : Pray spell out the easy method by which the thousand names of Lord Vishnu could be deemed to have been recited by learned persons daily. I wish to be enlightened by you My Lord. ishvara uvaacha shriiraama raama raameti rame raame manorame sahasra naama tattulyam raamanaama varaanane Isvara said : Here you are, Sri Rama's name, being the delightful source of mental exhilaration, I take great delight in reciting it repeatedly, any length of time. Rama's name is indeed on par with the thousand names of Lord Vishnu spelt out in this Hymnal, O my blessed lady. Hari Om Tat Sat