Vaishnava_das108

Except for the tiny fact that there is no reference to Akshar. So pat goes your idea.

Sorry, your ideas are all incorrect and not based on sastra. It may be true that some avatars exhibit only certain kalas, but occasionally Krishna descends in His supreme form. The universe will not be destroyed. And there are countless universes being created, not just one. Maha-Vishnu is still exhaling.

I am a member of the Dvaita list. There is no ongoing debate about this there, In fact, nothing is being spoken there on this issue at this present moment. Speaking of which. Madhva swamis themselves acknowledge Gaudiyas as a branch of Tattvavada, albeit with differences in philosophy. Please refer to: http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=hinduism&Number=4112&page=&view=&sb=&o=&fpart=1&vc=1 I know you very well satyaraj. You are yourself always quoting Upanishads, and these are not part of the prasthana-traya either. Each sampradaya is perfectly bona fide in interpreting these verses according to their own philosophy. Certain Ramanujas interpret that verse as in indication of the avatar of Nammalvar. See what I mean?

Sory, those verses that you quoted from Chapter 10 are not indications that Krishna approves of demigod worship. That chapter is simply how Krishna shows Himself as the best of everything. If you take this as an indication that demigod worship is approved because Rudra is mentioned, then by the same standard you should worship sharks, become a gambler, beat people with rods, be silent, etc. Yet earlier in the same chapter, Krishna clearly states: Neither the hosts of demigods nor the great sages know My origin, for, in every respect, I am the source of the demigods and the sages. [10.2] And some great verses are here: Chapter 7, verse 20. Those whose minds are distorted by material desires surrender unto demigods and follow the particular rules and regulations of worship according to their own natures. Chapter 7, Verse 21. I am in everyone's heart as the Supersoul. As soon as one desires to worship the demigods, I make his faith steady so that he can devote himself to some particular deity. Chapter 7, Verse 22. Endowed with such a faith, he seeks favors of a particular demigod and obtains his desires. But in actuality these benefits are bestowed by Me alone. Chapter 7, Verse 23. Men of small intelligence worship the demigods, and their fruits are limited and temporary. Those who worship the demigods go to the planets of the demigods, but My devotees ultimately reach My supreme planet.

OK, next time you have a toothache then don't complain about the pain. You are spotless pure tranquil consciousness so don't let a small toothache disturb you, OK? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Well as far as I can see, several people here including myself are either quoting sastra or the commentary of Sri Guru to back up their points. On the contrary, you have been repeatedly asked to back up your points with sastric quotes but you have not done so. Also, you should realise that several people here including myself are ex-Advaitins, so it remains to be seen how 'pathetic' is the knowledge that we have gained and subsequently rejected. Reading more what? Which kind of books are you talking about? You haven't even given a sample title. So we should think about "light within light"? I thought light was one? How can there be a light within light? /images/graemlins/wink.gif Aside from that, how is a realisation of "light" personal? The very meaning of 'personalism' is to interact with a Person, or some sort of living being. Light is neither embodied nor is it a living thing, so will you kindly explain to me how I can have a personal relationship with light? How will I love it, stroke it, caress it, talk to it, etc? Will it love me in return? It is plainly obvious that a "realisation of light" the Brahman effulgence is an impersonal realisation. We don't even need sastra for this, it is just common sense. Have you even read the entire Vedanta-sutra text? Do you know how to explain each and every sutra clearly? How can you say it is impersonal or personal? I don't think you have even read the text. Have you, I am asking? Well see, this is the thing we feel about followers of Advaitic philosophy, we fear that they are being mislead. It works both ways. /images/graemlins/smile.gif The reason being is that Advaitic philosophy is not in consonance with the sastras. Neither you nor anybody else has proved it. You still have to explain why you regard a 'manifestation of light' as all-in-all when there are clear sastric verses that completely refute this idea and specifically state that the Bhagavan-realisation is the topmost. Can you disprove this? By the way, it was not 'Srila' who said any of this. Srila Prabhupada did talk a lot about this topic, but you should be interested to note that Krishna Himself discounted Advaita philosophy in Bhagavad-gita. Well, I didn't know what to reply to, because your entire post was full of unsubstantiated garble about 'Atman' and 'Light' or so many vague things that it was almost impossible to clearly understand any point that you were trying to make and yet keep it relevant to the general discussion. We know that we are atman (souls), nobody is denying that. We also know that as tiny atmans, we must serve the whole, jivera-svarupa haya krsnera nitya-dasa, the constitutional position of the soul is to be the eternal servant of Krsna. When we are serving Krsna perfectly, we will be possessed of a joyful heart and our faces will be radiant. But if we aspire to merge in the brahmajyoti effulgence (which is forbidden by Krishna) then we shall remain in that hellish state.

Well as far as I can see, several people here including myself are either quoting sastra or the commentary of Sri Guru to back up their points. On the contrary, you have been repeatedly asked to back up your points with sastric quotes but you have not done so. Also, you should realise that several people here including myself are ex-Advaitins, so it remains to be seen how 'pathetic' is the knowledge that we have gained and subsequently rejected. Reading more what? Which kind of books are you talking about? You haven't even given a sample title. So we should think about "light within light"? I thought light was one? How can there be a light within light? /images/graemlins/wink.gif Aside from that, how is a realisation of "light" personal? The very meaning of 'personalism' is to interact with a Person, or some sort of living being. Light is neither embodied nor is it a living thing, so will you kindly explain to me how I can have a personal relationship with light? How will I love it, stroke it, caress it, talk to it, etc? Will it love me in return? It is plainly obvious that a "realisation of light" the Brahman effulgence is an impersonal realisation. We don't even need sastra for this, it is just common sense. Have you even read the entire Vedanta-sutra text? Do you know how to explain each and every sutra clearly? How can you say it is impersonal or personal? I don't think you have even read the text. Have you, I am asking? Well see, this is the thing we feel about followers of Advaitic philosophy, we fear that they are being mislead. It works both ways. /images/graemlins/smile.gif The reason being is that Advaitic philosophy is not in consonance with the sastras. Neither you nor anybody else has proved it. You still have to explain why you regard a 'manifestation of light' as all-in-all when there are clear sastric verses that completely refute this idea and specifically state that the Bhagavan-realisation is the topmost. Can you disprove this? By the way, it was not 'Srila' who said any of this. Srila Prabhupada did talk a lot about this topic, but you should be interested to note that Krishna Himself discounted Advaita philosophy in Bhagavad-gita. Well, I didn't know what to reply to, because your entire post was full of unsubstantiated garble about 'Atman' and 'Light' or so many vague things that it was almost impossible to clearly understand any point that you were trying to make and yet keep it relevant to the general discussion. We know that we are atman (souls), nobody is denying that. We also know that as tiny atmans, we must serve the whole, jivera-svarupa haya krsnera nitya-dasa, the constitutional position of the soul is to be the eternal servant of Krsna. When we are serving Krsna perfectly, we will be possessed of a joyful heart and our faces will be radiant. But if we aspire to merge in the brahmajyoti effulgence (which is forbidden by Krishna) then we shall remain in that hellish state.

What a lovely experience, Paul. You were so fortunate to see Krishna and experience all those things, prema etc. I pray one day He might show mercy on this silly sinful soul.

What a lovely experience, Paul. You were so fortunate to see Krishna and experience all those things, prema etc. I pray one day He might show mercy on this silly sinful soul.

Thank you for all of this evidence apparently from Sikh scriptures. I will have to check them out and do research. You have given me a good starting point, thank you again.

Wow that was a very nice dream too! It is so amazing how charming Srila Prabhupada is. I have read some quotes in which he said that dreams with the spiritual master in them are bona fide, but I do not have a reference for this. And isn't it interesting that you had this dream when you were 6 years old and your name is Narayani? The real Narayani devi (mother of Srila Vrindavan das Thakur) was 6 years old when she first saw Lord Caitanya and ate the remnants of His meals! What a coincidence! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Let me offer my respectful obeisances to Lord Caitanyacandra, whose face is as splendid as millions of moons and whose smile is as charming as moonlight. He is like a moon that has just risen from the ocean of the bliss of pure love for Lord Krsna. [sCC 2.8] 13 May Lord Caitanya, whose shoulders are like a lion's, whose smiling cheeks are the sweetest of all sweet things, whose body displays various wonderful symptoms of ecstatic love of Krsna, whose features are as splendid as the whorl of a blossoming golden lotus flower, and who is Sri Radha and Krsna joined in a single form, protect you all. 14 When He saw new rainclouds He was reminded of Lord Krsna, and became like a madman with love for Him. When He saw a peacock feather He became agitated, and when he saw a gunja bracelet He trembled. When He saw a dark-complexioned boy He thought He had just seen Lord Krsna, and He became filled with fear and wonder. In this way golden Lord Hari preached the glories of pure devotional love for Himself. 15 Creating great tidal waves in the ocean of mercy, splendidly dressed in wonderful saffron garments as glorious as the sunrise, and glowing with the nectar of pure love of Krsna, may the wonderful and handsome moon of Lord Caitanya, which has risen from the milk ocean of Saci's womb, enter the sky of your heart. 16 Chanting the Hare Krsna maha-mantra, His own holy names which bring auspiciousness to the world, His hand trembling with love as He touches the knotted string about His waist to count the number of names, His face bathed in tears as He comes and goes, eager to see His own form of Lord Jagannatha, and bringing great delight to the eyes of all, may the golden form of Lord Hari protect you all. 17 Uprooting the dense darkness in the hearts of the entire world, making the nectar ocean of the bliss of pure love of Krsna overflow its shores without limit, and cooling this universe tormented by the threefold miseries, may the splendid moonlight of the moon of Lord Caitanyacandra eternally shine within your hearts. [sCC 3.13-17] Even once seeing Lord Gaura's handsome face, which is overcome with feelings of love of Krsna, and which has blossoming lotus eyes filled with a great flood of tears, a person becomes maddened with newer and newer feelings of devotional love. He never abandons the ocean of sweetness that is Lord Gaura's feet. [sCC 4.21] I pray that the splendid moonlight of Lord Caitanyacandra, which violently uproots the darkness in the hearts of the entire world, which brings limitless tidal waves to the nectar ocean of the bliss of pure love of Krsna, and which brings coolness to the universe burning day and night in the threefold miseries of material existence, may shine in our hearts. [sCC 7.21] He does not consider whether a person is qualified or not. He does not see who is His own and who is an outsider. He does not consider who should receive and who not. He does not consider whether it is the proper time. The Lord at once gives that nectar of pure devotional service that is difficult to attain even by hearing the message of the Lord, seeing the Deity, offering obeisances, meditating, or following a host of spiritual practices. That Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Gaurahari, is my only shelter. [sCC 7.77] I have not learned from many saintly spiritual masters, and I have not carefully studied the scriptures with many learned scholars. Although I speak like a child, I pray that Lord Gaurahari will still be pleased with me. [sCC 12.143]

http://members.tripod.com/~gauranga1/free-books/caitanya_candramrta_prabhodananda.zip

aaraadhyo bhagavaan vrajesha-tanayas tad-dhaama vR^indaavana.m ramyaa kaachid upaasanaa vraja-vadhuu-vargeNa yaa kalpitaa | shriimad bhaagavata.m puraaNa.m amala.m prema-pum-artho mahaan shrii chaitanya mahaaprabhor matam ida.m tatraadaro naH paraH || "Our worshipable Personality of Godhead is Vrajendra-nandana, the son of Nanda Mahaaraaja. Vrindaavana is His abode. The path conceived of by the gopiis is the topmost method of worship. Shriimad Bhaagavatam is the spotless Puraana. Love of Godhead is the superlative human achievement. This is the view of Shrii Chaitanya Mahaaprabhu, for which we have the highest respect and love." (Chaitanya-mata-manjusha 1.1.1 of Shriinaatha Chakravarti Prabhu)

Savarana-sri-gaura-.-padme A Prayer to the Lotus Feet of Sri Gauranga (from Prarthana) 1 sri-krsna-caitanya prabhu doya koro more toma bina ke doyalu jagat-samsare 2 patita-pavana-hetu tava avatara mo sama patita prabhu na paibe ara 3 ha ha prabhu nityananda, premananda sukhi krpabalokana koro ami boro duhkhi 4 doya koro sita-pati adwaita gosai tava Krpa-bale pai caitanya-nitai 5 ha ha swarup, sanatana, rupa, raghunatha bhatta-juga, sri-jiva ha prabhu lokanatha 6 doya koro sri-acarya prabhu srinivasa ramacandra-sanga mage narottama-dasa PURPORT by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada This is a song composed by Narottama Dasa Thakura. He prays to Lord Caitanya "My dear Lord, please be merciful to me, because who can be more merciful than Your Lordship within these three worlds?" Actually, this is a fact. Not only Narottama Dasa Thakura but Rupa Gosvami also prayed to Lord Caitanya in this way. At the time of the first meeting of Lord Caitanya and Rupa Gosvami at Prayaga (Allahabad), Srila Rupa Gosvami said, "My dear Lord, You are the most munificent of all incarnations, because You are distributing love of Krsna, Krsna consciousness." When Krsna was personally present He simply asked us to surrender, but He did not distribute Himself so easily. He made con- ditions--"First of all you surrender." But this incarnation, Lord Caitanya, although Krsna Himself, makes no such condition. He simply distributes: "Take love of Krsna.'' Therefore Lord Caytanya is approved as the most munificent incarnation. Narottama Dasa Thakura says, "Please be merciful to me. You are so magnanimous, because You have seen the fallen souls of this age, and You are very much compassionate to them, but You should know also that I am the most fallen. No one is more greatly fallen than me." Patita-pavana-hetu tava avatara. "Your incarnation is just to reclaim the conditioned, fallen souls, but I assure You that You will not find a greater fallen soul than me. Therefore, my claim is first.'' Then he prays to Lord Nityananda. He says, ha ha prabhu, nityananda premananda-sukhi: "My dear Lord Nityananda, You are always joyful in spiritual bliss. Since You always appear very happy, I have come to You because I am most unhappy. If You kindly put Your glance over me, I may also become happy." Then he prays to Advaita Prabhu. Doya koro sita-pati adwaita gosai. Advaita Prabhu's wife's name was Sita. Therefore He is sometimes addressed as sita- pati. Thus Narottama Dasa Thakura prays, "My dear Advaita Prabhu, husband of Sita, You are so kind. Please be kind to me. If You are kind to me, naturally Lord Caitanya and Nityananda will also be kind to me." Actually, Advaita Prabhu invited Lord Caitanya to come down. When Advaita Prabhu saw that the fallen souls were all engaged simply in sense gratificatory processes, not understanding Krsna consciousness, He felt very much compassionate toward the fallen souls, and He also felt Himself incapable of claiming them all. He therefore prayed to Lord Krsna, "Please come Yourself. Without Your personal presence it is not possible to deliver these fallen souls." Thus by His invitation Lord Caitanya appeared. Naturally, Narottama Dasa Thakura prays to Advaita Prabhu, '~If You will be kind to me, naturally Lord Caitanya and Nityananda also will be kind to me." Then he prays to the Gosvamis. Ha ha swarup, sanatana, rupa, raghunatha. Swarup refers to Svarupa Damodara, the personal secretary of Lord Caitanya. He was always with Caitanya Mahaprabhu and immediately arranged for whatever Caitanya Mahaprabhu wanted. Two personal attendants, Svarupa Damodara and Govinda, were always constantly with Lord Caitanya. Therefore, Narottama Dasa Thakura also prays to Svarupa Damodara and then to the six Gosvamis, the next disciples of Lord Caitanya--Sri Rupa Gosvami, Sri Sanatana Gosvami, Sri Bhatta Raghunatha Gosvami, Sri Gopala Bhatta Gosvami, Sri Jiva Gosvami, and Sri Raghunatha Dasa Gosvami. These six Gosvamis were directly instructed by Lord Caitanya to spread this movement of Krsna consciousness. Narottama Dasa Thakura also prays for their mercy. After the six Gosvamis, the next acarya was Srinivasa Acarya. Actually, Narottama Dasa Thakura was in the disciplic succession after Srinivasa Acarya and was almost his contemporary, and Narottama Dasa's personal friend was Ramacandra Cakravarti. Therefore he prays, "I always desire the company of Ramacandra." He desires a devotee's company. The whole process is that we should always pray for the mercy of the superior acaryas and keep company with pure devotees. Then it will be easier for us to advance in Krsna consciousness and receive the mercy of Lord Caitanya and Lord Krsna. This is the sum and substance of this song sung by Narottama Dasa Thakura.

Who was Sai?

I note that you end your post with "Jai Shree Krishna." This is most appreciable. Well, Krishna Himself states that worshippers of demigods/goddesses have got it wrong, and he says this in the Bhagavad-gita, which is surely above Vedic literature being spoken by the Lord Himself? Else, how would you explain Krishna's statements against demigod worship?

What does this prove?

What does this prove?

[Crossposted from Dvaita List] nR^isimho.akhilA~jnAnamatadhvAntadivAkaraH | jayatyamitasajj~nAnasukhashaktipayonidhiH || shrI laxmIhayagrIvAya namaH shrImadAnandatIrthabhagavatpAdAchArya gurubhyo namaH shrI jayatIrthagurubhyo namaH shrI vyAsatIrthagurubhyo namaH shrI vijayIndratIrthagurubhyo namaH Vishnu-sarvottamatva is one of the primary tenets of our philosophy. It is well known that our doctrine came to be attacked by other schools, around the time of Sri Vadiraja tirtha, Sri Vijayindra tirtha. Dr.BNK Sharma writes highly of Sri Vijayindra tirtha's efforts in repelling those criticisms. Sri Vijayindra is said to have written 104 works, of which very few are available. His scholarship and the importance of such works can be estimated by the fact that the Raghavendra Vijaya enjoins that only he, who has studied all works of Sri Vijayindra, be considered a paNDita. I am going to briefly present here, Sri Vijayindra's replies to certain charges on 'Vishnu sarvottamatva'. The standard disclaimer about my lack of complete understanding applies with full force. What follows is only a pointer and should not be taken as representative of the original. These replies are contained in a book called 'nyAyamauktikamAlA'; the section called 'shaiva-sarvasva-khaNDanaM'. This section was published in 1983 along with 'sarva-siddhAnta-sAra-asAra-vivechanaM' by 'Brindavanam Office, Mantralayam'. A Kannada translation by Dr.Parthasarathy R Panchamukhi is also available. The book starts with mentioning 11 anecdotes from the purANAs and general mythology (i.e., general impression, unsupported by Puranas) that contradict the idea of Vishnu sarvottamatva. There will be a series of postings covering all the eleven. Hereby are presented 2 anecdotes (the book does not have them in the same order). Q1. In a competition between Brahma and Vishnu, they take the forms of hamsa and varAha respectively, to find out the tip and bottom of the shiva linga; Vishnu's not finding it out is an indication of Shiva's supremacy. Q2. Vishnu seeks Shiva's blessings to slay the demon, 'jalandhara'. With that purpose, he worships Shiva with thousand lotus petals every day. One day Shiva, to test Vishnu, hides a petal. To make up for that, Vishnu takes out an eye of his. Pleased with that, Shiva grants him the sudarshana chakra. This also explains the reason for Vishnu's name being 'puNDarIkAksha'. [Ambhrani sukta and other R^iks establish Vishnu's supremacy over everybody else; with that perspective these purANic anecdotes can be rejected as a 'mohanArthaka'. With that idea, Sri Vijayindra considers them and says] A1. That is false. That anecdote can be disregarded because it contradicts Vishnu's sarvottamatva, which is known from sAttvika purANas. In any case, this anecdote appears in kUrma and linga purANas. That these two are tAmasic is well known. It is also that it is contradicted by scriptures such as, 'uddhR^itAsi varAheNa kR^iShNena shatabAhunA' , 'Apo vA idamagre salilamAsIt.h tasminprajApatirvAyurbhUtvA imAM apashyat.h'. The first one refers to the support of the entire life, i.e., earth or prakR^iti as being lifted by Vishnu. It cannot be said that whatever was lifted by Vishnu is not the liN^ga; for, there is no pramANa that the shivalinga is aprAkrita (not made of prakriti elements), or that there is no limit to the shivaliN^ga. It cannot be objected that there might be limits to the shivalinga's dimensions, but Vishnu is not aware of it. Such a contention will contradict (in addition to the second pramANa quoted above) Vishnu's unparalled omniscience and powers established in this shruti: vichitrashaktiH puruShaH purANo na chAnyeShAM shaktyastAdR^ishAssyuH'. A2. That Vishnu obtained sudarshana chakra from Shiva is contradicted by the shruti: charaNaM pavitraM (See P.S), that talks of Vishnu possessing the sudarshana always (charaNaM pavitraM vitataM _purANaM_). Even the idea of Vishnu getting the appellation of 'puNDarIkAxa' is contradicted by the Chandogya statement: tasya yathA kapyAsaM puNDarIkamevAxiNI tasyoditi nAma sa eva sarvebhyaH pApmabhya uditaH. Here, it is only the form of Lord (bhagavadvigraha) that is considered 'aprAkrita' and it being beginningless and endless is mentioned. Due to these contradictions, the purANa statements can be rejected. Such anti-vedic ideas, generally found in tAmasic purANas, are also found in sAttvika purANas like varAha purANa, pUrva-khaNDa. In case of purANAs like the padmapurANa, there are three parts: sAttvika, rAjasa and tAmasa. Likewise, here too, it must be understood that the pUrva-khaNDa of varAhapurANa is tAmasic and therefore, not to be taken seriously. P.S: This is from Mahanarayana Upanishad. I was quite perplexed that the word 'charaNaM' denotes 'sudarshana'. Answer was in Sri Dhirendra tirtha's commentary on the Mahanarayana Upanishad. Under the pertinent verse of Mahanarayana Upanishad, he writes: snAnAntaraM mudrAdhAraNamAha | charaNaM iti | yatpavitraM pAvitryakAri vitataM bhakteShu dhAraNAdinA vyAptaM purANaM purAtanaM yachcharaNaM chakraM pavitram.h | 'charaNaM chakraM rathanemiH sudarshanaM cheti paryAyavAchakA hyete chakrasya paramAtmanaH' iti vedanighaNTau | Thus, he quotes the Vedanighantu to support the meaning of charaNaM as chakraM. There is a sub-commentary by Satara Raghavendracharya. He quotes padma purANa, uttara-khaNDa and writes 'charaNaM pApabhakshakaM pApanAshakaM pavitraM chakram.h | padmottarakhaNDe tathokteH |

[Crossposted from Dvaita List] nR^isimho.akhilA~jnAnamatadhvAntadivAkaraH | jayatyamitasajj~nAnasukhashaktipayonidhiH || shrI laxmIhayagrIvAya namaH shrImadAnandatIrthabhagavatpAdAchArya gurubhyo namaH shrI jayatIrthagurubhyo namaH shrI vyAsatIrthagurubhyo namaH shrI vijayIndratIrthagurubhyo namaH Vishnu-sarvottamatva is one of the primary tenets of our philosophy. It is well known that our doctrine came to be attacked by other schools, around the time of Sri Vadiraja tirtha, Sri Vijayindra tirtha. Dr.BNK Sharma writes highly of Sri Vijayindra tirtha's efforts in repelling those criticisms. Sri Vijayindra is said to have written 104 works, of which very few are available. His scholarship and the importance of such works can be estimated by the fact that the Raghavendra Vijaya enjoins that only he, who has studied all works of Sri Vijayindra, be considered a paNDita. I am going to briefly present here, Sri Vijayindra's replies to certain charges on 'Vishnu sarvottamatva'. The standard disclaimer about my lack of complete understanding applies with full force. What follows is only a pointer and should not be taken as representative of the original. These replies are contained in a book called 'nyAyamauktikamAlA'; the section called 'shaiva-sarvasva-khaNDanaM'. This section was published in 1983 along with 'sarva-siddhAnta-sAra-asAra-vivechanaM' by 'Brindavanam Office, Mantralayam'. A Kannada translation by Dr.Parthasarathy R Panchamukhi is also available. The book starts with mentioning 11 anecdotes from the purANAs and general mythology (i.e., general impression, unsupported by Puranas) that contradict the idea of Vishnu sarvottamatva. There will be a series of postings covering all the eleven. Hereby are presented 2 anecdotes (the book does not have them in the same order). Q1. In a competition between Brahma and Vishnu, they take the forms of hamsa and varAha respectively, to find out the tip and bottom of the shiva linga; Vishnu's not finding it out is an indication of Shiva's supremacy. Q2. Vishnu seeks Shiva's blessings to slay the demon, 'jalandhara'. With that purpose, he worships Shiva with thousand lotus petals every day. One day Shiva, to test Vishnu, hides a petal. To make up for that, Vishnu takes out an eye of his. Pleased with that, Shiva grants him the sudarshana chakra. This also explains the reason for Vishnu's name being 'puNDarIkAksha'. [Ambhrani sukta and other R^iks establish Vishnu's supremacy over everybody else; with that perspective these purANic anecdotes can be rejected as a 'mohanArthaka'. With that idea, Sri Vijayindra considers them and says] A1. That is false. That anecdote can be disregarded because it contradicts Vishnu's sarvottamatva, which is known from sAttvika purANas. In any case, this anecdote appears in kUrma and linga purANas. That these two are tAmasic is well known. It is also that it is contradicted by scriptures such as, 'uddhR^itAsi varAheNa kR^iShNena shatabAhunA' , 'Apo vA idamagre salilamAsIt.h tasminprajApatirvAyurbhUtvA imAM apashyat.h'. The first one refers to the support of the entire life, i.e., earth or prakR^iti as being lifted by Vishnu. It cannot be said that whatever was lifted by Vishnu is not the liN^ga; for, there is no pramANa that the shivalinga is aprAkrita (not made of prakriti elements), or that there is no limit to the shivaliN^ga. It cannot be objected that there might be limits to the shivalinga's dimensions, but Vishnu is not aware of it. Such a contention will contradict (in addition to the second pramANa quoted above) Vishnu's unparalled omniscience and powers established in this shruti: vichitrashaktiH puruShaH purANo na chAnyeShAM shaktyastAdR^ishAssyuH'. A2. That Vishnu obtained sudarshana chakra from Shiva is contradicted by the shruti: charaNaM pavitraM (See P.S), that talks of Vishnu possessing the sudarshana always (charaNaM pavitraM vitataM _purANaM_). Even the idea of Vishnu getting the appellation of 'puNDarIkAxa' is contradicted by the Chandogya statement: tasya yathA kapyAsaM puNDarIkamevAxiNI tasyoditi nAma sa eva sarvebhyaH pApmabhya uditaH. Here, it is only the form of Lord (bhagavadvigraha) that is considered 'aprAkrita' and it being beginningless and endless is mentioned. Due to these contradictions, the purANa statements can be rejected. Such anti-vedic ideas, generally found in tAmasic purANas, are also found in sAttvika purANas like varAha purANa, pUrva-khaNDa. In case of purANAs like the padmapurANa, there are three parts: sAttvika, rAjasa and tAmasa. Likewise, here too, it must be understood that the pUrva-khaNDa of varAhapurANa is tAmasic and therefore, not to be taken seriously. P.S: This is from Mahanarayana Upanishad. I was quite perplexed that the word 'charaNaM' denotes 'sudarshana'. Answer was in Sri Dhirendra tirtha's commentary on the Mahanarayana Upanishad. Under the pertinent verse of Mahanarayana Upanishad, he writes: snAnAntaraM mudrAdhAraNamAha | charaNaM iti | yatpavitraM pAvitryakAri vitataM bhakteShu dhAraNAdinA vyAptaM purANaM purAtanaM yachcharaNaM chakraM pavitram.h | 'charaNaM chakraM rathanemiH sudarshanaM cheti paryAyavAchakA hyete chakrasya paramAtmanaH' iti vedanighaNTau | Thus, he quotes the Vedanighantu to support the meaning of charaNaM as chakraM. There is a sub-commentary by Satara Raghavendracharya. He quotes padma purANa, uttara-khaNDa and writes 'charaNaM pApabhakshakaM pApanAshakaM pavitraM chakram.h | padmottarakhaNDe tathokteH |

Either you are jijaji or satyaraj. In any case, I have no wish to reply to your questions for two reasons: 1 - They have been answered elsewhere and are gone-cases. 2 - You are just here to cause conflict and not at all interested in a discussion.

Either you are jijaji or satyaraj. In any case, I have no wish to reply to your questions for two reasons: 1 - They have been answered elsewhere and are gone-cases. 2 - You are just here to cause conflict and not at all interested in a discussion.

I never said that it contradicted Advaita. I said that it contradicts your opinion. You said that individual souls are nto eternal, while Krishna says that they are. I am more inclined to believe Krishna for some reason. /images/graemlins/wink.gif I'd honestly say quite a lot, since I was myself an Advaitin for a very long time. So are you saying that there IS a complete provisiion for personalism in Advaita? Why not? You are doing exactly that, so why are you getting upset if I wish to join you? Surely you must share? /images/graemlins/wink.gif Joking aside, everything I have said previously is from sastra, namely Srimad Bhagavatam. So where did you get the idea that I am talking from my imagination? Yes this is what you have been repeating several times. You have only this to offer instead of trying to make a rebuttal or refutation of my points. Why?