RE: What Parasara Advocates...Hari

[Guest guest]

Dear Hari,

 

If you read the Kathamrita and Leela Prasanga carefully as well as other texts, Thakur was ultimately merged in the omkara and pure Upanishadic philosophy. Kathamrta is nothing but a living Upanishad narrated in dialectical stories. Circumstantially he was hanging around a Kali temple. He dwelt in a very high plane; a plane beyond forms. But yes he worshipped Raghuvira and had a Rama murti with him constantly along with his priest's Narayan Shila and his Shiva Linga. And he said, all karma and all puja ends in Hari naam, Rama naam and omkara.

 

Best regards,

 

Sarbani

 

 

sohamsa [sohamsa ] On Behalf Of Jyotisa Shisya11 June 2006 20:48sohamsa Subject: Re: Re: What Parasara Advocates...

 

 

|om|Dear Narasimha, namaste

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For example, Sanjay keeps on writing about the 12th house, Pisces and aakaasa tattva link to argue that only Vishnu gives moksha. But what the 12th house, Pisces and aakaasa tattva links suggests is that any deity who gives moksha is of aakaasa tattva and is close to formlessness.

{Hari} I do not think that Sanjay is suggesting that only Vishnu gives moksha. What he is suggesting instead that worship of a Vishnu-form corresponding to the avatar leads you faster along the road to attainment of the jivanmukta stage. It is not that the worship stops with Vishnu but leads you on to the devata who liberates you. As an example, young Sri Ramakrishna used to worship Rama (Sun in 12th to karakamsa) but later on, he became known for his devotion to Kaali. It is thus worth examining how the worship of one form (again that word!) led to the worship of another and finally the transcending of that form to attain the stage of a jivanmukta. best regardsHari