[Advaita-l] On the word "nArAyaNa"

[Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian]

BTW, the most pathetic thing in this affair is trying to get appayya
diixitas support on this matter. While appayya wrote something as a
pariplaava (eulogy), these people are tying themselves into knots
intepreting it as a literal statement.These people think any bhakta of
Vishnu has to support their viira-vaiShNava doctrine. Look at the
bhakti list archives and see the wishful interpretations of works of
smaartas like appayya and tyaagaraaja. Devotees of vishNu can be
advaitins or dvaitins, neither of whom will touch the viira vaiShNava
doctrine with a ten foot pole. Time to accept that and move on,
instead of trying to find support for their doctrines from aachaaryas
of other schools.

Rama

On 6/12/06, Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian <rama.balasubramanian at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks. That was interesting. But in case anyone didn't understand the
> original motivation behind this it is as follows: narAyaNa is a proper
> noun so it refers to the particular God and cannot refer to any other
> God. But all other words can be interprted figuratively to mean
> vishhNu. This is against the smaarta theory ALL followers of sha.nkara
> belong to.