[Advaita-l] manyu-sUktaM - as per dvaita siddhAnta

[Srinath Vedagarbha]

>On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Jaldhar H. Vyas via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:



>>On Tue, 10 Mar 2015, Anil Thakur via Advaita-l wrote:

>>It is very interesting to know that SrI NrIsimha is the adhiSTAna dEvata

>>for Manyu Suktam.



>He isn't and some random person saying it doesn't make it so. (I place
anyone outside smarta sampradaya as apramana for dharmic guidance.  Their
interpretations may or may not be interesting for other reasons but not for
this.)



I'm afraid it is not that easy to reject such views as 'apramANa' unless
you reject away whole bunch of pramANas as apramANa.



Others hold Brahman as sarvaShbda vAchya. All vaidIka and loukIka shabdas
denotes Parabrahman in their ultra-primary sense (parama-mukhyArtha). This
not held for nothing. Many pramANa-s are quoted. For example;



First of all, it is in the name itself. For the question of why vEdas are
'vEda', the pipplAda sruti itself quotes nEndriyANi nAnumAnaM vEdA
haivainam vEdayanti tasmAdAhuH 'vEdAH'. The commentary on this shruti goes
like this -- enaM paramAtmAnam.h  | tasmAt.h vedanakaraNatve samAne.api
asAdhAraNyena vyapadeshA bhavantIti nyAyAt.h
 vishishhTavastuvedanakaraNatvAdeva hi etAn.h vedA ityAhuH



(Although the quality of informing (about any subject) is common (between
Vedas and other texts), it is because this text (vEda-s) gives knowledge
about  "enaM" (Paramatma/Brahman Who is "Special" or "Most Important"),
that is why it is called `Veda'. This is also in tune with other usage
among astikas -- vEdayanti hi vEdaH



Thus, while above shruti establishes general framework about the mukhya
viShaya of all vEda shabda/vAkya/prakaraNa etc. has to be Parabrahman only,
elsewhere in many places in the whole spectrum of shAstra texts, there is
no shortage of specific direct quotes.



Let's see some samples ;



In vEda --



'yO dEvAnAm nAmadhA Eka Eva'  (note the emphasis here 'Eva' kaara)

 'Ekam sad viprA bahudhA vadanti',

'srijatO hi tE shrutayOanuvadanti'



In Upanishads --

'sarvE vEdA sarvE GhOSha Ekaiva vyArhutiH' (note the emphasis here 'Eva'
kaara)

'prANa Eva prANa Rcha itEva vidhyAt' ('Eva' kaara again here)

 'yadwai kiMchaitadadhyagISTa ... nAmaivaitat',

'sarvE vEdA yatpadamAmananti ......tadviShNOH paramam padam' (emphasis of
keyword "paramam")



In brahma sUtra --

'Om tattu samanvayAt Om'



In Bhagavata --

'mAm vdhattEabhidhattE ....'

'ityAsyA rudayam sAkshAt nAnyO madhwEda kacchana'

'vAsudEva parA vEdaH'   ('Eva' kaara again here)



In Harivamsha --

'vEdE rAmAyaNE chaiva purANE bhAratE tadhA , AdavantE cha madhE cha viShNuH
sarvatra gIyatE'



In Geeta --

'vEdEschha sarvErahamEva vEdyaH'  (Again 'Eva' kaara here)



In other purANa-s --

'vEdEShu sapurANEShu gIyatE puruShOttamaH'





Other member quoted shatapatha brAhmaNa identifying Manyu with Rudra. Here
too, quoted brAhmaNa vAkya will not be rendered apramANa if one does
samanvaya with other pramAna quoted elsewhere in Shruti  -- asya devasya
mILhuSo vayA viSNoreSasya prabhRthe havirbhiH vide hi ***rudro rudriyaM***
mahitvaM yAsiSTaM vartirashvinAvirAvat (Rig vEda 7.40.5) , which clearly
establishes the fact that Rudra's power is due to Vishnu (nArasiMha rUpI
Vishnu). This sentiment is generally  reflected in another Upansihad vAkya
-- AkAshAt patitam tOyaM yathA gachChati sAgaraM sarva dEva namaskAraH
kEshavaM pratigachChati.



It is Dvaita siddhAnta's stand that a purely conventional application
(rudyArtha) of all names would not be competent to achieve the true
significance of 'sarva-shabda-samanvaya' in Brahman as sUtrakAra demands.
This can be achieved only when applied words are charged with the deep
meaning supported by (or hidden elsewhere in) shAstra texts.  Knowledge so
generated from such application is exactly what is being termed as
"para-vidya".

 /SV