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

[Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan]

Actually you can reject it easily and Jaldhar did just that. This is not to
say that there may be some value here and there. But one has to be at an
aacharya level to cull the good parts. For most people it is not a feasible
solution.  It's a waste ofvtime. What next? Accept tattvamasi = atattvamasi?

Rama
On Mar 11, 2015 11:42 AM, "Srinath Vedagarbha via Advaita-l" <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> >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
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>