[Advaita-l] [advaitin] rAma-krishna-shiva-durga etc. are not same in shAstric vyavahAra!!!

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste Venkat Ji,

I was thinking of, say, ** To attain Swarga Loka . one needs to perform
Jyotishtoma **. Now Jyotishtoma needs to be performed only with the
prescribed devatAs. No other alternate devatAs can be invoked. Also, for
some specific results like attainment of swarga loka etc, only limited
options are prescribed in respect of devatAs capable of leading to such
results. Not all devatAs have such capabilities. Hence my earlier
conclusion.

It is not that there are only one unique way to attain a particular result,
say wealth. There could be alternate ways. But still in each prescribed
way, the particular devatA needs to be invoked. Any devatA is not
permitted. That is what I meant by saying tAratamyatA is admitted amongst
the devatAs.

Regards

On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 4:40 PM Venkatraghavan S <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:

> Namaste Chandramouliji,
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 10:52 AM H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Namaste Venkat Ji,
>>
>> Reg  <<  The tAratamyatA (gradation) of the phala (result) is not because
>> of the tAratamyatA of the upAsya devatA but because of the tAratamyatA of
>> the sankalpa and sAdhana >>,
>>
>> In the prescribed  sankalpa and sAdhanAs  for different pUjAvidhAnAs,
>> the upAsya devatA  is also prescribed. Is it not ?  Hence the tAratamyatA
>> of the upAsya devatA is also covered.
>>
>> How so? I know you know this, but for the sake of clarity, tAratamyatA =
> gradation.
>
> Suppose we perform a gAyatrI japa for the attainment of wealth. Suppose
> also that we perform another gAyatrI japa for chittashuddhi. The upAsya
> devatA is the same, the karma is the same, but the desired result is
> different.
>
> How then can we say that the results being superior or inferior implies
> that the object of worship is superior or inferior, when as I have shown in
> the previous email, the cause of the superiority or inferiority of the
> results can be for factors other than the superiority or inferiority of the
> object of worship.
>
> To prove the presence of A by the presence of B, one will have to
> necessarily demonstrate that B cannot be present unless A was present.
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "advaitin" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to advaitin+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAL34aEmr8p%3D2_cBp%3DncEBxTp%2Bh%3DgV8KnPyDzYLQVBHQ_JYnCNw%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/advaitin/CAL34aEmr8p%3D2_cBp%3DncEBxTp%2Bh%3DgV8KnPyDzYLQVBHQ_JYnCNw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>