You are here: SriPedia - Ramanuja - Archives - Nov 2003

Ramanuja List Archive: Message 00000 Nov 2003

 
Nov 2003 Indexes ( Date | Thread | Author )
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


Dear Sri Kasturi Rangan

Thanks for the information on Purusha suktam. I was also going through 
thetranslation of Vishnu suktam of Rigveda. I am giving below these two 
mantras(verses) and respective meaning.

Rigveda (1.22)
____________________________________________
idam vişhņur vichakrame tredhā nidadhe padam 
samūļham asya pāmsure ||17||

Meaning:
Through this Vishnu strode; thrice he

placed his foot, and the whole world

lay in the dust of his feet.
____________________________________________
trīnÙi padā vichakrame vişhņur gopā adābhyaĥ 
ato dharmāņi dhārayan ||18|| 

Three steps he made, Vishnu the Guardian

undeceivable; from there

upholding the eternal Laws.
____________________________________________

I have taken this translation from "SAKSIVC" website www.vedah.com.


Well, if we go by this translation, I don't think we will have any doubt 
regarding Vishnu paratvam. However, I am not sure if translation by others 
differ from this or not.

Can you please comment on this.

Regards
Adiyen Mohan Ramanujadasan





On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 amshuman_k wrote :
>Dear Shri Mohan & Shri Lakshmi Narasimhan,
> Just a correction - Purusha sUktam appears in shaunakIya atharvaNa
>vedam too with minor modifications from Rg reading. It still doesn't
>contain uttara anuvAkam appearing in taittriya Aranyakam. It is from
>the uttara anuvAkam of taittriya Aranyakam we find that purusha of
>Rig Veda being identified with Vishnu/Narayana. Till them Purusha was
>supposed to be "primeval" or "cosmic" man. Shathapatha brAhmaNa
>features somebody called "purusha nArAyaNa", implying the completed
>identification of Rig Vedic purusha with nArAyaNa. Though shri Mohan
>doesn't agree with the conclusion that the pUrva anuvAkam, almost
>same as Rig vedic reading, is of 'earlier date' and 'uttara anuvAkam'
>(new material) is of 'later date', I generally agree with this
>observation. This is a separate discussion though.
>
>Identity of "Virat Purusha" with "vyUha vAsudeva" is pAncharAtric
>interpretation of the rig vedic sUkta {vaguely recall that it is from
>brahma samhita. Learned scholars can clarify}. Though this in itself
>is not for or against the validity of pAncharAtra, we have to keep in
>mind regarding to what is interpretation and what is original.
>
>Regards,
>Kasturi Rangan .K
>
>--- In ramanuja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Mohan Ramanujan"
><mohan_ramanujan@xxxx> wrote:
> > Dear Sri Lakshmi Narasimhan,
> >
> > While my line of thinking regarding Supremacy of Narayana is same
>as that of yours, I have a small clarification/doubt regarding
>Purusha Suktam.
> >
> >
> > It is true that Purusha Suktam appears in Rig,Yajur & Sama vedas.
>However, I have noticed a difference between Rigvedic version and
>Yajurvedic version.(I have not read sama vedic version, so I don't
>know about it)
> > Differences:
> > 1)There are only 16 verses in Rigvedic version whereas in
>Yajurvedic version, there are 22 verses or so.
> > 2) The verses that refer to Hree & Lakshmi is absent in Rigvedic
>version whereas it is present in Yajurvedic version.
> >
> > I believe, there must be some reasons for this difference. (I have
>heard in one of the debate that Rigvedic version is original & old
>and the additional verses in Yajurveda was addedd later on.---> Well
>I don't really believe this).
> >
> > May I request you & others in the group to throw some light on this.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Adiyen
> > Mohan Ramanujadasan
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 Lakshmi Narasimhan wrote :
> > >Dear Kasturi Rangan,
> > >Kindly forgive me for pursuing this thread and please feel free to
> > >correct me if I am wrong. I've heard that Purusha Suktham is in all
> > >the 3 (rik, yajur and sama) vedas. It talks about the manifestation
> > >of the Leela Vibhuthi - Material World(starting from 'braahmanosya
> > >mukham aaseeth') from a being called Virata Purushan('tasmaat
>viraat
> > >ajaayatha'). It is stated that the devas performed an yagya called
> > >sarva aahuthi('tasmaat yagyaath sarvahutha:') upon which the Virata
> > >Purusha was satisfied and he came before them and initiated the
>leela
> > >vibhuti manifestation. It is also stated that the whole universe
> > >(Leela Vibhuti) thus came into existence from his 'Naval'('Naabhya
> > >aaseeth anthariksham').
> > >Now, a) who is this Virata Purushan? b) Why weren't the other
>deities
> > >not able to manifest the leela vibhuthi the way this Virata
>Purushan
> > >was able to?
> > >Answer to a) is, this Virata Purushan is the form that we worship,
> > >that we call as Narayana - (in artha panchakam, this Virata
>Purushan
> > >is the Vyuha Vasudevan?!), reasons being: 1) Both these forms have
> > >been known for the lotus coming out of the naval, and this lotus
> > >leading to the creation of this universe that we see and live. 2)
>The
> > >same purusha sukta continues to say that this Virata Purusha is the
> > >one who has Hree and Lakshmi as his wives - (hreeshca) Hree and
> > >(lakshmishca) Laskhmi are (patnyau) wives (te) to you - (reference
> > >http://www.ramanuja.org/purusha/sukta-6.html#6). Per innumerous
> > >references from the same vedas, we infer that Narayana aka Vishnu
>is
> > >the one who has Hree and Lakshmi as his wives.
> > >Answer to b) - I don't know. Some learned one could elaborate on
>the
> > >same. Well, I could only infer that this is the best form of the
> > >brahmam(and hence is an equivalent and prime form of the brahmam as
> > >revealed to the vedic seers) that "is" capable of the "jagat
> > >vyaparam" and as per the brahma sutras, jagat vyaparam is unique to
> > >the paramatma. Hence, it is clear without any doubt that this form,
> > >Narayana, could be claimed and worshipped as the supreme one, per
> > >vedas.
> > >
> > >There are other statements like 'devAnAm parama:' etc. Why even go
>to
> > >that, 'tat tvam asi svetha ketho' could be interpreted to mean that
> > >svethakethu is the brahmam;). There are innumerous ways to
>interpret
> > >these statements. Our acharyas had mastered all the vedas and hence
> > >they could define the context, usage and hence the appropriate
> > >interpretation for the same, unlike us, who try to interpret the
> > >same, line by line and hence quote one or two lines from the vedas
>to
> > >support our view.
> > >
> > >I haven't heard about any other form being claimed by the Vedas as
> > >the one that performs jagat vyaparam. Learned scholars, kindly feel
> > >free to correct me.
> > >
> > >My apologies for my ignorance and mistakes. Absolutely, no offense
> > >intended upon anyone.
> > >
> > >Yatheendra Pravanam Vandhe RAMYA Jaamaataram Munim
> > >
> > >Adiyen,
> > >Ramanuja Dasan
> > >
> > > > (b) Legitimacy of other vedic 'deities' claim to be brahman:
> > > > If we accept the 'entire shruthi' as pramANa, rudra is mentioned
> > > > as 'devAnAm parama:' supreme God in Taittriya Aranyaka and also
> > > > termed as pashupathi. Brihaspathi is called brahman!!!!! in
> > >numerous
> > > > places in the very first khanda of taittriya samhita. This is no
> > > > different from another line in nArAyaNopanishad which
> > >says 'nArAyaNa
> > > > param brahma'. Do you think we have to turn a blind eye to all
> > >these
> > > > with the escape sequence 'all vedanta acharyas didn't doubt
> > > > NarayaNa's paratvam?'.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam
> > >
> > >
> > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
>Rent DVDs Online - Over 14,500 titles.
>No Late Fees & Free Shipping.
>Try Netflix for FREE!
>http://us.click.yahoo.com/vhSowB/XP.FAA/3jkFAA/.itolB/TM
>---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>azhwAr emberumAnAr jeeyAr thiruvadigalE saranam
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index ] [Thread Index ] [Author Index ]
Home Page
http://www.ibiblio.org/sripedia
ramanuja-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To subscribe to the list