[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Just say no to "Hinduism" etc
-
To: soc-religion-hindu@uunet.uu.net
-
Subject: Re: ARTICLE : Just say no to "Hinduism" etc
-
From: ramana@ecf.toronto.edu (Ganapathiraju Sree Ramana Gopal)
-
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 00:48:45 -0400
-
Fake-Sender: News Administrator <news@ecf.toronto.edu>
-
Fake-Sender: news@ecf.toronto.edu (News Administrator)
-
Newsgroups: soc.religion.hindu
-
Organization: Academic disscussions only incorporated
-
References: <ghenDyAurt.Lqn@netcom.com>
-
Sender: News Administrator <news@ecf.toronto.edu>
In article <ghenDyAurt.Lqn@netcom.com>, Mani Varadarajan <mani@be.com> wrote:
>
>What you say or even what the Bhagavad Gita says is not the
>final authority. The final authority must be the eternal Veda
>itself. What does the Veda say?
>
> viSvam nArAyaNam devam aksharam paramam prabhum ...
> sa brahma sa Siva: sendra so'kshara: paramasvarAt
>
> [Taittiriya Aranyaka of the Yajur Veda.
> Check it out in the Ramakrishna Mutt edition
> of the Mahanarayana Upanishad.]
>
>Everything is the highest God Narayana, the resting place of all
>creatures, who is the supreme Imperishable described in the
>Upanishads, who is the supreme Lord. As their very Self,
>Narayana alone is Brahma, Siva, Indra, the Imperishable, the
>supreme Independent.
>
a small enquiry:
is the entire mantra pushpam --of which the above
seem to be two excerpts -- from the above quoted source?
and i *think* the first line should end with 'padam'
[not prabhum]
and the second line probably should read:
sa brahmA sa Siva ssa hari ssEndra ssO 2 ksharaha paramaswarAt
^^^^^
[ofcourse the above corrections are based on the assumption
-- may be erroneous one -- that the text might read the same
way in both the contexts: the mantrapushpam and the mahA nArAyaNa
upanishat]
in this context, how does the word nArAyaNam get
translated literally?
gopal
