Interesting threads

Dear folks: Please don't mistake me for asking this question here. This question was posted to me in
an email by a stauch group of advaitins. Their questions seemed too kiddish but as they are
otherwise knowlwedgeble, good people wanted to post in a forum rather me replying to them.
I was contemplating where to post the questions in FB or e groups. Finally i decided to post here
ONLY because i thought there would be some sensible debate on same. I am ofcourse with your
permission planning to just copy/paste and send your answers to the group of advaitins
1) If you guyz say that you all are stauch vaishnava followers and do not even eat certain fruits/veg,
why do you eat melchha fruit dates? why do you eat almonds which is aphrodisiac in nature. You
also distribute them in your mutts as prasada? doesnt it sound foolish?
2) If you say vishnu is superior why did he get his sister married to lord rudra?
3) If you say Ambrini sukta is mother of all sukta.. is she mother of vishnu? we also believe that
Ambike is the supreme as she is the mother of universe.
4) If you say vishnu is superieor why do you all perform mritunjaya homa?
There are several more questions but will post if i think we are going in the right direction..
9Vishnu Shanbhag, Srikanth Shenoy and 7 others
24 comments

• Meera Tadipatri > 1) If you guyz say that you all are stauch vaishnava followers and > do not even eat
certain fruits/veg, why do you eat melchha fruit dates?

First of all mlecha doesn't mean "foreigner". It means a "barbaric person" devoid of culture.

I have not come across any mention of mlechcha fruit in shastra.

Any item worthy of consumption should have the inherent nature to enhance the "sAttvika-sAdhana", and
based on this the eadibles are classified as acceptable or nishiddha. Also note that one needs specific
"nisheda" vAkhas in shastra.

> why do you eat almonds which is aphrodisiac in nature. You also > distribute them in your mutts as
prasada? doesnt it sound foolish?

Shastra is not against "sex" -- The Lord's wish is that shrushti has to continue for ever. It only condems
"morally illegal" aspect of "sex". Dasaru infact gives the example of how a married women who enjoys and
begets several children in her wedded life is praised as "jitendriyalu"!

> 2) If you say vishnu is superior why did he get his sister married to > lord rudra?

I don't think I understand the question/objection.

The concept of God will clear many a doubt -- to be superior one has to be "svatantra". A svatantra entity
is above all. He makes rules but he cannot be bound by the rules He makes. That is the characteristic of
being "svatantra". He is NOT made of "perishable" panchabhutas. Thus where is even the question of his
having "sister"?

> 3) If you say Ambrini sukta is mother of all sukta..

It depends in what context it is sdaid to be "mother of all suktas".

 > is she mother of vishnu?

A supreme "svatantra" entity devoid of panchabhuta deha surely doesn't have such "panchabhuta"
realtionship.

The very term "vishnu" means the one which pervades everywhere having jnana ananda. Unlike the
akasha, He not only pervades but controls everything in all three times -- past, present and future.

> we also believe that Ambike

> is the supreme as she is the mother of universe.

The Ambruni sukta says that Lord Vishnu is her source. So for everyone under her, she is supreme as a
mother.

> 4) If you say vishnu is superieor why do you all perform mritunjaya > homa?

We have what is called "antaryami" concept -- the homa itself is NOT God. It is just a jaDa and much
inferior to us. So, there must be something invisible in that which gives what we want. Such an entity
should be a chetana/sentient only. This entity we call it "devata" who controls yama. This is Rudra who
has power over yama. This Rudra gets the capacity due to His indweller Laxmi Narasimha who is the real
mritunjaya.

Thus we worship Rudra and His antaryami Laxmi Narasimha

o · 6y
• Rishikesh Shenoy Spot On Meera ji. End of the day who ever you pray it is "keshavam pratigachathi"
• Vishnu Shanbhag 4) It is said by Sri Vadiraja teertha
shivohambhaavadheerbhoge roge mRityunjayarcakaH. This applies to advaitin and not to a tatva vaadin.
Every Rik applies primarily to viShNu and then with "apakRiShya" to others as per the names which have
been given by Him. So mRityunjaya is viShNu whichever way you think . The entity called viShNu by a
tatva vaadin is entirely different from the entity called viShNu by a advaitin. Just because the name "
viShNu" is used by both , does NOT mean they are referring to the same supreme being.
For advaitin viShNu is a saguNa brahma who is afflicted with mAyA. :(
But the vedic viShNu , as defined and characterized by a tatva vaadin is the only supreme being who is
untouched by anything that has even a hint of doshas such as mAyA. The viShNu which is purely vedic in
tatva vaada and is understood in the SAME WAY in the texts accepted as pramANas by us is unchanging,
complete with infinite ( positive) attributes (guNas) and without even a HINT of a trace of anything that
can be construed as a fault.
So you , advaitins, may think that dvaitins worship mRityunjaya ( rudra) , devi ( durga ) , ganesha , skanda
,indra , navagrahas and various demogods. But this is not just an allowance that is given for social or any
other such reason. The worship of ALL of these stems from the essentials of maadhva siddhaanta itself.
Supreme viShNu has invested certain powers in the demigods according to the taaratamya. And when
when we say the power that is invested , it is His own form that is present in them and carries out those
functions. This is the concept of "antaryaami" as explained by Smt Meera Tadipatri ji.

For you advaitins mRiTyunjaya may mean Lord Shiva ( I am confused whether He is saguNa or nirguNa
according to you ) that is worshiped. But for us dvaitins mRityunjaya is a jeeva who is situated high in the
taaratamya ( he gets moxa AFTER he assumes shesha padavi ) , is a vaiShNava and viShNu is present in
mRityunjaya as mRityunjaya and hence that aspect of shiva is energized to function as such. We mortals
being of low status in taaratamya have to approach the supreme through the tatvaabhimanis ( by
worshiping the tatvaabhimaani rupa of vishnu present in that demigod) and not directly.

Here the act of worship of mRityunjaya or any other demigod , which are considred as parivaaras of
vishnu, is real , the phala is real and the different entities ( the puujaka , puujya -the demigod AND
antaryaami ) are all real.

14
 o · 6y
• Vishnu Shanbhag Come on folks :-) All of you have free hand in answering the questions. Try to post
what you now. Please base your answers on the siddhaanta of Sri Madhvacharya and post your
understanding. You can take all the questions or any one or two. :-)

o · 6y
• Vishnu Shanbhag 1) kharjuraa has been dealt with quite effectively by Smt Meera Tadipatriji . I
would like to add something more to the "case of almonds as aphrodisiacs' . I am a biochemist and I know
something about medical biochemistry.
First of all , the wonder drug " aphrodisiac " is a figment of imagination. No such nuts and fruits exist. :-)
The perfect aphrodisiac is a healthy young body and a close relation between the lovers :)

Almonds are certainly tasty , have good nutrients and trace elements etc. they are good, in moderation,
for a healthy food. But if you are looking for some secret constituent in almonds which enhances man's or
woman's base instincts, such things are simply not there , neither in almonds nor in any other plant
products.

Perhaps Almonds as aphrodisiacs may be a special case of superimposition of the non existent
aphrodisiac, on the poor tasty good old almond :-)

7 · 6y

• Krishna Kadiri Just one point to add to the fabulous responses here. AmbikA is not same as ambhrini.
The former is umA, while the latter is Lakshmi herself.
The questions have nothing 'advaitic' or 'smaartha' about them. They were just being funny with you,
SS :)

o · 6y
• Vishnu Shanbhag Anyway Madam gave some good material for our members to think on and I hope
we will get some more of the same :)
BTW many say they are advaitins but we hardly find any classic content of advaita in them.

• Sripriya Sridhar Thank you all very very much. I knew that there will be sensible post and so you all
did :) thanks. KK - yup I understood after the couple of mails - to be very honest with you all on some
occassions staunch dvaitins hv asked similar questions to me :).

Vishnu Shanbhag sir - yup i am going to paste some more of these.. it would be nice to know healthy
different perspectives ...
o · 6y
• Sripriya Sridhar Meeraji - Special thanks to you as always :)

Edit or delete this

o Like
o · Reply
o · 6y
• Vishnu Shanbhag It was very much refreshing and very much satisfying to see Smt Meera
Tadipatri ji back with us after a long time :-)

Hide or report this

o Like
o · Reply
o · 6y
• Srikanth Shenoy 2) If you say vishnu is superior why did he get his sister married to lord rudra?

I am not too sure if Parvathi is called Vishnu's sister anywhere. May be it is due to lack of my
understanding on my part
The very first letter of the word nArAyaNa i.e. nA = na + a = nishedha + nishedha = nEti nEti clearly says
he is not like other chetana or jaDa. He is vilakshaNa. So he has no sisters.
agrAhya purANas cite a all-in-one concept of dEvi ala. Shakta Agama as in Lalita Sahara Nama where she
is called padnAbha sahOdari.
A little later it also calls her mahAlaxmi and in the same breath calls her mRuDapriyA (!!!!). Who is (not)
confused by all these?

3) If you say Ambrini sukta is mother of all sukta.. is she mother of vishnu? we also believe that Ambike is
the supreme as she is the mother of universe.

To add to what Smt. Meera Tadipatri and Sri Vishnu Shanbhag said abt this.
The same ambrhaNi sukta where Laxmi declares herself as maker/destroyer of Rudras also refers to the
entity for her existence being in ksheera sagara - "mama yOniH apsvanta samudrE". So the mother of
universe owes her existence to the "mama swamirharir nityam sarvasya patirEvacha" :-D

However Laxmi is also mother of Vishnu in a way.

Remember that in the sriShTi process, at one stage the trimurthis (Chaturmuka, Vishnu and Rudra) are
born from Vishnu and Laxmi.
So, indeed, Laxmi IS the mother of Vishnu, but that form of Vishnu is being born from Vishnu and Laxmi
themselves. Its all leela of the ONE that is described as "atma va idameka evagra asit nanyat kincana ...." in
Aitareya.

Hide or report this

o Like
o · Reply
o · 6y
• Meera Tadipatri Sri Vishnu Shanbhag avare, thank you. Btw, I hardly get time to check pc these days as
my aged mother-in-law is with us and I don't feel good to sit before the pc when she is here. Also we have
been having "house guests" for almost a year. I will be back to my usual schedule of being online from
March. Till then it will be very slow from my end.

Hide or report this

o Like
o · Reply
o · 6y
• Meera Tadipatri SS, thanks. Actually as you pointed out many of our own folks have all these questions
and more but hesitant to ask it openly as they don't want to be "misunderstood" as "doubters". Many a
times they care more about what others think of them than clearing their doubt. This should change.

Hide or report this

o Like
o · Reply
o · 6y
• Vishnu Shanbhag Smt Meera Tadipatri ji , you have put your finger on the exact but very sensitive
fact. Our people are not just uninterested and uncaring about this. As there is no proper guidance AND as
the babas , yogis and swamis have been mushrooming all over the …See more

Hide or report this

o Like
o · Reply
o · 6y
• Vishnu Shanbhag .

Hide or report this

o Like
o · Reply
o · 1y
• Sripriya Sridhar You wanted us to debate further in this ? 🙂🙂

Edit or delete this

o Like
o · Reply
o · 1y
• Vishnu Shanbhag Sri Yogi Sreenivas ji

Hide or report this

o Like
o · Reply
o · 1y
• Vishnu Shanbhag Sripriya Sridhar madam , I was searching for a discussion and came across this
very interesting thread and therefore brought it up. Your participation is always welcome. ☺

Hide or report this

 o Love
o · Reply
o · 1y
• Sanjay Kumar Shenoy In one of the responses above Meera Tadipatri ji has mentioned that Paramatma
is beyond pancha bhootas and there is no question of Paramatma having a sister. But we call
Chathurmukharu and Vayu Devaru as Paramathma's sons. A natural doubt arises is that when sons are
possible why not a sister? Pls help in clarifying...thanks