The Greatness of Lord Vishnu

[Chakra]

I wanted to start this thread because of the recent issues happening in the Hindu DIR. Hopefully some people will find this a refreshing change. Just a couple of things.

1) Yes, this thread is going to portray Vishnu as the Supreme God of the Vedas, Upanishads, Gita, Itihasas, Puranas, and Agamas. If you can't bear to read Vishnu being glorified as such, please exit this thread immediately and do not post rubbish.
2) If you find something that you disagree with philosophically, make a new thread elsewhere and we can discuss it.
3) Let's be courteous and welcome Vishnu bhaktas from all sampradayas and backgrounds. Let's also keep philosophical quarrels to a minimum. Post any story from any work about Lord Vishnu that you want to share.

With that said, let us begin.

Lord Vishnu, the unequaled lord of the Universe, person par excellence, the most merciful and generous, the true and complete embodiment of the 6 great qualities such as aishwarya and jnana, and the most approachable way to liberation etc has been worshiped by all the Rishis and Vaidikas who have understood the purport of the Vedas. Indeed, all the Vedas, Upanishads, Gita, Itihasas, Puranas, Agamas, and works from Vaidika acharyas praise him as such. Let us see a couple of examples from these texts that show the greatness of Lord Vishnu and how no other entity can equal his splendor.

1) It is well known that Vishnu is known as "Achyuta". That would mean that he is unfallible, being the lord of the universe. However, another interpretation for the name given by Vaishnava scholars is "one who never lets his devotees fall". Indeed, Lord Krishna says in the Gita:

"My dear Arjuna, he who engages in My pure devotional service, free from the contaminations of fruitive activities and mental speculation, he who works for Me, who makes Me the supreme goal of his life, and who is friendly to every living being—he certainly comes to Me.”

"Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear."

Lord Rama has said the same exact thing:

""He who seeks refuge in me just once, telling me that 'I am yours', I shall give him assurance of safety against all types of beings. This is my solemn pledge"

""O, Sugreeva, the chief of monkeys! Let him either be Vibhishana or even Ravana himself; I have given an assurance of safety to him. Bring him here."

Lord Narasimha:

“Anyone who prays unto Me and takes shelter from Me becomes My ward, and I protect him always from all sorts of calamities.”

Thus it can be seen that after one becomes a devotee of Vishnu, Vishnu himself takes care of the devotee and ensures his path to liberation.

 

[kalyan]

Vishnu is the supreme brahma and there is not even an iota of doubt that nArayaNa is purport of vedas and they say sriya: pathi the husband of Sri Maha Lakshmi is nArayaNa and he is only described through vedas as supreme...well ofcourse nArayaNa is not a he/she it is tattvam but that tattwam appeared as sri maha vishnu...I respect Siva as one of greatest bhagavotthamas....Vishnu is only paramaatma and all others including nithya suris are in jIva section

 

[Fireside_Hindu]

 

[Aupmanyav]

And he is so humble. When Bhrigu kicked him in the chest, he messaged Bhrigu's feet. No wonder, he is considered Supreme.
(I am not an enemy of Lord Vishnu, actually he does not have any, even Hiranyakashipu, Ravana or Kamsa).

 

[kalyan]

I'm not sure either, isn't the story Aupmanyav is referring to pro-Vishnu? I know there's an alternative version where Vishnu acknowledges Shiva as his superior but I thought that was to show Vishnu's lack of arrogance compared to Brahma and Shiva.

Vishnu does not acknowledge shiva as superior and whole story is to show Vishnu as superior lol

 

[kalyan]

ok on topic:

Of the multiple incarnations of Sriman Narayana, it is visibly the Krishnavatara that has captured the imagination of all the Alvars. It is nigh impossible to find a work among the twenty-four divya prabandhas that does not carry a reference to the Lord’s Krishnavatara in one way or the other. Though the Lord’s incarnation as Rama lasted for a longer duration than His incarnation as Krishna, it is in this latter episode that the Lord demonstrated the unbounded limits of His easy accessibility (saulabhya). It is the possibility that the Supreme Lord, whose greatness spans a vast expanse that the Vedas fail to successfully describe (yata vaco nivartante), and whose abode remains unattainable to seers performing rigorous austerities, can descend down this earth, walk amongst cowherds, engage in memorable pastimes, and above all, demystify the Upanisads to posterity in the form of Bhagavad Gita, that makes Him celebrate-worthy. Has there been a more generous and an easily approachable God?

The sixth verse of the Eralum Irayonum Tiruvaimoli (4-8-6) goes as follows:

arivinal kuraivilla agal jnanattavar ariya
neriyellam edutturaittaan nirai jnanattoru murti

In his commentary to this verse, Nampillai characterizes earthlings as not just possessing inferior intellect, but also having an inability to understand that they have inferior intellect. For all those who are ignorant and incapable of going through the Vedic scriptures to synthesize its meanings, the Lord revealed the means to attain Him in the Bhagavad Gita, beginning from the description of Karma Yoga (in Chapter 3) and culminating in Prapatti (Chapter 18). For those who could still not follow His instructions, He stood as Parthasarathy revealing His divine form, luring them into contemplating His cosmic appearance and performing surrender unto His feet. Thus, we see Nammalvar eulogising the generosity of Parthasarathy, who reaches out to His devotees by adopting different methods with due consideration to their abilities.

credits to:
https://sreevaishnavam.wordpress.com/2015/06/21/parthasarathy-our-charioteer-to-srivaikuntam/

 

[DanielR]

Kalyan plz stop bullying Aup, thanks ...

 

[Aupmanyav]

Ah sorry, I was confusing it with another story.

No, you are not confusing anything. It is a story which eulogizes Lord Vishnu as the best. For me, all Gods and Goddesses are equally great. But Kalyan, and possibly some other members too, have an impression that I am against Lord Vishnu.

 

[kalyan]

ok...i deleted all the off topic posts, i request @Fireside_Hindu and @Aupmanyav if they can do the same......Lets keep this thread serious guys and that is what I want and I think @axlyz is chilling today

ok anyway....

Just to want to bring in some more of shankara bhasya characteristics:

The authentic works of Shankara displays the following characteristics:

* Unanimously whenever the Supreme Brahman is identified as a deity, Shankara mentions Vishnu/Narayana/Vasudeva.

* Whenever Shankara quotes an example of upAsana, he states "yathA sAlagrAme hariH". Not even in one place in the entire prasthAnatrayi bhAShya you find "yathA linge shivaH"

Shankara does not talk about Shanmata in any of his bhAShyas.

* Shankara does not say that Pancharatrins are narrow-minded in Pancharatra Adhikarana of Brahma Sutra Bhashya. On the contrary, Shankara says that the position of the Pancharatrins regarding Narayana as the only object of worship, and the Pancharatrins' mode of worship are absolutely acceptable.

* Shankara interprets "Ishvara" in Gita where Krishna says "Ishvara" in third person as "IshanasheelaH nArAyaNaH"

* Shankara says that the worshipers of the other deities obtain paltry results such as svarga and return to samsAra, while the Vaishnavas obtain the eternal result of mOkSha even though the effort involved is the same (Gita Bhashya 7.20-23, 9.23-25)

adiyen Ramanuja daasa

 

[Chakra]

Well, since kalyan has deleted his posts (though I didn't get the chance to read them), I feel it would be a good idea if everyone who was involved in this misunderstanding deleted his/her posts. I really don't know where the hostility came from, since Aup's comment about Bhrigu Muni didn't mention Shiva. Then it seemed to have escalated into people calling each other trolls and destroying the thread etc. Let's just forget all of that and stick with the thread topic. I really hope that people keep posting in spite of the big misunderstanding we had here.

I will also refrain from further comments.

When I created this thread, I was specifically hoping that you would talk about the stories of Lakshmi and Narayana, or Sita and Ram, that were particularly dear to you. That would really increase the auspiciousness of the already auspicious topic of the thread.

adiyen

 

[तत्त्वप्रह्व]

We know that the Gāyatrī is considered the nectar of entire vedas. The Cchandogopaniṣad 3|12|1-3|12|6 makes it unambiguous that Gāyatripratipādya is none other than Nārāyaṇa with the gāyatri eulogizing Him as catuṣpāt and further states that His majesty is infinitely more than that quoting the Puruṣa Sūkta that speaks of His presence in the jīvas as one pāda and three other pādas in dyuloka - Śvetadvīpa, Anatāsana, and Vaikuṇṭha.

The Gāyatri also speaks of all the avatāras of Nārayaṇa, but that is something to be learned thru' Gurūpadeśa.

[GALLERY=media, 6322]Gāyatri Pratipādya Nārāyaṇa by तत्त्वप्रह्व posted Sep 9, 2015 at 8:16 AM[/GALLERY]

Still, 1 of ∞

नारायणायेतिसमर्पयामि ।

 

[Aupmanyav]

I have deleted my posts except two, which I think are not against the spirit of the topic. I see Kalyan has not deleted all his post where he says Vishnu is superior to Shiva. I think he should do that. Kalyan should note that Shiva is not the topic here. However, I am not posting a reply to his post 11. I am also not replying to Tattvaprahva's post 13.

"Jahan jahan Rama charan chali jahin, tinha samana Amaravati nahin l
punyapunja maga nikata nivasi, tinahin sarahahin surapura basi ll"
Sri Rama Charit Manas - a reference to Lord Sri Rama walking in the forest accompanied by Mother Sita and brother Lakshman.

Wherever the feet of Lord Sri Rama go, even the city of Amaravati* cannot compare with that place;
those who live near near the road traversed by Lord Sri Rama are aggregates of merits, they are praised by the residents of heaven (as being so fortunate).

* Amaravati, the city of Lord Kubera, the treasurer of deities, supposed to be the most beautiful city in the world

 

[kalyan]

Rudra is a jIva as per Shankara commentaries too..Even nithya suris those who does not have to come in this karmic worlds are also jIvas...Paramaatma is referrs as vibhuvu and he is only one and he is nArayaNa and out of his many forms he came down as paripoorna avatara as Sri Krushna and confirmes his supremacy through Bg essence of vedas...

From any point of view there cannot be more than 1 supreme...it ia absurd...I am just saying what shankara said and with you being follower of advaita.. Rudra is also tied to Karma and he goes in maha pralaya too...however muktas and nithyas doesn't have to go in this cycle as they already arw above karma and live in eternal place nithya vibhuti...brahma and Rudra are just positions...in different kalpas rudras can be different just like brahma would be hanuman next

 

[kalyan]

Rudra again. This topic is about Lord Vishnu and his avataras. You, Tattvaprahva, Axlyz, etc. have already proved without a tinge of doubt that Lord Vishnu is the Supreme Lord.

You are like the Pakistanis, kicking up Kashmir, whatever be the topic of the talk. If it is a oil pipe-line - Kashmir, if it is import of onions - Kashmir, if it is pilgrimage to the shrine of Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti - Kashmir.

we are no ones to prove Vishnu is supreme lord......i am a sinner full of sins....Vedas and the acharyas showed Maha Vishnu as supreme.....am just asserting that again.....

rudranam sankaras casmi
vitteso yaksa-raksasam
vasunam pavakas casmi
meruh sikharinam aham

Rudra's power comes from his antaryami Srimannarayana .......

 

[Fireside_Hindu]

When I created this thread, I was specifically hoping that you would talk about the stories of Lakshmi and Narayana, or Sita and Ram, that were particularly dear to you. That would really increase the auspiciousness of the already auspicious topic of the thread.

adiyen

I have deleted all except the first, since there appears t be no delete button for it anymore. Perhaps there is a timer? Ah well, twas meant in jest only.

As for my stories of Ma Sita and Lakshmi-Narayan, I won't say too much since it would inevitably bend toward Shakti appreciation and that is not the point of the thread. I am no scholar. I am too new a Hindu to discuss scripture much. However I can say this, Lord Vishnu is dear to me in the sense that he is dear to MahaLakshmi. They are Parusha and Prakrti - all there is and isn't.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Baru teer marahun lakhanu, pai lagi na pay pakharihon l
tab lagi na, Tulsidas nath kripal paru utarihon ll
Sri Rama Charit Manas - reference to Nishada who would not take Lord Rama to the other shore in his boat unless Lord agrees to let Nishada wash his feet.

Lakshman may hit me with arrows, but till I wash your feet I will not let your feet touch the boat*;
till then I will not, O the kind master of Tulsidas, take you across to the other shore.

* Nishada said "Your feet turned a stone into a woman (in the case of Ahalya), my boat is made only of wood, I do not know what would happen to it when your feet touch it, and this the only support for my family'. So this is how the Lord whose name takes people cross the worldly ocean was taken across River Ganges by a boatman.

 

[kalyan]

"Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear."

This statement is wrong on many levels @axlyz

 

[kalyan]

"Your feet turned a stone into a woman (in the case of Ahalya), m

Who is nishada and 2nd why master of tulsidas...wasnt tulsidas is a recent character?
3rd ahalya turning into stone is myth actually she turns to ashes and will be born by the touch of ganga always coming from nArayaNas feet ans 4th why lakshmana would attack with arrows .. @Aupmanyav

 

[Aupmanyav]

Goswami Tulsidas (16th Century) was a devotee of Lord Rama and the writer of the book 'Rama Charit Manas'. The book is in 'Avadhi' language. For North Indians, where the majority of Hindus live, this book is Upanishads/Bhagawat/Gita all combined. He belonged to the Ramanandi Sampradaya. As per Lord Rama's story, A boatman (Generic - Nishada) would not take Lord Rama across the river unless the Lord allowed him to wash his feet. The Lord permitted him to do that. Nishada and his family drank the charanodak, before he took the Lord across River Ganges. Lakshman was short of temper, after all, he was an incarnation of Shesha. He never accepted a 'no' easily. That is why the mention of arrows. It is there at Shringaverpur that Lord, Mother Sita and brother Lakshaman abandoned their princely attires. Who else was Lord Rama but Narayana? When Lord Rama's feet touched the turned-to-stone Ahalya, she came back in her human form.

Release of Ahalya from the curse.

 

[Aupmanyav]

This statement is wrong on many levels @axlyz

See what is right, ignore what is wrong.