re: some thought on "parasurama"
From the Bhakti List Archives
• April 6, 1995
Krishna writes: > coming to naalayiram, they were all "purusha krita" authored by human beings > this makes them not acceptable as valid testimony - even though naalayiram > may explain the truths better than the vedas!! IT is even true that naalayiram > explains vivid details of the experience of God not found in the available > portions of vedas. but when other vedantic > faiths are involved in any argument, naalayiram cannot be brought in as > testimony. I understand your point on inter-scholastic debate, but don't our acharyas consider azhvaar paadals to be apaurusheya in the same sense as the Vedas? I think the normal citation is a paasuram where Nammaazhvaar says that PerumaaL sings through him (the obvious analogy being that just as the rishis were the means for the broadcasting of the Veda, so is Nammaazhvaar simply being used by God as an instrument). Mani
- Next message: Krishna Kalale: "re: some thought on "parasurama""
- Previous message: Krishna Kalale: "re: some thought on "parasurama""
- Maybe in reply to: Krishna Kalale: "re: some thought on "parasurama""
- Next in thread: Krishna Kalale: "re: some thought on "parasurama""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]