[Advaita-l] Narayana - Word

[Jay Nelamangala]

Dear Kalyan,

> >From this we *may* conclude one important thing - The name nArAyaNa was
not
> always identified with vishNu.
>
Namaskaaram.   What is 'NaarAyaNa' ?

"ApO nArAha iti proktAha ApO vai nara-soonavaha |  ayanam tasya tAha poorvam
tEna
nArAyaNa smritaha"
(Waters are said to be nArAha.  They are indeed the creation of nara.  They
are at the
beginning the abode of It.  Therefore, it is NArAyaNa)

For this reason,  NaarAyaNa alone is presented as being in the waters.

"yam kAmayE tam tam ugram kriNomi tam brahmANam tam sumEdhAm"  Rig-Sam.
10-125-5
(Whom I want to make Rudra I make him Rudra.  I make him chaturmukha-brahmA
whom
I want to make Chaturmukha.  I make him a sage whom I want make a sage.  I
make him
wise whom I want to make wise )
Having stated this, the author of this statement  LakshmI says,
"mama yOnirapsu antah samudrE"  Rik-samhitaa 10-125-7
(that which gives me birth dwells in the water within the sea)

Other shrutis such as,
"ambhasyapArE bhuvanasya madhyE nAkasya prshTe mahatO maheeyAn"
(The greatest of the great resides in the waters)
"saptArdha-garbhA bhuvanasya rEtO vishNoho tishTanti pradishA vidharmINI"
(all divinities, Chaturmukha and so on are there because of the desire of
VishNu)
"yamantassamudrE kavayO vayAnti .... tadEva brahma"
(Sea is the abode of Purusha i.e, VishNu)
"tadEva brahma paramam kaveenAm"

Thus,  what is presented in Shrutis as "antah-samudraha"  is the same as
what is
presented as "Brahman" and "NaarAyaNa" and  "VishNu".

Further,  kaTOpanishat warns us not to think of  one form of God as
different from
another form of God.

I hope it is clearer.

Harihi Om tatsat,
Jay Nelamangala.