In the minds of the ancient sages, there was absolutely no doubt regarding the supremacy of Vishnu. All the Vedic commentators have acknowledged this fact. Even in the post-Vedic period right up to A.D. 800 this fact was not questioned seriously by anyone. The saguna Brahman in the Advaita Vedanta is Vishnu or Narayana. Thus, right from the ancient time up to A.D. 800 there does not seem to have been any serious dispute regarding the supremacy of Vishnu. Shaivism, which is also one of the oldest religions and which upholds Shiva as the Supreme Being, existed along with Vaishnavism. But there was no rivalry between the two religions, probably due to the fact that the worshippers of Shiva in the earlier centuries did not question that Vishnu is the highest God. However, at a time following the 8th century, rivalry started between the two religions. It reached a climax in the 16th century when Appayya Deeksita (1552-1624), a follower of Sankara school of Vedanta, wrote a book under the name of Sivarkamanidipika as a commentary on Srikanth's Bhasya which itself is a commentary on the Vedanta-sutras in favour of Siva as the Ultimate Reality. Against this historical background, it became necessary for the Vaishnava acharyas, such as Alavandar, Ramanuja and particularly those who came in the post-Ramanuja period to defend the supremacy of Vishnu with elaborate arguments supported with scriptural and Smriti texts. The Upanishad enjoins that meditation is to be done on the entity which is the primary cause of the universe for achieving moksha. In other words, the Ultimate Reality which is accepted as the material cause of the universe is to be meditated upon for attaining the spiritual goal. According to the teaching of Vedanta, Isvara or God, who is the saviour of mankind and who is the bestower of moksha, is to be meditated upon for salvation. One should have a clear conception of who is that Isvara before one embarks on meditation. Meditation is not possible on an impersonal Being or an absolutely undifferentiated Being. The object of meditation should be such as the mind is able to concentrate on it (dharana). The Upanishads state that Brahman is the karana vastu, the primary cause of the universe and it is to be meditated upon. The Bhadaranyaka Upanishad which refers to the creation of the universe says that in the beginning there was only Brahman. In Chandogya Upanishad, it is stated that in the beginning 'sat' alone existed. In the same context, the Aitareya Upanishad says that this was in the beginning only atman. All the three terms, sat, atman and Brahman bear the same meaning. These terms are not equated with any specific deity as the object of meditation. The Mahopanisad in a similar context, states at the outset that only Narayana existed (eko ha vai narayana asit) and there was neither Brahma nor Isana (Rudra) nor other entities such as agni, soma, ap (water), heaven, prthivi (earth), stars, sun and moon. The word Narayana is used in place of the terms sat, atman and Brahman mentioned in other passages as the cause of the universe. When terms are used in the same context, the term having the general meaning should bear the meaning of the specific term. Further, according to the grammatical rule laid down by Panini, the term Narayana must be treated as a specific proper name and it is applicable to one specific Being but not to any other entity as in the case of the general terms such as Brahman and atman. On the strength of these authorities Ramanuja concludes that Brahman referred to in the Upanishads as the cause of the universe is the same as Narayana, which is the name of the Supreme Being (purusottama), or the para tattva of Vaishnava religion. The Taittiriya Narayana Upanishad (which is also part of the Taittiriya Aranyaka) emphatically asserts that Narayana is para brahma, Narayana is para tattva and Narayana is paramatma. The Mahopanisad, while stating that in the beginning only Narayana existed, categorically denies the existence of Brahma and Rudra. Another Upanishad named as Narayana Upanishad mentions that Purusa Narayana (equating Purusa of Purusa sukta with Narayana) willed to create the beings. It clearly states that from Narayana was born Rudra, Indra etc. It further asserts that the only one Reality is Narayana (suddho deva eko narayanah) and that there is no second as equal to Him and that the whole universe is pervaded by Narayana (narayana evedam sarvam). The hymns of Rig Veda relating to Vishnu extoll Him as the Supreme Deity. The religion of Rig Veda is monotheistic and the one devata which fulfils the criteria of Isvara or Supreme Lord is Vishnu. The hymn speaking of the eternal abode of Vishnu which is perceived all the time by the suris (nitya muktas) establishes beyond any doubt the supremacy of Vishnu. The Purusa sukta too extols the supremacy of Purusa, who is equated with Narayana or Vishnu. The statement found in the uttaranuvaka of Purusa sukta that Sri and Laxmi are the consorts of Purusa dispels all doubts regarding Purusa being any other Vedic deity such as Rudra or Brahma. It is held that the ultimate Deity to be worshipped is Hari who is called Vishnu and the same is described as Brahman. Thus of the several deities referred to in the Vedas, the one who is important and the highest and who is to be worshipped is Vishnu because He is antaratma or the indwelling self of all deities by virtue of His all-pervasive character and that very deity is no other than Brahman referred to in the Vedanta. The Vedic seers and the ancient commentators on the Vedas did not have any element of doubt regarding the Supremacy of Vishnuas para tattva. The great sages such as Valmiki, the author of the Ramayana, Vyasa, the author of the Mahabharata, Manu and Yajriavalkya, the authors of the Dharmasastras, Parasara, the author of the Vishnu Purana and Saunaka, the author of the Vishnudharmottara, have all upheld the same opinion. The Pancharatra Agamas, which is based on the ekayana- sakha of the Sukla Yajur veda and the Sattvika Puranas also speak of the Supremacy of Vishnu. |