First of all it is a sectarian position that they are the same. But by that logic all 1000 names of Vishnu can be merged under Vishnu


This doesn't seem to be correct - since THE ACTUAL PRACTICE of Hindus shows belief in a Narayana who is not the Narayana of Vaishnavites:


Narsingh Baba (he has nothing but the name in common with Narsingh Giri, the Abbot of the Qudsia Ghat Dasanaml-Math), the leader of the Naga group that had come to join the assembly, and his group consisted of about a dozen naked monks. He is a graduate from some Indian university, and had renounced the world soon after leaving college. When he was introduced to me, I greeted him with 'NamahSivaya, i.e. ‘Victory unto Siva', as a token of respect for his particular tutelary deity. He shook his head and said solemnly; ‘No, Maharaj, don't you know how sadhus greet each other?' ‘Of course,' I replied; ‘the general salute is Om Namo Narayanaya , but do you not object to N dr ay ana as a somewhat sectarian term?' Ndr ay ana usually refers to Visnu, and there is some sectarian discrimination between the Siva and the Visnu aspect of Divinity. ‘Not at all,’ Narsingh Baba replied, ‘and even if I did object, the N dr ay ana of the sa^M-salute is not the Naray ana of the Vaisnavas except by metaphysical generalization. No sadhii, of whatever personal predilection, should use a different salute, whatever he feels about “Narayana".' I was amazed at this statement for, though of course there is nothing new in his metaphysical disquisition—almost all divine epithets apply equally to all gods of the Hindu pantheon,

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .