Srimathe Rangaramanuja Mahadesikaya Namaha
Srimathe Sri Varaha Mahadesikaya Namaha
Sri Velukkudi Krishnan Swamy Thiruvadigaley Sharanam
Sri:

We have heard of
Rama Bhakthi
Krishna Bhakthi

But
Brahma Bhakthi?

Not Bhakthi on Brahma but Brahmam.

Is Brahmam really qualified for a Bhakthi?

If you think one step further

Decoding Brahma Sutra Sri Bashyam Mangala Shlokam

“Brahmani SrinivasE, Semushi Bhakthi Rupa”

Brahmam as such cannot be devoted

But Srinivasa Brahmam eligible for Bhakthi

Meaning what?
A SaguNa Brahmam is qualified for devotion.

Does it mean NirguNa Brahmam cannot be reached via Bhakthi?

Well, according to Sri Udayavar, Brahmam itself is not NirguNam but our understanding of such NirguNam can be wrong.

Meaning, there are no two kinds of Brahmam but same Brahmam in a particular form is eligible for “Bhakthi Rupapanna NyAnam”

Associating level to Brahmam will lead to Duality Dosham says Desikan. Saying NirguNam as higher than SaguNam.

My understanding
By yoga we speak of samathvam
By Bhakthi we speak of Daasathvam

Yoga = Equality
Bhakthi = Submissiveness

Such Brahmam which is supposed to be attained through NyAnam is not self made but by Brahmam’s help itself.

So it means the entity jeevAthman does not discover itself but made to discover (uncover) by Brahmam.

It’s not Brahmam helping Brahmam but Brahmam helping an entity which couldn’t by itself!

It’s like pulling to shore and swimming back to shore. Brahmam makes your task easier by pulling while you are trying to swim across.

“BhagawAn SwayamEva KArithavAn”

Unfortunately, when speaking of Brahmam we use terms like “that”.

It’s as if something unrelated.

It’s because we consider “it” as “NirGuNam”.

Actually it isn’t because that is a “he” which is SaguNam.

So when we speak of Srinivasan we say “He” which is apt.

“BruhatvAt Brahmam” learned say. Meaning Brahmam is Big.

How do you relate to something so big? No it’s not easy.

You can relate to Krishna. That’s the point.

Coming to EkAgraha Bhakthi
Hanuman= Rama
Uddhava = Krishna

We never associate
Hanuman = Krishna

It’s the power of association which I am telling by experience

The association “VAsanA” in this material world is too powerful to imagine and overcome even for Hanuman.

Not sure Hanuman is as interested in Krishna as he is interested in Ram.

So Hanuman = Rama Brahmam
Uddhavan = Krishna Brahmam

Uddhavan knowing about Ram would still be interested in Krishna as he got direct association.

Hope this clarifies

Please let me know any flaws in this thought process
Dasanudasan