Ganapathi pooja in Vaishnavism

[Viraja]

Namaste,

I wonder why Ganapathi pooja is very important even for Vaishnavas... Not only Vinayaka Chaturthi is celebrated, but also Ganapathi is worshiped in many poojas, such as Satyanarayana pooja. Infact, almost any pooja I can think of begins only with an invocation to Sri Ganapathi. I wonder why this is so for Vaishnavas? Does anyone know?

Thank you.

BTW: I like Ganapathi very much and include him in my daily prayers.

[jignyAsu]

Namaste,

None who is serious in pursuit of moksha through SriVaishnavam is supposed to worship a deity other than Lord Narayana, as instructed clearly and unanimously by the Alwars and Acharyas. The instruction is Ananya shEshatvam to Lord Vishnu only or absolute dedication without deviating even in dreams. Statements from Bhagavad Gita is pointed out where Sri Krishna denounces worship of other gods and say that they get their powers only from Him and so there is no need to go anywhere else.

You may, however, find quite a few iyengars that are Sri Vaishnavas by birth only and not by heart worshipping Lord Ganesha, Navagrahas, Sai etc due to family/society influence. I was once told by an iyengar that her family tradition is to visit Lord Vaideeswaran (Shiva) temple when a child becomes an year old.

Many Hindus subscribe to a popular belief that Lord Ganesha is the remover of all obstacles is to be prayed to before starting any task. We don't see any pramANA for this in the shAstrAs.

Also I can't speak for other Vaishnavas but with what I have observed I am sure that none of their Acharyas like Madhvacharya, Sri Chaitanya etc require them to worship Lord Ganesha first.

[Viraja]

Thank you, jignyAsu, that clarifies my doubt.

In my family, we observe Ganesh Chaturthi, and it seems many Vaishnavas do so too, for example, I even checked the "Iyengar Calendar" online at https://www.trsiyengar.com/id36.shtml and it lists Vinayaka Chaturthi. (I am a Sri Vaishnava by birth).

It is not that I am against worshiping Ganesha, but I do find it strange that why Vaishnavas should worship Shaiva deity, when Shaivas do not celebrate any Vaishnava festival. I like Sri Ganesha (for that matter, I like all Hindu deities), but my ishta-devata is Sri Rama and I do not even worship other forms of Sri Vishnu (except for celebrating appropriate festivals), so it is quite strange to me we are observing Ganesh Chaturthi.

I noticed that even in Pittsburg Sri Venkateswara temple, there is a sanctum for Sri Ganesha. Why this is so?

[jignyAsu]

Viraja,

I think I skipped a point here. As SriVaishnavas we do worship other deities but only in Vedic Yagnas, Sandya Vandanam etc and not outside of this. To worship a deity other than Sriman Narayana or consuming prasad in their temples where they are worshipped as being a Jagat Karana (original cause) or Moksha Pradana is actually considered a downfall.

Many including iyengars would remark at this as begin intolerant of other deities but that is just sheer nonsense. Sincere one pointed devotion cannot be hatred. I was a former devotee of Lord Ganesha myself. The last time I was at his temple, I bowed down to him and said that I don't think I will return - that was indeed my last.


I do find it strange that why Vaishnavas should worship Shaiva deity, when Shaivas do not celebrate any Vaishnava festival.

Your observation is correct. There is a lot of misinformation floating around. There's nothing wrong in being a Shaiva or a Vaishnava but half baked knowledge is the problem.



but my ishta-devata is Sri Rama and I do not even worship other forms of Sri Vishnu (except for celebrating appropriate festivals)

Parasara Bhattar Ghostiyo? :)

One thing I would like to add about Madhva Sampradaya is that even though Sriman Narayana is the highest for them, as far as my understanding goes if one worships Him directly then it is considered arrogance. One has to respect the "soul" hierarchy and report to Him through their next highest only like Indra, Rudra, Brahma. But definetely Lord Ganesh is not in the list.

Gaudiyas like Iskcon do not care about worshpping other deities but don't consider it as being counter productive either.

[jignyAsu]

I noticed that even in Pittsburg Sri Venkateswara temple, there is a sanctum for Sri Ganesha. Why this is so?

The reason is very obvious. In USA, we don't have many Hindus required to generate the revenue for maintanence of a temple. Therefore we have temples having different deities to attract the crowd. For me personally I don't like temples where all deities are in the same temple but most Hindus actually prefer that.

Pomona Sri Ranganatha temple is amazing in the sense that it has managed to acheive a solely dedicated Lord Vishnu temple but with great struggle and efforts, I hear. Even then Pittsburg temple doesn't deviate much from the tradition, with Lord Ganesha installed in a separate sannadhi downstairs. The upcoming Sri Venkateshwara Lotus temple in Virginia is also solely dedicated Vishnu temple.

One should clarify SriVaishnava practices not from these US temples but from our 80 or so South Indian Divya Desas only. None of these have Lord Ganesha. Some do have other deities like Lord Shiva etc but due to some specific reasons mentioned in the Sthala Purana.

[Viraja]

Thank you, jignyAsu, a great post!

I like Pomona Sri Ranganatha temple very much, although I've been there only once about 5 yrs ago.. Really that temple underwent much struggle being dedicated only to Sri Vishnu? I heard they do every Vaishnava function there very thoroughly and especially near Vaikunta Ekadasi, those festivities are of very grand scale and elaborate (the 'pagal-patthu' and 'raa-patthu'). Surely Sri Vishnu has all the blessings for such a grand temple!

You must be very correct, saying out here in USA, they have sanctums devoted to many deities from several traditions together. That is why I wondered about Venkateswara Temple in Pittsburgh, because the only sanctums there are of Ganesha, Sri Venkateswara and mother Mahalakshmi. But Pomona temple would be a good example for a proper temple for Sri Vishnu!

[smaranam]

Namaste

Shrimad BhAgvad Canto 11, Deity Worship.


SB 11.27.27 (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/11/27/27/en): One should worship, in order, the Lord's Sudarśana (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/sudarsana) disc, His Pāñcajanya (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/p/pancajanya) conchshell, His club, sword, bow, arrows and plow, His muṣala (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/m/musala) weapon, His Kaustubha (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/k/kaustubha) gem, His flower garland and the Śrīvatsa (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/srivatsa) curl of hair on His chest.

SB 11.27.28 (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/11/27/28/en): One should worship the Lord's associates Nanda (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/n/nanda) and Sunanda (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/sunanda), Garuḍa (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/g/garuda), Pracaṇḍa (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/p/pracanda) and Caṇḍa (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/c/canda), Mahābala (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/m/mahabala) and Bala (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/b/bala), and Kumuda (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/k/kumuda) and Kumudekṣaṇa.

SB 11.27.29
durgāḿ (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durgam) vināyakaḿ (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/v/vinayakam) vyāsaḿ (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/v/vyasam)
viṣvakṣenaḿ (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/v/visvaksenam) gurūn (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/g/gurun) surān (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/suran)
sve (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/sve) sve (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/sve) sthāne (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/sthane) tv abhimukhān (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/a/abhimukhan)
pūjayet (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/p/pujayet) prokṣaṇādibhiḥ

With offerings such as prokṣaṇa (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/p/proksana) one should worship Durgā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durga), Vināyaka (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/v/vinayaka), Vyāsa (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/v/vyasa), Viṣvaksena (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/v/visvaksena), the spiritual masters and the various demigods. All these personalities should be in their proper places facing the Deity of the Lord (abhimukhAn)

PURPORT by Shrila PrabhupAd
According to Śrīla (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/srila) Jīva (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/j/jiva) Gosvāmī, the Gaṇeśa (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/g/ganesa) and Durgā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durga) mentioned in this verse are not the same personalities present within the material world; rather, they are eternal associates of the Lord in Vaikuṇṭha (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/v/vaikuntha). In this world Gaṇeśa (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/g/ganesa), the son of Lord Śiva (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/siva), is famous for awarding financial success, and the goddess Durgā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durga), the wife of Lord Śiva (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/siva), is famous as the external, illusory potency of the Supreme Lord. The personalities mentioned here, however, are eternally liberated associates of the Lord who reside in the spiritual sky, beyond the material manifestation. Śrīla (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/srila) Jīva (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/j/jiva) Gosvāmī quotes from various Vedic literatures to prove that the name Durgā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durga) may also indicate the internal potency of the Lord, who is nondifferent from Him. The external, or covering, potency of the Lord expands from this original Durgā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durga). The Durgā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durga) of the material world, called Mahā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/m/maha)-māyā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/m/maya), assumes the function of bewildering the living entities. Thus a devotee should not fear becoming polluted by worshiping the Durgā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durga) mentioned here, who has the same name as illusion, but rather the devotee must show respect to these eternal servitors of the Supreme Lord in Vaikuṇṭha (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/v/vaikuntha).

_/\_

[Viraja]

PURPORT by Shrila PrabhupAd
According to Śrīla (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/srila) Jīva (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/j/jiva) Gosvāmī, the Gaṇeśa (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/g/ganesa) and Durgā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durga) mentioned in this verse are not the same personalities present within the material world; rather, they are eternal associates of the Lord in Vaikuṇṭha (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/v/vaikuntha). In this world Gaṇeśa (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/g/ganesa), the son of Lord Śiva (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/siva), is famous for awarding financial success, and the goddess Durgā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durga), the wife of Lord Śiva (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/siva), is famous as the external, illusory potency of the Supreme Lord. The personalities mentioned here, however, are eternally liberated associates of the Lord who reside in the spiritual sky, beyond the material manifestation. Śrīla (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/s/srila) Jīva (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/j/jiva) Gosvāmī quotes from various Vedic literatures to prove that the name Durgā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durga) may also indicate the internal potency of the Lord, who is nondifferent from Him. The external, or covering, potency of the Lord expands from this original Durgā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durga). The Durgā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durga) of the material world, called Mahā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/m/maha)-māyā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/m/maya), assumes the function of bewildering the living entities. Thus a devotee should not fear becoming polluted by worshiping the Durgā (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/d/durga) mentioned here, who has the same name as illusion, but rather the devotee must show respect to these eternal servitors of the Supreme Lord in Vaikuṇṭha (http://srimadbhagavatam.com/v/vaikuntha).

_/\_

Namaste Smaranamji,

Thank you for the clarification, I now understand that Sri Ganesha is an eternally liberated associate of Sriman Narayana in Vaikuntha, who lives in the spiritual sky. But this view is not so much heard-of in Vaishnavam? I have not read any work anywhere about Sri Ganesha's association in any kind with Lord Sriman Narayana? Where can I learn more about this?

Thank you.

[Viraja]

All I have heard of is that some Vaishnavas view Sri Ganesha as the amsa of 'Vishwaksena' or 'Senai Mudaliyaar', the chieftain of Sri Vishnu's army. Infact, it has been said once Shaivas and Vaishnavas fought over a vigraha of Sri Ganesha, with Shaivas claiming it is theirs' as it was Ganesha and Vaishnavas claiming it saying it is Vishwaksena. Is what you are saying, that Sri Ganesha being a liberated associate of Lord Sriman Narayana in Vaikuntha same as Ganesha being Vishwaksena?

Thanks again.

[jignyAsu]

All I have heard of is that some Vaishnavas view Sri Ganesha as the amsa of 'Vishwaksena' or 'Senai Mudaliyaar', the chieftain of Sri Vishnu's army. Infact, it has been said once Shaivas and Vaishnavas fought over a vigraha of Sri Ganesha, with Shaivas claiming it is theirs' as it was Ganesha and Vaishnavas claiming it saying it is Vishwaksena. Is what you are saying, that Sri Ganesha being a liberated associate of Lord Sriman Narayana in Vaikuntha same as Ganesha being Vishwaksena?

Thanks again.

The verse that Smaranam posted seems to indicate that Sriman Narayana has to be worshipped along with His eternal associates, whom we refer to as Nitya Suris. I am not able to map the Names properly but in general the Nitya suris are many. One thing to note is that these associates are not worshipped seperately as a prime deity of a temple but only as His subordinates using Vaishnava Agamas. Sri Vishwaksenar is worshipped as the leader of all the Suris in yagnas etc, at the start of all Vishnu Yagnas.

Regarding elephant faced Nitya Suri, the Sri Vaishnavas worship one called Gajananar - He has a Thiruman and His tusk is not broken. He is celebrated as Vishwaksenar's minister in Vishnu Sahasrana slokham - yasya dwirada vaktrAdyAH.... NathamunigaL is considered to be His amsam. I believe there is a Sannadhi of the Nitya Suri somewhere - in Tirumala or so. He is not to be confused with the Rudra GaNa Vinayaka.

[Viraja]

Regarding elephant faced Nitya Suri, the Sri Vaishnavas worship one called Gajananar - He has a Thiruman and His tusk is not broken. He is celebrated as Vishwaksenar's minister in Vishnu Sahasrana slokham - yasya dwirada vaktrAdyAH.... NathamunigaL is considered to be His amsam. I believe there is a Sannadhi of the Nitya Suri somewhere - in Tirumala or so. He is not to be confused with the Rudra GaNa Vinayaka.

Oh, wow! This is new to me.. I wonder if then, that in Vaishnava pujas such as Sri Satyanarayana puja, it is meant to give respect first to this Sri Gajananar first, and in the course of time, people started believing it is to Sri Ganesha instead...

[Anirudh]

I now understand that Sri Ganesha is an eternally liberated associate of Sriman Narayana in Vaikuntha, who lives in the spiritual sky. But this view is not so much heard-of in Vaishnavam? I have not read any work anywhere about Sri Ganesha's association in any kind with Lord Sriman Narayana? Where can I learn more about this?

May be time to check with Islamic website or Zakir and grace us with the details they offer ...

[jignyAsu]

Oh, wow! This is new to me.. I wonder if then, that in Vaishnava pujas such as Sri Satyanarayana puja, it is meant to give respect first to this Sri Gajananar first, and in the course of time, people started believing it is to Sri Ganesha instead...
SathyaNarayana pooja is not a part of the Sri Vaishnava tradition as commonly misunderstood. It seems to be of recent origin and I am sure they are not concerned with worshipping any Nitya Suri like Gajananar etc. They are also not associated with an ancient Guru Parampara of any kind. So, we shouldn't understand the Sri Vaishnava tradition based on this. He is worshipped in all US Sri Vaishnava temple because He has many Andra devotees and since He is Narayana, it is considered ok. Again an example on how only the 80 or so south Indian Divya Desas are to be considered a model for SriVaishnava practices.

In Sri Vaishnavam, Sri Vishwaksenar is always worshipped during the start of every Yagna and Gajananar worship is not very widespread. But irrespective, none of the associates are worshipped separetly or without Vaishnava symbols. This is a very important point to note.

[smaranam]

Thank you for the clarification, I now understand that Sri Ganesha is an eternally liberated associate of Sriman Narayana in Vaikuntha, who lives in the spiritual sky. But this view is not so much heard-of in Vaishnavam? I have not read any work anywhere about Sri Ganesha's association in any kind with Lord Sriman Narayana? Where can I learn more about this?
Namaste VirajaJi

What this is saying, is that the devas are pure devotees of BhagvAn in VaikunTha. DurgA, GaNesh, BramhA, SadAshiva, Lakshmi, Saraswati...

When Lakshmi (stand-alone without NArAyaNa), DurgA/KAli, Saraswati, GaNesh are worshipped in the material world, it is sakAm bhakti, fruitive prayers with expectation of some gain (as opposed to nishkAm bhakti). People who want material gains are "in the material world" Therefore such worship is of this world, and this is what Shri KRshNa calls "avidhipUrvakam" saying it gives temporary fruits.
It is not shAsvat - eternal.

Here Jiva Goswami is saying these are the material-world demigod positions for sakAm bhakti.
We can see this.
Saraswati - to do well in exams / musical career
Ganesh - wealth/obstacles
Lakshmi -prosperity
DurgA - for kula (family) well-being & prosperity

Whereas, in VaikunTha (which by the way includes the spiritual KailAsh of SadAshiva), they are not playing this role. They are pure devotee associates of NArAyaNa, and glorify Him. They are one big family.

To know which DurgA you are worshipping, you would introspect yr motives - are they pure, spiritual? nishkAm? Also, VaishNav do not worship all these as the Supreme Lord, but as His pArshads, associates.
Therefore the verse says "abhimukhAn" - facing the Lord. They make a semicircle around Him.

Haribol _/\_

[Viraja]

Namaste jignyAsu ji and Smaranam ji

Thank you for the clarifications. To sum it up:

i) As per jignyAsu ji's clarification, it appears to me that worship of Sri Ganesha has no grounding in Sri Vaishnava pujas.

ii) As per Smaranam ji's clarification, it appears that Sri Ganesha (and Durga, Lakshmi...) being the pure devotees and eternal associates of Sriman Narayana, that they are worshiped first during Sri Vaishnav pujas, but the devotees doing so mainly for reasons of removal of obstacles, prosperity and such..

Thank you both! :)

[smaranam]

So if your community is having GaNesh Utsav (festival) for several days from GaNesh Chaturthi, or yr friend does, as a VaishNav you can always be there to welcome Him in that consciousness, not as THE Supreme.

In Maharashtra, the tradition is to sing all aartis of 5-6 devas starting with GaNesh and ending with the Supreme NArAyaNa -

kAyena vAchA manas endriyervat
budhyAtmanavA prakRti svabhAvAt
karomi yadyat sakalam parasmai
NArAyaNAyeti samarapayAmi ... (SB quote)

Why? Because when GaNesh visits towns, communities and homes each year, all Devas are present on the occasion :) always. Even if you cannot see them there.
Or at any time, this is the bhAv. I am not suggesting this is a VaishNav thing, but there is this oneness spirit.

So, the aarati series (Ganesh durga shankar vitthal dattatreya) ends with a beautiful aarti of the Supreme Whole NArAyaNa composed by Sant NAmdev (a great devotee of ViTThal i.e. KRshNa in sakhya ras), which includes this SB verse above, sharanagati verse sung by Ramanuj always (tvameva mata...)
and finally all names of Ram KRshNa Hari and the Mahamantra.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIDlXNSNwA4


Same is said in Gauranga's aarati - Shiva Shuka NArad BramhA all attend Gauranga's aarti :) (shive shuke narada preme gada gada...)

Hari Hari Bol

[smaranam]

Thank you for the clarifications. To sum it up:

ii) As per Smaranam ji's clarification, it appears that Sri Ganesha (and Durga, Lakshmi...) being the pure devotees and eternal associates of Sriman Narayana, that they are worshiped first during Sri Vaishnav pujas, but the devotees doing so mainly for reasons of removal of obstacles, prosperity and such..:)

No, it is because the Lord tells Uddhav to worship Him with His associates, merely to honor them as that, not for material gains. Please do not mix the two.

The stand-alone worship of these as Supreme is not VaishNav.

I think the pArshad worship is followed mostly in Madhva tradition. However, VaishNavas do not generally worship them explicitly, following the Gita and because

aakAshAt patitam toyam yathA gacchati sAgaram
sarva deva namaskaran keshavam prati gacchati ||

Just as raindrops from the sky ultimately meet the ocean,
namaskAr to any deva reaches Keshav (KRshNa, VishNu) alone.

Keshava is the Lord of Ka (BramhA) and Isha (Shiva).

[Viraja]

Oh, yes, you bet, Smaranamji! I'll be the first one at the temple to celebrate Sri Ganesh chaturthi. When I ran my Ketu Mahadasha earlier, honestly, I worshiped Sri Ganesha to rid of my obstacles with my career. I used to prepare 51 modaks to be offered in to the yagna fire at the temple on Ganesh Chaturthi day for 3 subsequent years!

Now I shall attend Sri Ganesh ji's puja with a sincere devotion to Lord Narayan's purest devotee. Thank you.

[jignyAsu]

Now I shall attend Sri Ganesh ji's puja with a sincere devotion to Lord Narayan's purest devotee. Thank you.

A Sri Vaishnava would say that in that puja Sri Ganesh has already been worshipped as the highest Brahman using Vedic mantras and Shaiva agamas etc. So that is not equivalent to worshipping a pure devotee of Sriman Narayana. There's no pure eternal devotee version of gods in SriVaishnavam.

Nor is it intended by the thousands of devotees assembled there to worship Sri Ganesh as a devotee. Saying so may hurt their feelings.

Its the difference between worshipping a Vaishnava as a servant of Lord Narayana as opposed to worshipping him/her as being a Jagat Karana - both are different. And the theerta prasada that one receives here is influenced by the mantras. If you think Narayana mantras/prasad have one effect worship of other deities must certainly have another effect.

Just making sure you understand the difference in Vaishnava philosophies, that's all and one is not to be confused with the other. In the end, it is the tradition that appeals to you the most be it Shaiva or Vaishnava or Shakta.

[smaranam]

Oh, yes, you bet, Smaranamji! I'll be the first one at the temple to celebrate Sri Ganesh chaturthi.
Sure, that is totally upto you as long as the consciousness is VaishNav.

Just so we are all on the same page...

When I ran my Ketu Mahadasha earlier, honestly, I worshiped Sri Ganesha to rid of my obstacles with my career. I used to prepare 51 modaks to be offered in to the yagna fire at the temple on Ganesh Chaturthi day for 3 subsequent years!
This is not a VaishNav thing to do.


Now I shall attend Sri Ganesh ji's puja with a sincere devotion to Lord Narayan's purest devotee. Thank you.
This is VaishNav, but optional :)

[Viraja]

A Sri Vaishnava would say that in that puja Sri Ganesh has already been worshipped as the highest Brahman using Vedic mantras and Shaiva agamas etc. So that is not equivalent to worshipping a pure devotee of Sriman Narayana. There's no pure eternal devotee version of gods in SriVaishnavam.

Nor is it intended by the thousands of devotees assembled there to worship Sri Ganesh as a devotee. Saying so may hurt their feelings.

Its the difference between worshipping a Vaishnava as a servant of Lord Narayana as opposed to worshipping him/her as being a Jagat Karana - both are different. And the theerta prasada that one receives here is influenced by the mantras. If you think Narayana mantras/prasad have one effect worship of other deities must certainly have another effect.

Just making sure you understand the difference in Vaishnava philosophies, that's all and one is not to be confused with the other. In the end, it is the tradition that appeals to you the most be it Shaiva or Vaishnava or Shakta.

You have a very important point here, jignyAsu ji. Maybe that explains why Vaishnavas might celebrate Ganesh Chaturthi at home but might not visit him at his temple? Anyway, I have noted your point well.

[smaranam]

A Sri Vaishnava would say that in that puja Sri Ganesh has already been worshipped as the highest Brahman using Vedic mantras and Shaiva agamas etc. So that is not equivalent to worshipping a pure devotee of Sriman Narayana. There's no pure eternal devotee version of gods in SriVaishnavam.

Nor is it intended by the thousands of devotees assembled there to worship Sri Ganesh as a devotee. Saying so may hurt their feelings.

Its the difference between worshipping a Vaishnava as a servant of Lord Narayana as opposed to worshipping him/her as being a Jagat Karana - both are different. And the theerta prasada that one receives here is influenced by the mantras. If you think Narayana mantras/prasad have one effect worship of other deities must certainly have another effect.

Just making sure you understand the difference in Vaishnava philosophies, that's all and one is not to be confused with the other. In the end, it is the tradition that appeals to you the most be it Shaiva or Vaishnava or Shakta.

Namaste,

Agreed, but how can you refuse prasad? Also, KRshNa in your heart knows your consciousness.
These are community celebrations and generally you don't find people saying to their next door neighbors "I am VaishNav I cannot participate" although, Virajaji has a choice :)

Don't join into chanting the Ganapati Atharvasheersha for instance, which says things like "tvam bramhaa tvam vishnu tvam rudra tvam indrascha agnischa vayuscha..."

Also, the aaratis praise each Deity as Supreme - This is a smarta thing to do and highly prevalent in Maharashtra. e.g. Durga - "you alone can protect us, who else can?" etc.

So, you don't have to sing all that. You don't have to declare to the others assembled that Ganesh is a pure devotee either.

You don't do the puja yourself, but just passive participation.
And oh yes, don't see the moon that day :)

_/\_ Haribol

[smaranam]

The whole idea is that they all share a common AtmA, the Lord also says in the BhAgvatam Canto4 - "never distinguish between Bramha Shiva and Me",
but surely this taken directly is not VaishNav.

[jignyAsu]

You have a very important point here, jignyAsu ji. Maybe that explains why Vaishnavas might celebrate Ganesh Chaturthi at home but might not visit him at his temple? Anyway, I have noted your point well.

This point is the instruction from all the Srivaishnava Acharyas of the great Guru Parampara. For a Sri Vaishnava, to seek another deity is strictly prohibited just like for a wife another man's association is. As per Sri Krishna, there is no need to resort to any deity for any purpose anyway.

And by "Vaishnava" I think you mean Sri Vaishnava here. No, they genuinely believe that not praying to Sri Ganesha will affect them. They will be visiting Ganesh temple for sure. Similarly with Nava grahas, too. As Smaranam says, for a Vaishnava to resort to anyone other than Lord Vishnu is strictly prohibited and is a source of downfall. I know that the Nava Grahas are a weakness for iyengars, but even for that we have Sriman Narayana who stands as Rahu, Ketu etc. in a divya desam out of His causeless mercy.

[philosoraptor]

In the yajur veda upAkarma vidhi which we did yesterday, there is a part in the beginning where one pays homage to ?Ganesha as per the Sri Vaishnava manual - it occurs before the mahA-sankalpa. However, I think it is not "Ganesha" per se but rather Vishvaksena or another associate - maybe someone could clarify.

EDIT: I just checked both of the Sri Vaishnava upAkarma manuals that I have - it is indeed "vighna navAraNam/vishvaksena dhyAnam" and NOT ganesha. Is Vishvaksena also considered to have an elephant's head? There is mention of a tusk in the shloka...

[jignyAsu]

Agreed, but how can you refuse prasad? Also, KRshNa in your heart knows your consciousness.
These are community celebrations and generally you don't find people saying to their next door neighbors "I am VaishNav I cannot participate" although, Virajaji has a choice

I do understand what you mean here. Some Hindus gets offended by the refusal and it is unfortunate. After all, the Vaishnava and Shaiva tradition is age old and we are not making up new things here.

And we have to stop somewhere here. It will be Lord Ganesh, Shiva prasad first. Then someone will offer us Sai or Aiyappa or Aiyanaar or Kalki baba prasad. If you believe that Krishna prasad effects you, then we can't assume that other prasads don't have any effect at all. All in all a very sensitive topic.

But with my own exprience, they sooner or later tend to understand. All my close friends know that I am a pure Vaishnava. They include Iyers, Shaivas and Murugan devotees and I only encourage them to become better in the tradition they have embraced.

One pointed devotion to one deity is not the same as hating other deities. The tragedy of today's Hinduism is not because we iyengars, iyers, shaivas and shaktas have our differences but its because we are less informed about our own tradition.

[jignyAsu]

In the yajur veda upAkarma vidhi which we did yesterday, there is a part in the beginning where one pays homage to ?Ganesha as per the Sri Vaishnava manual - it occurs before the mahA-sankalpa. However, I think it is not "Ganesha" per se but rather Vishvaksena or another associate - maybe someone could clarify.

EDIT: I just checked both of the Sri Vaishnava upAkarma manuals that I have - it is indeed "vighna navAraNam/vishvaksena dhyAnam" and NOT ganesha. Is Vishvaksena also considered to have an elephant's head? There is mention of a tusk in the shloka...

Yes indeed the Vignam in this slokha and also in Suklam Bhadaram Vishnum is strangely confused with Lord Ganesh. Sri Vishvaksenar is the leader of the Vishnu Ganas is invoked in all Yagnas in Sri Vaishnava temples.

He does not have a elephant head but Sri Gajananar does. The verse says that Vishvaksenar or Senai Mudaliyar has several Nitya suris reporting to Him including the elephant faced (Gajananar). We have Senai Mudaliyar's sannadhi is several Divya Desams and He is not elephant faced.

http://photos.divyadesam.com/aug-09/photos-hindu-gods-goddesses-aug-27-09.shtml


Sri Visvaksenar is an Acharya is our Sri Vaishnava Guru Parampara.

[smaranam]

If you believe that Krishna prasad effects you, then we can't assume that other prasads don't have any effect at all. All in all a very sensitive topic.

I have some good news. Guess who eats all that you offer to anyone on your list above? Of course it is that natkhat Gopal who does :)

BG 9.23 (http://bhagavadgitaasitis.com/9/23/en): Those who are devotees of other gods and who worship them with faith actually worship only Me, O son of Kuntī (http://bhagavadgitaasitis.com/k/kunti), but they do so in a wrong way.
BG 9.24 (http://bhagavadgitaasitis.com/9/24/en): I am the only enjoyer and master of all sacrifices. Therefore, those who do not recognize My true transcendental nature fall down.

The Lord is yadnya and yadnya-pati, yadnya-bhoktA. He accepts all offerings and all sacrifices. People put tulasi leaf on naivedya for DurgA Devi. Guess why? Because You Know Who is going to be the bhoktA.

upadRshTA amumantA bhartA bhoktA maheshwara... BG Chapter 13

Hari bolo _/\_

[philosoraptor]

Namaste,

Agreed, but how can you refuse prasad? Also, KRshNa in your heart knows your consciousness.
These are community celebrations and generally you don't find people saying to their next door neighbors "I am VaishNav I cannot participate" although, Virajaji has a choice :)

Don't join into chanting the Ganapati Atharvasheersha for instance, which says things like "tvam bramhaa tvam vishnu tvam rudra tvam indrascha agnischa vayuscha..."

Also, the aaratis praise each Deity as Supreme - This is a smarta thing to do and highly prevalent in Maharashtra. e.g. Durga - "you alone can protect us, who else can?" etc.

So, you don't have to sing all that. You don't have to declare to the others assembled that Ganesh is a pure devotee either.

You don't do the puja yourself, but just passive participation.
And oh yes, don't see the moon that day :)

_/\_ Haribol

Pranams,

I think the issue is one of propriety. Just like when a boy is married to a girl, is it ok for that boy to be seen speaking casually and being friendly to other girls who are not his wife? Similarly, if one has surrendered to shrIman nArAyaNa, then he does not seek to worship any other deva. This is my understanding of the culture. Also, just FYI, I was born a smArtha and my family does do these puja-s. But I honestly just go along with it because it is expected. I would not be bothered if our family stopped doing them.

[jignyAsu]

I have some good news. Guess who eats all that you offer to anyone on your list above? Of course it is that natkhat Gopal who does :)

Hare Krsna Mataji,

The effect of a prasad depends on the deity, the Agamas with which the deity was installed, mantras chanted in the temple, the preists, saints who have sung praise of the deity, the devotees assembled etc. The individual's mindset cannot change the effect of a prasad - atleast not significantly enough.

And we are not even talking about the Vedic deities here. There are so many babas in the country of different reputation and what about taking food offered by a Christian or a Muslim? Just by thinking that Keshava is the consumer of all prasad cannot possibly make all prasad auspicious. The Prasad changes one's mind and it is not the other way. A baby consuming different prasad also has different effects.

Atleast I always assert that no Hindu should deviate from a Vedic deity like Sriman Narayana, Lord Shiva, Kartikeya (Muruga), Shakti etc. The effect of prasad of even these great Vedic deities are different and the non-Vedic ones are not even in the picture here. This is the logical conclusion that comes out of philosophy that holds Vishnu supremacy.

The view of Sri Vaishnavas is that the worshippers of all these deities are great. However having coming this far by developing the mindset that VAsudevam sarvam iti, to worship other deities and consume their prasad is a (relative) set back. Again, yagnas or Sandhya Vandanam where various deities are worshipped is different from worshipping them in their own temples.

Ofcourse, Sri Vaishnavas still bow in respect to other deities but don't hang out there or consume any prasad that's all.

[philosoraptor]

+1......

[smaranam]

praNAm

As Smaranam says, for a Vaishnava to resort to anyone other than Lord Vishnu is strictly prohibited and is a source of downfall.

Just for the record, smaranam did not say this on this thread, not in so many words or these words anyway such as downfall. However, this is indirectly implied by the 10 offences to Shri Hari's Holy names, padma purAN. It falls in the category of nAmaparAdh for those who chant harinAm, but all of these are implications.

Smaranam only pointed out what is and is not "a VaishNav thing to do"

In fact, a devotee does not need these rules - they are an automatic reaction. "I shall not join you in Ganpati Atharvasheersha, no way. Not even once, 21 times is out of the question" :)
Why? It is simple. MhAro ri giridhara gopAla, dUsarA na koyA...

________

Aside from this, all good points jignyAsuji, noted. For some, it may mean resorting to Atma-tattva-jnAna, to live in harmony with surroundings, but if a Hari-bhakta can stay in it like a kamala-patra (Lotus leaf), untouched, without having to resort to jnana, a big Haribol! After all, pure devotion is free of karma, jnana, anyAbhilAshA acc. to Rup Goswami.

_/\_

[jopmala]

Namaste
To me, vaishnab in the line of sri chaitanya mahaprabhu should offer prem bhakti towads sri krishna only and in that way shiva ganapati etc gods are automatically satisfied.
I am quoting some lines from chaitanya charitamrita madhya lila 22nd chapter
1. krishna kripalu Arjunere lakshya kariya // Jagatere rakhiachen upadesh diya
Translation :: “Krishna is very much kripalu (mercyful) and so he has given instructions to the whole world by aiming at Arjuna”.
“ Hear again My supreme word, the most secret of all. As you are dearly beloved of Me, I tell you what is the best for you” -BG-18.64
“ Become my minded, My lover and adorer, a sacrificer to Me, bow yourself to Me, to Me you shall come; this is My pledge and promise to you, for dear are you to Me” -BG 18.65
2. Purba ajna veda dharma karma yoga jnan // sab sadhi seshe ai ajna balvan
Translation :: executing the procesess of previous orders such as vedic ritualistic ceremonies,karma, yoga and jnan etc , at the end ‘this order’ is balvan or powerful”. ‘ this order ‘ means above order.
3. “ Ai ajna bale bhakter sradhya yadi hoya // sarva karma tyag kari se krishna bhajaya”
Translation :: If the bhaktas have faith( sradhya) on ‘this order’ , leaving aside all other activities (sarva karma) they perform krishna bhajan or serve sri krishna
4. “sradhya sabde biswas kahe sudida nischoy // krishne bhakti kaile sarva karma krita haya
Translation :: the word sradhya means firm faith unto sri krishna. All the activities ( sarva karma) are done simply by rendering bhakti towards sri krishna.
5 “ Yatha tarurmula nishechanena // trapyanti tat-skandha bhujopasakha
Pranopaharacha cha yathendriyanam // tathaiba sarvarhanam uchyutejya”
Translation :: “ we need not pour water on the trunk braches or sub branches of a tree if we pour water on the root of it similarly when we supply food to the stomach the remaining indriyas or senses automatically satisfied. In the same way, if we render bhakti with firm faith to sri krishna , we need not satisfy other gods. ( Sri Mad Bhagavat-4.31.14)
6. “ bhakta batsal kritajna samartha badanya // hena krishna chadi pandit nahi bhaje anya”
Krishna is very kind to his bhaktas,he is always grateful and magnanimous , he posses all abilities. A pandit doees not give up Krishna to worship any one else.
All these above quotations from sri chaitanya charitamrita only show that vaishnab in the line of chaitanya mahaprabhu need not worship shiva ganesha narayana Vishnu etc etc because all these gods are satisfied when vaishnab offer bhakti with firm faith to sri Krishna.

[Viraja]

Vishnu Sarvottama!

http://www.telugupedia.com/wiki/images/0/08/Lord_Vishnu.jpg

[Sudarshan]

Namaste,

None who is serious in pursuit of moksha through SriVaishnavam is supposed to worship a deity other than Lord Narayana, as instructed clearly and unanimously by the Alwars and Acharyas. The instruction is Ananya shEshatvam to Lord Vishnu only or absolute dedication without deviating even in dreams. Statements from Bhagavad Gita is pointed out where Sri Krishna denounces worship of other gods and say that they get their powers only from Him and so there is no need to go anywhere else.

You may, however, find quite a few iyengars that are Sri Vaishnavas by birth only and not by heart worshipping Lord Ganesha, Navagrahas, Sai etc due to family/society influence. I was once told by an iyengar that her family tradition is to visit Lord Vaideeswaran (Shiva) temple when a child becomes an year old.

Many Hindus subscribe to a popular belief that Lord Ganesha is the remover of all obstacles is to be prayed to before starting any task. We don't see any pramANA for this in the shAstrAs.

Also I can't speak for other Vaishnavas but with what I have observed I am sure that none of their Acharyas like Madhvacharya, Sri Chaitanya etc require them to worship Lord Ganesha first.

What you said is true for a mumuxu Srivaishnava, who are really hard to come by these days.

If you can beg for admissions in schools and colleges by paying donations or other means, and bow down or pay or take bribes to any number of human beings to get your job done, I don't see any problems whatsoever in anya devata upasana.

What really happens is people pick and choose religeous doctrines convenient to them and bypass whatever is inconvenient and start judging others as real or fake Vaishnavas. Do you take medicines if you are sick? Do you seek a lawyers's help if find yourself in legal trouble? How is worshipping of anya devata worse than these? What happened to your trust in Srimannarayana in these situations? So this is all selective choosing of whatever is convenient.

Most important thing is see the Lord's presence in all the Gods and honor them like you do to your parents, Acharyas, other devotees, and the whole of humanity with all its innumerable creatures.

[philosoraptor]

Seeing shrIman nArAyaNa's presence in other devas is not mutually exclusive from the doctrine of worshiping nArAyaNa alone. On the contrary, it is precisely because the jnAni can see His presence in the other devas that he makes no separate effort to worship the devas.

As far as the issue of "picking religious doctrines that are convenient," I must say very frankly that I don't find Vaishnavism to be convenient in the least. All this reading of shAstra, waking up early in the morning to do sandhya-vandana, doing pUja, etc. etc. I just don't have much time left for recreational activities...

:(

[jignyAsu]

What you said is true for a mumuxu Srivaishnava, who are really hard to come by these
days.
Every SriVaishnava who has adminstered Pancha Samaskaram through a bonafide SriVaishnava Acharya is a mumuxu only. Because he wishes to do uninterrupted Kainkaryam to Sriman Narayana here and hereafter. I guess what you mean here by a 'mumuxu SriVaishnava' is someone that is ideal like Alwar Saints without any limitations. The instructions of exclusive Vishnu worship is meant for saints and sinners alike.

It is also pointed out that in Bhagavad Gita after discouraging worship of other gods, the kind Lord praises His exclusive worshippers even if they are not mumuxus and after Him for money only.



If you can beg for admissions in schools and colleges by paying donations or other means, and bow down or pay
or take bribes to any number of human beings to get your job done, I don't see any problems whatsoever in anya
devata upasana.

We resort to Sriman Narayana only to cure us of these limitations born out of anAdhi Karma. In Gita He says that His devotee even though a sinner should be considered great because having made the right decision he very soon gets rid of all his sins.

Resorting (or not) to other deities has got nothing to do with if one does dharma or adharma. For that matter, we are even advised against eating outside food. It cannot mean that those who are not ideal SriVaishnavas
should start eating outside.



What really happens is people pick and choose religeous doctrines convenient to them and bypass whatever is
inconvenient and start judging others as real or fake Vaishnavas.

This is not about judging anyone but laying out what the tradition actually is. No one talked about any Vaishnava being a fake.



Do you take medicines if you are sick? Do you seek a lawyers's help if find yourself in legal trouble? How is
worshipping of anya devata worse than these? What happened to your trust in Srimannarayana in these situations?
So this is all selective choosing of whatever is convenient.

I don't know why Sriman Narayana wouldn't want me to go to a doctor or a lawyer. As mentioned above if I am not an Alwar, it doesn't mean I should resort to other deities.



Most important thing is see the Lord's presence in all the Gods and honor them like you do to your parents,
Acharyas, other devotees, and the whole of humanity with all its innumerable creatures.
We SriVaishnavas do respect all devas and follow basic rules of respect like not pointing feet in their direction etc like we do to our parents or elders in general. We just refrain from worshipping any of these devas (or parents) as being a jagat karana with Vedic hymns and consume their prasad.

We Hindus are an amalgamation of very different traditions like Vaishnava, Shaiva, Shakta or recent Sai worshippers etc. holding mutual respect for each other. We will continue to teach the world on how to coexist peacefully with our differences. We should understand our differences and not be frowned upon if we take our Acharyas a bit more seriously.

Jai Sri Krishna!

[Araloka]

In The Nectar of Devotion commentary by Srila Prabhupada it even says one should worship Ganapati before beginning anything else - I haven't ever seen anyone in ISKCON actually do that though.

[philosoraptor]

In The Nectar of Devotion commentary by Srila Prabhupada it even says one should worship Ganapati before beginning anything else - I haven't ever seen anyone in ISKCON actually do that though.

I remember reading that also, but I have yet to see a Gaudiya Vaishnava temple or tradition in which this is observed. I found that inconsistency to be quite strange.

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste.Jai shri narayana. श्री गणेशाय नमः

Worshipping ganesha in vaishnwism is general thing. However vaishnwa doesn't worship ganesha is very weird and strange thing!
Traditional vaishnwas worship ganesha with same devotion as they worship Vishnu.

Sant eknath, who was a great of lord krishna was a maharashtrian vaishnwa. He taught the devotion to lord krishna and how to surrender him. In his commentey of bhagavat purana he praises both ganesha and sarasvati. Because they both r gods of knowledge and liberation is not possible without knowledge !
He praised him like this:

1) Shri Ekadanta Gajanana, I also bow to You. In the Present, You are making manifest the
Multiplicity in Unity, yet You are not disturbing the Unity (Advaita = Non-duality).

3)You are called Lambodara (having a big belly) because within You the whole world – both
moving and stationary exists and, therefore, You are really the nearest relative of all Beings!

(4) The family-life of the man who gets Your (auspicious) glimpse becomes happy and therefore, the
name Wighnaharta is becoming You very aptly.

(5) O Ganaraja! (the king of Ganas), Your face is joy itself. All the four accomplishments of human
life are Your face, arms, and Your tooth, which shines, gives light to the luminous bodies (stars,
planets etc).

(6) The Vedas and the Upanishads (which are respectively the ‘Primary doctrine’ and the
‘Secondary doctrine’, called Poorva-meemansa, and the Uttar-meemansa) are attached with love
to both of Your ears, and all the four kinds of speech, viz, the soundless Para, Pashyanti,
Madhyama, and Waikhari – are standing with folded hands in Your mouth. (They are at your
command).

(7) O, Vinayaka! Your vision is such that by its power, the whole world is seen as Atman and is
divine and gives happiness and contentment.

(8) Your belly is big which is full of joy, there is joy also in the navel; and the girdle around Your
middle, which is called Nagabandha, is enhancing your beauty.

(9) You are wearing the white cloth of Shuddha Sattwa (Pure Piety), and the golden ornaments on
Your body are appearing beautiful because of the beauty of Your own body.

(10) Prakriti and Purusha (the Female and the Male Principles) are Your two feet. You have
pressed them down under Your body and seated in the natural easy posture, You are very
graceful in Your completeness.

(11) If even for a moment, we have the fortune to look at You, calamity is not found though we hunt
for it. This is because of the spade in Your hand, which destroys the bondage of worldly life.

(12) You pull, by your crooked goad, such devotee who is very dear to you, and freeing him from
the disaster of wordly life, keep him safe with You.

(13) By giving the sweet 'modaka’ which is joy itself, to Your devotee, who is really desireless,
You give him real ecstasy of divine joy.

(14) You are easily established in the smallest object and, therefore, the adjective ‘Mouse-Rider’
is very properly fitting for you.

(15) If we observe carefully, You are neither man nor elephant, thus You are beyond the visible and
invisible. Knowing You to be beyond any modification, (Vikara) I worship you as a supreme bramhan only.

So did u understand who is lord ganesha?

[Viraja]

Hinduism/Krishna,

:) That was a nice stuthi on Lord Ganesha written by Sant Eknath ji. Thanks for sharing it here.

As for your question, well, there are perhaps 2 questions which prompted me to post this question:

i) When Vishnu is 'sarvam', that is, if you see in his 'Virat' swaroopa, even Ganesha mukha is depicted as one of Sri Vishnu's, what then is the necessity to worship Ganesha explicitly?

ii) Why is Sri Ganesha worship becomes important in a Vaishnava puja when none of Vaishnava deities are worshiped in Shaiva rituals?

[hinduism♥krishna]

नमस्तु ।।

In sanatana vedic life, it is very uncommon to worship one god and to neglect other gods .If someone is devotee of one god .Its fine but this doesn't mean that one should not worship other gods.

Regards. Jai narayana hari ॐ ॐ ॐ

[philosoraptor]

Worshipping ganesha in vaishnwism is general thing. However vaishnwa doesn't worship ganesha is very weird and strange thing! This may sound weird to modern sectarian vaishnwas.

I for one, am getting tired of sectarian fanatics, who, despite being banned multiple times, never cease to return with the ongoing sectarian, one-sided cheap shots.

The difference between an intelligent debate and a noisy, sectarian brawl, is the presence in the former of a willingness to read and understand the other side's position before rushing off to disagree with it. Unfortunately, some individuals don't bother with that courtesy. They just start with the "you're sectarian/I'm enlightened" angle and never back down no matter how many times they are proven wrong.

[hinduism♥krishna]

deleted

[Viraja]

Namastu.
yes, i read all posts and understood them.
I m nt forcing my view to anyone. I didn't say to someone ' u r sectarian '. I didn't say ' i m only right '.
What type of discussion this is? Is this a debate to prove ganesha worship is not neccessary? I didn't find any shastra proof on it. so what is the que of debating on such matter ?

Everyone has a view and i just presented it without disturbing others.

Regards.

Namaste Hinduism (luv) Krishna,

The other day I heard PUrusha Suktam and it was beginning with an invokation to Ganapathi (Ganaanaam twa ganapathi hawamahe...). Do you think Ganapathi invokation is thus indispensible for Vaishnava pujas? If so, why is it so?

Thanks.

[philosoraptor]

Namaste Hinduism (luv) Krishna,

The other day I heard PUrusha Suktam and it was beginning with an invokation to Ganapathi (Ganaanaam twa ganapathi hawamahe...). Do you think Ganapathi invokation is thus indispensible for Vaishnava pujas? If so, why is it so?

Thanks.

Invokation to Ganapati is not part of puruSha-sukta as found in either Rg veda or yajur veda.

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste Hinduism (luv) Krishna,

The other day I heard PUrusha Suktam and it was beginning with an invokation to Ganapathi (Ganaanaam twa ganapathi hawamahe...). Do you think Ganapathi invokation is thus indispensible for Vaishnava pujas? If so, why is it so?

Thanks.
नमस्ते विराज, I think ganesha puja is necessary for vaishnwa. ganesha is called as god of knowledge. He is often identified with om supreme bramhan.He is master of all vidyas including atmavidya.
Ganesha is a non-sectarian deity, and Hindus invoke him at the beginning of prayers, important undertakings, and religious ceremonies .
Lord ganesha is commonly worshipped in bramhan families .In fact worship is incomplete without ganesh and vishnu.

Narad muni who is a bhakta of shankar and vishnu (vaishnwa) praises lord ganesha in many ways in narada purana. Ganapati stotra is one of them where narada addresses lord ganesha as a giver of moksha.

Thanks. हरी ॐ

[smaranam]

praNAm

Lord ganesha is commonly worshipped in bramhan families during panchapuja.
This is hindu sanatana dharma created by ishwara. Sanatana vaidikam has nothing to do with kaliyugic sectarianism of sanatan dharma.

Ancient vaishnwas were worshipping ganesha with vishnu treated both f them as the same. In kaliyuga also there r good no. of vaishnwa who worship ganesha and vishnu as supreme bramhan.

If my guess is correct, most of those brAmhaN families are smArta in origin, and smArtism pervades Maharashtra.

In any case this is slightly supported by KRshNa when He advises Uddhav - SB 11..27 - post#7 on this thread. Not treating the anya devas as exactly the same, but worshipping them alongside (before) NArAyaNa, along with His pArshads, personified Vedas, His Ayudha - shankha chakra gadA padma.

It is like - you are the guest, you don't just go straight to the host and keep talking to them alone. You also acknowledge and respect the members of the host's family.

Since EknAth Maharaj was a jnAni and most of the leaders of those smArta brAmhins were, they overlooked the hierarchy owing to jnAna.


But todays zealous vaishnwas ( mainly gaudiya) look at the other gods as they are enemies of vishnu. They say if we worship ganesha, lord will become angry and we will become deluded. Lol :D
None of the VaishNav fit the description you have given here such as "they think devas are enemies of VishNU" or "VishNu getting angry", but it is the Shri VaishNav who are more particular about not doing any pUjA for anya-deva-devatA.

GauDIyas come from a very devotional context. They are KRshNamay like the Gopis, and don't see any point in following anyone else, plus this is just fine and in line with the Bhagavad Gita.
GauDiya AchArya only say that if you are inclined to communicate with other devas, just seek their blessings to proceed smoothly in your devotional service TO KRshNa without any obstacles - but it is not necessary at all. SamarpaN is only and only at KRshNa's Lotus Feet.


But true vaishnwas consider any worship is incomplete without ganesha and vishnu.
not necessarily.


Narad muni who is a bhakta of shankar and vishnu (vaishnwa) praises lord ganesha in many ways in narada purana. Ganapati stotra is one of them where narada addresses lord ganesha as a giver of moksha.

Thanks. हरी ॐ Sure. NArad Muni is considered the Mind of BhagavAn. He had work to do, such as making Ganesh devotees properly established in Ganesh worship. That does not mean that each and every VaishNav has to necessarily follow suit. It is perfectly fine to focus on KRshNa alone. Ganesh is moksha-dAtA for His devotees, not for the VaishNav. Why should a VaishNav go anywhere else other than of their own accord.

om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya ~

[philosoraptor]

HK's sole basis for saying that "true Vaishnavas" should worship Ganesha is his personal opinion that Vaishnavas should worship Ganesha. That, and his arbitrary designation of Maharashtrian Vaishnavas as "ideal Vaishnavas," in contrast to Vaishnavas following Madhvacharya or Ramanuja.

A better example of ipse dixit logic would be harder to find.

[hinduism♥krishna]

HK's sole basis for saying that "true Vaishnavas" should worship Ganesha is his personal opinion that Vaishnavas should worship Ganesha. That, and his arbitrary designation of Maharashtrian Vaishnavas as "ideal Vaishnavas," in contrast to Vaishnavas following Madhvacharya or Ramanuja.

A better example of ipse dixit logic would be harder to find.

namaste philosoraptor.

vaishnwas should worship ganesha is not my personal opinion. This is the instruction of lord Krishna.
Lord Krishna instructs us to worship him alongwith other lords.
Lets see what lord keshava says
Bhagavat purana "11th skandha " Lord Krishna says :

Meaning of the Verse 29:
Durga, Vinayaka, Vyasa, Wishwaksena, Gurus, Devas are to be placed on all the four sides of the Lord but their faces should be towards the Lord. All these are to be worshipped mainly sprinkling water in very small quantity. (29)

The images of the goddess Durga, god Vinayaka, the sage Vyas, and Wishwaksena may be placed on the four sides of the main image facing that image and their worship may be done.
The Guru and the Supreme Guru are one with the Almighty God who is the highest Guru and Guru should be worshipped in the image of the main God (Lord Shri Krishna). No separate
pooja is required. Only one should announce the name of one’s Guru also as “ मूर्तिस्थीतं गुरुं पूजयिष्ये "
Indra and other regents of eight directions are to be placed (symbolically as betel nuts and to
be worshipped by sprinkling of water etc)
The four deities with Durga the goddess, and the Guru should be worshipped with water,
and other servings as well properly following the instructions of the conductor of the ritual.


Thankz, phil.
Jai shri hari

[jignyAsu]

Ancient vaishnwas were worshipping ganesha with vishnu treated both f them as the same. In kaliyuga also there r good no. of vaishnwa who worship ganesha and vishnu as supreme bramhan.


Pranams, hinduism♥krishna.

I fail to understand how a "Vaishnava" will mysteriously also worship someone other than Vishnu as the supreme Brahman.

To respect some deity does not mean that the deity should be worshiped as the supreme Brahman. As an extreme example we don't visit church or mosque either..that doesn't mean we are intolerant of them or hate them right?

But still we give special importance only to the Vedic deities (as opposed to non Vedic). All devas starting from Lord Brahma are duly worshiped in the Sri Vaishnava yagnas, Sandhya Vandana etc as per the prescription of shAstrAs. But as a Vaishnava, we don't visit other temples where deities other than Vishnu are worshiped as a supreme Brahman. Therefore for SriVaishnavas only Lord Vishnu is the supreme Brahman with all other Vedic deities being secondary and with other religions not even being in the picture.

For centuries the Sri Vaishnavas have been co-existing with the Shaivas in the same land. Not one example where a Sri Vaishnava went to a Shaiva and said - You have to include Vishnu worship in your schedule to prove to us that you do not hate our deity and are tolerant.

I do understand the society pressure which can make some Vaishnavas comprise on attending another deity's temple or consuming their prasad. But I don't see how a Vaishnava can equate another deity as a supreme or another deity can give him something that Lord Vishnu can't give.



But todays zealous vaishnwas ( mainly gaudiya) look at the other gods as they are enemies of vishnu. They say if we worship ganesha, lord will become angry and we will become deluded. Lol :D

There is no Vaishnava sect out there that considers worshipping other deities will make Lord angry. Infact, the unanimous Vaishnava understanding is that Hari is endowed with supreme tolerance, patience, vAtsalyam, compassion and forgiveness. The only instance where He gets angry is with Bhagavata Apacharam.


I would like to add one more point in the end. In Bhagavad Gita, the Lord talks about the rarety of His Bhakta but then almost all Hindus worship Him. So what He means here is that the soul that worships Him alone is very rare. Even among those only 1 in 1000 understand Sriman Narayana in full.

Jai Sri Krishna.

[Viraja]

What HK is saying vibes well with what Smaranam ji had instructed - that, Ganesha, Sri Durga and Sri Vishvaksena are pure devotees of the Lord that accompany him in Sri Vaikuntha and therefore should be given respects when proceeding to worship the Lord. I guess I am right in my understanding..

[Viraja]

I am going to post this question in a leading SriVaishnava cyber group and see what they say... :)

[philosoraptor]

What HK is saying vibes well with what Smaranam ji had instructed - that, Ganesha, Sri Durga and Sri Vishvaksena are pure devotees of the Lord that accompany him in Sri Vaikuntha and therefore should be given respects when proceeding to worship the Lord. I guess I am right in my understanding..

I don't know of any reference that says that gaNesha is a (1) a "pure devotee" of the Lord and that (2) He accompanies Him in Sri Vaikuntha. (1) would not be hard to believe, I'm just not aware of any shAstric pramANa for that statement. (2) would be very difficult to believe, given that gaNesha's activities would have to be in the same sphere as that of shiva and pArvathI, which we all know is not Vaikuntha.

Jijnyasu has already indicated that the elephant-headed attendant on Lord Vishnu in Vaikuntha is someone other than gaNesha.

[hinduism♥krishna]

I don't know of any reference that says that gaNesha is a (1) a "pure devotee" of the Lord and that (2) He accompanies Him in Sri Vaikuntha. (1) would not be hard to believe, I'm just not aware of any shAstric pramANa for that statement. (2) would be very difficult to believe, given that gaNesha's activities would have to be in the same sphere as that of shiva and pArvathI, which we all know is not Vaikuntha.

Jijnyasu has already indicated that the elephant-headed attendant on Lord Vishnu in Vaikuntha is someone other than gaNesha.
namaste phil,
Vinayak is the other name of ganesha. Why u r expecting that worshippable god should be from vaikuntha?

[philosoraptor]

@philosoraptor
namaste phil,
Vinayak is the other name of ganesha.

No one is disputing that.


Why u r expecting that worshippable god should be from vaikuntha?

Because vaikuNTha is the abode of viShNu, and viShNu's abode is the supreme one beheld by the nitya-suris, as stated in Rg veda saMhitA 1.22.20: "OM tad viShNoH paramaM padaM sadA pashyanti sUrayaH....."

As an aside, do you think you could take the time to learn how to spell, instead of writing as if you are teen-ager sending someone a text page? It would make it easier to read your posts, assuming you want to be taken seriously.



This is very bad that many vaishnwas don't obey Lord vishnu. Did they forget what lord Vishnu says in gita? Shri vishnu said that we should hv see bramhan and chandala as equal .
We should have a vision of equanimity.

First of all, you aren't exactly an exemplar when it comes to visions of equanimity, as you have never ceased to make derisive comments about "stupid ISKCON devotees" both here and elsewhere. Preaching a standard of behavior which you don't follow is hypocrisy.

Second, you are misinterpreting the verse in question, which occurs in the 5th chapter of bhagavad-gItA. Therein, it is stated that the humble sage sees with equal vision the brahmin, the chanDALa, etc. He sees them with equal vision because he sees them as jIvAtmA-s differentiated only by their guNa and karma and the resulting bodies they get, which are temporary and ultimately distinct from the jIvA itself - who are otherwise equal. Do you understand? It's not about seeing everything as the same, but rather seeing every jIva, divested of his guNa/karma as same. Everyone understands it like this, including Adi Shankara. Nowhere in that verse does it refer to treating "everything" as equal, nor does it refer to seeing deva-s as equal to brahman. Claiming otherwise is either blatant ignorance, or deliberate dishonesty. Please take some time to read and understand the gItA before misquoting it.

Worship of gaNesha is not a feature of Vaishnavism. Not the Vaishnavism of Ramanuja, nor the Vaishnavism of Madhva, nor the Vaishnavism of Vallabha nor Chaitanya. It's unlikely that the Vaishnavism of Sridhar Swami and Nimbarka have any special tradition allowing for it, either. Instead of preaching a standard of conduct based on your own uninformed assumptions, take some time to read about the philosophical systems advanced by these great souls. There is irony indeed in these great scholars, with their knowledge of Vedas and Puranas, being criticized by a child whose only knowledge of Hinduism is what he read in Amar Chitra Katha comic books.

[jignyAsu]

Namaste jigyasu, I understood ur point. Before my reply, i request u to read my #50 post.
And tell me what do u think about it ?

Namaste,

As I said before, I think all the Nitya Suris (eternal residents of Vaikuntha) are being referred to over here. Guru is, ofcourse, special and so is Vyasa - the representative of all Gurus and so don't have to reside in Vaikuntha. There are many Nitya Suris and devas worshipped in the Sri Vaishnava yagnas beginning with Sri Vishwaksenar. I just don't have enough knowledge of all of them; a beginner in the tradition myself.

One thing is clear though; all these are associates and not supreme Brahman themselves and not worshipped separately. Otherwise Garuda, Nanda, Sundanda....Vyasa Guru everyone should be worshipped as the supreme Brahman or in seperate temples. Therefore "VinAyakA" here should always be worshipped facing Krishna as a subordinate and not in a seperate temple. Also He should be worhsipped along with Vishwaksenar, Garuda etc.

I have a question to you though. Is there any tradition in Maharastra that worships Sri Krishna along with all the mentioned associates (with Lord Ganesh, Mother Durga as you hold but also with Garuda, Vishwaksena, Sunanda etc) with the exact way described? Or even partially - just curious.

Vinayaka can indeed not be our Rudra putra Ganesha. Infact even Ganesh or Ganapathy means the leader of GaNAs - there are Vishnu GaNAs and Shiva GaNas as well. Sanskrit allows for same words to have different meaning in different context - there's no conspiracy going on here.

I read this in bANAsura charitram - http://vedabase.com/en/sb/10/63/10-11 search for: "sa-vināyakān" which means, with VinAyakAs - many vinAyakA as opposed to a specific vinAyakA. You may point out if you refer to a different version of the same verse. Same goes to all the Vaishnavas here.

[Eastern Mind]

Vinayak is the other name of ganesha.


Vannakkam: The other name? What about Pillaiyar, Ganapati. Vignarajaya, Lambodharaya, and the other 108 or 1008?

Pillaiyar and Ganapati are particularly common.

Continue on. :)

Aum Namasivaya

[hinduism♥krishna]

i have a question to you though. Is there any tradition in Maharastra that worships Sri Krishna along with all the mentioned associates (with Lord Ganesh, Mother Durga as you hold but also with Garuda, Vishwaksena, Sunanda etc) with the exact way described? Or even partially - just curious.Namaate bandhu

Mayb but generally
In Maharashtra, kriahna is worshipped along with lakshmi, ganesha, parvati, and guru. Some worship Krishna with Lord shiva. U will see different associates along with vishnu, ram or Krishna.
I request you to tell me who is lord ganesha? what shastras say about him? why ganesha is identified with om ( symbol of bramhan ?
These r questions arising in my mind.

Thanks.Jai shri hari.

[philosoraptor]

I have a question to you though. Is there any tradition in Maharastra that worships Sri Krishna along with all the mentioned associates (with Lord Ganesh, Mother Durga as you hold but also with Garuda, Vishwaksena, Sunanda etc) with the exact way described? Or even partially - just curious.

I don't think HK knows of any traditions outside of the one practiced by his community. So far, whenever confronted with any custom, practice, or belief that does not match those of his family, he reacts with a provincial mindset, arguing that the differences are due to the other party following "stupid Hare Krishnas." This is in contrast to the Hindus of his community, whom he asserts are "ideal Vaishnwas." Why are they ideal? Because HK said so, that's why.

It's really only a matter of time before he starts referring to us both as "stupid Hare Krishnas." The definition of "stupid Hare Krishna" apparently, is anyone who disagrees with HK.

[Viraja]

Namaste all,

I got a wonderful reply from a Bhagawatha. He not only clarified the doubt of worshiping Sri Ganesha in Srivaishnavam, but also gave a wonderful definition of 'Bhagawath Aaradhana' itself in Srivaishnavam. Kindly read on:

Q: What is the significance of Ganapathi worship in SriVaishnavam? We find that in Satyanarayana puja, Sri Vaibhava Lakshmi puja and various other pujas, first a turmeric Ganesha murthi is made and Sri Ganesha is invoked and offered first respects to and only then we worship the actual god. Since Sri Ganapathi is a Shaivite god, what is the significance of this practice?

A:

Sri Desikanallal Deivamillai!

Dear Bagavatha,

We donot have any specific 'poojas' in Sri Vaishnavam.

We have only the concept of 'Thiruvaradhanam' and 'Thaligai Samarpanai'.



Sri Vaishnavas should generally refrain them from doing any specific poojas for 'Kamyartham'.



The following are the 6 duties of a Sri Vaishnava as specified by Jagadhacharya



1 Reading Sri Bashyam and propagating it

2 Reading Sri Bagavath Vishayam and propagating it

3 Serving Divya Desams and Abhimana Kshethrams with Thaligai and other Kainkaryams

4 Staying at Melkote and other Divya Desams

5 Chanting Dwayam and understanding the meanings of Rahasya Thrayam from noble Aacharya

6 Sheltering ourselves in the Lotus Feet of a good Bagavatha



We have the practice of chanting and reading Azhwar and Aacharya Compositions.

Even thiruvaradhanam is must only for gents and ladies could always enjoy the Azhwar Sri Sookthis uninterruptedly

.

Performing the set of Yagnas like Vajapeya, Athirathra, Agnihothram, Thiru Ashtakshari and others as per Vaidic regulations could be practiced.



There is no 'Ganapathi' worship in Sri Vaishnavam, for Our Lord Sri Krishna is 'Gana-pathi'!

In the places of 'Vinayaka' worship, Sri Vaishnavas do worship Sri Vishwaksena (mostly misunderstood as Sri Vinayaka in Sri Vaishnavam).



Sri Vishwaksena has no resemblance to the 'Elephant-headed' Sri Vinayaka. Sri Vishwaksena is a 'Nithyasoori' and a form of our Lord, who controls the entire universe as a 'General'. He controls all Devatas, Raksasas, Kinaras and others as a 'Supreme Commander'.



In Guruparampara, He comes next to Sri Periya Piratti (Goddess Sri Mahalakshmi). In tradition Sri Nammazhwar (But Sri Nammazhwar is God Almighty Himself and Thayar being His 'Vakula mala') and Sri Lakshmi Kumara Thatha Desika are considered to be the incarnation of Sri Vishwaksena.



Hope We have cleared your doubt.



Generally worship, Azhwars and surrender yourself at the Lotus Feet of Sri Emberumanar and Swamy Srimadh Vedantha Desika, to understand Sri Vaishnavam and the secrets of the creation and the Creator!

* * * * * * * * * * * *

[philosoraptor]

That response is consistent with my understanding of the Sri Vaishnava view.

With one exception: is vishvaksena actually bhagavAn Himself in the form of a devotee, or an eternally liberated jIva? I always thought it was the latter.

Also, I am curious to know how vishvaksena got wrongly identified with vinAyaka, especially as the former does not have an elephant head.

[Viraja]

That response is consistent with my understanding of the Sri Vaishnava view.

With one exception: is vishvaksena actually bhagavAn Himself in the form of a devotee, or an eternally liberated jIva? I always thought it was the latter.

Also, I am curious to know how vishvaksena got wrongly identified with vinAyaka, especially as the former does not have an elephant head.

Those are very good questions. I hope our jignyAsu ji knows the answer.

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste,
Jignyasu , phil, viraj ji.

I politely request you to read and understand my point.
Vinayaka may be ganesha or an associate in vaikuntha.Leave this aside for some time. Now let us know why lord Ganesha should be worshipped first.

Lord Ganesha rules 'muladhara chakra' in our psychic body. Muladhara is the interface between material and spiritual worlds. This suggests that Lord Ganesha controls everything in both these worlds. So, his Grace is crucial in the material world(Earth) and beyond(spiritual world).

In other words, he is the giver of material enjoyment on the Earth (bhoga) and liberation (moksha) from endless birth and death cycle. He gives the fruits of all our works or actions whether they are material or spiritual.

During the creation of our body and mind mechanism, Mother Kundalini starts her creation from the top chakra Sahasrara. She finishes her creation process at the bottom most chakra Muladhara and starts sleeping spiritually so that we(or our Individual Self) will be functional in the material world. So, our material life starts from Muladhara chakra, controlled by Lord Ganesha.

In Kundalini yoga, a Realized Master awakens the Mother Kundalini to initiate a worthy disciple to undergo spiritual transformation to experience complete realization by merging with the Universal Self. Therefore, our spiritual journey also begins at Muladhara chakra ruled by Lord Ganesha.

Thus, introduction of ourselves to both material and spiritual worlds first happens at this strategic interface of Muladhara chakra. Lord Ganesha rules this chakra.

From this we have understood that Lord Ganesha is the ruler of obstacles and muladhara chakra. If we need to complete any task successfully, we need the Grace of Lord Ganesha in advance. So, he is the important deity to be worshiped first before we begin any work, may it be material or spiritual.

I hope this may be the point in worshipping ganesha in vaishnawism and i hope it is crystal clear now ! Replies are welcome.

THANK YOU.

[jignyAsu]

Namaate bandhu

Mayb but generally
In Maharashtra, kriahna is worshipped along with lakshmi, ganesha, parvati, and guru. Some worship Krishna with Lord shiva. U will see different associates along with vishnu, ram or Krishna.
I request you to tell me who is lord ganesha? what shastras say about him? why ganesha is identified with om ( symbol of bramhan ?
These r questions arising in my mind.

Thanks.Jai shri hari.

Bandhu,

I don't have any proper reference for Lord Ganesha in the itihAsa Puranas(18) as we have for Lord Vishnu, Shiva etc. and as accepted by all Hindus. There's either remote resembles like Vinayaka here or some creative stories like him having defeated Vishnu and Shiva etc. We also have stories of Aiyappa being son of Vishnu and Shiva and attributed to one Shasta in some purana etc in the same way.

I would post this question outside Vaishnava thread and get inputs on him from Shaiva devotees. I believe there's a special purana - Vinayaka purana dedicated to him.

As regard to this verse, I would side with the ISKCON translation which I think says that this Vinayaka is totally different from Rudra putra Ganesha and is what we Sri Vaishnavas refer to as Nitya Suri. And I would point to Viraja, as pointed out by another member, that worshiping him as a pure devotee does not have any reference. The Vinayaka of the verse is a part of Vaikuntha while the Rudra putra Ganesha happily resides is Sri Kailasha :-).

[jignyAsu]

I got a wonderful reply from a Bhagawatha. He not only clarified the doubt of worshiping Sri Ganesha in Srivaishnavam, but also gave a wonderful definition of 'Bhagawath Aaradhana' itself in Srivaishnavam.

Can I know what this satsang is? Also, I thought you would post this specific verse of interest and get clarification on that because rest all of it we know. Can you post it now? Thanks

[jignyAsu]

With one exception: is vishvaksena actually bhagavAn Himself in the form of a devotee, or an eternally liberated jIva? I always thought it was the latter.

You are correct. He is an eternally liberated jIva or Nityasuri. He is the chief of all Vishnu GaNAs (and in general everyone as per SriVaishnavas). He is one of our Acharyas.



Also, I am curious to know how vishvaksena got wrongly identified with vinAyaka, especially as the former does not have an elephant head.

As far as I know there has been no intelligent debate in this matter and only remarks from uninformed Hindus. For e.g. "Vignam" in Shuklam bharadaram is confused to be Vinayaka by many. For once, we start by clarifying Vignam means obstacle (not kidding) and then say that the remover of obstacle refferred here is Sri Vishwaksenar for us. Because we start with Vishwaksenar aradhanam, maybe that's why Ganesha is confused with Him here.

Sri Gajananar is the one who is confused with Sri Ganesha but the difference is easily pointed out by saying that the former's tusk is not broken.

[Viraja]

jignyAsu ji,

This satsang is at groups.yahoo.com/group/SriRangaSri. Actually I feel quite lost when you say clarification is needed on some verse. Which verse is that? Sorry I feel lost. I can post again with the query.

Thank you.

[philosoraptor]

As regard to this verse, I would side with the ISKCON translation which I think says that this Vinayaka is totally different from Rudra putra Ganesha and is what we Sri Vaishnavas refer to as Nitya Suri. And I would point to Viraja, as pointed out by another member, that worshiping him as a pure devotee does not have any reference. The Vinayaka of the verse is a part of Vaikuntha while the Rudra putra Ganesha happily resides is Sri Kailasha :-).

So in other words, the Vinayaka of the verse is the same as Vishvaksena? Or is an attendant on Vishvaksena (Sri Gajananar)?

That would imply that there are two Vinayakas, one in Vaikuntha and one who is Rudra-putra, which should be noted whenever we hear mention of "Vinayaka" in any context.

[Omkara]

. I believe there's a special purana - Vinayaka purana dedicated to him.


It is Mudgala Purana and Ganesha Purana. They tell of 12 Avatars of Ganesha. I had made a thread on this some time ago.

[jignyAsu]

Actually I feel quite lost when you say clarification is needed on some verse. Which verse is that?

durgāḿ vināyakaḿ vyāsaḿ viṣvakṣenaḿ gurūn surān...

I would ask them who this "VinAyakam" is orif they have a different version of the verse.


So in other words, the Vinayaka of the verse is the same as Vishvaksena? Or is an attendant on Vishvaksena (Sri Gajananar)?

That would imply that there are two Vinayakas, one in Vaikuntha and one who is Rudra-putra, which should be noted whenever we hear mention of "Vinayaka" in any context.

I would think so too. If "vyAsam" is not b/w vinAyakA and Vishvaksena, I would have thought that by vinAyakA, VishvaksenA is meant.

But then I showed above how there are many vinAyakAs in Kailasha itself - depends on what the word stands for.

[smaranam]

Namaste

A few things...

1. Canto 11 and 12 of PrabhupAd's bhAgvat were completed by his disciples. Regarding ref. to SB 11.27.29 (post#7) Jiva Goswami - a highly evolved bhAgvat - says these Durga, Vinayaka and anya deva are pure
devotees "in VaikunTha." What this means is they are on that platform, in that consciousness of devotion to Narayana as opposed to fruit-giving offerings-receiving [stand-alone] Deities in the material world.

I do not take this literally as 2 sets of demigods. To me they are the same Durga and Vinayak, but with a different consciousness when in front of Narayana - abhimukhAn, in His court. Therefore, the consciousness
of the bhakta/pujAri/yajmAn is also such.

Although the devas are in KAilash and Svarga/Indrapuri/Amravati or whatever (within the 14 lokas), they are perpetually "by NArayan's side" singing His glories. So in this latter sense also, they are "in/visiting
VaikunTha" , and Sadashiv-loka is in VaikunTha as it is.

I have a strong feeling these pArshads, Devas and Gurus are to be remembered and revered mentally only, and only a few selected representatives may be symbolically present for puja/prokshan IF this vidhi is the chosen way of worship.

2. SB 11.27.29 - it appears this is done during hom-havan (yadnya) or a special puja by the priest (temple or home) - possibly with a material goal for themselves or for the community by large. As HLK notes, DurgA, vinAyak, Indra, varuN, vishvedeva etc. are all betel-nuts on a bed
of raw rice grains. In some pujAs, a kalash with mango leaves and coconut become the GaNesh - the first AvAhan. Plus, I have only seen this betel-nut representation and elaborate vidhi done by priests, pundits, not the gRhastha themselves in their daily home puja.

3. this chapter 27 describes detailed vidhi. One thing to note is that at least GauDiya Vaishnav are primarily into rAga bhakti, so are pushti-kul families (not their acharyas who do yadnyas as well). Any hands-on vidhi they perform is towards that rAga-goal. They do not worship NArAyaNa in VaikunTha (formal aishwarya-pUrNa worship), so this optional Deity Worship that Uddhav asks about is not selected.

4. KRshNa says the qualifications for this elaborate vidhi is a dvija - twice-born (who has received diksha and training). So daily home worship of Murlidhar, bal gopal or Radha-KRshNa does not fall in this category as women do it too.

5. KRshNa provides alternative modes of worship - sun, water, mind. It shows this vidhi is opional and 'yathAshakti'.

6. Parampara AchArya know what the next generations and disciples can and cannot handle, what knowledge and resources will be available. So they make it simple. Just water the roots, not the branches and leaves (anya-deva). This is consistent with Shri KRshNa's words in Gita, and does not mean the parampara is being zealous and not listening to KRshNa's directions in SB 11.27

7. From POV of Atma-tattva-jnAna, these things don't matter. It is Adi Purush Govind playing.

om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya ~

[smaranam]

What this means is they are on that platform, in that consciousness of devotion to Narayana as opposed to fruit-giving offerings-receiving [stand-alone] Deities in the material world.

I do not take this literally as 2 sets of demigods. To me they are the same Durga and Vinayak, but with a different consciousness when in front of Narayana - abhimukhAn, in His court. Therefore, the consciousness
of the bhakta/pujAri/yajmAn is also such.

This is how these devas have been to me - always. Before being contaminated by VaishNav paramparA dos and don'ts, they were the big loving family, who pampered the "5 yr old" bhakta, gave them abhay (courage), love, fed them honey, gift them nice new clothes and celestial goodies, and took them to KRshNa, the transcendental bhakta-vatsal Supreme Bramhan.

It is said that " a pure devotee takes you to KRshNa not the devas"
Well, to me, there devas have precisely been THE devotees of Keshav who brought me to His doorstep. Although I almost never think much about them anymore, I am fond of them and grateful to them.

They shed tears for Him, dance on His flute or just thinking of Him, and sing His glories. It all depends on the consciousness of the sAdhak, aspirant-devotee, and not the devas themselves.

govindam Adi purusham tam aham bhajAmi ~

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste all of you.
I explained why one should worship ganesha in #64 post. But its sad that no one replied ! I want to know what you think about it.

Thank you ♥

[Viraja]

Namaste all of you.
I explained why one should worship ganesha in #64 post. But its sad that no one replied ! I want to know what you think about it.

Thank you ♥

You have stated that opening the mooladhara chakra is necessary for both spiritual and material success. And thus, with Ganapathi ruling the mooladhaar chakra, it becomes necessary to invoke him first.

It maybe true if Vaishnavas were to involve in pujas in the first place.

However, from the other Bhagawathas' reply, it appears that the only prescribed mode of worship in Vaishnavam is 'Sharanagathi' that is 'total surrender to the Lotus feet of the Lord'. Hence, no pujas either for one's spiritual or material success is necessary or prescribed. All one has to do is read about Lord, propagate it, do cooking at divya desams, serve other devotees of the Lord and stay at divya desams.

Therefore, with no puja being carried out, it becomes unnecessary to worship Sri Ganapathi.

EDIT: I wonder how Sri Sudharshana homa, etc are carried out...

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste, viraja.
It's not like that ! As ganesha is the ruler of muladhara chakra so we should worship ganesha only in kundalini yoga, this is not my point! My post doesn't mean it.
Muladhara chakra is the interface between material consciousness and spiritual consciousness ( self) . Whatever you will gain by kundalini yoga, the same you will obtain through worship of Vishnu. The final aim of both is one supreme reality, bramhan. In bhakti yoga also, one passes beyond muladhara chakra which is the opening of self consciousness by repeatedly chanting lords name. The lord ganesha is the ruler of this chakra. So dont you think it's our job to worship him before undertaking of any good work? Did you forget lord vishnu himself gave him a boon that he will be worshipped by all before taking any spiritual or material work?

Thank you. shri narayana hari ♥

[philosoraptor]

Actually, Sri Vaishnava males are supposed to perform ArAdhana each day. Unless this differs from "pUja," or kriyA-yOga (as per the bhAgavatam) I would imagine that the same questions apply.

[philosoraptor]

Namaste all of you.
I explained why one should worship ganesha in #64 post. But its sad that no one replied ! I want to know what you think about it.

Thank you ♥

It's not likely that you are going to get a response, given that your claims about gaNesha vis-a-vis mooladhara chakra are so far unsubstantiated by shAstric pramANa-s.

[Omkara]

It's not likely that you are going to get a response, given that your claims about gaNesha vis-a-vis mooladhara chakra are so far unsubstantiated by shAstric pramANa-s.

Ganesha is indeed the presiding deity of the Muladhara Chakra, but all pramanas for this are from Shaiva and Shakta Agamas.

I was under the impression that Vaishnavas do nor practice kundalini Yoga, so this is irrelevant to them. Am I mistaken?

[hinduism♥krishna]

It's not likely that you are going to get a response, given that your claims about gaNesha vis-a-vis mooladhara chakra are so far unsubstantiated by shAstric pramANa-s.
Namaste, phil ji.
No, it has a pramana. Lord ganesha as the ruler of mooladhara chakra is described in sri ganesha atharva seersha.

त्वं गुणत्रयातीतः ।
त्वं देहत्रयातीतः ।
त्वं कालत्रयातीतः ।
त्वं मूलाधारस्थितोऽसि नित्यम् ।
त्वं शक्तित्रयात्मकः ।
त्वां योगिनो ध्यायन्ति नित्यम् ।
त्वं ब्रह्मा त्वं विष्णुस्त्वंरुद्रस्त्वमिन्द्रस्त्वमग्निस्त्वं
वायुस्त्वं सूर्यस्त्वं चन्द्रमास्त्वं ब्रह्मभूर्भुवःस्वरोम् ॥६॥

You are beyond Sathva, Rajas and Thamas,
You are beyond three types of experiences-waking , sleep and dream,
You are beyond the body states of Gross, subtle and casual,
You are beyond the three divisions of time-past, present and future,
You always and daily stay in mooladhara Chakra,
You are the three states of energy-creation, maintenance and destruction,
You are being daily meditated upon by sages,
Yo are Brahma , you are Vishnu , you are Shiva.
You are Indra, You are fire , you are wind.
You are the Sun, You are the moon,
You are all inclusive and all pervading.

Thank you ♥

[smaranam]

Namaste all of you.
I explained why one should worship ganesha in #64 post. But its sad that no one replied ! I want to know what you think about it.

Thank you ♥
Dear HLK,

Ganapati presides over Muladhara, indeed. To many He is the one who awakens the sleeping materialist
"knock knock, anyone home?" he says, and becomes the gateway to the spiritual world.
However, worshipping GaNesh in order to open up the MULadhArA is not bhakti yoga.

Bhakti Yoga is about nirapeksha ahaituki prem (unconditional love) irrespective of chakras, & sharaNAgati, samarpaN (surrender, unequivocal trust and dependance) to the Love of the heart - the Supreme antaryAmi & Bhagvan.

Like the kitten who is safe and secure in the Mother Cat's mouth who carries it across
OR
Like the baby monkey who holds onto the Mother monkey as she leaps from branch to branch.

I choose the first one - mAnjar.

Jai GovindA jai gopAlA jai jai rAdhe-krishNA
murlimanohar kishNa-kanhaiyA bolo jai shri krishNA
krishNA S jai shri krishNA...

[smaranam]

However, worshipping GaNesh in order to open up the MULadhArA is not bhakti yoga.
Nor does worshipping DurgA or KAli (Shakti) via tantra [to raise kunDalini to sahasra) fall in the category of bhakti yog.

Jai Shri KRshNa

[jignyAsu]

I was under the impression that Vaishnavas do nor practice kundalini Yoga, so this is irrelevant to them. Am I mistaken?

That would be correct for SriVaishnavas. Yoga rahasya based on the asthanga yoga system was preserved till the time of yAmunAchArya by SriVaishnavas and then it was lost. I am not sure if it dealt with Kundalini in any way. But in general for SriVaishnavas only Bhakti/Sharanagathi to Sriman Narayana can get us moksha.

I would like to add one more point towards the thread. A/c to SriVaishnavas there is nothing that one can get from any deity that Vishnu can't give. If we require Lord Ganesha to raise our Muladhara Chakra or remove obstacle, it would equate to saying that Krishna cannot do that. If we require Navagraha to rid us of our problem then it would mean that Rama cannot solve that problem. That's the reason why looking upto another deity is considered a setback. This is true not only for moksha but also for money, yogic siddhi, kaivalya, beautiful wife etc. SriVaishnavas in jest tell that Putana got moksha because even though she wanted to poison Him, she had preserved it exclusively for Him. :-)

[philosoraptor]

Namaste, phil ji.
No, it has a pramana. Lord ganesha as the ruler of mooladhara chakra is described in sri ganesha atharva seersha.

Please refer to our previous discussions on the questionable authority of many "upaniShad-s" which were not quoted by pUrvAchArya-s.

[philosoraptor]

SriVaishnavas in jest tell that Putana got moksha because even though she wanted to poison Him, she had preserved it exclusively for Him. :-)

You may have heard U.Ve Velukkudi Krishnan Swamy's talk on bhAgavatam where he mentions this very point. Sri Krishna has a trait by which He becomes very eager to have something that is reserved just for Him, be it water, flower, a leaf, or..... even poison.... as long as it is meant only for Him!

[philosoraptor]

I would like to add one more point towards the thread. A/c to SriVaishnavas there is nothing that one can get from any deity that Vishnu can't give. If we require Lord Ganesha to raise our Muladhara Chakra or remove obstacle, it would equate to saying that Krishna cannot do that. If we require Navagraha to rid us of our problem then it would mean that Rama cannot solve that problem. That's the reason why looking upto another deity is considered a setback. This is true not only for moksha but also for money, yogic siddhi, kaivalya, beautiful wife etc.

It's also worth pointing out that Sri Krishna's instruction "sarva dharmAn parityajya mAm ekam sharaNam vrajA....." would implicitly seem to preclude anya-devata worship when one is accepting the conviction that Lord Himself will become the cause of his upliftment.

Also, Vaishnavas in most traditions don't look to gaNesha to remove obstacles, but rather to the guru and the guru-paramparA.

[Viraja]

I think if we felt we need not worship Sri Ganapathi or any other devata other than Sriman Narayana, we have the freedom to do so (as per VA we do not need other deities). But, I think we need to keep this information to ourselves, merely posting in this forum with this question itself, generates feelings among others that we are disrespecting Sri Ganapathi, when actually the fact is that we are merely questioning our right to fall to the feet of only 1 lord as opposed to many! (For example, tell a strict Shaiva that he has to worship mother Lakshmi, he will ask why?).

Here is the answer I got from another devotee:


Lord Vigneshwara is the remover of obstacles according to the Hindu religion in general .. So it is customary to invoke His blessings before embarking on any activity..

Even in Thirumala Thirupathi, at the foot hills of the Lord of the Seven Hills, Sri Venkateswara, there's a shrine for Lord Vigneshwara and everyone prays to Him first, before embarking on the journey up the Hills, for a safe and pleasant trip up the Hills and return back safely.

As His Holiness Kanchi Paramacharya has said, there's only one Gayathri whether you are a Smartha or a Vaishnava.

So why discriminate between Smartha Deities and Vaishnava deities .. As there's only one Lord in Heaven ..

As a frequent visitor to SriRanganatha Temple, Pomona, NY, I truly enjoy the religious festivities performed in an elaborate manner in strict adherence to the scriptures. I fully subscribe to the facts in a recent mail thread enumerating what's unique about this Vaishnava temple under the series 'THE UNIQUE TEMPLE'. With all due respect, there's also one more unique aspect about this temple, which is, a total ban on even mentioning the sacred name(s) of a Smartha deity like Lord Vigneshwara, leave alone invoking Their blessings.

I have not experienced anything like this anywhere else in the world, much to the distaste and hurt of countless Smartha devotees like me who frequent the temple. If there's one thing I would like to see changed at this temple, it is this aspect, which will bring in more devotees and tons of Goodwill. With Ganesh Chathurthi around the corner, how delightful it would be, if the temple and its authorities change their stance on this thorny issue!

[philosoraptor]

I am a smArtha by birth and by upbringing, and I would never ask Vaishnavas (or any other Hindu tradition) to change centuries-old practices to accommodate me.

[jignyAsu]

HDF would be the ideal place to inform (without name calling/lashing) people about the great traditions that span milleniums easily and comprise the Hinduism of today. If we hide information then it will be a great loss to aspiring Vaishnavas and Shaivas that look up to the forum for true knowledge.

We, as Hindus, should be proud to be a part of a universal religion that truely encourages unity in diversity. The other religions are merely putting up a show of having such universality and acceptance.

As an aside, the question of whom to worship is unfortunately considered to be only a quarrel these days. However, if we look deeper we will find that such questions are posed by dedicated souls and are easily a subject matter of many Puranas. To insist on every Hindu to accept every deity is not fair. And at the end of the day, people can subscribe to any of these Hindu traditions that appeal to their heart.

If my answers in the thread has hurt anyone's feelings, I apologize anyway.

[smaranam]

the question of whom to worship is unfortunately considered to be only a quarrel these days. However, if we look deeper we will find that such questions are posed by dedicated souls and are easily a subject matter of many Puranas.
YudhishThir UvAcha:

kimekam daivatam loke? kim vyApekam parAyaNam ?
stuvantah: kam kamarchantah: prApnuyurmAnavA shubham ?

Bheshma uvAcha:

jagat-prabhum devadevam anantam purushottamam
stuvannAmasahasreNa purushah: satatotthitah:

tam eva chArchayannityam bhaktyA purushamavyayam
dhyAyanstuvannamasyansh cha yajamAnastam eva cha

anAdinidhanam vishNum sarvaloka-maheshwaram
lokAdhyaksham stuvannityam sarvadukkhAtigo bhavet

[smaranam]

bramhaNyam sarva-dharmadnyam lokAnAm kIrtivardhanam
lokanatham mahatbhUtam sarva-bhUta-bhavot-bhavam

esha me sarvadharmANAm dharmo-adhikatamo matah:
yadbhaktyA punDarIkAksham stavairarchennarah: sadA

paramam yo mahatteja paramam yo mahattapah:
paramam yo mahat-bramha paramam yah: parAyaNam

[smaranam]

pavitrANAm pavitram yo mangalAnAm cha mangalam
daivatam devatAnAm cha bhutAnAm yo avyayah: pitAh:

yatah: sarvANi bhUtAni bhavantyAdiyugAgame
yasminscha pralayan yA anti punar eva yugakshaye

tasya loka-pradhAnasya jagannAthasya bhUpate
vishNornAmasahasram me shruNu pApabhayApaham

yAni nAmAni gauNAni vikhyAtAni mahAtmanah:
Rshibhih: parigitAni tAni vakshyAmi bhUtaye...

(Conversation between YudhishThir and Bheeshma - last 3 posts,
just before VishNusahasranAma - which is Bheeshma's real ans to Yudhishthir's QN. Please refer to Vishnusahasranama for translation. If there is interest I can post it here.)

_/\_

om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya ~

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste, smaranam, jignyasu, viraja and phil.

I read all posts but really i didn't find any satisfactory reason for neglecting worship of ganesha .
Here everyone want to say that we shouldn't worship lord ganesha in vaishnawism, but i think this has no authority in shastras. However we get many pramanas that state we should worship him before starting of any worship.

If really we shouldn't worship ganesha then what about that boon? Lord shiva bestowed upon Ganesha the boon that before every new venture and every worship , people would always invoke the name of lord Ganesha first and foremost and now we are seeing impact of this in every hindu families. Every hindu ( vaishnawa, shiva or devi-bhakta ) , invokes ganesha at the starting of the worship. I don't think vaishnawas are exceptions for it.Because lord shiva didn't say that you would be worshipped only by non-vaishnawas.

Besides , Sar khandam Ramayana Chapter 10 talks about RAma's worship : Before building the bridge(sEtu) on the ocean, RAma did pooja for Lord VignEswara (GaNapati); with NaLan's help, He established 9 stones for Navagrahams and prayed to Navagrahams.
This is how lord ram invoked ganesha before construction of bridge .As far as vedic tradition matters, lord ganesha is first worshipped . All great sages gave salutations to ganesha in their commentries on shastras before writing any word !

Thank you. Hare Krishna

[philosoraptor]

Namaste, smaranam, jignyasu, viraja and phil.

I read all posts but really i didn't find any satisfactory reason for neglecting worship of ganesha .
Here everyone want to say that we shouldn't worship lord ganesha in vaishnawism, but i think this has no authority in shastras. However we get many pramanas that state we should worship him before starting of any worship.

Again, you have not quoted any such pramANa-s. Even the bhAgavatam verse mentions worship of viNAyaka in conjunction with the Lord, not as a prerequisite.

Nobody will take you seriously if you merely assert the truth of something without providing good evidence. So far, the few sources you have quoted are obscure ones that are not used by any vedAnta tradition. You seem to have some basic confusion about the difference between shruti and smRiti. Moreover, your concept of advaita philosophy, is starkly different from that developed by Adi shankarAchArya, a fact which you seem completely oblivious to.



Besides , Sar khandam Ramayana Chapter 10 talks about RAma's worship : Before building the bridge(sEtu) on the ocean, RAma did pooja for Lord VignEswara (GaNapati); with NaLan's help, He established 9 stones for Navagrahams and prayed to Navagrahams.

This is false. The building of the bridge is mentioned in sarga 22 of the yuddha-kANDa of vALmIki rAmAyaNa. There is no mention therein of rAma doing pUja to gaNapati.

You haven't given any convincing reason for your position, other than that Hindus all over India whose practices you happen to approve of, endorse it. Meanwhile, real Vaishnavas who actually have a scholarly tradition upon which they base their practices, like those following Madhva and Ramanuja, do not do this Ganesha puja. Seeing as how their traditions predate yours by centuries, and that they have scholarly commentaries on a wide variety of mainstream shAstra-s, they have more of a right to call themselves Vaishnavas than you do, and consequently more of a right to set the standard for what is, and what is not, "ideal Vaishnavism."

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste, phil.

Here is my understanding of ganesha tattva and why we should worship him.
In simple language, the goal of man is to reach divinity. But evil feelings come in the way. But Lord Ganesh is the remover all difficulties. That’s why , since ancient times in Hinduism, any ‘upasana’ or ritual begins with ‘Ganesh Pooja’.

Beginning with a Vedic prayer to Ganesh, is done everywhere. The religious books say that Lord Shiva and Parvati worshipped Shree Ganesh on the occasion of their marriage. Many people find this surprising. But in 100th verse of Bal Kand of ‘Ramcharitamanas’ composed by Tulsidas this is explained very convincingly. He said: This ‘Leela’ can only be understood by a true believer. As long as Shree Ganesh remains in the form of Maha Ganesh, he is the first complete free person from the beginning, middle and end of the creation of the universe. But when he takes the form of the son of Shiva and Parvati, a new chapter begins in his Leela. Undoubtedly this chapter is an inspiration to all of us.

Thank you.

――――――――
hinduism♥krishna

[Viraja]

Besides , Sar khandam Ramayana Chapter 10 talks about RAma's worship : Before building the bridge(sEtu) on the ocean, RAma did pooja for Lord VignEswara (GaNapati); with NaLan's help, He established 9 stones for Navagrahams and prayed to Navagrahams.
This is how lord ram invoked ganesha before construction of bridge .As far as vedic tradition matters, lord ganesha is first worshipped . All great sages gave salutations to ganesha in their commentries on shastras before writing any word !


Namaste HLK,

I opine that Sri Rama should not be looked upon as a model Sri Vaishnava. Either that or there are interpolations added later on to make Rama worship Sri Ganesha, Lord Shiva and so forth. I checked with Philosoraptor who had read the original Valmiki Ramayana and he says none of these are given in the text. Rama worshiped the present day Ranganatha in SriRangam for his ishta-devata (that is how the idol in SriRangam came to be there, through Rama) and he worshiped Sri Suryanarayana for victory in battle wit Ravana. If it is indeed true that he worshiped Sri Ganapathi and Lord Shiva, and it is for sure not interpolations, then also, we cannot look at his behaviour for a model Sri Vaishnava as told by Acharya Ramanuja.

I even have a picture of Lord Shiva worshiping Rama, but this can only be understood as 'Lord Shiva doing Manasika prayer of Rama at Rama's coronation' and never can be understood as Lord Shiva physically being present at the Coronation ceremony. It is doubtful as to whether really Sri Rama prayed to Sri Ganesha and Lord Shiva, except for one time when Rama built the Shivling at Rameswaram to pray get rid of his 'brahmahatya' of slaying Ravana. So we cannot reach to conclusions from Ramayana, as we do not know what the original held!

[philosoraptor]

Namaste, phil.

Here is my understanding of ganesha tattva and why we should worship him.

Precisely. This is your understanding, not the understanding of shruti/smRiti.



In simple language, the goal of man is to reach divinity. But evil feelings come in the way. But Lord Ganesh is the remover all difficulties. That’s why , since ancient times in Hinduism, any ‘upasana’ or ritual begins with ‘Ganesh Pooja’.

We have no proof that "since ancient times in Hinduism, any 'upasana' or ritual begins with 'Ganesh Pooja." I can think of several upAsana-s/yagna mentioned in itihAsa/purANa where a preliminary worship of gaNesha is not done. These include, but are not limited to, rAma's worship of the family deity jagannAtha-nArAyaNa (who became the main deity of shrI rangam temple) described at the beginning of ayodhya-kANDa, rAma's appeasement of varuNa in order to get permission to build the bridge to lanka, dasharatha's putra-kAmEShTi-yagna described in bALa-kANDa, and many more. In each and every one of these events, a preliminary worship of gaNesha is not described.



Beginning with a Vedic prayer to Ganesh, is done everywhere.

It is not done in Vaishnava sampradAya-s of madhva, rAmAnuja, chaitanya and others.

Moreover, being "done everywhere" is not the criterion for determining right action in sanAtana-dharma. Meat-eating is "done everywhere." God-man worship is "done everywhere." Politically-correct revisionism of conservative, dharmic, social standards is "done everywhere." That does not make those things correct.



The religious books say that Lord Shiva and Parvati worshipped Shree Ganesh on the occasion of their marriage.

In sanAtana-dharma, the only "religious books" which enjoy universal authority are the shruti-s and those smRiti-s which uphold the shruti-s.



Many people find this surprising. But in 100th verse of Bal Kand of ‘Ramcharitamanas’ composed by Tulsidas

.... is not the authority on the rAmAyaNa. The original work by vALmIki is the oldest, extant version of the events of the rAmAyaNa, and is universally accepted as the undisputed authority (with the exception of mAdhva-vaiShNava-s who consider an older version of the epic to be the original).



this is explained very convincingly. He said: This ‘Leela’ can only be understood by a true believer. As long as Shree Ganesh remains in the form of Maha Ganesh, he is the first complete free person from the beginning, middle and end of the creation of the universe. But when he takes the form of the son of Shiva and Parvati, a new chapter begins in his Leela. Undoubtedly this chapter is an inspiration to all of us.

Whether this is true of tuLasi-dAs or not, I cannot say. But if he did indeed write that, then it contradicts what is stated in shruti, which is that nArAyaNa is brahman, and He is the only free person from the beginning, middle, and end of the creation of the universe. It is He from whom everything originates, and He into whom it all returns. Before the creation, it is He only who exists. This is a cardinal teaching of vedAnta, and hence, anyone who considers that there is another free person who transcends all this, is accepting a non-vedAntic view of a second brahman, which is a heretical doctrine. People who propose such views have no business arrogating to themselves the authority of determining what is and is not authentic Vaishnavism.

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam

वक्रतुण्ड महाकाय सुर्यकोटि समप्रभ

निर्विघ्नं कुरु मे देव सर्वकार्येषु सर्वदा

It would be wrong for me insist or expect, on a Vaisnava thread, the worship of Ganesha the foremost of ganas.

It is up an individual or sect to follow their rules and interpretation of Ganesh as they see fit. There is no denying, the agra puja of Ganesh the gori putra in Satyanarayan Katha. Most Hindus will see Ganesh or Vinayak as Gori putra, with a few exception of Vaishnava sect and may be, come up as some different deity but they would not be convincing the majority of Hindus.

There are many Vaishnava especially in north, east and west who are largely influenced by Go-Swami Tulsidas that they would invoke Ganesha first in any endeavour.

There is also one very interesting past time that is performed within JaganNath lila, in Puri, every year on snan yatra day after bathing the deities both Krishna and Baladev are decorated in the image of Lord Ganesh.

Off course there are reference in sruti/smriti text of Ganapati, subject to interpretation which would convince some and not the others depending on predilection

Jai Shree Krishna

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste all

I think if we felt we need not worship Sri Ganapathi or any other devata other than Sriman Narayana, we have the freedom to do so (as per VA we do not need other deities). But, I think we need to keep this information to ourselves, merely posting in this forum with this question itself, generates feelings among others that we are disrespecting Sri Ganapathi, when actually the fact is that we are merely questioning our right to fall to the feet of only 1 lord as opposed to many! (For example, tell a strict Shaiva that he has to worship mother Lakshmi, he will ask why?).


I would like to add one more point towards the thread. A/c to SriVaishnavas there is nothing that one can get from any deity that Vishnu can't give. If we require Lord Ganesha to raise our Muladhara Chakra or remove obstacle, it would equate to saying that Krishna cannot do that. If we require Navagraha to rid us of our problem then it would mean that Rama cannot solve that problem. That's the reason why looking upto another deity is considered a setback. This is true not only for moksha but also for money, yogic siddhi, kaivalya, beautiful wife etc.

Scriptures approve worship of the gods, eternally liberated souls, etc., the only question is what of all that is common for Vaishnava practice.
Here I will give a brief passage from the Brahma-vaivarta purana
(Brahma-vaivarta puranam. Translated into English by Rajendra Nath Sen. Published 1920 by Panini Office in Allahabad)
http://www.archive.org/stream/brahmavaivartapu04allauoft#page/11/mode/1up

Krishna janma khanda, ch. CXXIII.54-59, p. 534.
where Radha eulogised Ganesha "You are the supreme Brahma ... there is none superior to you ... you cause the gods to manifest themselves".

Some people do not understand how this kind of worship of deities such as Ganesha is not actually addressed to him, ie is not addressed to Ganesha but is addressed to the Supreme Lord, Supreme Brahman. If we carefully examine Radha's eulogy we can clearly see that the words "You are the supreme Brahma ... there is none superior to you ... you cause the gods to manifest themselves" can not be applied to Ganesha who is just a jiva soul (jivatma).
How do we know that these words are not really addressed to Ganesha?
Not one jiva soul or jivatma is supreme Brahman, not one jiva soul or jivatma can be described as "there is none superior to you" and also "you cause the gods to manifest themselves". Obviously only the Supreme Lord who is supreme Brahman or paramatma can be described with these words. So Radha's eulogy of Ganesha is, obviously, addressed not to him but to the paramatma or the supreme Lord situated in his heart. This paramatma is called antaryami or the Supersoul existing in everyone's heart.
That's the point. A Vaishnava should keep in mind when gods (sometimes called "demigods"), eternally liberated souls and other divine beings have been eulogised in this manner, these words are addressed to the Lord. So they are not worshiped as an independent divinities.

There is no provision for Vaishnavas that only the supreme Lord should be worshiped. For example shruti scriptures enjoin worship of the guru:


yasya deve parā bhaktir yathā deve tathā gurau

"we should have bhakti (devotion) towards both the Lord and the spiritual master" (Svetasvatara Upanisad 6.23)


Should a Vaishnava think "I do not need to worship anyone other than God (the Supreme Lord)"?
Obviously not.

regards

[philosoraptor]

Scriptures approve worship of the gods, eternally liberated souls, etc., the only question is what of all that is common for Vaishnava practice.

By "Vaishnava practice," brahma jijnasa is of course referring to his understanding of "Hare Krishna practice." Hare Krishnas don't represent Vaishnavaism, and brahma-jijnasa does not exactly represent Hare Krishnas.



There is no provision for Vaishnavas that only the supreme Lord should be worshiped. For example shruti scriptures enjoin worship of the guru:


yasya deve parā bhaktir yathā deve tathā gurau

"we should have bhakti (devotion) towards both the Lord and the spiritual master" (Svetasvatara Upanisad 6.23)


Should a Vaishnava think "I do not need to worship anyone other than God (the Supreme Lord)"?
Obviously not.


This is a typical example of what is known as a strawman. The original position is that a Vaishnava need not worship any other deva. Now brahma-jijnasa hopes to refute this by pointing to the worship of the guru as requirement for a Vaishnava. Except that the guru is not a deva, and saying that one need not worship any other deva is not contradicted by a requirement that one should worship one's guru.

It really is bizarre, that a member of a sect that elevates one specific form of Vishnu as being superior to the rest, will nevertheless try to rationalize worship of other devas.

[hinduism♥krishna]

I would like to add one more point towards the thread. A/c to SriVaishnavas there is nothing that one can get from any deity that Vishnu can't give. If we require Lord Ganesha to raise our Muladhara Chakra or remove obstacle, it would equate to saying that Krishna cannot do that. If we require Navagraha to rid us of our problem then it would mean that Rama cannot solve that problem. That's the reason why looking upto another deity is considered a setback. This is true not only for moksha but also for money, yogic siddhi, kaivalya, beautiful wife etc.

Namaste , bandhu.

Where is the point ? Worshipping other supreme gods doesn't mean krushn or Vishnu can't do that thing ! Then tell me, Why worshipping radha for moksh wouldn't mean Krishna can't do that ( although worshipping radha is a non-vedic practice ) ? Why worshipping durga wouldn't mean mean Krishna can't ? Why worshipping balaram wouldn't mean krishna cant do that? & so on.......

This is one of the problem when we consider bramh as sagun bramh with form. We can't accept omnipresent nature of bramh unless we are stuck on supremacy.

Hare Krishna govind

[brahma jijnasa]

By "Vaishnava practice," brahma jijnasa is of course referring to his understanding ...

Do you remember that I've already said that your comments on my posts are ridiculous. Now you are going from the ridiculous towards even more ridiculous.
Will there be at least one post of mine which you will not misunderstand or misinterpreted?

Man, get a life!

regards

[philosoraptor]

Do you remember that I've already said that your comments on my posts are ridiculous. Now you are going from the ridiculous towards even more ridiculous.
Will there be at least one post of mine which you will not misunderstand or misinterpreted?

Man, get a life!

regards


Yes, I remember. You have a tendency to make puerile misinterpretations of straightforward scriptural statements (such as, for example, arguing that anAdi karma does not imply anAdi samsAra) which no reputable Vaishnava scholar would make. And then, when it is pointed out that you are going against the grain of Vaishnava Vedantic standards of interpretation, you usually respond with something along the lines of the above.

Getting back to the point, your attempt to rationalize gaNesha worship from the standpoint of "Vaishnavism" is incorrect even as per the particular subsect of gauDIya sampradAya to which you belong. In his own books, Sri Prabhupada did not encourage the worship of gaNesha, and in fact he overtly discouraged worship of other devas when asked about it by his disciples. Although he mentions its place once in his book Nectar of Devotion, there is not a single temple established by him in which gaNesha was installed for worship. He did not, as your have suggested, try to argue that worship of gaNesha with the meditation of his inner paramAtmA was an acceptable meditation. There is no doubt that the AtmA of gaNesha also has nArAyaNa as his inner paramAtmA. The same is true of son, moon, stars, planets, jIva-s, matter, etc. However, that specific meditation (of meditating on the paramAtmA within the AtmA of gaNesha) is not recommended in shAstra - not in any universally accepted shruti, and certainly not in the bhAgavata purANa which is given the greatest importance by Hare Krishna devotees (at least, in theory.... I'm assuming a certain purity of presentation and not some self-motivated need to ingratiate one's self with other Hindus).


Namaste , bandhu.

Where is the point ? Worshipping other supreme gods doesn't mean krushn or Vishnu can't do that thing ! Then tell me, Why worshipping radha for moksh wouldn't mean Krishna can't do that ( although worshipping radha is a non-vedic practice ) ? Why worshipping durga wouldn't mean mean Krishna can't ? Why worshipping balaram wouldn't mean krishna cant do that? & so on.......

This is one of the problem when we consider bramh as sagun bramh with form. We can't accept omnipresent nature of bramh unless we are stuck on supremacy.

Hare Krishna govind

The above is an example of the kind of hazy, confused, free-thinking that occurs when one applies expectations based on one's provincial mindset to larger, more venerable traditions outside those of his local community. First, there is no "other supreme gods" as per Vedaantic Vaishnavism, and thank goodness for that. The idea of multiple, supreme gods is inconsistent with the shruti which describes brahman as "one without a second." It also happens to defy common sense, since everyone knows there can be only one best or supreme among things. Second, jijnasu's point is abundantly clear and does not require explanation - everything can be had from worship of nArAyaNa, and thus there is no need to go to any other deity. This has been a cornerstone of Vaishnava philosophy for centuries, upheld by shruti and smRiti, and indisputably consistent and logical. Moreover, this is the Vaishnava forum, and the irony is thick that those who don't like views preached against their own views, are here preaching a view that gaNesha worship should be done in a forum dedicated to traditions endorsing the exclusive worship of nArAyaNa. Is that hypocrisy? Um.... yeah, that is. Finally, neither the bhAgavata purANa, nor the viShNu purANa, nor the upaniShad-s, nor any other principle texts of Vedantic Vaishnavism recommend the worship of gaNesha in any context, and arguing against this point because one's sectarian, family traditions hold otherwise, is an arbitrary position that is beyond ridiculous in its execution.

Read the description: "Vaishnava Forum for discussion of Vaishnava Dharma." This isn't the forum for new-agey, free-thinkers to push their non-Vaishnava views onto those who believe in Vaishnavism. At the very least, if you are going to disagree with established Vaishnava traditions with foundations built on centuries of scholarship, you could at least offer logical, scripturally-based arguments, instead of the same old, same-old....

[jignyAsu]

Should a Vaishnava think "I do not need to worship anyone other than God (the Supreme Lord)"? Obviously not.

Namaste brahma jijnasa,

When a servant is employed in a house, it is implicitly understood that he serves the head of the household along with his wife, kids etc. Infact his job is much more secure when the relatives are pleased with him :-). Just because the head of the household employs him, neither can he refuse to serve his relatives nor can he start serving the owner of some other house.

In SriVaishnavam, we regard the devotees of Sriman Narayana like Garuda, Lakshmi, VishwaksEnar, Hanuman etc., even more than we regard Him! This includes the Gurus that show the way to His Lotus Feet and none here are worshipped seperately or as supreme. Nayanmars also worshipped Lord Shiva along with family and devotees but not with a Vishnu devotee. To stretch this to indicate that Vaishnavam encourages worshipping all deities is indeed far fetched.

And I did mention above that we do worship all deities in yagnAs and in Vishnu temples. This does include authorized Vedic hymns praising various deities having Sriman Narayana as their Atman (as per Vaishnavas). When the Lord says in Gita to worship only Him, it is not right to say that a Vaishnava does not have any provision for such an exclusive worship.



This is one of the problem when we consider bramh as sagun bramh with form. We can't accept omnipresent nature of bramh unless we are stuck on supremacy.


Pranam,

A Vaishnava by definition is someone that holds only Lord Vishnu(with the problematic Sagun form) as the Supreme Lord.

[smaranam]

Here I will give a brief passage from the Brahma-vaivarta purana
(Brahma-vaivarta puranam. Translated into English by Rajendra Nath Sen. Published 1920 by Panini Office in Allahabad)
http://www.archive.org/stream/brahmavaivartapu04allauoft#page/11/mode/1up

Krishna janma khanda, ch. CXXIII.54-59, p. 534.
where Radha eulogised Ganesha "You are the supreme Brahma ... there is none superior to you ... you cause the gods to manifest themselves".

Some people do not understand how this kind of worship of deities such as Ganesha is not actually addressed to him, ie is not addressed to Ganesha but is addressed to the Supreme Lord, Supreme Brahman.

Namaste,

Yes, this is exactly what I said here http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=108721&postcount=75
and also mentioned the same RAdhA-GaNesh saMvAd in Shri KRshNa KhanDa that you have sited, in post #65 on the same thread.

But guess what, I did not just talk the talk, but also walked the walk.
This year, I did not attend the community Ganesh aarati on Ganesh Chaturthi. What i did was, offered the things that were being cooked for Ganesh at home, to my muralIdhar, shyAmsundar (KRshNa). Then, after the people had dispersed, I went to our guest of honour, Ganapati Bappa in the sArvajanik (common) area. I slowly looked into His eyes, offered Him a red flower, and... you have no idea how He addressed / spoke to me. That was it!

My Lord NArAyaNa was speaking thru this beautiful sAttvic Ganesh form! I just knew instantly that my Lord comes here every year to bring people together while He stays in the background. *This gave rise to the "God in Hindu Dharma" thread.

On the 4th day - I made a nice prasadam item by instinct, offered a bowlful to Shyam at home, and immediately took the rest of it to Ganapati Bappa as surprise-naivedya for the morning arati (each morn/eve aarati , a family is assigned the puja and naivedya, so the assigned family had already brought the mittai they were offering). The idea also was to take some warm savoury food to Bappa as a change from the store-bought sweets that people usually bring.

On visarjan day, I made Him a cute flower crown (did not have enough flowers for a vaijayanti haar). Again this was after people had dispersed, just a few remained. I sang two Ganesh and one KRshNa bhajan as we waited for the rain to stop.

Went home. Saw Ganpati Bappa brought out with drums, for the 'mirauNuk' (procession) to send Him off. I could not stay indoors any longer. I joined the procession and danced till the end just as I would for Radha-KRshNa or Jagannath (not random or like people dance for entertainment). Some people - youth - were there just to 'enjoy themselves' - not all of them had the concept of dancing FOR the Lord, they were way up in the front. I was with Ganesh and a few ladies joined. Hoped to set example to a few.

:)

Sant NAmdev was smart. What I realized this Ganesh Chaturthi, he knew this upfront, and composed the aarati "ghAlin loTAngaN vandIna charaNa..."

*However, I was not keen to attend the aarati with people and sing all those aratis and atharvashirshas. Was happy to meet Bappa alone. The antaryAmi solves puzzles when the situation actually comes up.

_/\_

[smaranam]

*However, I was not keen to attend the aarati with people and sing all those aratis and atharvashirsha. Was happy to meet Bappa alone. The antaryAmi solves puzzles when the situation actually comes up.
Regarding atharvashIrsha, I never joined the ladies in my neighbourhood in it. Once, on a random chaturthi, they invited me. I kept talking to KRshNa - "I don't know what to do" "Do what you think is best"

I decided to stay back with KAnhA, and He was happy with this. Had the most divine few moments with Him. However, when I took the prasad to Ganapati Bappa this year, they chanted the Ganapati atharvashIrsha, I stayed and just listened with closed eyes. It was very meditative, and did not want it to stop. Becs this time it hardly mattered - the tvam bramhA tvam vishnu.... did not bother me. Becs it is always Shri Hari my Lord, NArAyaNa, and NO ONE ELSE. Nothing can 'take Him away'

It is funny that my Ganesh festival experience was just like Radha's in Radha-Ganesh samvad, BVP. Had not noticed that till right now as I type :) The only difference is, She worshipped GaNEsh with an objective to never be seperated from KRshNa again ever (just as the Gopis prayed to KAtyAyani, Durga maa to get KRshNa as husband). Whereas, I just wanted to welcome and honour GaNesh (becs that would indirectly please VAsudeva, KRshNa), but what a surprise the Lord gave!

Just imagine, you go to visit someone becs it is 'proper' or to honour them, and you find out its nobody but your Beloved in disguise :)

Jai GaNesha Deva!
om namo narayanaya namo namo narayanaya om namo narayanaya namo namah

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste

they chanted the Ganapati atharvashIrsha, I stayed and just listened with closed eyes. It was very meditative, and did not want it to stop. Becs this time it hardly mattered - the tvam bramhA tvam vishnu.... did not bother me. Becs it is always Shri Hari my Lord, NArAyaNa, and NO ONE ELSE. Nothing can 'take Him away'

I would say just this:


Some people do not understand how this kind of worship of deities such as Ganesha is not actually addressed to him, ie is not addressed to Ganesha but is addressed to the Supreme Lord, Supreme Brahman.
:)

regards

[hinduism♥krishna]

Here I will give a brief passage from the Brahma-vaivarta purana
(Brahma-vaivarta puranam. Translated into English by Rajendra Nath Sen. Published 1920 by Panini Office in Allahabad)
http://www.archive.org/stream/brahma...ge/11/mode/1up

Krishna janma khanda, ch. CXXIII.54-59, p. 534.
where Radha eulogised Ganesha "You are the supreme Brahma ... there is none superior to you ... you cause the gods to manifest themselves".

Some people do not understand how this kind of worship of deities such as Ganesha is not actually addressed to him, ie is not addressed to Ganesha but is addressed to the Supreme Lord, Supreme Brahman.
Namaste bramh jijnyasa.

I really didn't understand this. I don't want to down your view. I appreciate it but I request you to explain me that. You are saying that one is praising ganesha as supreme bramhan means krishna is supreme bramhan, as if translation of supreme bramhan is bhagavan Krishna.

Why radha eulogized ganesha if he is not supreme bramh ? How 'ganesha is supreme bramh' doesn't mean 'ganesha is not supreme' ? & how 'ganesha is supreme bramh' means 'only krishna is bramh' ?

I think Radha knows better than us who is lord krishna, what is his true nature. She realised that krishna and ganesha are one, the difference between them is only of the form. However their real nature is satchitanand only. Radha was situated in the atmik bliss where mind and it's products like form doesn't remain and that form is not applicable for bramh.

Thank you. Ram Krishna Hari ♥

[smaranam]

I think Radha knows better than us who is lord krishna, what is his true nature. She realised that krishna and ganesha are one, the difference between them is only of the form.
This is the realization the Lord gave, seperately, on this Ganesh Chaturthi. (had no BVP or any shastra in mind.)

However, says Radha, that sacchidAnanda is NArAyaNa to me as long as I am Shri

Aham BramhAsmi

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste

I really didn't understand this. I don't want to down your view. I appreciate it but I request you to explain me that. ...

There are two tattvas or categories of beings. One is called Vishnu tattva and the other is called jiva tattva.
We living beings are jiva tattva category, we are jivas or jiva souls (jivatmas). Ganesha and others gods (sometimes called "demigods") such as Brahma, guna avatara Shiva, Indra, Agni, Vayu, etc. are all jivas or jiva tattva.
The other category is called Vishnu tattva. This is Lord Vishnu who appears in his various personal forms such as Narayana, Krishna, Rama, Balarama, Nrisimha, Varaha, Sadasiva, etc. They are all one and the same Lord Vishnu or the Supreme Lord or Supreme Brahman.
Jivas, jiva souls or jiva tattva are not the Supreme Lord but are subordinate to Him.

Ganesha is just a jiva soul and thus he is not the Supreme Lord, he is not Lord Vishnu, he is not Vishnu tattva, he is not Supreme Brahman.
For this reason I said:


Krishna janma khanda, ch. CXXIII.54-59, p. 534.
where Radha eulogised Ganesha "You are the supreme Brahma ... there is none superior to you ... you cause the gods to manifest themselves".

Some people do not understand how this kind of worship of deities such as Ganesha is not actually addressed to him, ie is not addressed to Ganesha but is addressed to the Supreme Lord, Supreme Brahman. If we carefully examine Radha's eulogy we can clearly see that the words "You are the supreme Brahma ... there is none superior to you ... you cause the gods to manifest themselves" can not be applied to Ganesha who is just a jiva soul (jivatma).
How do we know that these words are not really addressed to Ganesha?
Not one jiva soul or jivatma is supreme Brahman, not one jiva soul or jivatma can be described as "there is none superior to you" and also "you cause the gods to manifest themselves". Obviously only the Supreme Lord who is supreme Brahman or paramatma can be described with these words. So Radha's eulogy of Ganesha is, obviously, addressed not to him but to the paramatma or the supreme Lord situated in his heart. This paramatma is called antaryami or the Supersoul existing in everyone's heart.
That's the point. A Vaishnava should keep in mind when gods (sometimes called "demigods"), eternally liberated souls and other divine beings have been eulogised in this manner, these words are addressed to the Lord. So they are not worshiped as an independent divinities.

regards

[smaranam]

Ganesha is just a jiva soul and thus he is not the Supreme Lord, he is not Lord Vishnu, he is not Vishnu tattva, he is not Supreme Brahman.

Well, this wasn't exactly what I realized this year. It was Him!

-----
Anyways, as an aside, I borrowed a lot more time from BAla Mukunda than I was supposed to.

[Sri Vaishnava]

I hope other hindus do not take offense to this, but sri vaishnavas do not accept the existence of Ganesha or that he is a vedic devata.

As per the writings of our acharyas, we recognise only Subrahmanya, the son of Shiva. The deity named vinAyaka (also named by srI adi shankara in his bhashya) according to us is part of Shiva's bhUta gaNas, but is not his son and is not the Ganapati worshipped popularly as Shiva putra.

The rg vedic mantra containing the word "ganapatim" as well as "ganapati" appearing in the Satarudriyam are interpreted as epithets to Vishnu (lord of the nitya sUrIs, known as ganas) by us. In addition, the sahasranAmA vAkya,

yasya dvirada vaktrAdyAh pArisadyAh parassatam | vighnam nighnanti satatam visvaksEnam tamAsrayE

...is interpreted as "We salute the elephant faced gajanana, the nitya suri and the army of nitya sUrIs in thousands, headed by the commander Vishwaksena, who is the destroyer of obstacles to the realisation of Brahman (sriman nArAyaNa)."

Vishwaksena is a nitya sUri and occurs in the pancharAtra agama as well.

Of course, there are other vaishnavas who do accept Ganesha as a legitimate deity, but that is their sampradaya. To each his own.

[brahma jijnasa]

You have a tendency to make puerile misinterpretations of straightforward scriptural statements (such as, for example, arguing that anAdi karma does not imply anAdi samsAra) which no reputable Vaishnava scholar would make. And then, when it is pointed out that you are going against the grain of Vaishnava Vedantic standards of interpretation, you usually respond with something along the lines of the above.

Then why don't you tell Gaudiya vaishnava acaryas that they are "puerile"? They have explained anadi karma thus as I have said. You know, I'm still waiting for you and that your "reputable Vaishnava scholars" to show that the anAdi karma actually means anAdi samsAra.


Getting back to the point, your attempt to rationalize gaNesha worship from the standpoint of "Vaishnavism" is incorrect even as per the particular subsect of gauDIya sampradAya to which you belong. In his own books, Sri Prabhupada did not encourage the worship of gaNesha ... there is not a single temple established by him in which gaNesha was installed for worship.

In my post on Ganesha I said "Scriptures approve worship of the gods, eternally liberated souls, etc., the only question is what of all that is common for Vaishnava practice."

As acknowledged by your colleague jignyAsu "we do worship all deities in yagnAs and in Vishnu temples. This does include authorized Vedic hymns praising various deities having Sriman Narayana as their Atman (as per Vaishnavas)."
You have forgotten that in this very thread Bhāgavatam 11.27.29 was mentioned where it is said that some demigods including Vināyaka are worshiped (http://vedabase.net/sb/11/27/29/en) in chapter "Lord Kṛṣṇa's Instructions on the Process of Deity Worship":


"With offerings such as prokṣaṇa one should worship Durgā, Vināyaka, Vyāsa, Viṣvaksena, the spiritual masters and the various demigods. All these personalities should be in their proper places facing the Deity of the Lord."

Now, I'm not saying that Vināyaka mentioned in this verse is Ganesha but still the verse mentions some divinities and various demigods!
Obviously worship of mentioned divinities and various demigods is not prohibited. That's my point. It does not matter whether Srila Prabhupada established worship of Ganesha or not. It's just a matter of customs of the sampradaya and practical application of the above mentioned Bhāgavatam 11.27.29 verse and similar scriptural injunctions.


He did not, as your have suggested, try to argue that worship of gaNesha with the meditation of his inner paramAtmA was an acceptable meditation. There is no doubt that the AtmA of gaNesha also has nArAyaNa as his inner paramAtmA. The same is true of son, moon, stars, planets, jIva-s, matter, etc. However, that specific meditation (of meditating on the paramAtmA within the AtmA of gaNesha) is not recommended in shAstra - not in any universally accepted shruti, and certainly not in the bhAgavata purANa which is given the greatest importance by Hare Krishna devotees

It seems that your colleague jignyAsu does not agree with you, see above where I have quoted him "This does include authorized Vedic hymns praising various deities having Sriman Narayana as their Atman (as per Vaishnavas)."
If that specific meditation on the paramatma within the divinities is not recommended in the scriptures then why did Sri Radha worshiped Ganesha in this way?
I have already quoted Brahma-vaivarta purana, Krishna janma khanda, ch. CXXIII.54-59, p. 534.
where Radha eulogised Ganesha "You are the supreme Brahma ... there is none superior to you ... you cause the gods to manifest themselves".
If this is not that specific type of meditation or worship, then what is it?
As I have already explained if we carefully examine Radha's eulogy we can clearly see that the words "You are the supreme Brahma ... there is none superior to you ... you cause the gods to manifest themselves" can not be applied to Ganesha who is just a jiva soul (jivatma).
To whom does it apply those words if can not be applied to Ganesha? :)
Who can be described as "You are the supreme Brahma, etc."? :)
Guess Who?

regards

[philosoraptor]

You have a tendency to make puerile misinterpretations of straightforward scriptural statements (such as, for example, arguing that anAdi karma does not imply anAdi samsAra) which no reputable Vaishnava scholar would make. And then, when it is pointed out that you are going against the
grain of Vaishnava Vedantic standards of interpretation, you usually respond with something along the lines of the above.
[FONT="Times New Roman"][SIZE="2"]
Then why don't you tell Gaudiya vaishnava acaryas that they are "puerile"? They have explained anadi karma thus as I have said. You know, I'm still waiting for you and that your "reputable Vaishnava scholars" to show that the anAdi karma actually means anAdi samsAra.

I did not say that Gaudiya Vaishnava acharyas are puerile. I said that your misinterpretations of scripture are puerile. Let us not confuse the two. Gaudiya Vaishnavas accept the Vedaantic view that karma is anAdi, and that karma means what everyone else understands it to mean - action in the material world which results in puNyam or pApam. Nowhere in the writings of Baladeva Vidyaabhuushana do we see this being reinterpreted in the sense of a "fall from Vaikuntha." Asking for proof that anAdi karma implies anAdi samsAra is moronic. Every Vedaanta commentator knows that it does, since that is a straightforward inference - Adi Shankara, Madhva, Raamaanuja, Baladeva... they all do. In none of their writings do we see them referring to a "fall from Vaikuntha." The burden of proof is on the challenger to centuries of Vedaantic interpretation to show otherwise.





Getting back to the point, your attempt to rationalize gaNesha worship from the standpoint of "Vaishnavism" is incorrect
even as per the particular subsect of gauDIya sampradAya to which you belong. In his own books, Sri Prabhupada did not
encourage the worship of gaNesha ... there is not a single temple established by him in which gaNesha was installed for
worship.
In my post on Ganesha I said "Scriptures approve worship of the gods, eternally liberated souls, etc., the only question is what of all that is common for Vaishnava practice."

First of all, as a believer in "Jesus is a pure devotee" and "Mohammed is a shaktyavesha avatar," what to speak of other non-Vedic deviations like "fall from Vaikuntha," you have no credibility to speak on behalf of Gaudiya Vaishnavas, what to speak of Vaishnavas in general.

Second, shAstra does not say that gaNesha is an "eternally liberated soul." In fact, there is no universally accepted shruti which even mentions gaNesha.



As acknowledged by your colleague jignyAsu "we do worship all deities in yagnAs and in Vishnu temples. This does include authorized Vedic hymns praising various deities having Sriman Narayana as their Atman (as per Vaishnavas)."

The deities mentioned by jignyAsu are Vedic deities whose names are explicitly mentioned in veda - rudra, indra, agni, vAyu, mitra, varuNa, etc. gaNesha's name is not mentioned in any extant shruti and is not included in that list.



You have forgotten that in this very thread Bhāgavatam 11.27.29 was mentioned where it is said that some demigods including Vināyaka are worshiped (http://vedabase.net/sb/11/27/29/en) in chapter "Lord Kṛṣṇa's Instructions on the Process of Deity Worship":


"With offerings such as prokṣaṇa one should worship Durgā, Vināyaka, Vyāsa, Viṣvaksena, the spiritual masters and the various demigods. All these personalities should be in their proper places facing the Deity of the Lord."

Now, I'm not saying that Vināyaka mentioned in this verse is Ganesha but still the verse mentions some divinities and various demigods!

This is completely irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion. Here is the commentary on that verse from your own sampradAya:

PURPORT According to Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī, the Gaṇeśa and Durgā mentioned in this verse are not the same personalities present within the material world; rather, they are eternal associates of the Lord in Vaikuṇṭha. In this world Gaṇeśa, the son of Lord Śiva, is famous for awarding financial success, and the goddess Durgā, the wife of Lord Śiva, is famous as the external, illusory potency of the Supreme Lord. The personalities mentioned here, however, are eternally liberated associates of the Lord who reside in the spiritual sky, beyond the material manifestation. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī quotes from various Vedic literatures to prove that the name Durgā may also indicate the internal potency of the Lord, who is nondifferent from Him. The external, or covering, potency of the Lord expands from this original Durgā. The Durgā of the material world, called Mahā-māyā, assumes the function of bewildering the living entities. Thus a devotee should not fear becoming polluted by worshiping the Durgā mentioned here, who has the same name as illusion, but rather the devotee must show respect to these eternal servitors of the Supreme Lord in Vaikuṇṭha.

Now, you either agree with jIva gosvAmI or you don't. If you don't, then you are no Gaudiya Vaishnava and have no business misrepresenting yourself as such. If you do, then this verse does not bolster your case any, making it quite dishonest for you to try and imply otherwise.



Obviously worship of mentioned divinities and various demigods is not prohibited. That's my point. It does not matter whether Srila Prabhupada established worship of Ganesha or not. It's just a matter of customs of the sampradaya and practical application of the above mentioned Bhāgavatam 11.27.29 verse and similar scriptural injunctions.

Because you are obviously confused, let me remind you that the title of this thread is "Ganapathi pooja in Vaishnavism." In response to jignyAsu's very correct position that nothing need be sought from anya-devatas that cannot be had from the worship of shrIman nArAyaNa, it was you who jumped in and rambled on about tangential points regarding the merits of worshiping entities other than shrIman nArAyaNa, obviously to lay the foundation for your implied position that gaNesha-worship as a liberated soul might be acceptable. So far, you have not proven the case. You cannot show where gaNesha is mentioned as a vedic deity, cannot show that he is a liberated soul, and cannot produce any evidence even from the writers in your own sampradAya (excluding some Jesus followers from ISKCON who obviously lack intellectual credibility) authenticating the worship of gaNesha as a valid ancillary sAdhana.



It seems that your colleague jignyAsu does not agree with you, see above where I have quoted him "This does include authorized Vedic hymns praising various deities having Sriman Narayana as their Atman (as per Vaishnavas)."

Once again, you have no idea what you are talking about. There are no authorized Vedic hymns discussing the worship of an elephant-faced deity who is the son of Shiva, making your point moot.



If that specific meditation on the paramatma within the divinities is not recommended in the scriptures then why did Sri Radha worshiped Ganesha in this way?
I have already quoted Brahma-vaivarta purana, Krishna janma khanda, ch. CXXIII.54-59, p. 534.

Which is not a core scripture for Gaudiya Vaishnavas, and is also not shruti. Thus it has no bearing on practices based on authorized Vedic hymns

[Omkara]

In fact, there is no universally accepted shruti which even mentions gaNesha.


Shaivas (and possibly Smartas and Madhva Vaishnavas, but I'm not sure) identify Ganesha wirh the deity Brahmanaspati mentioned in the Vedas. This identification is of course debatable as there is no mention of Brahmanaspati having an elephant head.

[Omkara]

Some people do not understand how this kind of worship of deities such as Ganesha is not actually addressed to him, ie is not addressed to Ganesha but is addressed to the Supreme Lord, Supreme Brahman. If we carefully examine Radha's eulogy we can clearly see that the words "You are the supreme Brahma ... there is none superior to you ... you cause the gods to manifest themselves" can not be applied to Ganesha who is just a jiva soul (jivatma).
How do we know that these words are not really addressed to Ganesha?
Not one jiva soul or jivatma is supreme Brahman, not one jiva soul or jivatma can be described as "there is none superior to you" and also "you cause the gods to manifest themselves". Obviously only the Supreme Lord who is supreme Brahman or paramatma can be described with these words. So Radha's eulogy of Ganesha is, obviously, addressed not to him but to the paramatma or the supreme Lord situated in his heart. This paramatma is called antaryami or the Supersoul existing in everyone's heart.


I have problems with this logic.
While we say 'Jack is a tall boy' and the attributes of Jack's physical body are applied to the Jiva Jack due to the inseparable relation between soul and the body, 'Jack' is a term that refers to the inseparable combination of the soul and the body. Thus we can say "Jack was born on 12th June 1984" wherein are referring to the body of the composite entity Jack. We can also say that "Jack has existed for all eternity" wherein we are referring to the eternal soul in the composite entity "Jack".

We cannot, however attribute to individual components of "Jack" attributes of each other. We cannot say "Jack's body has existed forever " or "Jack's soul was born on so-and-so date"

Similarly, Brahman abd Jiva are parts of a composite which is as inseparable as the body and the soul. However, we cannot say that Brahman is a being of limited knowledge who transmigrates under the influence of Karma, because we are attributing properties of the other part of the Brahman-Jiva composite to Brahman.

Similarly, we cannot go upto a particular jiva and tell him "You are the supreme lord who creates, sustains and destroys the universe" and then invoke the inseparability of the Antaryamin and Jiva.

Keep in mind that I am not saying that Ganesha is the Supreme Brahman. He is a Jiva.

[ShivaFan]

Philosoraptor: There are no authorized Vedic hymns discussing the worship of an elephant-faced deity who is the son of Shiva

Namaste

Which Vedic hymns name Rama?

Which Vedic hymns name Krishna?

Which Vedic hymns name Garuda?

Which Vedic hymns name Ananta Shesha Naga?

There are no Vedic hymns describing the worship of any of these names? Therefore we should not worship them?

Om Namah Sivaya

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam


Namaste

Which Vedic hymns name Rama?

Which Vedic hymns name Krishna?

Which Vedic hymns name Garuda?

Which Vedic hymns name Ananta Shesha Naga?

There are no Vedic hymns describing the worship of any of these names? Therefore we should not worship them?

Om Namah Sivaya

Good question, i might add Narayana is not explicit in any samhita yet no Hindu can deny he is Chaturbuja Vishnu, i find strange this whole debate!

Jai Shree Krishna

[philosoraptor]

Actually, nArAyaNa is explicitly mentioned in the mahAnArAyaNa upaniShad, which is the 10th prapataka of the taittirIya AraNyaka which is pramANa for all vedAntists.

kRiShNa is mentioned in the chAndogya upaniShad.

garuDa ("garutmAn") is mentioned in the Rg veda saMhitA.

[jignyAsu]

It seems that your colleague jignyAsu does not agree with you, see above where I have quoted him "This does include authorized Vedic hymns praising various deities having Sriman Narayana as their Atman (as per Vaishnavas)."
[/SIZE][/FONT]

Pranam,

As Philosoraptor mentioned, I quoted that only for Vedic hymns of various deities like Lord Brahma, Agni etc. as opposed to using (Rajasic)Puranas under heavy interpolation. The Bhagavatam verse talks about worshiping deities alongside with Lord Narayana while you are using it to worship deities installed in a separate temple. Worshiping Lord with His associates and guru is but basic Vaishnavam but you are using it to rationalize worship other deities.

We give a lot of importance to the agamas used to install a deity.

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam

While i do not deny Narayana, does he get mention in Veda saMhitA? secondary text yes, on the same token Ganesh ji is clearly mentioned here Rg Veda 2.23.1. Aum gananAm tva ganapatingm havamahe (even though with some reservation for some) but vedantist as par excellence as,do not deny his existence and eulogise him in;

Ganesh Bhujangam - Adi Shankaracharya

I praise the ruler of Gaṇa, Who is the son of Īśāna (Śiva), Who appears pleasing with the sounds of joyful swinging small bells across His body, Whose lotus-feet is trembling to the dance of Tāṇḍava in rebellious ways, and Who has a snake-garland shining over His belly.[1]

enough said!!

Jai Shree Krishna

[Sudas Paijavana]

Pranam

While i do not deny Narayana, does he get mention in Veda saMhitA? secondary text yes, on the same token Ganesh ji is clearly mentioned here Rg Veda 2.23.1. Aum gananAm tva ganapatingm havamahe (even though with some reservation for some) but vedantist as par excellence as,do not deny his existence and eulogise him in;

Ganesh Bhujangam - Adi Shankaracharya

I praise the ruler of Gaṇa, Who is the son of Īśāna (Śiva), Who appears pleasing with the sounds of joyful swinging small bells across His body, Whose lotus-feet is trembling to the dance of Tāṇḍava in rebellious ways, and Who has a snake-garland shining over His belly.[1]

enough said!!

Jai Shree Krishna

Pranam-s,

I do not wish to argue nor debate, especially not...since this is the Honorable Vaishnava Forum.

But, I believe, if I recall correctly, Rishi Grtsamada Bhārgava Shaunaka is lauding Devatā Brahmaṇas-Pati, not Shri Ganesha.

Though, please, by all means, correct me if I am wrong.

[Omkara]

Pranam-s,

I do not wish to argue nor debate, especially not...since this is the Honorable Vaishnava Forum.

But, I believe, if I recall correctly, Rishi Grtsamada Bhārgava Shaunaka is lauding Devatā Brahmaṇas-Pati, not Shri Ganesha.

Though, please, by all means, correct me if I am wrong.

Brahmanaspati is considered to be Ganesha by Hindus, though indologists consider him a form of Brihaspati.

Rig Veda 2.23 is dedicated to Ganesha.

[Sudas Paijavana]

Brahmanaspati is considered to be Ganesha by Hindus, though indologists consider him a form of Brihaspati.

Rig Veda 2.23 is dedicated to Ganesha.

Pranam-s,

That is very interesting. Thank you for your help.

[smaranam]

Similarly, we cannot go upto a particular jiva and tell him "You are the supreme lord who creates, sustains and destroys the universe"
Namaste Omkar

You know I am going to go around the world doing just that, but not out loud, only in the antaranga, so the Supreme Bramhan hiding in layers and covers has no choice but to grin. The jiva's mana-buddhi will have no clue. What fun! Just the Lord and me ~ and no one has a clue of what's going on.

ShAstra? If you indeed want shAstra, SB 1.2.33.

Going going gone crazy

A Gopi said to her sakhi

"Look, KRshNa has taken sooo many forms, He actually came to the neighbourhood for 5 days as "GaNesh" and coolly accepted worship from unsuspecting innocent people. While living in homes for 1.5 to 10 days, just imagine the amount of butter He must have stolen! Oh no, but it was the blissful bliss-giving NArAyaNa or Bramhan that had come in the guise of "GaNesh". He does not steal butter.

And now look, He is walking around in sooo many forms -
a coconut tree, ashoka tree, champa, mogra jui kadamba lotus rose
Radharani came as the pink rose tree, but KRshNa came as Radharani
a bulbul, canary, parrot, crow, sparrow, KokiL, robin, bhAradvAj
cute children playing
people walking on streets
your next door neighbours, back neighbours, front neighbours, ...
all people on this thread - they are fighting for and against "GaNesh" - so cute.

Well, it is important for establishing correct VaishNav practice.
The VaishNavs have the answers, and others have their opinions.

And look KRshNa is also posing as Narendra Modi, Gurus, sAdhus, yogis, teachers, students, pujaris, kathakars, and all different beings.

Why, He is posing as me and you!
Oh my MAdhavA! I think the head is about to spin."

[philosoraptor]

Pranam

While i do not deny Narayana, does he get mention in Veda saMhitA? secondary text yes, on the same token Ganesh ji is clearly mentioned here Rg Veda 2.23.1. Aum gananAm tva ganapatingm havamahe (even though with some reservation for some) but vedantist as par excellence as,do not deny his existence and eulogise him in;

Ganesh Bhujangam - Adi Shankaracharya

I praise the ruler of Gaṇa, Who is the son of Īśāna (Śiva), Who appears pleasing with the sounds of joyful swinging small bells across His body, Whose lotus-feet is trembling to the dance of Tāṇḍava in rebellious ways, and Who has a snake-garland shining over His belly.[1]

enough said!!

Jai Shree Krishna

Excuse me... but taittirIya AraNyaka is a "secondary text?"

Please explain the objective basis for that comment.

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam


Excuse me... but taittirIya AraNyaka is a "secondary text?"

Please explain the objective basis for that comment.

when i say secondary i don't mean to down play the importance of Brahmanas, Upanishad, Aranayaks that forms the part of sruti but when i say Samhita i mean the hymn, just the mantras that are contained in the vedas.

Kamakoti org;
When we speak of "Veda-adhyayana" (the study or chanting of the Vedas) we normally have in mind the Samhita part only. When we bring out a book consisting of the Samhita alone of the Rgveda we still call it the "Rgveda". The Samhita is indeed the very basis of asakha, its life-breath. The word means "systematised and collected together".
The Rgveda Samhita as all in the form of poetry. What came to be saled "sloka" in later times is the"rk" of the Vedas. "Rk" means a "stotra", a hymn. The Rgveda Samhita is made up entirely of hymns in praise of various deities. Each rk is a mantra and a number of rks in praise of a deity constitute a sukta.http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap27.htm

I stand by my statement, Narayan does not appear in veda saMhitA

Jai Shree Krishna

[jignyAsu]

Keep in mind that I am not saying that Ganesha is the Supreme Brahman. He is a Jiva.

Are you stating this from a Vaishnava POV or your understanding as a Shaiva?

[philosoraptor]

Pranam



when i say secondary i don't mean to down play the importance of Brahmanas, Upanishad, Aranayaks that forms the part of sruti but when i say Samhita i mean the hymn, just the mantras that are contained in the vedas.

Kamakoti org;
When we speak of "Veda-adhyayana" (the study or chanting of the Vedas) we normally have in mind the Samhita part only. When we bring out a book consisting of the Samhita alone of the Rgveda we still call it the "Rgveda". The Samhita is indeed the very basis of asakha, its life-breath. The word means "systematised and collected together".
The Rgveda Samhita as all in the form of poetry. What came to be saled "sloka" in later times is the"rk" of the Vedas. "Rk" means a "stotra", a hymn. The Rgveda Samhita is made up entirely of hymns in praise of various deities. Each rk is a mantra and a number of rks in praise of a deity constitute a sukta.http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap27.htm

I stand by my statement, Narayan does not appear in veda saMhitA

Jai Shree Krishna


Feel free to stand by that statement, because it is meaningless.

taittirIya AraNyaka is not a "secondary" text. Study of the veda did traditionally include study of upaniShad-s, brAhmaNa-s, and AraNyaka-s in addition to saMhitA-s. There is no basis for giving greater importance to the saMhitA-s, and your long-winded rationalization above is arbitrary and unconvincing. The TA contains the entire puruSha-sukta and also contains mantras used for sandhya-vandanam, both of which cross sampradAya boundries in terms of significance. Adi shankarAchArya accepts the conclusion of the mahAnArAyaNa upaniShad that nArAyaNa is the brahman of the veda-s and upholds the supremacy of nArAyaNa over other deva-s in his gItA commentary. The vedic character of the mahAnArAyaNa is quite obvious from studying it, and there is no logical basis for ascribing lesser importance to pramANa-s from it, unless you just want to spam arbitrary arguments for the purpose of sectarian one-upmanship against Vaishnavas.

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam


Feel free to stand by that statement, because it is meaningless.

-----

And you think your statement has any meaning! i had no reason at all to indulge in inane discourse with you, that on a Vaisnava thread, no sir but when you make in a public forum statement like


" In fact, there is no universally accepted shruti which even mentions gaNesha.

i just could not keep quite, just saw me where in saMhitA ????

Jai Shree Krishna

[Omkara]

Are you stating this from a Vaishnava POV or your understanding as a Shaiva?

It is the view of most Shaivas as far as I have seen, and the view of most Shaiva Acharyas. It is also my personal opinion based on my understanding of scripture.
I do know that most Sri Vaishnavas do not accept Ganesha's existence, but the Madhva Vaiahnavas do, and consider him a jiva. I have not read enough about other Vaishnava traditions to comment on their views about Ganesha.

[philosoraptor]

Just FYI, here is Rg veda saMhitA 2.23 with Griffith's translation, for anyone who is interested. As a smArtha, I'm inclined to believe in a Vedic basis for gaNesha, but I'm not entirely convinced from reading this. The word "gaNapati" is clearly there, but it isn't a proper noun and apparently is not taken as such in Griffith's translation (who follows Shayana if I am not mistaken). The rest of the mantras do not contain any reference to distinguishing features of gaNesha (i.e. being remover of obstacles, having four arms, having rudra/shiva as father, having elephant-face, etc).

ghaṇānāṃ tvā ghaṇapatiṃ havāmahe kaviṃ kavīnāmupamaśravastamam |
jyeṣṭharājaṃ brahmaṇāṃ brahmaṇas pata ā naḥ ṣṛṇvannūtibhiḥ sīda sādanam ||
devāścit te asurya pracetaso bṛhaspate yajñiyaṃ bhāghamānaśuḥ |
usrā iva sūryo jyotiṣā maho viśveṣāmijjanitā brahmaṇāmasi ||
ā vibādhyā parirāpastamāṃsi ca jyotiṣmantaṃ rathaṃ ṛtasya tiṣṭhasi |
bṛhaspate bhīmamamitradambhanaṃ rakṣohaṇaṃghotrabhidaṃ svarvidam ||
sunītibhirnayasi trāyase janaṃ yastubhyaṃ dāśān na tamaṃho aśnavat |
brahmadviṣastapano manyumīrasi bṛhaspate mahi tat te mahitvanam ||
na tamaṃho na duritaṃ kutaścana nārātayastitirurna dvayāvinaḥ |
viśvā idasmād dhvaraso vi bādhase yaṃ sughopā rakṣasi brahmaṇas pate ||
tvaṃ no ghopāḥ pathikṛd vicakṣaṇastava vratāya matibhirjarāmahe |
bṛhaspate yo no abhi hvaro dadhe svā taṃ marmartu duchunā harasvatī ||
uta vā yo no marcayādanāghaso.arātīvā martaḥ sānuko vṛkaḥ |
bṛhaspate apa taṃ vartayā pathaḥ sughaṃ no asyai devavītaye kṛdhi ||
trātāraṃ tvā tanūnāṃ havāmahe.avaspartaradhivaktāramasmayum |
bṛhaspate devanido ni barhaya mā durevā uttaraṃ sumnamun naśan ||
tvayā vayaṃ suvṛdhā brahmaṇas pate spārhā vasu manuṣyā dadīmahi |
yā no dūre taḷito yā arātayo.abhi santi jambhayā tā anapnasaḥ ||
tvayā vayamuttamaṃ dhīmahe vayo bṛhaspate papriṇā sasninā yujā |
mā no duḥśaṃso abhidipsurīśata pra suśaṃsā matibhistāriṣīmahi ||
anānudo vṛṣabho jaghmirāhavaṃ niṣṭaptā śatruṃ pṛtanāsusāsahiḥ |
asi satya ṛṇayā brahmaṇas pata ughrasya cid damitā vīḷuharṣiṇaḥ ||
adevena manasā yo riśaṇyati śāsāmughro manyamāno jighāṃsati |
bṛhaspate ma praṇak tasya no vadho ni karma manyuṃ durevasya śardhataḥ ||
bhareṣu havyo namasopasadyo ghantā vājeṣu sanitā dhanaṃ dhanam |
viśvā idaryo abhidipsvo mṛdho bṛhaspatirvi vavarhā rathāṃ iva ||
tejiṣthayā tapani rakṣasastapa ye tvā nide dadhire dṛṣṭavīryam |
āvistat kṛṣva yadasat ta ukthyaṃ bṛhaspate vi parirāpo ardaya ||
bṛhaspate ati yadaryo arhād dyumad vibhāti kratumajjaneṣu |
yad dīdayacchavasa ṛtaprajāta tadasmasu draviṇaṃ dhehicitram ||
mā na stenebhyo ye abhi druhas pade nirāmiṇo ripavo.anneṣu jāghṛdhuḥ |
ā devānāmohate vi vrayo hṛdi bṛhaspate naparaḥ sāmno viduḥ ||
viśvebhyo hi tvā bhuvanebhyas pari tvaṣṭājanat sāmnaḥ sāmnaḥ kaviḥ |
sa ṛṇacid ṛṇayā brahmaṇas patirdruho hantā maha ṛtasya dhartari ||
tava śriye vyajihīta parvato ghavāṃ ghotramudasṛjo yadaṅghiraḥ |
indreṇa yujā tamasā parīvṛtaṃ bṛhaspate nirapāmaubjo arṇavam ||
brahmaṇas pate tvamasya yantā sūktasya bodhi tanayaṃ ca jinva |
viśvaṃ tad bhadraṃ yadavanti devā bṛhad vadema ... ||

1. WE call thee, Lord and Leader of the heavenly hosts, the wise among the wise, the famousest of all,
The King supreme of prayers, O Brahmaṇaspati: hear us with help; sit down in place of sacrifice.
2 Bṛhaspati, God immortal! verily the Gods have gained from thee, the wise, a share in holy rites.
As with great light the Sun brings forth the rays of morn, so thou alone art Father of all sacred prayer.
3 When thou hast chased away revilers and the gloom, thou mountest the refulgent car of sacrifice;
The awful car, Bṛhaspati, that quells the foe, slays demons, cleaves the stall of kine, and finds the light.
4 Thou leadest with good guidance and preservest men; distress o’ertakes not him who offers gifts to thee.
Him who hates prayer thou punishest, Bṛhaspati, quelling his wrath: herein is thy great mightiness.
5 No sorrow, no distress from any side, no foes, no creatures double-tongued have overcome the man,—
Thou drivest all seductive fiends away from him whom, careful guard, thou keepest Brahmaṇaspati.
6 Thou art our keeper, wise, preparer of our paths: we, for thy service, sing to thee with hymns of praise.
Bṛhaspati, whoever lays a snare for us, him may his evil fate, precipitate, destroy.
7 Him, too, who threatens us without offence of ours, the evilminded, arrogant, rapacious man,—
Him turn thou from our path away, Bṛhaspati: give us fair access to this banquet of the Gods.
8 Thee as protector of our bodies we invoke, thee, saviour, as the comforter who loveth us.
Strike, O Bṛhaspati, the Gods’ revilers down, and let not the unrighteous come to highest bliss.
9 Through thee, kind prosperer, O Brahmaṇaspati, may we obtain the wealth of Men which all desire:
And all our enemies, who near or far away prevail against us, crush, and leave them destitute.
10 With thee as our own rich and liberal ally may we, Bṛhaspati, gain highest power of life.
Let not the guileful wicked man be lord of us:—still may we prosper, singing goodly hymns of praise.
11 Strong, never yielding, hastening to the battle-cry, consumer of the foe, victorious in the strife,
Thou art sin's true avenger, Brahmaṇaspati, who tamest e’en the fierce, the wildly passionate.
12 Whoso with mind ungodly seeks to do us harm, who, deeming him a man of might mid lords, would slay,—
Let not his deadly blow reach us, Bṛhaspati; may we humiliate the strong ill-doer's wrath.
13 The mover mid the spoil, the winner of all wealth, to be invoked in fight and reverently adored,
Bṛhaspati hath overthrown like cars of war all wicked enemies who fain would injure us.
14 Burn up the demons with thy fiercest flaming brand, those who have scorned thee in thy manifested might.
Show forth that power that shall deserve the hymn of praise: destroy the evil speakers, O Bṛhaspati.
15 Bṛhaspati, that which the foe deserves not which shines among the folk effectual, splendid,
That, Son of Law I which is with might refulgent-that treasure wonderful bestow thou on us.
16 Give us not up to those who, foes in ambuscade, are greedy for the wealth of him who sits at ease,
Who cherish in their heart abandonment of Gods. Bṛhaspati, no further rest shall they obtain.
17 For Tvaṣṭar, he who knows each sacred song, brought thee to life, preeminent o’er all the things that be.
Guilt-scourger, guilt-avenger is Bṛhaspati, who slays the spoiler and upholds the mighty Law.
18 The mountain, for thy glory, cleft itself apart when, Aṅgiras! thou openedst the stall of kine.
Thou, O Bṛhaspati, with Indra for ally didst hurl down water-floods which gloom had compassed round.
19 O Brahmaṇaspati, be thou controller of this our hymn and prosper thou our children.
All that the Gods regard with love is blessed. Loud may we speak, with heroes, in assembly.

[philosoraptor]

Pranam



And you think your statement has any meaning!

OK GP, have it your way. It's meaningless to say that nArAyaNa is the supreme brahman based on statements from the taittirIya AraNyaka, which all vedAnta schools, including that of Adi shankara, accept as shruti. Meanwhile, it's meaningful to say that the name "nArAyaNa" not being mentioned in currently extant saMhitA-s implies something, even though all vedAnta schools, including that of Adi shankara, give no more significance to the saMhitA than to the rest of shruti.

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam


OK GP, have it your way. ---, including that of Adi shankara,


It is meaningless to say have it your way only then to explain it your way.

Mentioning Narayan was only to draw to your attention, your own statement about sruti or lack of it for Ganesha.

Since you are so fixed on Vedanta at least give some credit to Adi Shankara, he would not have eulogised Ganesha if he was not a Vedic deity, would he?

Jai Shree Krishna

[Omkara]

Since you are so fixed on Vedanta at least give some credit to Adi Shankara, he would not have eulogised Ganesha if he was not a Vedic deity, would he?


The stotra you have cited is a later work falsely attributed to Shankaracharya. Shankaracharya has explicitly mentioned in his Gita Bhashya that Vinayaka is not to be worshipped in the commentary to verse 9.23.

[philosoraptor]

It is meaningless to say have it your way only then to explain it your way.

Mentioning Narayan was only to draw to your attention, your own statement about sruti or lack of it for Ganesha.


You don't have any idea what you are talking about. Again, let me just restate my point: mahAnArayaNa upaniShad which equates nArAyaNa with brahman is recognized as an authentic shruti even by non-Vaishnavas. It's acceptance across different sampradAya lines reinforces its authenticity. By contrast, there is no universally-accepted shruti pramAna I am aware of which recognizes the existence of gaNesha. I am happy to be proven wrong on this; I don't have a strong feeling about it one way or another.

[philosoraptor]

The stotra you have cited is a later work falsely attributed to Shankaracharya. Shankaracharya has explicitly mentioned in his Gita Bhashya that Vinayaka is not to be worshipped in the commentary to verse 9.23.

Omkar, are you sure about that reference? I checked shankara's commentary to 9.23 in Sanskrit and found no reference to gaNesha or viNAyaka.

[philosoraptor]

You don't have any idea what you are talking about. Again, let me just restate my point: mahAnArayaNa upaniShad which equates nArAyaNa with brahman is recognized as an authentic shruti even by non-Vaishnavas. It's acceptance across different sampradAya lines reinforces its authenticity. By contrast, there is no universally-accepted shruti pramAna I am aware of which recognizes the existence of gaNesha. I am happy to be proven wrong on this; I don't have a strong feeling about it one way or another.

I dislike responding to my own postings, but I just remembered the following reference which is germane to our discussion:

tatpuruShAya vihmahe vakratuNDAya dhImahi |
tanno dantiH prachodayAt || MNU (dp) 25 ||
"We meditate upon that Purusha. For that purpose, we meditate upon 'Vakratunda' - the Lord of the curved trunk. May the Lord with the elephant face invigorate us." (mahAnArAyaNa upaniShad 25 - NASR)

That would indeed seem to be a stronger reference in favor of gaNesha. How do Sri Vaishnavas interpret this?

[Amrut]

The stotra you have cited is a later work falsely attributed to Shankaracharya. Shankaracharya has explicitly mentioned in his Gita Bhashya that Vinayaka is not to be worshipped in the commentary to verse 9.23.

Namaste,

I did not find mention of Vinayaka in 9.23, but found in 9.25. It does mention the word vinayaka (http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?script=HK&beginning=0+&tinput=+vinayaka&trans=Translate&direction=AU), but from Hindi Commentary, vinayaka could mean a 'particular class of demon'

Sanskrit:

भूतानि विनायकमातृगणचतुर्भगिन्यादीनि यान्ति भूतेज्याः भूतानां पूजकाः। यान्ति मद्याजिनः मद्यजनशीलाः वैष्णवाः मामेव यान्ति। 9.25

Hindi

भूतोंकी पूजा करनेवाले विनायक, षोडशमातृकागण और चतुर्भगिनी आदि भूतगणोंको पाते हैं तथा मेरा पूजन करनेवाले वैष्णव भक्त अवश्यमेव मुझे ही पाते हैं। 9.25

:)

---------

I have searched for atharvashirsha and Ganesh atharvashirsha is not hard to find by

The question is whether it is genuine. It is very popular in Maharashtra. It is embedded in Ganesh temple at Ranjangaon. Some say it was written in 16th - 17th century.

According to Gita Press, all 5 atharvashirsha are from atharveda and ancient. As a pramana, they are find their mention in smriti-s like atri, vasistha, gautam, shankha, etc.

शतरुद्रियमथर्वशिरस्त्रिसुपर्ण ... महाव्रतम्* ।
Shankha Smriti 19.4,

म्धून्यघमर्षणमथर्वशिरो रुद्रा ... पावनानि ।
Gautam Smriti 19.6

Further, the author of book, Radhe Shyam Khemkha, says. Prior to Adi Shankara, Shrihansayogi in his Gita bhashya mentions devi atharvashirsha

He further says that the all-acceptance of atharvashirsha-s can be concluded by saying that in Veda-shakha-s karmakand and granthas teaching samskara find mention of moola atharvashirsha paatha.

Ganesh Atharvashirsha

Om Namaste Ganpataye
Tvameva Pratyaksham Tatvamasi
Tvamev Kevalam Kartasi
Tvamev Kevalam Dhartasi
Tvamev Kevlam Hartasi
Tvamev Sarvam Khalvidam Bramhasi
Tvam Sakshadatmasi Nityam || 1 ||

O Lord Ganesha
I Pay my deep homage to you, the Lord of the Deva-Gana
You are the first facet of the Bramha-Tatva to arise
You have alone created this Entire universe
You alone can maintain this universe
You are indeed the all conquering supreme Lord
Indeed you are the "ATMA" || 1 ||

http://www.adwaitjoshi.com/atharvashirsha.php
http://www.panditjiusa.com/ganapati_atharvashirsha.htm

scribd

http://www.scribd.com/doc/52740011/ATHARVASHIRSHA
http://www.scribd.com/doc/63794707/atharvashirsha
http://www.scribd.com/doc/119732763/Ganapati-Atharvashirsha

Though my family's main deity or central deity is Lord Shiva, I have equal respect for 'Supreme Personality of Godhead', as we daily worship him along with nava-graha puja - Nahi ninda Nyaya

Namo Naranayana

[Omkara]

Omkar, are you sure about that reference? I checked shankara's commentary to 9.23 in Sanskrit and found no reference to gaNesha or viNAyaka.

It is 9.25. My mistake. I was quoting from memory.

There was a long discussion about it on the advaita mailing list here- http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2011-July/thread.html#27958

[philosoraptor]

It is 9.25. My mistake. I was quoting from memory.

There was a long discussion about it on the advaita mailing list here- http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/2011-July/thread.html#27958

I couldn't make heads or tails of what Vidyasankar was trying to say about this reference on the Advaita list. However, I looked at Malladi Sastry's translation of shankara-bhAShya on 9.25 - it appears he mentioned vinAyaka-s in the plural sense as being one class of bhUta-s. I didn't get the sense that he was arguing that viNAyaka was a non-vedic deity.

[Amrut]

Namaste,

Few queries to Vaishnava friends.

From my understanding, all shastras including SB (1.1.2) talk about purity of mind as prerequisite to study tatva-Jnana. Hence upadesha-s for general public and sanyasins are different.

If one has attained mental purity from meritious karma (by performing karma-kand) and good deeds, and by practicing intense sadhana, then one can live 100 % spiritual life.

In this case, since it is end of karma kand, so no need to worship any other deity. In this context, It is logical to surrender to only one Deity and exclusively worship the Lord.

My question is, for layman, karma-kand is not to be renounced. In this case, are they advised to chant veda mantra-s, which would even say that other deities like Ganesh or Shiva are supreme Godhead or are they instructed to chant mantra-s which praise a particular deity.

Another question is, are there separate instructions for laymen and spiritually advanced bhakta-s?

I have read many posts in this thread mostly by Jigyasu ji and he says that they chant mantra-s but think that narayana is residing in them.

I would not ask to give authentic proof, just an answer, as I do not want to question honesty. We all practice what acharya-s have asked us to practice. So the question is - what have acharya-s actually asked us to do.

Though it may look like the answer is already given in this thread i.e. exclusive devotion to Sriman Narayana, my query is - it is for for all or just for sanyasins.

Namo Narayana

[philosoraptor]

I dislike responding to my own postings, but I just remembered the following reference which is germane to our discussion:

tatpuruShAya vihmahe vakratuNDAya dhImahi |
tanno dantiH prachodayAt || MNU (dp) 25 ||
"We meditate upon that Purusha. For that purpose, we meditate upon 'Vakratunda' - the Lord of the curved trunk. May the Lord with the elephant face invigorate us." (mahAnArAyaNa upaniShad 25 - NASR)

That would indeed seem to be a stronger reference in favor of gaNesha. How do Sri Vaishnavas interpret this?

*bump*

I assume that the vakratuNDa referred to here would be seen as a reference to gajanana, the nitya-suri aide to Vishvaksena?

At first, I thought it was significant that vakratuNDa was being invoked to help with one's meditation on the puruSha, i.e. as a remover of obstacles, which would be a distinguishing trait of gaNesha. However, in the previous mantra, durgA is invoked in the same sense... so no help there.

[Amrut]

I dislike responding to my own postings, but I just remembered the following reference which is germane to our discussion:

tatpuruShAya vihmahe vakratuNDAya dhImahi |
tanno dantiH prachodayAt || MNU (dp) 25 ||
"We meditate upon that Purusha. For that purpose, we meditate upon 'Vakratunda' - the Lord of the curved trunk. May the Lord with the elephant face invigorate us." (mahAnArAyaNa upaniShad 25 - NASR)

That would indeed seem to be a stronger reference in favor of gaNesha. How do Sri Vaishnavas interpret this?

I appreciate your honesty and sincerity :) - this is what I was talking about in MNU in another thread - it is Ganesha Gayatri mantra

Namaste

[Amrut]

*bump*

I assume that the vakratuNDa referred to here would be seen as a reference to gajanana, the nitya-suri aide to Vishvaksena?

At first, I thought it was significant that vakratuNDa was being invoked to help with one's meditation on the puruSha, i.e. as a remover of obstacles, which would be a distinguishing trait of gaNesha. However, in the previous mantra, durgA is invoked in the same sense... so no help there.

EDIT: 'Vakratunda' is mentioned in Ganesh atharvashirsha - 8 as Ganesh Gayatri Mantra and in verse 9 and in . But are they considered as genuine by Vaishnava-s :)

Pranams

[philosoraptor]

If one has attained mental purity from meritious karma (by performing karma-kand) and good deeds, and by practicing intense sadhana, then one can live 100 % spiritual life.

It depends on what you mean by "spiritual" in this context. The beginning of vedAnta starts with the realization that the fruits obtained by karma-kANDa rituals are temporary, and that a higher goal should be sought after. It is certainly better to follow karma-kANDa if one wants temporary fruits such as promotion to heaven, however even this use of the veda is still nothing more than refined materialism.



In this case, since it is end of karma kand, so no need to worship any other deity. In this context, It is logical to surrender to only one Deity and exclusively worship the Lord.

My question is, for layman, karma-kand is not to be renounced. In this case, are they advised to chant veda mantra-s, which would even say that other deities like Ganesh or Shiva are supreme Godhead or are they instructed to chant mantra-s which praise a particular deity.

A Vedantin would say that all these mantras appearing to praise other deities are supreme, are in fact praising brahman, since there can be only one supreme deity. Thus, there is no injunction against chanting such mantras as a part of one's sadhana. We who do sandhya-vandanam chant mantras invoking sun-god and sarasvatI, for example.

Moreover, it's not the case that one should simply surrender to any one deity. One should surrender to that deity who is brahman, who is capable of giving mOkSha, which is the highest, eternal fruit.



Another question is, are there separate instructions for laymen and spiritually advanced bhakta-s?

Lay people can follow purANa-s/itihAsa-s and sAdhana-s prescribed therein, as directed by a qualified guru who knows vedAnta.



I have read many posts in this thread mostly by Jigyasu ji and he says that they chant mantra-s but think that narayana is residing in them.

There is no question about it - nArAyaNa aka brahman does reside within the jIva-s who become devas - this is mentioned clearly in the antaryAmi-brAhmaNa of the bRihadAraNyaka upaniShad.

[Amrut]

Thank you PR ji

Living 100 % spiritual life means the one and only goal is

to attain moksha or
to be at the lotus feet of lord or
to serve lotus feet of lord or
to be in union (Yog) with Paramatman, etc

Namo Narayana

[ShivaFan]

Namaste Philosorsptor

Your statement "There are no authorized Vedic hymns discussing the worship of an elephant-faced deity who is the son of Shiva", is clearly groping for an explicit reference in the Vedas of hymns to someone described very explicitly as with an elephant-face as the Son of Shiva and the name "Ganesha".

Hymns of Vedas, and Vedas in this context means the Four Vedas, and not commentaries on the Vedas or later holy texts. Instead what is offered is the word Krishna in the chAndogya upaniSha which is a commentary.

The Sanskrit word garuda means eagle, the verse you reference with garutmAn can mean nothing more than comparing the supreme to a flying eagle or the constellation Aquilla and the verse does not even mention Vishnu in this context but does mention Indra as is typical because there are many such hymns to Lord Indra. This is not an explicit reference in description as you demand of Ganapati as Son of Shiva.

So while I do not deny Garuda for example (I have a Murti of Garuda from Nepal on my altar), I am asking the fair question which you put in the context of the Cosmic Family of Shiva such as Ganapati, whether there is an explicit reference in the Vedas to members of the Cosmic Family of Vishnu such as Ananta or Garuda, or such explicit references to Ram or Krishna.

I am told the Vedas give praise to 33, including for example Indra. Now I can say why the Vedas do not say the name Ram, because Ram and His history here on Earth was an event still to come.

I do not need an explicit reference to cherish Ganapati, Ram, Garuda and so on. There is no explicit reference to Hanuman, so what? From my perspective, the events of the Ramayana on Earth planet came later after Indra killed the Serpent Snake, the Ramayana discusses Ram and Hanuman and not the Four Vedas, which makes sense to me since the focus of some Vedas is on yagna or sacrifice and homas and rites. This does not mean Hanuman or Ram should not have puja.

If some Vaishnavas do not want to give puja to Ganapati, then they should do whatever is their tradition. I know for a fact, that some Vaishnavas to offer pujas to Ganesha.

But if you are looking for explicit hymns in the Vedas regarding members of one Cosmic Family or another, as some criteria for what is proper for puja, then perhaps you should give puja to Indra. Even Indra must still exist, since there is a very clear and explicit reference to Indra in the story of Govardan Hill even though some Vaishnavas have told me the purport of this Govardan Hill means from the time of Krishna and forward this means one should worship Krishna for what Indra may provide. I don't know about that in detail, but I think Indra is still holding the position in Indra Loka before and after Govardan. He certainly exists.

Om Namah Sivaya

[Omkara]

As a pramana, they are find their mention in smriti-s like atri, vasistha, gautam, shankha, etc.

शतरुद्रियमथर्वशिरस्त्रिसुपर्ण ... महाव्रतम्* ।
Shankha Smriti 19.4,

म्धून्यघमर्षणमथर्वशिरो रुद्रा ... पावनानि ।
Gautam Smriti 19.6


These pramanas refer to the authentic atharvashirsha upanishad which is accepted by all vedantins and can be found here- http://siddhantadeepika.blogspot.in/2012/03/atharvasira-upanishat-this-is-22-nd-in.html

The rest of the atharvashirshas are of doubtful authenticity.

[Omkara]

I couldn't make heads or tails of what Vidyasankar was trying to say about this reference on the Advaita list. However, I looked at Malladi Sastry's translation of shankara-bhAShya on 9.25 - it appears he mentioned vinAyaka-s in the plural sense as being one class of bhUta-s. I didn't get the sense that he was arguing that viNAyaka was a non-vedic deity.

You might want to read the rest of the posts on the topic. There are various interpretations, and it is not clear that Shankaracharya is speakung of Vinayaka in the plural.

I am not claiming that Shankaracharya considered Vinayaka a non-Vedic deity. I was just pointing out this controversy as it is germane to the topic being discussed.

[Omkara]

But if you are looking for explicit hymns in the Vedas regarding members of one Cosmic Family or another, as some criteria for what is proper for puja, then perhaps you should give puja to Indra.
Shivafan, the Vedas are clear that worship is to be given to the supreme Brahman alone-

Atharvashika Upanishad
39. Siva alone is to be meditated upon, Siva the Giver of good. Give up all else. Thus, concludes the Atharvasikha.
RV 2.33.4 Let us not anger thee with (imperfect) adorations, Rudra, unworthy praise,or mixed oblations (worship along with worship of other gods) Strong God!

Of course, Vaishnavas will say that 'Rudra' and 'Shiva' here refer to Lord Vishnu. What is important here is that the Vedas recommend one-pointed devotion.

[philosoraptor]

Namaste Philosorsptor

Your statement "There are no authorized Vedic hymns discussing the worship of an elephant-faced deity who is the son of Shiva", is clearly groping for an explicit reference in the Vedas of hymns to someone described very explicitly as with an elephant-face as the Son of Shiva and the name "Ganesha".

Namaste ShivaFan. I am stunned as always with your ability to grasp the obvious.



Hymns of Vedas, and Vedas in this context means the Four Vedas, and not commentaries on the Vedas or later holy texts.

Vedas means shruti. Commentaries on Vedas are not shruti.



Instead what is offered is the word Krishna in the chAndogya upaniSha which is a commentary.

Non-sequitur. It was you who claimed that Krishna is not mentioned in Vedas. I merely pointed out that He is mentioned in chAndogya upaniShad, which is part of the Veda. It even mentions that He is the son of devakI. You can do whatever you like with that information. Don't dislike me merely for having the audacity to correct you. I'm only from a "vile" culture, remember?



The Sanskrit word garuda means eagle, the verse you reference with garutmAn can mean nothing more than comparing the supreme to a flying eagle or the constellation Aquilla and the verse does not even mention Vishnu in this context but does mention Indra as is typical because there are many such hymns to Lord Indra. This is not an explicit reference in description as you demand of Ganapati as Son of Shiva.

Again, it was you who claimed that garuDa is not mentioned in the veda, and I was merely correcting you. The reason for wanting more explicit identifying information about gaNesha (i.e. remove of obstacles, son of rudra, elephant-faced, etc) is because there already exists an older tradition of identifying one of the nitya-sUri-s as an elephant-faced deity with some features resembling those of gaNesha, but who is not gaNesha. Hence, the desire for shruti-pramANa-s which can only be interpreted to refer to the elephant-faced son of shiva. If such pramANa-s exist, then it is logical to assume that gaNesha should be worshiped in the same context as indra and agni. But the reality remains that in vedic yagnas, gaNesha is not so worshiped. In vedic yagnas, we find viShNu/nArAyaNa, lakShmI, umA, rudra, indra, agni, vAyu, mitra, varuNa but no gaNesha. And I for one would like to know why that is, if gaNesha is indeed a Vedic deity.

By contrast, there is no other tradition identifying a non-supreme garuDa as anyone other than the carrier of viShNu. Hence the same question does not arise.


I do not need an explicit reference to cherish Ganapati, Ram, Garuda and so on. There is no explicit reference to Hanuman, so what? From my perspective, the events of the Ramayana on Earth planet came later after Indra killed the Serpent Snake, the Ramayana discusses Ram and Hanuman and not the Four Vedas, which makes sense to me since the focus of some Vedas is on yagna or sacrifice and homas and rites. This does not mean Hanuman or Ram should not have puja.

Again, irrelevant. No one is talking about pUja to hanumAn, or even about pUja to kRiShNa or rAma. The context of this discussion was vedic yagna-s. Can you not focus on what we are discussing, instead of going off on tangents?



If some Vaishnavas do not want to give puja to Ganapati, then they should do whatever is their tradition. I know for a fact, that some Vaishnavas to offer pujas to Ganesha.

Sri Vaishnavas and Chaitanya Vaishnavas do not do pUja to gaNapati or worship him in vedic yagnas. That is a fact. If you know of a Vaishnava Vedaanta tradition that does, please furnish references to writings belonging to them in which prescriptions for such worshp are found.



But if you are looking for explicit hymns in the Vedas regarding members of one Cosmic Family or another, as some criteria for what is proper for puja, then perhaps you should give puja to Indra. Even Indra must still exist, since there is a very clear and explicit reference to Indra in the story of Govardan Hill even though some Vaishnavas have told me the purport of this Govardan Hill means from the time of Krishna and forward this means one should worship Krishna for what Indra may provide. I don't know about that in detail, but I think Indra is still holding the position in Indra Loka before and after Govardan. He certainly exists.

Vaishnavas do vedic yagnas in which indra is worshiped as part of the sacrifice. jinyAsu already said this and I also acknowledged that. Is there any reason why you have trouble grasping this?

[philosoraptor]

You might want to read the rest of the posts on the topic. There are various interpretations, and it is not clear that Shankaracharya is speakung of Vinayaka in the plural.

I am not claiming that Shankaracharya considered Vinayaka a non-Vedic deity. I was just pointing out this controversy as it is germane to the topic being discussed.

You are right - I just now noticed the older thread in which this was discussed. I was looking at another thread with 3 postings. I'll check out the earlier one that is longer.

[Sri Vaishnava]

Hmm...my post seems to opened a hornet's nest here. The point I was trying to make is that sri vaishnavas do not accept Ganesha as a vedic deity or as the son of Shiva. The so-called Ganesha gAyatri is indeed taken as a referrent of Gajanana in our tradition. Others are free to worship Ganesha and need not accept our opinions. Simple as that.

Shruti only talks about nArAyaNa, so it is silly to ask a vaishnava for pramAnAs to prove his existence. Bit of information.

Brahmanaspati = Lord of Brahma = nArAyaNa.

Agni = Agra Netha = One who leads = nArAyaNa.

Indra, the vajrapAni, slayer of vRtra = The foremost one (Indra), who destroys the covering known as prakrti (vRtra) and who bears the vajra mark on his foot (vajrapAni) = nArAyaNa.

Manyu = Angered Narasimha/Yajna (Sacrifice)/Intelligent One (root-man) = nArAyaNa.

vAyu = One who moves (towards his devotees) = nArAyaNa.

Rudra = Destroyer of samsAra dukham = nArAyaNa.

Bhaga = Gracious Lord = nArAyaNa.

Kshetrapati = Lord of Kshetra (body or holy place) = nArAyaNa.

Isa = Ruler = nArAyaNa.

Shambhu = One who causes happiness (by his beauty) = nArAyaNa.

Vishnu = all-pervading One = nArAyaNa.

nArAyaNa = nArAyaNa (from mahAnArAyaNa up.)

---

This is the view of all vedAntins.:)

[ShivaFan]

Namaste Omkara

That is all well and understood, the context of my questions however are not regarding Whom we should worship, Who is "supreme" or what constitutes the Brahman.

The context of my questions are how can someone proclaim some so-called litmus test on explicit Vedic references regarding Ganapati or members of the Cosmic Family of Shiva, and yet cannot even provide the same litmus test regarding references to members of the Cosmic Family of Vishnu in the Four Vedas regarding Ram, Krishna, Garuda or Ananta Shesh Nag.

And what was provided in the same dismissal tone as was expected was zero, just some dubious rehashed propaganda that only proves the pertinance of my question.

It is truly amazing to me how some, who actually seem to have no respect for the Shri Devatas of the Vedas who are obviously and clearly proclaimed in hymns, have entire pantheons of Devatas which are given puja which have no reference or dubious wordsmithing in these same Vedas, while at the same moment stating some other puja is somehow unauthorized because it is not referenced in the same scripture. It's sort of like saying baby pigeons do not exist because they have only seen grown pigeons.

Om Namah Sivaya


Shivafan, the Vedas are clear that worship is to be given to the supreme Brahman alone-

Atharvashika Upanishad
39. Siva alone is to be meditated upon, Siva the Giver of good. Give up all else. Thus, concludes the Atharvasikha.
RV 2.33.4 Let us not anger thee with (imperfect) adorations, Rudra, unworthy praise,or mixed oblations (worship along with worship of other gods) Strong God!

Of course, Vaishnavas will say that 'Rudra' and 'Shiva' here refer to Lord Vishnu. What is important here is that the Vedas recommend one-pointed devotion.

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam


The stotra you have cited is a later work falsely attributed to Shankaracharya. Shankaracharya has explicitly mentioned in his Gita Bhashya that Vinayaka is not to be worshipped in the commentary to verse 9.23.

How can you be so sure!


Much water has cascaded since, I see no clear mention of Ganesha in the commentary by Shankara in relation to BG 9.25 sure he says Vinayaka-s, as the verse it self is in plural for Bhutas I have no reason to believe otherwise, under such circumstances I have no reason to doubt the authenticity of Ganesha Bhujanga of Adi Shankracharya

Next you probably refute the Panchayatana puja as prescribed in smarta tradition

I believe this was established by Shankara although I have heard it existed even before him!
the worship of five deities:
"Adityam Ambikaam Vishnum Gananaatam Maheswaram"

Jai Ganesha

Jai Shree Krishna

[jignyAsu]

Omkar, are you sure about that reference? I checked shankara's commentary to 9.23 in Sanskrit and found no reference to gaNesha or viNAyaka.

"viNAyaka" has also been mentioned in Gita Bhashya translated in this site: http://www.sankaracharya.org/gita_bhashya_9.php

I was always curious to get the actual sanskrit verse of Adi Shankaracharya.


The so-called Ganesha gAyatri is indeed taken as a referrent of Gajanana in our tradition.

Pranam Sri Vaishnava,

Would you happen to know who "durgAm" is in our tradition?

I thank Philosoraptor for bringing up the verse here. This seems so similar to the Bhagavatam verse.

[Sri Vaishnava]

"viNAyaka" has also been mentioned in Gita Bhashya translated in this site: http://www.sankaracharya.org/gita_bhashya_9.php

I was always curious to get the actual sanskrit verse of Adi Shankaracharya.



Pranam Sri Vaishnava,

Would you happen to know who "durgAm" is in our tradition?

I thank Philosoraptor for bringing up the verse here. This seems so similar to the Bhagavatam verse.

Durga certainly exists! We are not denying the deities mentioned in the mahAnArAyaNa upanishad.

The tatpurusha mantras are interpreted as "we meditate on nArAyaNa, the tatpurusha by meditating on Durga/Shiva/etc who will guide us" if we take "tatpurusha as "sa chAsou purushashcha".

OR "we meditate on Durga/Shiva/etc (designated as purusha) who belong to nArAyaNa (designated as Tat), ie, his vibhUtIs, to help us progress. This interpretation is if we take "tatpurusha" as "tasya paramAtmanaH purushAya". "Tat" refers to parabrahman nArAyaNa - "Om tatsadhithi nirdeshaH".

These tatpurusha mantras are to be recited by upAsakas seeking to attain sriman nArAyaNa by the grace of these deities and are not required for daily recitation for prapannas or even other upAsakAs.

But even the female names belong to nArAyaNa. The vishnu sahasranAma contains the name of Durga as well and it applies to him. But of course, context is important, one must use that interpretation only if it fits the subject in hand. Interpetation always require careful analysis of context.

[jignyAsu]

The tatpurusha mantras are interpreted as "we meditate on nArAyaNa, the tatpurusha by meditating on Durga/Shiva/etc who will guide us" if we take "tatpurusha as "sa chAsou purushashcha".


In the Bhagavatam verse posted by smaranam:

SB 11.27.29
durgāḿ vināyakaḿ vyāsaḿ
viṣvakṣenaḿ gurūn surān
sve sve sthāne tv abhimukhān
pūjayet prokṣaṇādibhiḥ

who would the durgA be if we interpret as vinAyakA as Gajananar? I do know that in events like BrahmOtsavam all the nitya suris starting from VishvaksEnar and also the dEvas like Brahma etc are invoked into specific places by mantrAs. Is this durgA a nitya suri or the respective consort of Lord Shiva?

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam

Jai Ganesh

Maha narayana Upanishad I.24 and Taittiriya Aranyaka 10.1.5 of the Krsna Yajurveda.

Aum tatpuruṣāya vidmahe | vakratuṇḍāya dhīmahi | tanno dantiḥ pracodayāt ||
'Aum! May we know that divine Person, And meditate upon Him with a curved trunk, May the tusked One guide us on the right path.'

Krsna Yajurveda - Maitrayani Samhita 2.9.1

Aum tatpuruṣāya vidmahe | hastimukhāya dhīmahi | tanno dantiḥ pracodayāt ||
'Aum! May we know that divine Person, And meditate upon Him with an elephant visage, May the tusked One guide us on the right path.'

Now Vaishnava may wish to interpret this any which way they like but for most Hindus it leaves no doubt, it is an invocation to Gouri putra Ganesh, similarly

Shuklaam Baradharam Vishnum
Shashi Varnam Chaturbuhjam
Prasanna Vadanam Dhyaayet
Sarva Vighno Pashaantaye

One may argue Vishnum that it refers to Vishnu but then when we take both the stanza together it leves no doubt that it is addressed to Vighnaharta Gajananam Eakdanta Ganesha.


Agajaa Aanana Padmaarkam
Gajaananam Aharnisham
Anekadantam Bhaktaanaam
Ekadantam Upaasmahe.

Jai Shree Krishna

[Omkara]

Pranam



How can you be so sure!


Much water has cascaded since, I see no clear mention of Ganesha in the commentary by Shankara in relation to BG 9.25 sure he says Vinayaka-s, as the verse it self is in plural for Bhutas I have no reason to believe otherwise, under such circumstances I have no reason to doubt the authenticity of Ganesha Bhujanga of Adi Shankracharya

Next you probably refute the Panchayatana puja as prescribed in smarta tradition

I believe this was established by Shankara although I have heard it existed even before him!
the worship of five deities:
"Adityam Ambikaam Vishnum Gananaatam Maheswaram"

Jai Ganesha

Jai Shree Krishna

"Vinayaka" is rendered in plural by those who wish to change the meaning of Shankaracharya's words.

25. Votaries of the gods reach the gods; the votarites of the manes go to the manes the worshippers of the Beings reach the Beings; and those who worship Me reach Me. Deva-vratah, votaries of the gods, those whose religious observances [Making offerings and presents, circumambulation, bowing down, etc.] and devotion are directed to the gods; yanti, reach, go to; devan, the gods. Pitr-vratah, the votaries of the manes, those who are occupied with such rites as obsequies etc., who are devoted to the manes; go pitrn, to the manes such as Agnisvatta and others. Bhutejyah, the Beings such as Vinayaka, the group of Sixteen(divine) Mothers, the Four Sisters, and others. And madyajinah, those who worship Me, those who are given to worshipping Me, the devotees of Visnu; worship Me, those who are given to worshipping Me, the devotees of Visnu; reach mam, Me alone. Although the effort (involved) is the same, still owing to ingorance they do not worship Me exclusively. Thereby they attain lesser results. This is the meaning. reach mam, Me alone. Although the effort (involved) is the same, still owing to ngorance they do not worship Me exclusively. Thereby they attain lesser results. This is the meaning'Not only do My devotees get the everlasting result in form of non-return form of non-return(to this world), but My worship also is easy.' How?

Other than the prasthanatrayi bhashyas of Shankaracharya, most other works of his are considered of doubtful authenticity.

In his prasthanatrayi Bhashyas, he does not once call Brahman by any name other than Narayaba. He calls Surya and Rudra as Jivas.

Mist importantly, though Shiva Purana and Skanda Purana identify the Supreme being who humilated the devas in Kena upanishad as Shiva, Shankaracharya does not mention this. Why?

[philosoraptor]

The context of my questions are how can someone proclaim some so-called litmus test on explicit Vedic references regarding Ganapati or members of the Cosmic Family of Shiva, and yet cannot even provide the same litmus test regarding references to members of the Cosmic Family of Vishnu in the Four Vedas regarding Ram, Krishna, Garuda or Ananta Shesh Nag.[


The problem is, nobody did that. As usual, when you feel the need to argue, you first transform the other person's argument into a strawman you feel more comfortable knocking down. I am well aware of the paucity of references to kRiShNa and rAma. However, kRiShNa and rAma are not the deities worshiped in vedic yagnas, and thus this issue is moot. Feel free to disbelieve in kRiShNa and rAma if you wish. The vedic basis of kRiShNa/rAma/other viShNu avatArs was not the issue. The issue was why Sri Vaishnavas worship some devatas (indra, agni, vAyu, etc) as part of yagna dedicated to pleasing viShNu, and not other devatas (i.e. gaNesha). The answer is that the former are found in the veda-s and the latter are not. It takes only a modicum of common sense to realize that that Vedic yagna must be done according to the prescriptions found in the Veda.

I honestly don't know if you are really this obtuse, or if you just pretend to be. It would be helpful if you could exercise a bit of intellectual honesty and stop misrepresenting my words just to give yourself a reason for sectarian one-upmanship.

[brahma jijnasa]

Regarding anadi karma.

I said that your misinterpretations of scripture are puerile. Let us not confuse the two. Gaudiya Vaishnavas accept the Vedaantic view that karma is anAdi, and that karma means what everyone else understands it to mean - action in the material world which results in puNyam or pApam.
Nowhere in the writings of Baladeva Vidyaabhuushana do we see ...

No, they do not!
Not long ago I have demonstrated this with examples from Bhagavatam purports by Srila Prabhupada where he refers to the opinion of previous Bhagavatam commentators as for example Gaudiya Vaishnava acharya Visvanatha Chakravarti Thakura who clearly states that we have not always been trapped in material world or beginningless samsara.
It seems that you very quickly forget.
Since Baladeva Vidyabhusana was a disciple of Visvanatha Chakravarti Thakura it is not to be expected that he disagreed with the idea endorsed by his spiritual master.


Asking for proof that anAdi karma implies anAdi samsAra is moronic. Every Vedaanta commentator knows that it does, since that is a straightforward inference - Adi Shankara, Madhva, Raamaanuja, Baladeva... they all do. In none of their writings do we see them referring to a "fall from Vaikuntha." The burden of proof is on the challenger to centuries of Vedaantic interpretation to show otherwise.

No, the burden of proof is on you!
That what you think is "centuries of Vedaantic interpretation" is just your own misunderstanding of all the acaryas the Vedantists.
If you really think that "Every Vedaanta commentator knows that it does" then give me examples of their statement where they say that there is "beginningless samsara". Even better than that, give me examples from the scriptures where it says "beginningless samsara".

Not only that, but if you think the idea of Gaudiya Vaishnavas is unacceptable then you can keep your own children locked up in a dungeon in miserable conditions for no reason. Then, while holding them captive so you hope that one day they will strive towards liberation, and when they do, you will release them and ask them to join you on the 1st floor. ... (Remember my 1st reason and also 2nd reason of why the idea of bondage of the jiva soul in beginningless saṃsāra is wrong. It is there in "Start of the 'Atma'/Soul" thread http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=11407&page=10) :)


First of all, as a believer in "Jesus is a pure devotee" and "Mohammed is a shaktyavesha avatar," what to speak of other non-Vedic deviations like "fall from Vaikuntha," you have no credibility to speak on behalf of Gaudiya Vaishnavas, what to speak of Vaishnavas in general.

I have never said "Jesus is a pure devotee", nor did I ever said "Mohammed is a shaktyavesha avatar".


Regarding worship of other devatas.



If that specific meditation on the paramatma within the divinities is not recommended in the scriptures then why did Sri Radha worshiped Ganesha in this way?
I have already quoted Brahma-vaivarta purana, Krishna janma khanda, ch. CXXIII.54-59, p. 534.
Which is not a core scripture for Gaudiya Vaishnavas, and is also not shruti. Thus it has no bearing on practices based on authorized Vedic hymns

Yes it is a core scripture for Gaudiya Vaishnavas. Is it shruti or not does not matter because Gaudiya Vaishnavas accept the authority of the Puranas. This Brahma-vaivarta purana is one of the most important scriptures for Gaudiya Vaishnavas from which we learn about Sri Sri Radha and Krishna, gopis, their place of residence Goloka, their pastimes, etc., if you did not know I can tell you. Every Gaudiya Vaishnava can confirm the enormous significance of Brahma-vaivarta purana for Gaudiya Vaishnava philosophy and siddhanta.


There are no authorized Vedic hymns discussing the worship of an elephant-faced deity who is the son of Shiva, making your point moot.
...
In fact, there is no universally accepted shruti which even mentions gaNesha.

In this very passage from the Brahma-vaivarta purana
(http://www.archive.org/stream/brahmavaivartapu04allauoft#page/11/mode/1up)
Krishna janma khanda, ch. CXXIII.54-59, p. 534.
where Radha eulogised Ganesha "You are the supreme Brahma ... there is none superior to you ... you cause the gods to manifest themselves"
we read that this eulogy of Ganesha is "the hymn mentioned in the Kauthuma branch of the Vedas". Kauthuma branch of the Vedas belongs to Sama Veda. So this hymn is taken from shruti.
I do not know if you care, but I can tell you Gaudiya Vaishnavas have no reason to doubt whether the author of Brahma-vaivarta purana actually took this hymn from Kauthuma branch of the Sama Veda.


This is completely irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion. Here is the commentary on that verse from your own sampradAya:
Purport: ...
...
Now, you either agree with jIva gosvAmI or you don't. If you don't, then you are no Gaudiya Vaishnava and have no business misrepresenting yourself as such. If you do, then this verse does not bolster your case any, making it quite dishonest for you to try and imply otherwise.

And my case was ... ... what?
Are you sure you understood what was my case?


Because you are obviously confused, let me remind you that the title of this thread is "Ganapathi pooja in Vaishnavism." In response to jignyAsu's very correct position that nothing need be sought from anya-devatas that cannot be had from the worship of shrIman nArAyaNa, it was you who jumped in and rambled on about tangential points regarding the merits of worshiping entities other than shrIman nArAyaNa, obviously to lay the foundation for your implied position that gaNesha-worship as a liberated soul might be acceptable.

Well finally we came to the crux of the problem. Are we?
Why are you putting in my mouth words that I did not say?
Excuse yourself from commenting on my posts if you do not understand them or you do not even care to read them carefully.

Where did I said that I disagree with the opinion provided by Viraja and jignyAsu?
My position was that whoever Ganesha is, a liberated soul or Shiva's son, worship of Ganesha, worship of mentioned divinities and various demigods is not prohibited because we can clearly see that even Bhagavatam 11.27.29 approves such a worship.
Sometimes even the Vaishnavas think "Oh, I'm not allowed to worship Ganesha, divinities and various demigods because my Lord Krishna says in the Bhagavad-gita that we should not worship them".
"Oh, I can not do it, OMG, I can not do it because I'll be accused of being a demigod worshiper". :)

Sometimes people who lack in understanding of the scriptures and Vedanta think so. They think that the instruction of Lord Krishna given in Bhagavad-gita is somehow contradictory to the instruction given by this very same Lord Krishna in Bhagavatam 11.27.29:


"With offerings such as prokṣaṇa one should worship Durgā, Vināyaka, Vyāsa, Viṣvaksena, the spiritual masters and the various demigods. All these personalities should be in their proper places facing the Deity of the Lord."

They do not realize that Sri Radha's worship of Ganesha is not contrary to Vaishnava doctrine if properly understood. Sri Radha was not a demigod worshiper. She did not think "I surrender my life in the hands of Ganesha. He is my Lord, he is Supreme Brahman, etc".
I think I was clear on this matter when I said that the words of Sri Radha's eulogy were not actually addressed to Ganesha but were addressed to the Supreme Lord, Supreme Brahman situated in his heart in the form of paramatma.
So then whom is she worshiped? Ganesha or The Supreme Lord who is Supreme Brahman?
The answer is obvious.

regards

[philosoraptor]

Other than the prasthanatrayi bhashyas of Shankaracharya, most other works of his are considered of doubtful authenticity.
In his prasthanatrayi Bhashyas, he does not once call Brahman by any name other than Narayaba. He calls Surya and Rudra as Jiva.

This same point is made by U.Ve Velukkudi Krishnan Swami in his discourses. I'm only just now becoming aware of the controversies surrounding the authorship of some of shankara's works.

I'm going to take a closer look at the Sanskrit for shankara's commentary on gItA 9.25 when I get a chance. I did get the impression that the Advaita list members were confounding the issue in order to avoid confronting an unpleasant truth. It should be easy enough to tell whether viNAyaka is singular or plural.

[Omkara]

Regarding anadi karma.


No, they do not!
Not long ago I have demonstrated this with examples from Bhagavatam purports by Srila Prabhupada where he refers to the opinion of previous Bhagavatam commentators as for example Gaudiya Vaishnava acharya Visvanatha Chakravarti Thakura who clearly states that we have not always been trapped in material world or beginningless samsara.
It seems that you very quickly forget.
Since Baladeva Vidyabhusana was a disciple of Visvanatha Chakravarti Thakura it is not to be expected that he disagreed with the idea endorsed by his spiritual master.


I have asked you this before but you did not reply.
The purvapaksha in the anadi karma sutra as intetpreted by Baladeva and all other Vedantin commentators is that God is partial because there is no prior karma before the first birth yet the first birth of every jiva is unequal- Some are born blind, crippled, poor etc.

Baladeva's answer is that karma is anadi. If Baladeva means something else by anadi than beginningless then he is merely restating the purvapajsha and not answering it.

[Omkara]

This same point is made by U.Ve Velukkudi Krishnan Swami in his discourses. I'm only just now becoming aware of the controversies surrounding the authorship of some of shankara's works.

I'm going to take a closer look at the Sanskrit for shankara's commentary on gItA 9.25 when I get a chance. I did get the impression that the Advaita list members were confounding the issue in order to avoid confronting an unpleasant truth. It should be easy enough to tell whether viNAyaka is singular or plural.

If you leave aside the controvery about "Vinayaka" for a moment you will notice the unequivocal condemnation of the worship of the matrikas in the same paragraph.
Also, Sri Vaishnava says Shankaracharya has referred to Surya and Rudra as jivas in his upanishad bhashyas.

So there goes the myth that Shankaracharya was a Smarta.

[brahma jijnasa]

I have asked you this before but you did not reply.
The purvapaksha in the anadi karma sutra as intetpreted by Baladeva and all other Vedantin commentators is that God is partial because there is no prior karma before the first birth yet the first birth of every jiva is unequal- Some are born blind, crippled, poor etc.

Baladeva's answer is that karma is anadi. If Baladeva means something else by anadi than beginningless then he is merely restating the purvapajsha and not answering it.

Yes I did:
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?p=104000#post104000

regards

[jignyAsu]

My question is, for layman, karma-kand is not to be renounced. In this case, are they advised to chant veda mantra-s, which would even say that other deities like Ganesh or Shiva are supreme Godhead or are they instructed to chant mantra-s which praise a particular deity.

Another question is, are there separate instructions for laymen and spiritually advanced bhakta-s?
......

Though it may look like the answer is already given in this thread i.e. exclusive devotion to Sriman Narayana, my query is - it is for for all or just for sanyasins.


Namaste Amrut Ji,

Lord Krishna instructs Arjuna after advising him against taking up sanyAsa and so I deem His instructions to pertain to even non Sanyasis.

In chapter 7 there arises a comparison of different types of Bhaktas. He identifies 4 types of His devotees and He celebrates all of them. This is immediately followed by the verse 20 onwards where He says that those who resort to other gods gain limited fruit. He also says that He is the one that makes their faith steadfast as per their desires. Those 4 kinds of His devotees include those who seek wealth and release from distress, which is not at all the mind of a mumukshu.

Therefore, to answer your question, our Acharyas have instructed us to resort to Sriman Narayana only irrespective of our spiritual level. However in all Upanyasams, they keep urging to ask Him only for His Kainkaryam and association instead of any material needs. That many iyengars continue to visit all temples is a proof that such instructions is given only in a friendly way instead of pushing anyone.

Also we are encourage to visit only Vishnu temples where only Vedic hymns pertaining to Vaishnava Agamas are recited. Having a basic understanding that all hymns finally address Keshava only, is encouraged.

As you say, at the eod, it boils down to the Achaya that appeals to your heart the most.

[philosoraptor]

No, they do not!
Not long ago I have demonstrated this with examples from Bhagavatam purports by Srila Prabhupada where he refers to the opinion of previous Bhagavatam commentators as for example Gaudiya Vaishnava acharya Visvanatha Chakravarti Thakura who clearly states that we have not always been trapped in material world or beginningless samsara.
It seems that you very quickly forget.
Since Baladeva Vidyabhusana was a disciple of Visvanatha Chakravarti Thakura it is not to be expected that he disagreed with the idea endorsed by his spiritual master.

Rubbish. VCT stated no such thing, and neither he nor Baladeva ever wrote about a "Fall from Vaikuntha." Bhagavatam purports are not the Bhagavatam, and in any case, you only accept the BBT purports when they suit you, as for example, when Sri Prabhupada says that aside from cases like Jaya and Vijaya, no one falls from Vaikuntha. You had no sensible response to this statement of his.



No, the burden of proof is on you!
That what you think is "centuries of Vedaantic interpretation" is just your own misunderstanding of all the acaryas the Vedantists.
If you really think that "Every Vedaanta commentator knows that it does" then give me examples of their statement where they say that there is "beginningless samsara". Even better than that, give me examples from the scriptures where it says "beginningless samsara".

BJ, you are embarrassing your self by trying to pretend that you have some kind of argument here. Everyone knows that anAdi karma implies beginningless bondage. The bhAgavata purANa also confirms that both bondage and avidyA are also anAdi:

ekasyaiva mamāṁśasya jīvasyaiva mahā-mate |
bandho 'syāvidyayānādir vidyayā ca tathetaraḥ || bhA 11.11.4 ||

anādy-avidyā-yuktasya puruṣasyātma-vedanam |
svato na sambhavād anyas tattva-jño jñāna-do bhavet || bhA 11.22.10 ||

Predictably, the ISKCON translator, whose views on anAdi karma you accept, and who is also the same one who wants to promote homosexual monogamy and believes ancient Indian women walked around with their breasts exposed, mistranslates "anAdi" as "from time immemorial," implying that there was a beginning and that it just happened before recorded time. Translating "anAdi" as meaning that there was a beginning is wrong. "anAdi" literally means without beginning.

The burden of proof is on you to say that anAdi means something other than what it means. It is obvious that anAdi-karma is synonymous with beginningless bondage. Only you and a handful of misguided ISKCON devotees seem to be unclear on this point.



Not only that, but if you think the idea of Gaudiya Vaishnavas is unacceptable then you can keep your own children locked up in a dungeon in miserable conditions for no reason. Then, while holding them captive so you hope that one day they will strive towards liberation, and when they do, you will release them and ask them to join you on the 1st floor. ... (Remember my 1st reason and also 2nd reason of why the idea of bondage of the jiva soul in beginningless saṃsāra is wrong. It is there in "Start of the 'Atma'/Soul" thread http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=11407&page=10) :)

I have no idea what the above is supposed to mean. I do not find the idea of Gaudiya Vaishnavas (as described by Baladeva and other pre-ISKCON writers) regarding beginningless karma to be unacceptable because it is the exact same idea that mAdhva-s and followers of rAmAnuja have. It is the non-vedAntic idea of karma beginning at some "time immemorial" which is unacceptable because it contradicts the argument vyAsa is trying to make in his sUtra-s, a fact which would be apparent to you if you had the basic skills of reading comprehension that would allow you to understand the discussion taking place just prior to sUtra 2.1.35.

I don't subscribe to the hubris that your theories represent Gaudiya Vaishnavism. So far as I can see, you are just another ISKCON devotee who likes to argue about things he does not understand, even when it is obvious that he has no idea what he is talking about. The fact that you could give us a lesson on Sanskrit translation ("hiraNmayena pAtrena....") without yourself knowing the basics of Sanskrit grammar just underscores this desperate need you seem to have to be perceived as some kind of authority on something.



I have never said "Jesus is a pure devotee", nor did I ever said "Mohammed is a shaktyavesha avatar".

It's in the BBT purports which you claim to accept.



Regarding worship of other devatas.


Yes it is a core scripture for Gaudiya Vaishnavas.

Oh really? Then please let me know which Gaudiya Vaishnava wrote a commentary on the Brahma-Vaivarta Purana, and I'll retract my claims that it is not a core scripture for Gaudiya Vaishnavas.



Is it shruti or not does not matter because Gaudiya Vaishnavas accept the authority of the Puranas.

This is false. In his tattva-sandarbha, shrI jIva gosvAmI states that he will place greatest emphasis on sAttvik purANa-s, and even then only to the extent that they support his interpretations of the bhAgavata purANa. According to the three-fold classification of the purANa-s which constitutes a major cornerstone of his argument, the brahma-vaivarta belongs in rAjAsic class and thus, by that classification, should be less authoritative.

[unsubstantiated remarks deleted]



In this very passage from the Brahma-vaivarta purana
(http://www.archive.org/stream/brahmavaivartapu04allauoft#page/11/mode/1up)
Krishna janma khanda, ch. CXXIII.54-59, p. 534.
where Radha eulogised Ganesha "You are the supreme Brahma ... there is none superior to you ... you cause the gods to manifest themselves"
we read that this eulogy of Ganesha is "the hymn mentioned in the Kauthuma branch of the Vedas". Kauthuma branch of the Vedas belongs to Sama Veda. So this hymn is taken from shruti.

This argument again. You really need to take a course on elementary logic before you bore us with these kinds of childish arguments.

As is obvious to anyone who can think, merely claiming that a certain hymn comes from shruti is ultimately baseless if one cannot demonstrate where that hymn is actually found. By your standard of "logic," anyone can claim anything based on it supposedly being from a "lost" hymn from the Vedas. Essentially, you argue that the purANa is genuine, because it is based on a lost shruti. Then you will say that the claim about the lost shruti is genuine, because it comes from the purANa. This is a classic tautology, and is unacceptable.



I do not know if you care, but I can tell you Gaudiya Vaishnavas have no reason to doubt whether the author of Brahma-vaivarta purana actually took this hymn from Kauthuma branch of the Sama Veda.


So far, you haven't even quoted the writings of one Gaudiya Vaishnava who makes this claim. Once again, the ISKCON hubris - we are meant to think that if brahma-jijnasa accepts it, then Gaudiya Vaishnavas accept it.



And my case was ... ... what?
Are you sure you understood what was my case?


You don't have a case. What you have is a lot of garbled reasoning based on disconnected thinking. I don't find that your being ignorant of Sanskrit, Gaudiya Vaishnava philosophy, and the logic of vedAnta-sUtras to be a problem. What I find troublesome is your continued need to appear that you know more than you actually do.



Where did I said that I disagree with the opinion provided by Viraja and jignyAsu?
My position was that whoever Ganesha is, a liberated soul or Shiva's son, worship of Ganesha, worship of mentioned divinities and various demigods is not prohibited because we can clearly see that even Bhagavatam 11.27.29 approves such a worship.

No it does not. The BBT purport clearly states: "According to Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī, the Gaṇeśa and Durgā mentioned in this verse are not the same personalities present within the material world; rather, they are eternal associates of the Lord in Vaikuṇṭha. In this world Gaṇeśa, the son of Lord Śiva, is famous for awarding financial success, and the goddess Durgā, the wife of Lord Śiva, is famous as the external, illusory potency of the Supreme Lord. The personalities mentioned here, however, are eternally liberated associates of the Lord who reside in the spiritual sky, beyond the material manifestation."

So in other words, according to shrI jIva gosvAmI, who knows more about Gaudiya Vaishnavism than you do, the viNAyaka mentioned here is not shiva's son, but rather an eternal associate in Vaikuntha.



Sometimes even the Vaishnavas think "Oh, I'm not allowed to worship Ganesha, divinities and various demigods because my Lord Krishna says in the Bhagavad-gita that we should not worship them".
"Oh, I can not do it, OMG, I can not do it because I'll be accused of being a demigod worshiper". :)

Sometimes people who lack in understanding of the scriptures and Vedanta think so.

Sometimes fallen people with no social status get attracted to revisionist, neo-Hindu ideologies which promise to turn them into great spiritual authorities. Such people, having no status in their previous material lives, become very intoxicated at the prospect of wearing dhoti and tilak and being regarded as great preachers who can teach and command others. Such people have a desperate need to believe that others don't understand the religion as they do, and must hear from them in order to make any advancement in spiritual life. Whatever the subject may be, whether it be Sanskrit, the vedAnta-sUtra-s, the veda-s, the upaniShad-s, these fallen people will always wish to appear to be the authority on the subject, even if their knowledge of the subject comes entirely from the internet. Such people will never admit that they are wrong. How can they be wrong? They are "bona fide." They will twist simple arguments around and proclaim their correctness as obvious.

I have seen hundreds of people just like this, who eventually fell down from ISKCON and start websites and cults devoted to the exposition of their deviant doctrines in the name of "Gaudiya Vaishnavism." The world does not need more false religions and false prophets. Please stop misusing Gaudiya Vaishnavism for your own impure goals.

[ShivaFan]

Namaste Philosoraptor


Philosoraptor: The issue was why Sri Vaishnavas worship some devatas (indra, agni, vAyu, etc) as part of yagna dedicated to pleasing viShNu, and not other devatas (i.e. gaNesha).

Actually, no, that was not the subject of the OP, the OP and thread was not asking why Vedic Devatas such as Indra are worshipped by Vaishnavas and not Ganesh, the thread subject was the OP question as to why Ganesh puja and at this time of recent Vinayaka Chaturthi is celebrated by Vaishnavas and Ganesh is also worshipped as part of Satyanarayana Puja.

The Vedic injunctions and Shri Devatas was introduced by an insistence through such comments as yours "There are no authorized Vedic hymns discussing the worship of an elephant-faced deity who is the son of Shiva" as a strawman argument that Ganesh puja is not authorized, and is a classic example of what you claim of others in that you cannot even apply the same litmus to other Vaishnava Devatas such as Garuda or Ananta.

This is not my litmus or example, this was yours. I do not agree with such a litmus as meaningful to this discussion about Vaishnavas giving puja to Ganesha, something which you seem to claim Vaishnavas do not do even though the OP makes explicit example of observing Vaishnavas giving such worship, celebration and praise, and which I have observed myself as well as a fact that does occur.

You have to learn to "eat your own dogfood" as the old American saying goes.

Om Namah Sivaya

[satay]

Namaste,
Please keep it on topic.

[satay]

Admin Note
namaste,

Since some members of HDF could not follow the simple instrution of 'Keep it on topic', I have moved the unrelated posts to http://hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=12107

Please continue your jalpa there.
Thank you

[Garuda]

interesting thread viraja........i cannot scan through the entire replies but they are many educated answers from the sri vaishnavas.

Care to explain the final result of all this talk ? So is vishwaksena pooja needs to be done on vigna nivaraka chaturthi from a vaishnava stand point ?

adiyen Ramanuja daasa