VISHNU SAHASRANAMA- BIG DOUBT

[Ram11]

Namaste,

I often hear contradicting information about Sri Vishnu Sahasranama.Some people say SVS is a mantra and must be chanted with dhyana,nyasa,mudra etc. and many others say there are no restrictions, even women can chant SVS.Which is true?Is it a mantra or not a mantra?Can everybody chant it or should one undergo any special initiation?Can women chant it?Please give authoritative responses and kindly clear my doubt.Thank you.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam Ram: This situation is typical of many. There are several opinions presented, each perhaps claiming to be 'authoritative' yet contradictory in nature. So its left up to the individual devotee to decide. Personally, I have no opinion on it.

I hope you are able to decide.

Aum Namasivaya

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste

Namaste,

I often hear contradicting information about Sri Vishnu Sahasranama.Some people say SVS is a mantra and must be chanted with dhyana,nyasa,mudra etc. and many others say there are no restrictions, even women can chant SVS.Which is true?Is it a mantra or not a mantra?Can everybody chant it or should one undergo any special initiation?Can women chant it?Please give authoritative responses and kindly clear my doubt.Thank you.

Vishnu Sahasranama is recorded in the smriti literature of Itihasa, Mahabharata in this case, and some Puranas. It is said that everyone can recite Itihasas and Puranas, including women and even shudras.
Vishnu Sahasranama consists of the holy names of Lord Vishnu. It is also said that there are no regulations that regulate recitation of the holy names of the Lord,
so that the holy names can be pronounced without any additional actions or rules.


regards

[Ram11]

Namaste,

Thank you for the responses.
I like the version sung by MS Amma.

http://media.tumblr.com/fce0294aa5a01a55b404b4106d4d6786/tumblr_inline_mm9ijaLA4h1qz4rgp.jpg

http://www.hindu.com/mag/2004/06/20/images/2004062000010102.jpg

Her voice is divine. :bowdown:

[Anirudh]

Namaste Ram


[ even women can chant]

What is the difference between women and men? Why this attitude towards women? Also as much i understand Manu Neethi is not for Kali Yug.


Also can you clarify whether Maa Seetha or Maa Parvati are women.

If they are women do they listen to Mantra when their respective consorts are invoked.

[Ram11]

Namaste,

I saw on a Vaishnava website that women must not chant SVS since it is considered a mantra by Vaishnava Acharyas.
Personally I feel women should be allowed to chant.

EDIT:I think it would be appropriate for women to practice as suggested by their own Sampradaya Acharyas.

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste

Namaste,

I saw on a Vaishnava website that women must not chant SVS since it is considered a mantra by Vaishnava Acharyas.
Personally I feel women should be allowed to chant.

Srimad Bhagavatam 1.4.24-25:
http://vedabase.net/sb/1/4/24/en
http://vedabase.net/sb/1/4/25/en


"Thus the great sage Vyāsadeva, who is very kind to the ignorant masses, edited the Vedas so they might be assimilated by less intellectual men.

Out of compassion, the great sage thought it wise that this would enable men to achieve the ultimate goal of life. Thus he compiled the great historical narration called the Mahābhārata for women, laborers (shudras) and friends of the twice-born."

Vishnu Sahasranama is located in the Mahabharata, so why women should not recite Vishnu Sahasranama?
Is there any reason why they should not recite it?
Even if in the Itihasas and Puranas there is some mantra or anything else, everyone can recite it.

regards

[ShivaFan]

Namaste

All I know is what I have observed practiced at Hindu temples and homes here in California, and related temples and homes in India, and here there are devotees of Vithoba Vitalla Panduranga, and in India there is the Vithoba temple, Pandharpur.

Here these devotees and their Swamis, have everyone chant with no restrictions, women, low caste or no caste, there are no restrictions only encouragement.

Of side note to SVS, but on the theme of restrictions of different sorts, at Pandharpur all the devotees are allowed to touch the feet of the idol of Vithoba.... There is a presence of devotees of The Lord of Pandharpur in Oakland California. Vitalla Vithoba of the Varkari and Haridasa sampradayas consider Lord Panduranga Vithobha also known as Vitalla as a svarupa emanation (verse avatar) and there are many Vaishnavs who have Lord Vitalla, Whose name literally means "Accepts All", as Number Nine of the Dasavatars. Accepting all, reflects the practice of SVS open to all among famous traditions.

So from my observation, authority teaches that SVS is accepted from all, there are no restrictions such as caste, no caste, women, nothing like that.

Om Namah Sivaya

[Anirudh]

Namaste

I wasn't interested to derail the thread. The tone of the question posed in OP was bit harsh on women (without whom men can't take birth).

Without taking birth We can't burn our Karma and without burning that we don't attain Moksha. So We are eternally dependant on our women folks to reach our final destination.

I want to reason out whether women are barred from reading any portion of scriptures (including vedas). I seek the help of learned members to clarify that. If the answer is yes kind elucidate why?

Many question arise in my mind so if OP feels I am deviating will post my questions in a separate thread.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam: I find it odd that in any discussion where gender is involved, reincarnation tends to be (conveniently?) forgotten. Since souls are genderless, we all are as equally likely (may depend on karma) to be born in either gender.

So in essence any chauvinistic or sexist attitude shown by either gender is suggesting that the individual has failed to cognise reincarnation fully.

For the record, I thought the OP's question was innocent enough based on confusion from listening to different sources.

Aum Namasivaya

[Ram11]

Namaste,

Thanks to everyone for the answers.

I posted the question because in this website SVS is considered to be a mantra and many friends told me the same thing :

http://www.srivaishnavam.com/

faq's question no. 28

28.What’s role of women in our sampradayam? Why they are not allowed to recite Veda or even Vishnu sahasranamam? Just like the man is entitled to uphold his dharma, the woman has to uphold her dharma. Both have to follow what the saastra has prescribed to each one of them specifically. The dharma-saastras, aaknika-grantas and smruthies categorically prescribe these dharmas. Women are equally entitled to get the knowledge about Brahman Shreeman Narayana but the way in which she has to get it is different from that of man. This should not be misunderstood as “restriction”. The recitation of Veda is not like telling the slokas. The Veda has to be learnt, comprehended and applied with its six accessories namely siksha, chandas, vyaakaranam, niruktham, jyothisham and kalpam. This is suitable only for man. Vishnu Sahasranamam is also a mantra, which has to be chanted only by men because it has to be chanted with nyaasa, pranavam etc. The woman can get the same knowledge through listening to itihaasaas, satvika puraanas, pUrvaacharya-stotras-grantas and divya-prabandams. She has to accompany the man in doing all the vaidika karmas like yaagas. The Parama-vaidika-matham considers both man and woman as its two eyes. She can adopt prapatti and get salvation just like the man.


It says listening but not chanting.

Generally Dvija-bandhus(birth Brahmins not performing Brahmin duties),Sudras(non Brahmins) and Stri(Women) are lumped together,that is why I asked if people other than those involved in daily Vedic activities require any special initiation from their Guru.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam: So now Ram, after reading all the different answers, what do YOU think? Or are you still questioning it?

Aum Namasivaya

[Omkara]

This is a point of dispute between two subsects of Srivaishnavism. As has been pointed out above the Mahabharata itself is very clear that it is open to everyone.QED so is the Vishnu Sahasranama which is a part of it.

As for why women are debarred from certain practices- One is born in a cerain gender, location, family,etc as a durect result of our karma.One is not, as was ststed above, 'equally likely to be born male or female'.Since we are at different stages of our karmic journey, it is logical that the scriptues would prescribe different practices for people of different genders or income groups just like different syllabus is prescribed at different stages of education.Nevertheless if one wants to be egpistic and do something not prescribed for them, it will only hamper one's own spiritual development.

[hinduism♥krishna]

28.What’s role of women in our sampradayam? Why they are not allowed to recite Veda or even Vishnu sahasranamam? Just like the man is entitled to uphold his dharma, the woman has to uphold her dharma. Both have to follow what the saastra has prescribed to each one of them specifically. The dharma-saastras, aaknika-grantas and smruthies categorically prescribe these dharmas. Women are equally entitled to get the knowledge about Brahman Shreeman Narayana but the way in which she has to get it is different from that of man. This should not be misunderstood as “restriction”. The recitation of Veda is not like telling the slokas. The Veda has to be learnt, comprehended and applied with its six accessories namely siksha, chandas, vyaakaranam, niruktham, jyothisham and kalpam. This is suitable only for man. Vishnu Sahasranamam is also a mantra, which has to be chanted only by men because it has to be chanted with nyaasa, pranavam etc. The woman can get the same knowledge through listening to itihaasaas, satvika puraanas, pUrvaacharya-stotras-grantas and divya-prabandams. She has to accompany the man in doing all the vaidika karmas like yaagas. The Parama-vaidika-matham considers both man and woman as its two eyes. She can adopt prapatti and get salvation just like the man.

I totally agree, women can't chant vishnu sahasranama. (*however they can chant vishnu's names given in sahasranama. But that wouldn't be a vishnu sahasranama. Vishnu Sahasranamam is not just a mantra. It is a vedic worship of Vishnu and the right of performing such exalted worship is only for Dvijas. Brahabandhu, Shudra & women are not allowed to do it. Doing nyasa is always better as it makes our body itself divine. Only Divine can worship Divine. Only a pure thing can worship a pure thing.

My question to those who say in dharma women have full authorities like men.. Why in bhagavad gita Krishna calls women as lower born? Why he said EVEN women can attain me? Emphasising on EVEN word.

The reason why they're considered lower born is the reason why they shouldn't chant Vishnu sahasranama. It's clear that women have no authority on all Dharma rituals especially related to Veda. In Dharma they have many restrictions. This inequality of dharma is better than equality. In Dharma, works of people are distributed according to their Varna. Men have different & women have others. It's better to follow one's own Dharma. Dharma assures that by doing prescribed dharma for different varna one can attain even Moksha. Teaching of Veda is prescribed for Brahmanas only. Shudra or women can not do that as they are forbidden even to hear veda by Dharma.

And those who say Men and women have same soul, then I'd say Dharma rituals & their authorities have nothing to with Brahman or soul. Dharma is created under the conditions of Maya. Maya says brahman are in Satvika and can understand brahman. Maya says shudra are under the effect of rajas and especially tamasa guna. All these dharma rituals, mantra are being practised through three gunas. There's only one which is Nirguna it is Brahman or vaishnawa calls it as Nirguna Bhakti and dyanis call it as a nirguna dnyana.

And if you ask how dharma gives us moksha even if it has nothing to do with brahman.. Then I'd say knowledge (dharma) and ignorance (adharma) are the two opposite sides of one coin. Maya itself creates them. Veda uses maya(Knowledge) itself to remove Maya (appearance of bondage). It's like 'Removing one thorn by another thorn'

[devotee]

I totally agree, women can't chant vishnu sahasranama. (*however they can chant vishnu's names given in sahasranama. But that wouldn't be a vishnu sahasranama. Vishnu Sahasranamam is not just a mantra. It is a vedic worship of Vishnu and the right of performing such exalted worship is only for Dvijas. Brahabandhu, Shudra & women are not allowed to do it. Doing nyasa is always better as it makes our body itself divine. Only Divine can worship Divine. Only a pure thing can worship a pure thing.

My question to those who say in dharma women have full authorities like men.. Why in bhagavad gita Krishna calls women as lower born? Why he said EVEN women can attain me? Emphasising on EVEN word.

The reason why they're considered lower born is the reason why they shouldn't chant Vishnu sahasranama. It's clear that women have no authority on all Dharma rituals especially related to Veda. In Dharma they have many restrictions. This inequality of dharma is better than equality. In Dharma, works of people are distributed according to their Varna. Men have different & women have others. It's better to follow one's own Dharma. Dharma assures that by doing prescribed dharma for different varna one can attain even Moksha. Teaching of Veda is prescribed for Brahmanas only. Shudra or women can not do that as they are forbidden even to hear veda by Dharma.

And those who say Men and women have same soul, then I'd say Dharma rituals & their authorio have nothing to with Brahman. Dharma is created under the cobditions of Maya. Maya says brahman are in Satvika and can understand brahman. Maya says shudra are under the effect of rajas and especially tamasa guna. All these dharma rituals, mantra are being practised through three gunas. There's only one which is Nirguna it is Brahman or vaishnawa calls it as Nirguna Bhakti and dyanis call it as a nirguna dnyana.

It is so surprising to see this post from you who is a strong believer in Advaita. You have based your argument on BG verse where "even women" is used by Lord Krishna. This only shows that even in Krishna's time, women were discriminated against by the society and therefore he makes it clear that whatever he says applies to women too. It doesn't say or mean that women are of lower birth.

... and the argument that women should not recite Sahasranama is deplorable. Taking God's name is forbidden for some human beings ... why ? What would happen if these so called lower-birth people take God's name in the form of Sahasranama ? God's supremacy will be challenged ?? God's piety will be defiled ??? If that is so, I don't need such a God who has such an inflated ego and is so easily contaminatable.

This is not against you or anyone. Please forgive for my above post. Anyone is free to harbour as much hatred against fellow humans in the name of caste, sex, age, color skin and whatever but I am exercising my rights to speak against injustice.

OM

[hinduism♥krishna]

क्षमस्व मम् :) devotee ji...


It is so surprising to see this post from you who is a strong believer in Advaita. You have based your argument on BG verse where "even women" is used by Lord Krishna. This only shows that even in Krishna's time, women were discriminated against by the society and therefore he makes it clear that whatever he says applies to women too. It doesn't say or mean that women are of lower birth.

I think you're thinking according to today's ideology of equality. It's not like that there was discrimination. It means, At that time there was honest following of Dharma even by lower varna, like Shudra were not doing the task like teaching veda. That dharma was without any disputes over discrimination between men & women. And even if we consider there was really a discrimination, then why shri krishna didn't oppose this? We don't get ANY opposition on such discrimination in any purana. In fact purana itself supports that so called discrimination. It is the purana who say women should not hear veda.


... and the argument that women should not recite Sahasranama is deplorable. Taking God's name is forbidden for some human beings ... why ? What would happen if these so called lower-birth people take God's name in the form of Sahasranama ? God's supremacy will be challenged ?? God's piety will be defiled ??? If that is so, I don't need such a God who has such an inflated ego and is so easily contaminatable.

This is not against you or anyone. Please forgive for my above post. Anyone is free to harbour as much hatred against fellow humans in the name of caste, sex, age, color skin and whatever but I am exercising my rights to speak against injustice.

OM
You're absolutely right. However,

I think this is not a matter of discrimination. It's the matter of Duty. What shastra prescribes we should follow it according to our varna & sex. It's just so simple.

I'm not saying women can not chant vishnu's names. I said there are many restrictions over women about vedic rituals & mantras. And one shouldn't forget that there are many rituals & mantras prescribed for women in our Puranas.

It's natural that you'll get surprised to see me saying that. But know that I'm not realised. I have not yet realised who I'm and I think dharma is prescribed only until the realisation. One shouldn't give up duties(dharma) unless you're not realised. Though women and men have one soul, I have already mentioned soul is beyond dharma. Dharma is according to conditions of Maya. Doesn't dharma consider different gunas acting on two sexes; men & women? Why doesn't dharma say Varna dharma should be scrapped as everyone has one soul? Why there's distinction of four varna? Why there's distinction between rakshasa & aryas though they have one soul? Why doesn't dharma praise the Rakshasas varna in high esteem like that in the case of Brahmana varna?

[Kalicharan Tuvij]

[FONT=Georgia]And even if we consider there was really a discrimination, then why shri krishna didn't oppose this? We don't get ANY opposition on such discrimination in any purana. In fact purana itself supports that so called discrimination. It is the purana who say women should not hear veda.
But, there as we see, there are many women seers who composed a handful of the Vedic Rica-s. But I agree that in the Kaliyuga PurANa-s have authority that supersedes that of Veda.
Let us think this: PurANa-s are the preservers of Dharma, and Veda-s are the creators of it. As it happens today, the preservers override the creators.


I think this is not a matter of discrimination. It's the matter of Duty. What shastra prescribes we should follow it according to our varna & sex. It's just so simple.
I'm not saying women can not chant vishnu's names. I said there are many restrictions over women about vedic rituals & mantras. And one shouldn't forget that there are many rituals & mantras prescribed for women in our Puranas.
PurANa-s know the territory and people of India and also how they will continue to evolve over a period of time. Vaishnavism, as I see it, is a male-dominated endeavour, and has prospered in certain parts and sections of India.


Why doesn't dharma say Varna dharma should be scrapped as everyone has one soul?
Even among the ritvija priests of Vedic Yagna, for example, the Udgatr is supposed to do his work and not assume Hotr priest's work. So everyone's duty is prescribed.
Today some say, only Brahman priest has survived (as BrāhmaNa who preserved Yagna ritual) and Hotr, Udgatr and Adhvaryu have vanished.
But did they really vanish? No, they are among us, silently waiting within their subconscious for a time to come when the creator will again assume power and importance over the preserver, and they will be back to business and Yagna will again become more than mere ritual: it will again become the factory that converts on a mass scale the Dasyus into the Aryas.

This is a narration that has parallels in the Varna-s story.


Why there's distinction of four varna? Why there's distinction between rakshasa & aryas though they have one soul? Why doesn't dharma praise the Rakshasas varna in high esteem like that in the case of Brahmana varna?
In the Veda the Asvins are praised as Devatā-s who have the power to transform the fallen, the dasyu, their whole being, upto the enlightened state, apparently that of an Arya.

But as I said earlier, the issue is the question of preservance or creation of Dharma. The question is: has the average man there, in this age of democracy and science, become conscious enough of his own spiritual advancement that cannot be delayed any longer anymore, or the rise of materialism has only meant that we need to preserve Dharma with even more rigour?

Frankly, I don't have an answer. I guess we should just do our best. Further, it will be better if we stopped taking offense at differing stances of our own fellow Hindus on this. Dharma is large enough, and everyone has all the freedom to pursue their paths. I don't think liberalising the conservative sections among us will do any good. Who knows, the liberals are in the wrong, and in their zeal inadvertently actually end up finishing what remains of Dharma?

What I am saying is:
"If A says I cannot recite a mantra, I shouldn't be offended by it."
"Then what should I do?"
"Ask the Devatā you are bhakta of."

[ShivaFan]

Namaste

This makes no sense to millions and millions of Hindus, inclusive of within Vaisnava sampradayas and temples as well. My example of the Varkari and Haridasa sampradayas, which have huge pilgrimages in the millions to their holy dhams, are just one of many which teach the Vishnu Sahasranama by publication and in practice to all, regardless of gender for example.

The very idea one can chant one Name of the SVS - the SVS which basically is NOT a Vedic mantra at all but praising a NAME(s) of the Lord so named - but not allowed to praise ALL the Names strikes as absurd. It is Hari Nam Sankirtan. The very title Vishnu Sahasranama means the “Thousand Names of Vishnu.” It is actually considered a stotra.

So my daughter can praise the Name Pavitra (That which purifies everything) outloud, but not Maṅgala param (Supremely auspicious), or at what point is the restriction, 999 Names but not 1,000? 1008?

It is said the Vishnu Sahasranaama was composed by Sri Veda Vyaasa, the author of the Mahabarata, quoting Bishma on his deathbed in response to what will free one from rebirth, and so it was praising by the Names. So let me understand, this sect of this website's sampradaya, thinks my daughter can read the Mahabharata, read the SVS, but not say it outloud praising the Names? Vishnu sahasranama iS said to be the essence of the Mahabharata, and also confirms the appearance in the Kali Yuga.

Firstly, no, my daughter is not going to go barging up onto some homa platform or temple altar, shove the priest aside, and start chanting the Vishnu Sahasranama. That would be just absurd and is not the point.

This particular sect of this swmpradaya can preach anything they like, they just cannot force it on others. One more reason I thank the Divine that I am not a member of that particular sect of that sampradaya of that website. Millions and millions are not.

It really is amazing how, in material nature, it works out that there is almost a perfect balance of women to men in population (almost 50 to 50, 101 males to every 100 females world wide, and 107males to 100 females even in continents that favor boys over girls), a perfect balance to maintain the species. You would think, considering how horrible we all are, that there would be 89% women and only 11% men.

Om Namah Sivaya

[satay]

Admin Note

Namaste
Please note that 'this' is a Vaishnava forum. Keep your posts in alignment with vaishnava philosophy.

Thanks,

[ShivaFan]

Namaste
In 2011 in Banglapore India there was a huge congregational chanting of the Vishnu Sahasranama, involving multiple Vaishnav communities, and all were welcome as well, no restrictions.

I know for a fact that the Sri Vishnu Sahasranam as found in the Mahabharata, Anusasana Parva, Section 149, verses 14 to 120, is chanted regularly by Vaishnavs in homes including by women. So my observation is sects who restrict women are a minority. For some it is every day, for others then on days of an eclipse to mitigate effects of planets and other times. In MANY Sanskrit courses here in California, students are asked to learn by heart the Vishnu Saharanama as part of beginning Sanskrit studies.

By the way, for anyone in the Bay Area of California, there are Vishnu Sahasranama classes in the Bay Area at the Sanatan Dharma Kendra in Sunnyvale, California, typically starting at 7:30pm. Here is there link if you are interested in attending:

http://www.sanatandharmakendra.org/

In fact there is one today (May 5, 2014 at 730pm) "Vishnu Sahasranamam chanting class", all are welcome, children, adults, men and women.

There are others also if live in the Bay Area as I do, for example there are Bay Area contacts of the Datta Yoga Hanuman Temple (where Sri Vishnu Sahasranama Sloka learning courses started in January of this year 2014) that also have instruction.

Om Namah Sivaya

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste
In 2011 in Banglapore India there was a huge congregational chanting of the Vishnu Sahasranama, involving multiple Vaishnav communities, and all were welcome as well, no restrictions.

I know for a fact that the Sri Vishnu Sahasranam as found in the Mahabharata, Anusasana Parva, Section 149, verses 14 to 120, is chanted regularly by Vaishnavs in homes including by women. So my observation is sects who restrict women are a minority. For some it is every day, for others then on days of an eclipse to mitigate effects of planets and other times. In MANY Sanskrit courses here in California, students are asked to learn by heart the Vishnu Saharanama as part of beginning Sanskrit studies.

By the way, for anyone in the Bay Area of California, there are Vishnu Sahasranama classes in the Bay Area at the Sanatan Dharma Kendra in Sunnyvale, California, typically starting at 7:30pm. Here is there link if you are interested in attending:

http://www.sanatandharmakendra.org/

In fact there is one today (May 5, 2014 at 730pm) "Vishnu Sahasranamam chanting class", all are welcome, children, adults, men and women.

There are others also if live in the Bay Area as I do, for example there are Bay Area contacts of the Datta Yoga Hanuman Temple (where Sri Vishnu Sahasranama Sloka learning courses started in January of this year 2014) that also have instruction.

Om Namah Sivaya

Pranam ShivaFan...

It's all good. No one is opposing the right of woman to recite vishnu sahasranama. I was talking about vedic rituals & mantras.

No doubt, women can chant vishnu sahasranama. Ishwara nama is open to all higher & lower varnas. There are two reasons which support the right of women to recite that. First, Nama is open to all. Even chandala can perform nama japa and the second, sahasranama is from mahabharata which was created for shudras & women.

Jai Krishna.. ;)

[hinduism♥krishna]

+++Help+++


With mercy, can someone post here Mantras of Karanyasa and Hridayadi Anganyasa for Vishnu Sahasranama? I need it.

Thank You.

[ShivaFan]

Namaste HLK

I see. I thought someone was saying folks cannot chant SVS. I was about to contact a Vaishnav group leadership to find out, but I see even you agree anyone can chant the 1000 Names of Vishnu.

Even I, a Saiva, have chanted the 1000 names in Oakland California during a public chanting in the 1970s and again in the 80s.

Om Namah Sivaya

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste

Namaste HLK

I see. I thought someone was saying folks cannot chant SVS. ... but I see even you agree anyone can chant the 1000 Names of Vishnu.

Yes, who knows how this happened? :rolleyes:


Even I, a Saiva, have chanted the 1000 names in Oakland California during a public chanting in the 1970s and again in the 80s.

Om Namah Sivaya

Tell us something about it, how did it come about?
Thanks


regards

[Ram11]

Namaste hinduism♥krishna (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/member.php?u=5478) Ji,

May I know why you changed your opinion?Do you mean anyone can chant SVS or just the Namavali/Namas(i.e. SVS split up into names)?

[Ram11]

Namaste ShivaFan Ji,

Please do contact that Vaishanava Acharya,it would be better if we know the opinions of different Sampradayas.Ultimately,we might know a lot of information about SVS.:)

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste
http://vedabase.net/sb/1/4/25/en

Out of compassion, the great sage thought it wise that this would enable men to achieve the ultimate goal of life. Thus he compiled the great historical narration called the Mahābhārata for women, laborers (shudras) and friends of the twice-born.

Slightly Incorrect Translation



स्त्रीशूद्रद्विजबंधूनां त्रयी न श्रुतिगोचरा ।
कर्मश्रेयसि मूढानां श्रेय एवं भवेदिह ।
इति भारतमाख्यानं कृपया मुनिना कृतम् ॥ २५

स्त्रीशूद्रद्विजबंधूनां- of women, Shudra, Brahmabandhu | त्रयी- These three | न श्रुतिगोचरा- not in the scope ( field for action) | कर्मश्रेयसि- About Karma rituals which cause welfare | मूढानां- of unintelligent | श्रेय- welfare | एवं- this way | भवेदिह- will become in this | इति भारतमाख्यानं- Mahabharata | कृपया- with mercy | मुनिना कृतम् - created by Muni |

Meaning: Veda is not the field of action for women, shudra and brahmabandhu . These unintelligent people's welfare about Karma Rituals will be caused, knowing thus with mercy Muni created Bharata. [ Mahabharata ]

राम कृष्ण हरी :)

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste hinduism♥krishna (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/member.php?u=5478) Ji,

May I know why you changed your opinion?Do you mean anyone can chant SVS or just the Namavali/Namas(i.e. SVS split up into names)?


Let them do.:) But I'm not still completely agreed that women can chant Vishnu SahastraNama as like a Brahmana or Dvija. As per my view, women and shudra have right for Vishnu Sahastranama but only by Shravanam [Hearing from Dvijas] not by JapaYadnya.

Let me mention some couple of supports from Shruti and Smriti.

तस्मात् शूद्रो यज्ञ अनवक्ल्रुप्त ( तै. स. ७|१|१|६| ) - So Shudra has no right in Yadnya.

सुगतिमियात् श्रवणात् च शुद्रयोनिः | इति हरिवंशे | - So only those shudra attain ParamaGati who Hear.

So I think it is possible that women and shudra have right to hear Vishnu Shastranama from Brahmana or Dvija. Because they have right in shravanam but not in JapaYadnya. I said Possible but not sure.

[Sahasranama]

Namaste,

I saw on a Vaishnava website that women must not chant SVS since it is considered a mantra by Vaishnava Acharyas.
Personally I feel women should be allowed to chant.

EDIT:I think it would be appropriate for women to practice as suggested by their own Sampradaya Acharyas.

The Vishnu Sahasranama is an integral part of the Mahabharata and the Mahabharata does not place restrictions based on gender and caste on chanting the Vishnu Sahasranama. Later sectarian acharyas have tried to hijack the Vishnu Sahasranama, but if you are not a member of said sampradaya, you can basically ignore whatever those acharyas are saying.

The nyasa is not a part of the Mahabharata, but from Tantric origin. It has become customary, especially in South India, to chant it along the Sahasranama. The phala shruti has also been extended with shlokas from other sources, including the Bhagavad Gita. The dhyana shlokas are also not found in the Mahabharata.

[ganeshamylord]

Guess whoever says SVS cant be chanted by women or shudras are the real shudras themselves:)

Typical dumb brahminical superiority show off

Vishnu is the lord of all the father of all the sustenance of all.
If vishnu loved brahmins more than others then is He supplying 30percent oxygen to brahmins and 20percent of oxygen to women and shudras???and or does vishnu make brahminical excreta smell like flowers while women and shudras release yucky odor:P:P or is the Lord supplying pure water to brahmins or does the Lord remove the pesticides in the vegetables the brahmins eat!!! if He is not doing any of the above it means He is equal to all:)And HIS names can be chanted by anyone except those who are egoistic and ignorant just like the gurus of kaliyuga who propagate caste system and differentiate the souls who are none but the children of Vishnu

[hinduism♥krishna]

प्रणाम || जय गणेश जय कृष्ण रुक्मिणी ||



The nyasa is not a part of the Mahabharata, but from Tantric origin. It has become customary, especially in South India, to chant it along the Sahasranama. The phala shruti has also been extended with shlokas from other sources, including the Bhagavad Gita. The dhyana shlokas are also not found in the Mahabharata.


:eek: Disagreed ! Nyasa is not indigenous to south only. It is an ancient standard practice of whole BharataVarsha. North indians abandoned Nyasa Practice. The reason may be Muslim's invasion. It destroyed some vaidik beliefs and practices.But South including Maharashtra mostly remained aloof and retained purest Vaidik Dharma. The same thing for classical music and Dance, which differs from North tradition as one can see North Dance tradition having some aspects of Islmic Dance tradition.

Back on to the topic..There're three types of worship of Vishnu. Vaidik, Tantrika and Mishra. Mishra is the mixture of Vaidik and Tantrik and people generally follow their desired type of worship.

Krishna himself said how to worship him. You'll get details about this in Bhagavata Purana- Uddhava Gita - KriyaYoga. There it is said :

" My worship is of three types. Vaidik, Tantrik and Mixed. One should choose whatever he wishes" (7)

" First worshipper should do AngaNyasa and KaraNyasa. He,should gently wash the earlier paste of the image and that image is similarly consecrated and then duly adorned with the paste and flowers, the pitcher full of water to be used in the worship." (20)

One thing is very important. The idea behind Nyasa is that worshipper is Narayana himself playing the role of the worshipper. In this way when one makes Nyasa, it creates a Nirguna devotion where separate sense and the recognition as the worshipper and the God, disappears. This is the purest path of devotion where there's no place for Maya(Duality).

Any mantra should be recited while touching the hands and various parts of the body. It is a standard practice.

It's interesting to note that Krishna guides us to worship him by both Vaidik and Tantrika menthods. Both are valid and supreme, leads the devotee to the Parabrahman. So I think Nyasa and Dhyana Shlokas are highly recommended during reciting Vishnu Sahastranama. When one does this, it becomes an authentic worship of Vishnu.

[Sahasranama]

:eek: Disagreed ! Nyasa is not indigenous to south only.

Do you even read? I never said such a thing.

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste

One thing is very important. The idea behind Nyasa is that worshipper is Narayana himself playing the role of the worshipper. In this way when one makes Nyasa, it creates a Nirguna devotion where separate sense and the recognition as the worshipper and the God, disappears. This is the purest path of devotion where there's no place for Maya(Duality).

That's not how it is perceived in the mainstream vaishnava sampradayas. The sense of duality "I'm a devotee of the Lord" and "He is my Lord" never vanishes for a vaishnava devotee (bhakta) because that sense of duality continues eternally even when the devotee reaches the world of Vaikuntha where he continues eternally being dedicated to the Lord with devotion (bhakti).
This sense of duality "I'm a devotee of the Lord" and "He is my Lord" with devotion (bhakti) in Vaikuntha is permanent and eternal state of liberation (mukti), which is the ultimate goal for every yogi who:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe15/sbe15012.htm


"reaches the end of the journey, the Highest abode of Vishnu" (Katha Upanishad 1.3.9)

and also


"he reaches indeed that place, from whence he is not born again." (Katha Upanishad 1.3.8)

This "the end of the journey" and "he is not born again" tells us that this viṣṇoḥ paramaḿ padam "Highest abode of Vishnu" (called Vaikuntha in the Puranas) is a place of liberation (mukti, "he is not born again"), which is the final and ultimate goal for every yogi ("the end of the journey"). !!!
This is also confirmed in the Bhagavad gita 8.21:
http://vedabase.net/bg/8/21/en


"That which the Vedāntists describe as unmanifest and infallible, that which is known as the supreme destination, that place from which, having attained it, one never returns — that is My supreme abode."

Here also the Lord's abode is described as "the supreme destination" and "place from which, having attained it, one never returns" tells us that this is a place of liberation (mukti, "one never returns"), which is the ultimate goal for every yogi ("the supreme destination")!!!

Yes, my dear, that's what they say, Shruti and Smriti. Needless to say how many such verses we read in the Puranas and Mahabharata. Indeed, plenty of verses. ;)



Any mantra should be recited while touching the hands and various parts of the body. It is a standard practice.

It's interesting to note that Krishna guides us to worship him by both Vaidik and Tantrika menthods. Both are valid and supreme, leads the devotee to the Parabrahman. So I think Nyasa and Dhyana Shlokas are highly recommended during reciting Vishnu Sahastranama. When one does this, it becomes an authentic worship of Vishnu.

This Nyasa is a Vedic practice and is associated with the worship of the deities at the altar in the temple, as described in the Bhagavatam, canto 11, ch. 27: http://vedabase.net/sb/11/27/en

However it has nothing to do with the recitation of the Vishnu sahasra nama, 1000 holy names of Lord Vishnu located in the Mahabharata and also in some Puranas because there was not given instruction of Nyasa to be performed. So, recitation of the Vishnu sahasra nama has nothing to do with Nyasa or any other Vedic practice, and therefore can be practiced by anyone, even by shudras.


regards

[hinduism♥krishna]

The sense of duality "I'm a devotee of the Lord" and "He is my Lord" never vanishes for a vaishnava devotee (bhakta) because that sense of duality continues eternally even when the devotee reaches the world of Vaikuntha where he continues eternally being dedicated to the Lord with devotion (bhakti). This sense of duality "I'm a devotee of the Lord" and "He is my Lord" with devotion (bhakti) in Vaikuntha is permanent


Pranama,
I see Your Vaishnawa Sampradaya views are contradictory to the vaishnawism of Bhagavata Purana. I have already told you that as per Shri krishna's view individuallity vanishes after jeeva becomes Brahman. Jiva merges in Krishna or Brahman , is the core teaching of Uddhava Gita.



“satvam chabhijayed ………jivam vihay mam “ ( BP 11.25.35)

Meaning: The Jeeva having been free from Gunas, and having dropped the idea that it is Jeeva, attains Me and thus Jeeva freed from its separateness and liberated from Gunas unites with Me. ( bramhan)


“ avam samahit……..jyotishi sanyutam “ (BP 11.14.45)

Meaning: With his intellect thus established, he sees me in himself and himself actually merged in me (bramhan) like an individual light in the element of fire. :)




and eternal state of liberation (mukti), which is the ultimate goal for every yogi who:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe15/sbe15012.htm


"reaches the end of the journey, the Highest abode of Vishnu" (Katha Upanishad 1.3.9)and also
"he reaches indeed that place, from whence he is not born again." (Katha Upanishad 1.3.8)Padam/Dhama does not necessarily mean Loka/Vaikuntha. Moreover; if we take Vaikuntha as Padam, then it gets contradicted with Bhagavata Purana 12.5.11 wherein it is said that Jiva becomes Brahman and the self of Jiva is the highest absolute abode. "that place, from whence he is not born again."- Hear it is stressed that there is no Punarjanma. This is used only to deny the Punarjanma of Jiva. This is not supporting Vaikuntha.


"That which the Vedāntists describe as unmanifest and infallible, that which is known as the supreme destination, that place from which, having attained it, one never returns — that is My supreme abode."Dear Bandhu, you have not yet understood what is Avyakta. With proper understanding of what is avyakta, it is clear that avyakta means formless. Avyakta means the Tattwa which is smaller than the smallest and bigger than the biggest. Advaitians know that tatwa which is beyond formless and form. It is unexplainable, unseen, mind can not enter there. This akshara avyakta which is the most sublime abode of vishnu, is none other than the self. This is the core teaching of the Bhagavad Gita. And from common sense, Vaikuntha is not that unmanifested which krshna is talking about. The thing which has doors how can this become unmanifested ? :) Vaikuntha is the creation of Vishnu by his maya. It is the divine sport of Vishnu. Mind can easily think about it and it is full of dualities . These conditions of vaikuntha are contradictory to the Brahman which is non-dual ekamevadvitiya where is no second thing and which is not in the scope of Mind.


Even if we accept krishna is talking about Vaikuntha in that Gita shloka, the logic says that krishna should have said that clearly. Then why krishna didn't mention Vaikuntha and not even in the uddhava Gita which is the essence of Veda. Why? Krishna has some kind of allergy to utter Vaikuntha word or he wants to say something different? :)

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste HLK

Your Vaishnawa Sampradaya views are contradictory to the Bhagavata Purana and so they are contradicting to my Vaishnawism.

As far as I can see Gaudiya vaishnava (and also other mainstream vaishnava sampradayas) view is consistent with Bhagavatam teaching. It is your 'Vaishnawism' contrary to Bhagavatam.


I have already told you that as per Shri krishna's view individuallity vanishes after jeeva becomes Brahman.

“satvam chabhijayed ………jivam vihay mam “ ( BP 11.25.35)

Meaning: The Jeeva having been free from Gunas, and having dropped the idea that it is Jeeva, attains Me and thus Jeeva freed from its separateness and liberated from Gunas unites with Me. ( bramhan)

Many times by now I told you that jiva never loses his individuality. How many times do I have to repeat that?
Lord Krishna said that clearly and explicitly in the Bhagavad gita 15.7 (http://vedabase.net/bg/15/7/en) :


jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ

"Jivas (the living entities) are eternal"

Here the word sanātanaḥ "eternal" is clearly applied. This means that individuality of jiva is eternal, and it will never cease to exist!!!!

This verse in the Bhagavatam 11.25.35 sattvaḿ cābhijayed ... ... jīvaḿ vihāya mām was spoken by the Lord Krishna.
Now the question arises: Why would Lord Krishna first said in the Bhagavad gita 15.7 "Jivas (the living entities) are eternal", and then contradicted himself in the Bhagavatam 11.25.35 by saying "The Jeeva having been free from Gunas, and having dropped the idea that it is Jeeva"? !!!
Do you think Lord Krishna was confused so that He contradicted himself? Do you think Lord Krishna was not well acquainted with his own teachings so that He, miserable, got confused?
I do not think so. No, Lord Krishna certainly did not got confused, but your translator got confused. Yes, my dear, this happened to your translator!!! ;)
See how BBT vaishnava translator translated this verse (http://vedabase.net/sb/11/25/35/en) :


"Then, being fixed in devotional service, the sage should also conquer the material mode of goodness by indifference toward the modes. Thus pacified within his mind, the spirit soul, freed from the modes of nature, gives up the very cause of his conditioned life and attains Me."

See, there is no mention of "having dropped the idea that it is Jeeva", but instead says "gives up the very cause of his conditioned life". Thus BBT translator did not contradict the statement jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ (see above Bhagavad gita 15.7).
Jiva soul never drops the idea that he is a jiva because this idea remains forever!


Padam/Dhama does not necessarily mean Loka/Vaikuntha. Moreover; if we take Vaikuntha as Padam, then it gets contradicted with Bhagavata Purana 12.5.11 wherein it is said ...



"he reaches the end of the journey, the Highest abode of Vishnu (viṣṇoḥ padam)" (Katha Upanishad 1.3.9)

See what is the use of words Padam/Dhama in the various scriptures and you'll see that it actually refers to Lord Vishnu's abode or Vaikuntha.
This is clear from the Bhagavad gita and Puranas, and even in the shruti texts we see that words pada or lokam refer to the Lord's abode which is the world of liberation (mukti).

Monier Williams Sanskrit-English Dictionary:


pada

viṣṇoḥ padam N. (name) of a locality

Now, about Bhagavatam 12.5.11:
" You are That Brahman. You are that Supreme Absolute abode .. You should always meditate like this. Thus you'll surely know your Infinite Self " ( BP 12.5.11 )

It says "always meditate like this", it is a type of meditation only.


Dear Bandhu, you have not yet understood what is Avyakta. With proper understanding of what is avyakta, it is clear that avyakta means formless.

In the Bhagavad gita 8.21 avyaktaḥ means "unmanifested" because it does not manifest before our eyes and we can not see it. This means "unmanifested".
Monier Williams Sanskrit-English Dictionary:


avyakta

undeveloped , not manifest , unapparent , indistinct , invisible , imperceptible


Vaikuntha is the creation of Vishnu by his maya. It is the divine sport of Vishnu. Mind can easily think about it and it is full of dualities . These conditions of vaikuntha are contradictory to the Brahman which is non-dual ekamevadvitiya where is no second thing and which is not in the scope of Mind.

Vaikuntha is not created because it is eternal and indestructible.
Vaikuntha is Brahman because it is the state of liberation (mukti). No one can reach Vaikuntha if he did not achieve mukti in Brahman! Only those who have realized Brahman can reach Brahman, ie Vaikuntha.
It seems that you do not understand that, because according to your view Vaikunta is something different from Brahman. This is not correct view, my dear, because Vaikuntha is Brahman, ie Vaikuntha = Brahman !!! It is not that Vaikunta is something different from Brahman!


Krishna has some kind of allergy to utter Vaikuntha word or he wants to say something different?

Should we call a doctor to help the Lord to heal His allergy?


regards

[hinduism♥krishna]

Paranam my Bandhu Barhma Jijnasa..



Many times by now I told you that jiva never loses his individuality. How many times do I have to repeat that?
Lord Krishna said that clearly and explicitly in the Bhagavad gita 15.7 (http://vedabase.net/bg/15/7/en) :
jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ

"Jivas (the living entities) are eternalThis happens when we don't think deeply but directly interpret literally. :)

" Jivabhutah are my eternal ansha " - There's only one way to interpret this. Because if we interpret it as Jiva are eternal, then it contradicts to the Uddhava Gita wherein it is said that jiva merges in Brahman or Jiva becomes Brahman. So it'll be foolish to consider jivas are eternal. The correct meaning of that shloka is as below :

" First thing why krishna calls jiva as Ansha. Jiva is called as Ansha because it appears as surrounded by subtle body - Mind, intellect and Prana , which are smaller than the smallest. These Mind, intellect and prana are Sukshma tattva - atomic in size and appears as a part of complete Brahman. That's the reason why Jiva is imagined as Ansha but in reality he is of the nature of Barhman. Ansha doesn't mean that jiva is really a part of Barhman/Krishna. You forget that you are assuming part of the infinite, which is not ever possible. Part of the infinite is never possible. Moreover your part concept also contradicts with ekamevadvitiya Brahman or absolute brahman. So having no doubts, here jiva is certainly imagined as amsha according to the nature of Mind, intellect and Prana. " mam eva ansho " - Here eva (I'm only) is stressed implying that krishna is in the form of Jiva. This interpretation is greatly supported by Bahgavad Gita 10.20 " Aham atma sarvabhutashaysthitah - I'm Atma of all Jivas " So it's very clear that Jiva(false self) is not eternal. Atma/Barhman is eternal. :) Jiva is imagined as the amsha but not the infinite Atma.


See how BBT vaishnava translator translated this verse (http://vedabase.net/sb/11/25/35/en) :


"Then, being fixed in devotional service, the sage should also conquer the material mode of goodness by indifference toward the modes. Thus pacified within his mind, the spirit soul, freed from the modes of nature, gives up the very cause of his conditioned life and attains Me."It seems your source has somewhat biased translation.

सम्पद्यते गुणैर्मुक्तो जीवो जीवं विहाय माम् ॥ ३५ ॥

: Jiva having been free from his jivahood unites with me.

सम्पद्यते- Unites | गुणैर्मुक्तो- having been free from Guna | जीवो- jiva | जीवं विहाय-Giving up Jivahood ( individual existence of atma/Barhman caused by mind, intellect and prana. This defination of Jiva is already stated by krishna before )


जीवो जीवविनिर्मुक्तो गुणैश्चाशयसम्भवैः ।
मयैव ब्रह्मणा पूर्णो न बहिर्नान्तरश्चरेत् ॥ ३६ ॥

: Thus dropping the Jivahood caused by gunas, jiva becomes complete brahman exactly as I'm. Thereafter he doesn't move either in himself or outside.

जीवो- Jiva | गुणैश्चाशयसम्भवैः- caused by the effects of gunas | जीवविनिर्मुक्तो - escaped from Jivahood | मयैव- exactly like me | ब्रह्मणा पूर्णो - complete Barhman | न बहिर्नान्तरश्चरेत् - doesn not move either in in himself or outside


Now, about Bhagavatam 12.5.11:
" You are That Brahman. You are that Supreme Absolute abode .. You should always meditate like this. Thus you'll surely know your Infinite Self " ( BP 12.5.11 )

It says "always meditate like this", it is a type of meditation only.
Error 404 : meaningless comment found. You can't comment. :)

." Dear Parikshita , " Self is that Brahaman. Self is that supreme absolute abode", thus/so you should fix your self in an undivided Atma ( having no duality) " Bhagavata 12.5.11

Before this verse, Shuka declares that the Jiva becomes Brahman. He's trying to say that this Jiva itself is Brahman. So thus by seeing yourself as that Brahman or that absolute supreme abode, you should fix your self in an undivided Atma/Brahman. You should think the self as what it is in reality. This is the way to escape from the dream. Because logically by constant contemplating on the self as Brahman, jiva can quickly realizes himself as Brahman. This is the meaning. So no need to apply absurd tricks to down the real meaning. You are just trying to trick me in just words. Because it seems that you've no answer for that shloka.

घटे भिन्ने घटाकाश आकाशः स्याद् यथा पुरा ।
एवं देहे मृते जीवो ब्रह्म सम्पद्यते पुनः ॥ 12.5.५ ॥

: Even as the appeared different space enclosed in the pot becomes complete Akasha after breaking of that pot, in the same way, when subtle body dies, jeeva becomes Brahman again [ Here "again" implies that he was already Brahman. His jivahood was because of maya only but not in the real sense. This concept is explained by Adi shankara in his upanishada Bhashya]

The example of becoming of enclosed space into complete akasha clearly explains how the Jiva becomes brahman dropping his jivahood( false individual existence).

[caitanya]

Pranams ,

I have another verse from Srimad Bhagwatam that IMHO inclines more towards Advaita . Here it is :

yo vai (http://vedabase.net/v/vai) mad-bhāvam (http://vedabase.net/b/bhavam) āpanna (http://vedabase.net/a/apanna)
īśitur vaśituḥ (http://vedabase.net/v/vasituh) pumān (http://vedabase.net/p/puman)
kutaścin na (http://vedabase.net/n/na) vihanyeta (http://vedabase.net/v/vihanyeta)
tasya (http://vedabase.net/t/tasya) cājñā yathā (http://vedabase.net/y/yatha) mama
(http://vedabase.net/m/mama)


A person who perfectly meditates on Me acquires My nature of being the supreme ruler and controller. His order, like Mine, can never be frustrated by any means. (SB 11.15.27)

If there is only one supreme ruler and controller , Lord Krishna . Then how can there be another supreme controller . There can be only one SUPREME . This implies identity of Jiva and Brahman or Jiva is Shiva .

Please correct me if I am wrong .

Jai Shri Krishna .

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste


This happens when we don't think deeply but directly interpret literally.
... So it'll be foolish to consider jivas are eternal.

Many times so far I've seen that people do not want to accept the literal statement handed down by the verse because it does not fit their philosophy. That's what you're doing right now. :D
Why do not you tell the Lord: "My dear Lord, you have not thinking deeply" and "My dear Lord you said something foolish". :)


... That's the reason why Jiva is imagined as Ansha but in reality he is of the nature of Barhman.

Yes, jiva is of the nature of Brahman.


Ansha doesn't mean that jiva is really a part of Barhman/Krishna. You forget that you are assuming part of the infinite, which is not ever possible. Part of the infinite is never possible.

Yes, jiva really is a part of Brahman (Lord Krishna), and it is a very small part of Brahman, atomic in size, and is Brahman but it is atomic in size.
Yes, a part of the infinite is possible, because it is exactly what says Bhagavad gita 15.7 (http://vedabase.net/bg/15/7/en) :


"The living entities in this conditioned world are My eternal fragmental parts."


Moreover your part concept also contradicts with ekamevadvitiya Brahman or absolute brahman. So having no doubts, here jiva is certainly imagined as amsha according to the nature of Mind, intellect and Prana.

No, the contradiction is only in your mind, my dear, and it's happening to you because you do not understand Lord Krishna's words.
Jiva as a part of Brahman (aḿśa) is not imagined, but is real!
Jiva is real and eternal part of Brahman (Lord Krishna): mamaivāḿśo jīva-loke jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ (Bhagavad gita 15.7).


Bahgavad Gita 10.20 " Aham atma sarvabhutashaysthitah - I'm Atma of all Jivas "

Of course Lord Krishna is Atma of all the Jivas, but He is the other Atma called Paramatma (Supersoul). In every living being there are two souls (two atmas):
1) individual soul called jiva or jiva-atma (jiva soul)
and also
2) the Lord in the form of the Supersoul called Paramatma

So, Bhagavad gita 10.20 speaks about Paramatma.


So it's very clear that Jiva(false self) is not eternal. Atma/Barhman is eternal.

I really do not know what you think is clear, but I just see the confusion in your viewpoint.
Jiva soul is eternal part of Brahman and thus is real as much as Brahman is real. So jiva is not false self, but is eternal and real part of Brahman (Lord Krishna).
Jiva is real self, and will never cease to exist because it is eternal self (sanātanaḥ -- "eternal", Bhagavad gita 15.7).


It seems your source has somewhat biased translation.

सम्पद्यते गुणैर्मुक्तो जीवो जीवं विहाय माम् ॥ ३५ ॥

: Jiva having been free from his jivahood unites with me.

सम्पद्यते- Unites | गुणैर्मुक्तो- having been free from Guna | जीवो- jiva | जीवं विहाय-Giving up Jivahood ( individual existence of atma/Barhman caused by mind, intellect and prana.

My two punch lines:
1. This "जीवं विहाय-Giving up Jivahood" in Bhagavatam 11.25.35 jīvaḿ vihāya is not translated as "Giving up Jivahood" because it would be contradictory to jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ (Bhagavad gita 15.7). That's what I explained in my previous post.

2. This idea of yours "individual existence of atma/Barhman caused by mind, intellect and prana." is not true!
Individual existence of the jiva soul is not caused because individual existence of the jiva soul exists forever!!! Jiva was never created and will never cease to exist, will not be destroyed. :) That is the meaning of the word sanātanaḥ "eternal", Bhagavad gita 15.7.
Even when jiva soul get rid of mind, intellect and prana, this jiva soul will continue to exist as an liberated soul (mukta soul, achieved mukti), individual liberated jiva forever in Vaikuntha, the world of Brahman -- world of Lord Vishnu, the world of immortality.

See, how many times I have to quote one and the same verse again and again (jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ, Bhagavad gita 15.7), and none of this is clear to you.


Error 404 : meaningless comment found.

There is no error here. This is just one type of meditation. It says "You should always meditate like this".
There are many types of meditation recommended in the scriptures.


घटे भिन्ने घटाकाश आकाशः स्याद् यथा पुरा ।
एवं देहे मृते जीवो ब्रह्म सम्पद्यते पुनः ॥ 12.5.५ ॥

: Even as the appeared different space enclosed in the pot becomes complete Akasha after breaking of that pot, in the same way, when subtle body dies, jeeva becomes Brahman again [ Here "again" implies that he was already Brahman. His jivahood was because of maya only but not in the real sense. This concept is explained by Adi shankara in his upanishada Bhashya]

The example of becoming of enclosed space into complete akasha clearly explains how the Jiva becomes brahman dropping his jivahood( false individual existence).

This verse in the Bhagavatam 12.5.5 is translated differently by the BBT translator:
http://vedabase.net/sb/12/5/5/en


"When a pot is broken, the portion of sky within the pot remains as the element sky, just as before. In the same way, when the gross and subtle bodies die, the living entity within resumes his spiritual identity."

This verse just speaks that the soul attains liberation (mukti) when is released from the subtle material body (mind, intelligence, false ego, material senses and prana), and thus recovers its status as a pure soul.
Jivahood (jiva status of existence) of the jiva soul was not because of maya (illusion), but is eternal property of the jiva soul as a particle of Brahman:


mamaivāḿśo jīva-loke
jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ

"The living entities in this conditioned world are My eternal fragmental parts." (Bhagavad gita 15.7)


regards

[hinduism♥krishna]

Pranam Bandhu... Note to Mods : My views are from Advaitian Vaishnawism. I hope it'll be fine to post my views. Because I'm too Vaishnawa. :)


Namaste

Many times so far I've seen that people do not want to accept the literal statement handed down by the verse because it does not fit their philosophy. That's what you're doing right now. :D
As far as your translations are concerned, you're trying to defend your philosophy which I think is contradicting with Bhagavata Purana. :)


Yes, jiva really is a part of Brahman (Lord Krishna), and it is a very small part of Brahman, atomic in size, and is Brahman but it is atomic in size.
Yes, a part of the infinite is possible, because it is exactly what says Bhagavad gita 15.7 (http://vedabase.net/bg/15/7/en) :


"The living entities in this conditioned world are My eternal fragmental parts."
I've already told you that there's difference between Jiva and Atma. Jiva is the mixture of mind, intellect and prana and as these material things are atomic in size, jiva is called as amsha. It is nowhere said that Atma is amsha. Scriptures state that jiva is amsha but Jiva's original self atma is Brahman alone. " Aham brahmasmi " " Tat twam asi" " Atmaiva idam sarvam " Such thousands of shruti and smruti shlokas are standing to posit the real self of jiva is Brahman.



Of course Lord Krishna is Atma of all the Jivas, but He is the other Atma called Paramatma (Supersoul). In every living being there are two souls (two atmas):
1) individual soul called jiva or jiva-atma (jiva soul)
and also
2) the Lord in the form of the Supersoul called ParamatmaFirst time I've seen such belief - Two souls in one Body. Better you should give clear support from Bhagavata Purana. But please don't give that two birds analogy. Apart from this if you've anything you can post your references here. I'd like to know them.


I really do not know what you think is clear, but I just see the confusion in your viewpoint.
Jiva soul is eternal part of Brahman and thus is real as much as Brahman is real. So jiva is not false self, but is eternal and real part of Brahman (Lord Krishna).
Jiva is real self, and will never cease to exist because it is eternal self (sanātanaḥ -- "eternal", Bhagavad gita 15.7).

This idea of yours "individual existence of atma/Barhman caused by mind, intellect and prana." is not true!

Jiva is false self, this is supported by many shlokas of Bhagavata Purana and yes if you have read any unbiased non-sectarian Bhagavata Purana. Atma or Barhman is called as Jiva when he appears in Mind, intellect and prana which is collectively called as Suksha Sharira. From this Suksha sharira, Sthula sharira gets formed.

Read what is Jiva, the definations of Jiva based on Bhagavata Purana:

“dehendriya pranamayo…..adhavati kalatantrah “ (BP 11.28.16)

Meaning:

The spirit hidden behind the body, the senses, the vital airs and the mind and identifying itself with them is called the Jeeva. The subtle body constituted of the Gunas and karmas is its material manifestation and is variously known as the Sootrama or the Mahat-Tattwa and controlled by God in the form of the Time-spirit) it revolves in Sansara. (World)

“satwam rajastam……tayoho param yat “(BP 11.3.37)

Meaning:

That which was one before creation became known as Pradhana (or Prakriti) of triple nature, consisting of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. Then by its active power it became as the Sutratma and by its power of understanding it became known as Mahat Principle. Again as a condition investing the Jeeva or individual soul, it became known as Ahankara (the ego). The incomprehensible Brahman alone shines as deities presiding over the senses and their objects and the pain pleasure experience. The effect and the cause – are all Brahman only, because it is cause of both.

“avam vimrushya….makhilasanshayadhim “ (BP 11.13.23)

Meaning: You should think like this and arrive at the conclusion about the nature of the self that the three states of mind born out of three Gunas are falsely superimposed on Me as the Jeeva, by my delusive Power (Maya) and should cut at the root of egoism, the basis of all doubts, with the sword of Wisdom fortified by reasoning, the precepts of saints and the texts of Shruti
(Upanishads), and join in the Unity with Me seated in your heart.



See, how many times I have to quote one and the same verse again and again (jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ, Bhagavad gita 15.7), and none of this is clear to you. I've already told you why only Jiva is called as Amsha and why not Atma.



There is no error here. This is just one type of meditation. It says "You should always meditate like this".
There are many types of meditation recommended in the scriptures.
Clearly speaking ,this quote seems childish which is completely illogical and I think you just want to defend and for that you want to say something even if it is absurd. So I wouldn't comment on this. .



This verse in the Bhagavatam 12.5.5 is translated differently by the BBT translator:
http://vedabase.net/sb/12/5/5/en


"When a pot is broken, the portion of sky within the pot remains as the element sky, just as before. In the same way, when the gross and subtle bodies die, the living entity within resumes his spiritual identity."Again trying to defend the philosophy by intentionally creating non-existent confusions . All know BBT translation is the translation done by Gaudiya Vaishnawism. I've personally studied their translations but honestly didn't find them authentic and honest. The unbiased translation I've given:

घटे भिन्ने घटाकाश आकाशः स्याद् यथा पुरा ।
एवं देहे मृते जीवो ब्रह्म सम्पद्यते पुनः ॥ 12.5.५ ॥

: Even as the appeared different space enclosed in the pot becomes complete Akasha after breaking of that pot, in the same way, when subtle body dies, jeeva becomes Brahman again [ Here "again" implies that he was already Brahman. His jivahood was because of maya only but not in the real sense. This concept is explained by Adi shankara in his upanishada Bhashya]


In that verse, There's no sanskrit word equivalent to "Spiritual Identity". There's Brahman word - Jiva becomes Brahman is the meaning of जीवो ब्रह्म सम्पद्यते पुनः . By seeing this, you are trying badly to defend. I said badly because the example of becoming of individual sky into complete sky is totally irrelevant to the "getting spiritual identity"

I guess even a school kid too can understand the meaning of that. In that verse, the example of pot is used to clarify how jiva(individual false self) becomes Brahman( complete true infinite self).

In that verse,
घटाकाश is equivalent to जीवो ( enclosed space within pot mean enclosed jiva within the pot of subtle body ie mind, intellect and prana)

आकाशः is equivalent to ब्रह्म ( The complete space which is already covering in the pot. When the pot gets broken means when the body dies, the appeared space becomes complete space means the appeared jiva becomes complete Brahman. Punah-Again is mentioned to show that as the individual sky seems seperate from Brahman but in reality it is complete sky only. That individual sky was already complete akasha, in the same way jiva was already brahman. The individuality of brahman appears due to maya. Because knowledge and ignorance have appearance due to the Maya. But Atma is always aloof from Bondage and Moksha. But Ignorant persons impose the dirt of the sky to the Pure sky. Because They're completely unaware of what is Atma. )



This verse just speaks that the soul attains liberation (mukti) when is released from the subtle material body (mind, intelligence, false ego, material senses and prana), And besides the verse uses additional example of pot and sky to show how jiva becomes Brahma :D

[caitanya]

Pranams ,


There is one more verse in Bhagvatam that IMHO inclines towards Advaita . Here it is :

yo vai (http://vedabase.net/v/vai) mad-bhāvam (http://vedabase.net/b/bhavam) āpanna (http://vedabase.net/a/apanna)
īśitur vaśituḥ (http://vedabase.net/v/vasituh) pumān (http://vedabase.net/p/puman)
kutaścin na (http://vedabase.net/n/na) vihanyeta (http://vedabase.net/v/vihanyeta)
tasya (http://vedabase.net/t/tasya) cāj�ā yathā (http://vedabase.net/y/yatha) mama (http://vedabase.net/m/mama)


A person who perfectly meditates on Me acquires My nature of being the supreme ruler and controller. His order, like Mine, can never be frustrated by any means. (SB 11.15.27)


If there is only one Supreme , Lord Krishna , then how can be another Supreme as well. This implies the identity of Jiva and Brahman . Please Share your views .




Jai Shree Krishna .

[hinduism♥krishna]

Pranam Chaitanya :) Welcome !



Pranams ,
There is one more verse in Bhagvatam that IMHO inclines towards Advaita .

;) We vaishnawas can show thousands of verses showing the unity of Atma & Brahma.


yo vai (http://vedabase.net/v/vai) mad-bhāvam (http://vedabase.net/b/bhavam) āpanna (http://vedabase.net/a/apanna)
īśitur vaśituḥ (http://vedabase.net/v/vasituh) pumān (http://vedabase.net/p/puman)
kutaścin na (http://vedabase.net/n/na) vihanyeta (http://vedabase.net/v/vihanyeta)
tasya (http://vedabase.net/t/tasya) cāj�ā yathā (http://vedabase.net/y/yatha) mama (http://vedabase.net/m/mama)

A person who perfectly meditates on Me acquires My nature of being the supreme ruler and controller. His order, like Mine, can never be frustrated by any means. (SB 11.15.27)
I think here shri krushna is talking about Various siddhis. The general idea behind siddhis is that whoever meditates on saguna rupa of krishna becomes supreme controller exactly like how krishna is.

Your above verse is talking about two siddhis. In fact both are one. One is Ishitu and other is vashitu. Ishitu means who can rule everything and Vashitu means who can control everything. When one acquires these both, his orders become orders of krishna himself. NO ONE can disobey them. In short, whoever meditates on saguna form gains the nature of krishna. He becomes identical to krishna. But such siddhis are barrier for attainment of nirguna brahman. So there krishna instructs that when one acquires such siddhis, one should not hold pride over them and should not give up meditating on my nirguna nature of Brahman. Who meditates in such way, actually merges in Brahman like an individual light in the fire. “ avam samahit……..jyotishi sanyutam “ (BP 11.14.45)

Meaning: With his intellect thus established, he sees me in himself and himself actually merged in me (bramhan) like an individual light in the element of fire. :) ,In the end after describing all siddhis, krishna says this verse :

अहं आत्मा आंतरः बाह्यः अनावृतः सर्वदेहिनाम् ।
यथा भूतानि भूतेषु बहिरंतः स्वयं तथा ॥ ३६ ॥

: I alone is the Atma of all jivas, who's Anavrutah and situating inner and outer side of Jivas , like all panchbhutas are present everywhere in the body and out of the body.

In short, Just as a pot is in the space and the space is both inside and outside of that pot, similarly Brahman is fully occupying the inner and the outer aspect of everything and that what has adhishtan everywhere is Atma or Brahman.



If there is only one Supreme , Lord Krishna , then how can be another Supreme as well. This implies the identity of Jiva and Brahman . Please Share your views .
I wanna say only one thing. The reality is one and whatever is beyond maya is indeed supreme. " Brahman alone is the truth " So both jiva and Brahman can not be true simultaneously as there's only one truth. Strictly, only one of them should be true true and another should be an superimposition over other ie over the true thing. If we consider jiva as eternal and reality, then brahman becomes a false thing as it subjects to change and duality. And for sure, as far as scripture's authority is concerned, jiva no doubt merges in Brahman or becomes Brahman or acquires his true self which is none other than Brahman.

[hinduism♥krishna]

Pranam Brahma Jijnyasa . [ Check 39th post to know what's jiva according to Bhagavata Purana ]



This "जीवं विहाय-Giving up Jivahood" in Bhagavatam 11.25.35 jīvaḿ vihāya is not translated as "Giving up Jivahood" because it would be contradictory to jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ (Bhagavad gita 15.7). That's what I explained in my previous post.
Why I shouldn't consider this a tactic? Now I feel pity about myself. I'd have to prove Jivam as Jiva and Brahma as Brahma. :D

Whether anything is contradictory or not, is the matter of deep thinking. You should look at the BG 2.24 itself to know how you're contradicting yourself. Shri Krishna clearly describes what's Atma - " नित्यः सर्वगतः " BG 2.24 . Here it is stated that Atma is omnipresent, which refutes the atomic size of atma and confirms that jiva is not true self. However it should be noted that this doesn't contradict with " Jiva is amsha ". Because In BG 3.42, Atma is clearly distinguished from Jiva which is the mixture of mind, intellect and prana according to Bhagavata Purana. " इन्द्रियाणि पराणि आहुः इन्द्रियेभ्यः परं मनः मनस्तु परा बुद्धिर्यो बुद्धेः परतस्तु सः " - " Atma is beyond senses, mind and intellect ." In short, Atma has two self ( two birds ) in the body (tree). One is imagined self ( Jiva) and another is true self ( Atma ) and that Moksha is nothing but the identifying Atma as the self and discarding Jivahood. If if you are thinking why Krishna calls Jiva as sanatana, then my answer is that Jiva is eternal at vyavaharik level. This world appears as eternal and unending. So logically it becomes that moksha is not attainable for jivas. Because this wordly existence is beginning less . The logic states that whichever has not beginning can not have an end too. So So jiva too can not escape from eternal wordly existence. Krishna is comparing that worldy existence to an eternal tree whose roots are upwards. There he states that this tree ( worldy existence ) is an eternal and has no beginning nor have an end. He instructs that there's only one way- to cut that tree by the knowledge of self, otherwse Jiva is surely considered to be eternal. It means , in vyavaharik plane, Jiva is no doubt eternal and as what causes jivahood (Suksha sharira- mind, intellect and prana) are Atomic in size, generally jiva is called as Amsha of Purusha ( Brahman living as the soul of world or body is called as Purusha ). However one should not do a mistake to call Atma as Amsha. Because Atma is indeed Brahman. "|| Aham Brahma Asmi ||"

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste

As far as your translations are concerned, you're trying to defend your philosophy which I think is contradicting with Bhagavata Purana.

My philosophy is Bhagavata Purana. Your philosophy is something that is not Bhagavata Purana. :)


First time I've seen such belief - Two souls in one Body. Better you should give clear support from Bhagavata Purana. But please don't give that two birds analogy.

There's nothing wrong with two birds analogy that we read in the Upanishads and Bhagavatam.


Jiva is false self, this is supported by many shlokas of Bhagavata Purana and yes if you have read any unbiased non-sectarian Bhagavata Purana. Atma or Barhman is called as Jiva when he appears in Mind, intellect and prana which is collectively called as Suksha Sharira. From this Suksha sharira, Sthula sharira gets formed.

If we assume that your theory is correct that "Jiva is false self", then when Lord Krishna said in the Bhagavad gita 15.7: jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ, it would then actually meant that He said "Jiva, which is false self, is eternal". :D
Thus Lord Krishna according to your theory would have been said that every one of us will remain as false self in the future eternally, and so no one will ever be able to attain liberation (mukti)!!!

Not only that, but it would also mean that liberated jivas (mukta souls) in Vaikuntha are liberated individuals who are false selves! :D
This is the greatest nonsense that I have heard in my life.
The state of liberation (mukti) in Vaikuntha is the state where there is no falsity or illusion (maya)!!! There is no state of liberation (mukti) in which falsity or illusion (maya) exists! There are several types of mukti such as salokya and sarupya, etc., and each of them is true mukti. There is no falsity or illusion (maya) in the state of mukti.


घटे भिन्ने घटाकाश आकाशः स्याद् यथा पुरा ।
एवं देहे मृते जीवो ब्रह्म सम्पद्यते पुनः ॥ 12.5.५ ॥

: Even as the appeared different space enclosed in the pot becomes complete Akasha after breaking of that pot, in the same way, when subtle body dies, jeeva becomes Brahman again [ Here "again" implies that he was already Brahman. His jivahood was because of maya only but not in the real sense. This concept is explained by Adi shankara in his upanishada Bhashya]

In that verse, There's no sanskrit word equivalent to "Spiritual Identity". There's Brahman word - Jiva becomes Brahman is the meaning of जीवो ब्रह्म सम्पद्यते पुनः . By seeing this, you are trying badly to defend. I said badly because the example of becoming of individual sky into complete sky is totally irrelevant to the "getting spiritual identity"

Now again about Bhagavatam 12.5.5 (http://vedabase.net/sb/12/5/5/en) :

Yes, there is a word in this verse equivalent to "Spiritual Identity". That is word brahma "his spiritual status", and thus जीवो ब्रह्म सम्पद्यते पुनः jīvo brahma sampadyate punaḥ is translated as "jiva (the living entity) attains his spiritual status once again".
Word brahma has several different applications in the scriptures. It is not that brahma always means "Supreme", ie Brahman. Many things can be called "brahma".
There is nothing "trying badly to defend" here. In this material world every jiva lives in the material body with mind, Pranas, material senses, etc. Therefore a jiva is described as trapped in the vessel. When get rid of the body, he reaches liberation (mukti). It's like to get rid of the vessel and is to regain his own spiritual status of pure soul liberated from the material influence and material body.


Your next post:


Atma is beyond senses, mind and intellect ." In short, Atma has two self ( two birds ) in the body (tree). One is imagined self ( Jiva) and another is true self ( Atma ) and that Moksha is nothing but the identifying Atma as the self and discarding Jivahood.

As I have said many times so far jiva is not imagined self but is true, real and eternal individual self which remains to be true, real and eternal even in the state of mukti!!!
So there is no discarding of Jivahood. This "discarding" will never happen: jīva-bhūtaḥ sanātanaḥ (Bhagavad gita 15.7), Jivahood exists eternally.
Jivas who are liberated in Vaikuntha are also proof of this.


If if you are thinking why Krishna calls Jiva as sanatana, then my answer is that Jiva is eternal at vyavaharik level.

Vaishnavas do not admit interpretation of the scriptures by the terms and ideas such as "vyavaharik" and the like.


regards

[Anirudh]

My philosophy is Bhagavata Purana. Your philosophy is something that is not Bhagavata Purana.
.
.
.
.
.


This is the greatest nonsense that I have heard in my life.


Namaste,

Sorry to step in... But couldn't be mute spectator to unwanted de railing...

When the OP has already abandoned the thread why struggling to educate someone who comes up strange views....

[Ram11]

Namaste Ji,

I haven't abandoned the thread.Learned members are expressing their opinions and I am reading those posts regularly.I am silent as I do not want to interrupt the ongoing discussion.:)

[Anirudh]

Namaste Ram,



I haven't abandoned the thread.


oh no... Sorry I woke you up... :)

Nevertheless.... discussion dragged me in because I found it as an endless argument between two different philosophical sect....

I ain't against the doctrines of Advaita but when it is forced into a discussion that doesn't have any room for it, I raised my views...

Also it confuses me to understand how Sita Maata can be any way different from an ordinary woman.... I went through the web site you had posted and found it unconvincing...

My wild guess is not many have complete understanding on all our scriptures and when folks argue to the tooth and nail it irks me.... Also it would take ages to understand what Sri Raamaanuja has preached...

[Ram11]

Nevertheless.... discussion dragged me in because I found it as an endless argument between two different philosophical sect....


Namaste Ji,

Edit: Deleted Closure Request

[IcyCosmic]

Namaste Admin Ji,

Please close this thread.



Regards,
:sleeping:

Namaste,
Must we? I'm watching over this thread with great attention to see if any conclusive statements are drawn. I always enjoy when thoughts are challenged.

[Believer]

Namaste,


I always enjoy when thoughts are challenged.
When personal opinions of different sects become the basis of a debate, there is no real service being done to the HDF community. It is meaningless, idle banter meant to sharpen one's debating skills. Having said that, I am not requesting a closure of this thread or any other threads. But without reading through the discussions or participating in them, the title of the thread sounds disrespectful and insulting. Small minds analyzing and declaring a Hindu concept to be doubtfull is a shameful state of mind.

Pranam.

[IcyCosmic]

Namaste,


When personal opinions of different sects become the basis of a debate, there is no real service being done to the HDF community. It is meaningless, idle banter meant to sharpen one's debating skills. Having said that, I am not requesting a closure of this thread or any other threads. But without reading through the discussions or participating in them, the title of the thread sounds disrespectful and insulting. Small minds analyzing and declaring a Hindu concept to be doubtfull is a shameful state of mind.

Pranam.

I thought similar which is why I don't want the thread to close without some resolution of some form, even if it doesn't change the individuals perspective, because others are bound to read this thread after it dies. Just how I see it. I don't agree with much in the thread at this point, but I am curiously spectating.

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste all

A few days ago I asked Satay to move the discussion between me and HLK to some other forum, eg Philosophy or similar.


regards

[Ram11]

Vishnu Sahasranama- Doubt Clarified

Namaste,

Firstly,I request members to forgive me if anyone was offended because of my questions.

Secondly,this is what I understand.

1.SVS is interpreted and used in different ways in different traditions.
2.Majority members are of the opinion that every person is eligible to chant SVS.
3.Some devotees consider it a mantra and chant it by performing Dhyana,Nyasa etc.This mantric method is allowed only for initiated devotees.
4.Most Sampradayas encourage women to can chant SVS.
5.As we have different Sampradayas,it is good to do things as suggested by one's own Guru/Sampradaya.Same thing applies for women.
6.According to some,SVS can be split into names and every devotee can chant Vishnu Sahasra Namavali irrespective of his/her Varna,caste,gender etc.

Shanti: (x3) _/\_

[brahma jijnasa]

Namaste

Vishnu Sahasranama- Doubt Clarified

Namaste,

Secondly,this is what I understand.

6.According to some,SVS can be split into names and every devotee can chant Vishnu Sahasra Namavali irrespective of his/her Varna,caste,gender etc.

Just one small observation:
Vishnu Sahasranama can not be split into names because Vishnu Sahasranama are names of Lord Vishnu! ;)


regards

[vishnupriya]

This is a video I made on VS.Please have a look and share your feedback.By the way, i'm a non-brahmin woman,been reciting the VS for nearly 3 years.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5t6AccXQLiA

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste


Just one small observation:
Vishnu Sahasranama can not be split into names because Vishnu Sahasranama are names of Lord Vishnu! ;)


regards

Pranam Brahma, yes, VS is the Nama Kirtana of supreme God Vishnu and who can stop them to chant their self's divine names? Indeed In this Kaliyuga, there's nothing other than chanting Vishnu names. It's my firm conviction that only Nama Japa is the giver of Moksha. Even Upanishads can not trace the superiority of Nama Japa. See how this is amazing! Even though this Nama Japa is the easiest way to achieve the final goal, it has become rare and the rare is that person who knows Mahatmya of Nama. :) Study of Veda is really meaningless who doesn't chant Hari Nama. "Always Bhaj Govindam"

I don't want to know anything but oh Bhagavan Krushna, when will that time come when you yourself will chant Hari Nama in my heart and I'll hear that calmly with devotion " :)

[caitanya]

Pranam Chaitanya :) Welcome !




;) We vaishnawas can show thousands of verses showing the unity of Atma & Brahma.

I think here shri krushna is talking about Various siddhis. The general idea behind siddhis is that whoever meditates on saguna rupa of krishna becomes supreme controller exactly like how krishna is.

Your above verse is talking about two siddhis. In fact both are one. One is Ishitu and other is vashitu. Ishitu means who can rule everything and Vashitu means who can control everything. When one acquires these both, his orders become orders of krishna himself. NO ONE can disobey them. In short, whoever meditates on saguna form gains the nature of krishna. He becomes identical to krishna. But such siddhis are barrier for attainment of nirguna brahman. So there krishna instructs that when one acquires such siddhis, one should not hold pride over them and should not give up meditating on my nirguna nature of Brahman. Who meditates in such way, actually merges in Brahman like an individual light in the fire. “ avam samahit……..jyotishi sanyutam “ (BP 11.14.45)

Meaning: With his intellect thus established, he sees me in himself and himself actually merged in me (bramhan) like an individual light in the element of fire. :) ,In the end after describing all siddhis, krishna says this verse :

अहं आत्मा आंतरः बाह्यः अनावृतः सर्वदेहिनाम् ।
यथा भूतानि भूतेषु बहिरंतः स्वयं तथा ॥ ३६ ॥

: I alone is the Atma of all jivas, who's Anavrutah and situating inner and outer side of Jivas , like all panchbhutas are present everywhere in the body and out of the body.

In short, Just as a pot is in the space and the space is both inside and outside of that pot, similarly Brahman is fully occupying the inner and the outer aspect of everything and that what has adhishtan everywhere is Atma or Brahman.


I wanna say only one thing. The reality is one and whatever is beyond maya is indeed supreme. " Brahman alone is the truth " So both jiva and Brahman can not be true simultaneously as there's only one truth. Strictly, only one of them should be true true and another should be an superimposition over other ie over the true thing. If we consider jiva as eternal and reality, then brahman becomes a false thing as it subjects to change and duality. And for sure, as far as scripture's authority is concerned, jiva no doubt merges in Brahman or becomes Brahman or acquires his true self which is none other than Brahman.
Thanks, Hinduism Krishna, for detailed views of yours .

Jai Shree Krishna

[Anirudh]

Namaste Ram,

Thanks for summing up, how ever, this thread has re ignited old never ending discussion on the laws governing the equality and its relevance to the present society.

My view is either the set of members who are advocating in favour of "the differences based on gender and varna etc" as dharmic should explain it clearly why they believe so to other members or should refrain from criticizing the questioner.

[satay]

Admin Note
Namaste,
This thread is under review.