PDA

View Full Version : Suitable Scripture



Soul of Light
19 May 2014, 10:00 AM
Namaste all!
I know this question may ask many time but I have to ask it for myself in detail
I am a devotee of Lord Shiva, and I have read only a Bhagavat geeta, I want to read more scriptures which will increase my devotion, knowledge and tell me what I have to do in this spiritual path..
So please tell me about, which scripture I have to prefer to read next.. Any suggestion is welcome althought I am a true devotee of lord shiva but I also like to chant names of lord vishnu or krishna, and I am pleased by their words, so please suggest any vaishnavism, shaivism scriptures or vedas which are best for me....
Thanking in advance...
Regards :)

hinduism♥krishna
21 May 2014, 04:02 AM
Namaste all!
I know this question may ask many time but I have to ask it for myself in detail
I am a devotee of Lord Shiva, and I have read only a Bhagavat geeta, I want to read more scriptures which will increase my devotion, knowledge and tell me what I have to do in this spiritual path..
So please tell me about, which scripture I have to prefer to read next.. Any suggestion is welcome althought I am a true devotee of lord shiva but I also like to chant names of lord vishnu or krishna, and I am pleased by their words, so please suggest any vaishnavism, shaivism scriptures or vedas which are best for me....
Thanking in advance...
Regards :)

Pranam SoulOfLight...

When someone asks such question to me, I point finger towards Bhagavata Purana, the greatest treasure of BrahmaVidya which is even superior than Bhagavad Gita. In this Kaliyuga, there's nothing great other than this Bhagavata Purana. It is stated that even by reading one shloka of this purana daily, one gets liberated in an eternal brahman after his death. In that Bhagavata Purana also, I highly recommend you to read "Uddhava Gita- Last discourse of shri krishna" which explains Bhagavad Gita clearly, which is complete in itself, which is the essence of all vedanta, there bhagavan krishna assures that whoever reads his conversation with uddhava comes to him for sure. So this is my kind request to you to read Uddhava Gita. Whoever reads it, doesn't remain hungry for knowledge. I say this because I have experienced this. Such a beautiful conversation between Uddhava and Krishna, I daily drink that nectar flowing through the mouth of krishna.

isavasya
21 May 2014, 06:53 AM
Namaskar

Read the Upanishads - they depict great philosophical wisdom. Read Shiva Sutras and other such texts which will teach you true nature of Shiva. One other text that I will advise is Ashtavakra Gita, though I have yet not completed it. If you want to read stories of Shiva then go for Shiva Puran or Vayu Puran. Reading stories after stories may be good for starting but ultimately we want to understand Shiva - the absolute consciousness which pervades everything. For that we need to read gems like Upanishads, Yoga Sutra and Shiva Sutra. Read the works and teachings of Sri Abhinavgupt, Sri Ramana mahasrhi, Sri Ramkrishna Paramhansa, Sri Aurobindo and other great gurus.

shantam, shivam, advaitam!

Eastern Mind
21 May 2014, 07:54 AM
Vannakkam: The Bhagavat Gita is the most well known Hindu scripture in the west, mainly due to the efforts of ISKCON. Ironically, it's not a Saiva scripture, strictly speaking. But it's still a beautiful book.

It really depends on what interests you. If you want advaita philosophy, read the Upanishads. If you want ethics, read the Tirukural. If you want to learn more from modern saints, read books like 'The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna' or works by Sivananda.

There are also lots of 'introduction to Hinduism' style books.

So the literature is vast. What interests you?

Aum Namasivaya

Kalicharan Tuvij
21 May 2014, 08:35 AM
Hinduism is diffiCult
:D:D

btw, it is better to have a copy (soft/ hard) of these:
Gita, Ramayana, Purana (Vishnu & Shiva), and some of the more modern efforts (imperfect nonetheless).

In addition, sound-bytes of:
hanumAn chAlisA, gAyatri mantra. (even better if equipped with some additional material as to how to offer simple puja in a temple)

I guess all of these, because you never know..

Soul of Light
21 May 2014, 02:42 PM
Namaste!
Thanx for posting replies, as already mention I had read a bhagavat gita. Yes it is very beautiful book EM..
Now im thinking to start with shiv sutra or bhagavatam and then other Upanishads...
Thanx!

ShivaFan
21 May 2014, 06:19 PM
Namaste Soul of Light

As Eastern Mind says, there are many scriptures including those he suggested.

If you are interested in Saivism, I might also suggest you explore Saiva Bhakti as well as Advaita. Some are not aware, but there is a very strong Bhakti movement centered on Murugan (Skanda) Who is the Son of the Cosmic Family of Shiva. It is a very beautiful devotion, you might start with the Skanda Purana if you wish to look into this. I would also recommend the Kashi Khanda section and learn more about Kashi (Varanasi, Banaras) India, the City Never Foresaken by Lord Shiva.

Om Namah Sivaya

Soul of Light
23 May 2014, 03:20 AM
Namaste Kalicharan Tuvij,
thanx for posting, I'll take care of it :D
hello ShivaFan,
I too don't know that Skanda purana is centered on the devotion of Kartikeya.. Thanx 4 ur knowledge, I'll search about shaiva bhakti on web..! :)
Pranam

IcyCosmic
23 May 2014, 04:55 AM
Namaste,

I would say the Himalayan Academy Publications (Dancing with Siva, Living with Siva, Merging with Siva). [These are not scriptures of course]

However, as previously mentioned I would surely attempt to attain the Upanishads, and the translation is up to your own discretion, but personally, I would propound Eaknath Easwaran's basic translation to start off with. It is very newbie-friendly and extremely well written and captivating.

Have a good day.

Amrut
23 May 2014, 07:19 AM
Namaste,

Just ot begin with, Reading Upanishads is not recomended. Please DO NOT read Ashtavakra Gita or Yoga VAsista.

I would prefer you to Read Shiva Purana and Linga Purana. they not only instil bhakti, but also grant knowledge.

Just like there is bhagavad gita, there is Shiva gita too. It is also an important text.

Shiva Sutras are heavily coded. Though you can understand apparent meaning, the real meaning is understood only in presence of a Guru.

When Yoga comes into picture, Guru is necessary. For bhakti, one can chant Gods name.

I would suggest you to read

Shiva Purana
Linga Purana
Shiva Gita
Stotras / devotional songs on Shiva - like Shiva Sahasranama, Shiva chalisa
Uddhava Gita as pointed by HLK is excellent.
Abhinavagupta, a great Shaiva bhakta has also commented on bhagavad Gita. If you have a liking towards yoga, then it is a good commentary.

Lal ded's poems are very good. they fill one with ecstasy. Lala Ded / Lalla Yogeshwari / Lalleshwari was a Shiva devotee like Meera bai was a Krishna devotee.

Sri rudram / Satrudriyam is an important vedic stotram in praise of Lord Shiva.

I think this is enough material to be immersed in Shiva :)

Yoga sutra start from duality and end in non-duality. Shiva Sutra's are of non-dual nature.

Also note that there are some who follow sampradAya like shaiva Siddhanta or Kashmir shaivism. then there are those who are shiva devotees but but not adhere to any sampradayas.

Please specify of you wish to follow any sampradaya or simply wish to increase shiva bhakti. From your post, I think you do not mind chanting Krishna / Vishnu's name.

btw, Madhurastakam, a hymn in praise of Krishna, composed by Vallabhacharya is very poetic and sweet to listen. you will be filled with bhakti.

Have a look at these links.

Shiva bhajans:
http://hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=11891
Vaishnav Bhajans
http://hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=12513

Hari OM

isavasya
23 May 2014, 08:04 AM
Namaste Amrut,

I can see your logic behind recommending Smritis. You assume that the person is not mature enough to handle dense non-dual philosophy to begin with. But I will like to say that Purans should not be read until at least grasping basics of Vedanta. Purans cannot be understood and should not be understood without understanding the Vedanta. Purans glorify 'particular' Devtas and if not read with open attitude they can instill false notions of supremacy of one devta or one philosophy. Sometimes people can misunderstand the hidden meaning of singing praise of a particular God (to instill devotion) and can resort into false beliefs like demi-gods etc. Purans also contain things which are not very useful in current society. This is not to say that Purans are useless but only that they should be read with caution. I have myself gained a lot from reading Purans but from my experience I can tell that I read them after reading the basics of Advaita and that helped me.

Though Soul of Light seems pretty mature from his post I will still like to say reading the basic message of Vedanta is important before reading particular God based texts. And when I recommend reading Upanishads I mean one should do so with accompanying commentary and not just direct translations of verses.

Amrut
23 May 2014, 09:07 AM
Namaste Amrut,

I can see your logic behind recommending Smritis. You assume that the person is not mature enough to handle dense non-dual philosophy to begin with.

<content clipped>

Though Soul of Light seems pretty mature from his post I will still like to say reading the basic message of Vedanta is important before reading particular God based texts. And when I recommend reading Upanishads I mean one should do so with accompanying commentary and not just direct translations of verses.

Namaste Isavasya,

You speak in opposite way. First Puranas and Itihas should be read. After that vedanta must be read.

Veda also mean vidyA i.e. knowledge. ved-anta (vedAnta) means end of vidya meaning 'where knowledge ends'. So after knowing essence of vedanta, nothing new needs to be known. Knowledge ends. Vedanta is the highest philosophical truth. Hence they must be read by those who are inwardly pure.

Being intelligent does not mean one is inwardly pure.

veda has two parts - karma kANDa nad karma tyAga (sanyAsa) --> GYAna marg

After one becomes inwardly pure by repeated practice of vedic karma kANDa, one is asked to leave the very karma (vedic karma) that gave him purity. Now it is time to dive deep within.

Puranas and itihasa where created so that all can reach highest adobe (know the truth), but in a easy way. There are mantras of different deities mentioned in puranas. These mantra-s can be chanted by all.

e.g. of OM Namah Shivaya is found in any purana, though it is a vedic mantra, this mantra can be changed by all.

Also note that chanting just one mantra is different from vedic chanting of the whole of vedic shakha like vAjasayeni of Sukla YV or SAkAla of RV

Puranas are not sectarian. They do not exclusively glorify one deity. Bhagavad Purana also glorifies lord shiva, Kurma Purana also glorifies both Vishnu and Shiva. Shiva purana also glorify Vishnu. Padma Purana also glorify Shiva and talks about holy places like Kasi.

According to Maharshi Suta, all the Puranas are nothing but the mediums through which Sri Hari manifests himself

एकं पुराण रुप वै तत्र पाद्मं परं महत् । ब्रह्मं मूर्धा हरेरेव ह्रदयं पद्मसंज्ञकम्॥
वैष्णवं दक्षिणो बाहुः शैव वामो महेशितुः । उरु भागवतं प्रोक्तं नाभिः स्यान्नारदीयकम्॥
मार्कण्डेयं च दक्षांग्रिर्वामो ह्याग्रेयमुच्यते । भविष्यं दक्षिणो जानुर्विष्णोरेव महात्मन: ॥
ब्रह्मवैवर्तसंज्ञं तु वामज्जानुस्नदाहृतः । लैऽगैं तु गुल्फकं दर्क्ष वाराहं वामगुल्फकम् ॥
स्कान्दं पुराण लोमानित्वगस्य वामनं स्मृतम् । कौर्म पृष्ठं समाख्यातं मात्स्यं मेदः प्रकी्र्तितम् ॥
मज्जा तु गारुडं प्रोक्तं ब्रह्माण्डमस्थि गीयते । एवमेवाभवद्विष्णुः पुराणाव्यवो हरिः ॥

पद्म पुराण, स्वर्ग खण्ड (६२।२-७)

Brahma Purana is said to be the 'forehead' of Sri Hari,
Padma Purana is said to be the 'heart' of Sri Hari,
Vishnu Purana is said to be the 'right arm' of Sri Hari.
Shiva Purana is said to be the 'left arm' of Sri Hari.
Srimad Bhagawat is said to be his 'thigh',
Narada Purana is said to be his 'navel',
Markendeya Purana is said to be his 'right-foot'.
Agni Purana is said to be his 'left foot',
Bhavishya Purana is said to be his 'right-knee',
Brahma Vaivrata Purana is said to be his 'left-knee'.
Linga Purana is said to be his 'right ankle',
Varaha Purana is said to be his 'left ankle',
Skanda Purana is said to be the hair on the body of 'Sri Hari'.
Vamana Purana is said to be his 'skin'.
Kurma Purana is said to be his 'back'.
Matsya Purana is said to be his 'stomach'.
Garuda Purana is said to be his 'bone-marrow'.
Brahmanda Purana is said to be his 'bone'.

Padma Purana, svarga khaNDa (62.2-7)

Note: These verses are found in both south Indian version with 5 khanda and bengali version with 7 khanda.

So, all the Puranas being manifestation of different parts of Sri Hari's body are very sacred and capable of bestowing salvation.

For a body to function properly, all parts are important.

Source: Padma Puarana, Swarga Khand, International Gita Society / sankshipta Padma Purana

According to Padma Purana, there was just one purana, which was split into 18 by Bhagavan Veda Vyasa.

Sampradayas give sectarian touch to these puranas and smriti-s and shruti-s. Puranas themselves do not say such a thing. Those verses in padma purnas which vaishnavas gladly adhere to to prove Vishnu supremacy are, IMO, interpolated. I have already given another classification above, which looks more apt.

Also note that no such classification is found either in mahabharata or in vedas. There is no such part in MBh or in vedas which is considered as tamasic, rajasik or sattvik. There are no upanishads which ar classified as sAttvik, rAjasik or tAmasik.


---

there are saint like GYAneSvara, TukAram, Meerabai, KalidAsa, pAnini, patanjalI, madhusudan sarasvatI, appaya dikSita, upniSad brahmendra, and even rAdhA rAnI, who has never ever denigrated status of any deity.

Even Lord rAma and kruShNa worshipped Shiva.

rAma worshipped Siva linga is mentioned in AdhyAtma rAmAyaNa. kruShNa taking paSupata dixA is mentioned in kurma purANa. kruShNa also tells Siva sahasranAma in Mahabharata. SIva is also seen naratting glories of rAma to pArvatI (forgot exact reference).

---

If you are talking about non-duality, then before reading Gita, one must first read basic texts called prakaraNa grantha-s like tatva bOdha, vivek chuDAmaNi, etc.

I understand that you got clarify an dopen mind by reading vedanta. Still I would not ask anyone to read vedanta and then read puranas.

If one can grasp what vedanta say, then there is no need to read even puranas, if you believe in advaita. All hat you need to do is mediate and establish yourself in SELF, i.e. know your true nature.

---

Hari OM

Eastern Mind
23 May 2014, 10:32 AM
Namaste Kalicharan Tuvij,
thanx for posting, I'll take care of it :D
hello ShivaFan,
I too don't know that Skanda purana is centered on the devotion of Kartikeya.. Thanx 4 ur knowledge, I'll search about shaiva bhakti on web..! :)
Pranam

Vannakkam: When you get so many opinions, it must be difficult to decide. Some say this, some say that. Of course most people will offer up what worked for them, occasionally not recognising or accepting that just because it worked for them doesn't mean it will work for everyone. So that leaves you with making the decision yourself. I hope, for your sake, your intuition guides you to the right scripture ... for you.

Aum Namasivaya

Soul of Light
23 May 2014, 01:02 PM
Thank you for posting your replies, you all have lots of knowledge...

Vannakkam: When you get so many opinions, it must be difficult to decide. Some say this, some say that. Of course most people will offer up what worked for them, occasionally not recognising or accepting that just because it worked for them doesn't mean it will work for everyone. So that leaves you with making the decision yourself. I hope, for your sake, your intuition guides you to the right scripture ... for you.

Aum Namasivaya
as EM sir says, it is too difficult to choice when you get lots of opinions, I am totally agree with this.. This replies gives me the knowledge about scripture which I don't even know before coming to this forum and their importance..
isavasya ji says read Vedanta and then purana and amrut ji says read purana and then vedanta
I have not any exeperience but from my view purana rises our devotion to god, and make us excited to know more about him..
While Vedanta gives us pure knowledge and explains everything...
I think god wish that isavasya ji read vedanta first and amrut ji read purana first
as Eastern mind ji says, my destiny and god's will lean me towards perfect scripture for me...
Everyone's spiritual path and destiny is different but most imp is destination which is that supreme soul.. I don't know what is the god's plan for me but I know he cares for all and thats why I am here, getting knowledge from all of you who are closer to destination than me, I don't know what will I read first but I know I will read all this scriptures
eigher I get knowledge from puranas or from Upanishads first is not so important than I will exeperience and get knowledge from both
again Thanks for posting
regards
Shivoham Shivoham Shivoham

isavasya
23 May 2014, 03:05 PM
Namaste Amrut

Veda also mean vidyA i.e. knowledge. ved-anta (vedAnta) means end of vidya meaning 'where knowledge ends'. So after knowing essence of vedanta, nothing new needs to be known. Knowledge ends. Vedanta is the highest philosophical truth. Hence they must be read by those who are inwardly pure.I cannot agree more that vedanta is end of knowledge. But there is difference between reading Upanishads and understanding their essence. Only a realised soul understands the essence of vedanta and only for that soul vedanta means end of knowledge. Very few people attempt to get liberated in present life itself. That would be followers of Gorakhnath Sampradaya. For the rest better karma and better understanding or gyan of atma is way to move forward. It takes birth after birth to achieve Moksha.

I definitely agree with you that our Purans are not sectarian but selective reading or biased reading generally makes them appear sectarian. In fact our Purans have lots of hidden meaning or purpose in detailing the stories. Many of these stories come directly from Vedas. For example, Bhagwan Shiva burning the Tripura or Bhagwan Vishnu measuring the entire world with 2 and half steps are derived directly from vedas. I only mean to say that understanding of basics of Vedanta can make one realise the intent of Puranic stories more easily than without having the knowledge of oneness of God-soul or Vedanta. Regarding karma kanda - Very small percentage of people really follow prescribed Vedic karma kanda. In this age people do not even perform sandhyavandanam regularly so it is rather difficult to find people getting pure for initiation to vedantic study after completing karma Kanda for a good amount of time. On the contrary reading Vedanta can give impetus to start following vedic life. Brother when I speak I speak after considering entire Hindu population. Many youngsters find Puranic stories unbelievable and lose interest in Dharma (the more urban the society- the more it is getting away from Dharma). But if you teach the outline of Advaita to these very youngsters they get convinced of deep teachings of our Dharma. After that they find sense in Puranic stories too.

Eastern Mind
23 May 2014, 06:16 PM
Many youngsters find Puranic stories unbelievable and lose interest in Dharma



Vannakkam: This has been my experience as well. I was at a temple recently where there was a grade 8 class on a field trip. The Hindu instructor ended her presentation with the story of Ganesha getting his head chopped off.

I saw lots of kids with a dumbfounded look: "What kind of religion is this?"

Aum Namasivaya

Amrut
24 May 2014, 02:05 AM
Namaste Isavasya and EM ji,

I understand what you say and in a way agree with you. Still, upanishads are end part and are to be learned later. Inner purity is a must, whether one has followed vedic karma kand or have purified himself through service and chanting God's name.

I know that puranic stories are at times difficult to digest.

See, if you read sahasranama, any hymn, glorification of Lord, then they are connected to a story. Stories are found in puranas and other folk tales.

The problem is that now-a-days, puranas are not told to us since our childhood.

So these days saints while explaining vedanta cover even prakaran granths and connect with stories from puranas. I also agree that after understanding vedanta, understanding puranas and finding them meaningful becomes easy. But then again, understanding vedanta is not child's play.

If you do not have inner purity, then you will not be able to apply teachings of vedanta in practical life. This is my personal experience.


But there is difference between reading Upanishads and understanding their essence. Only a realised soul understands the essence of vedanta and only for that soul vedanta means end of knowledge. Very few people attempt to get liberated in present life itself. That would be followers of Gorakhnath Sampradaya. For the rest better karma and better understandinSee if all could have understood the essence of upanishads by reading, then there would not have been qualifications to learn upanishads.

Realizing essence, AtmaGYAna is different. But there are certain class of seekers who are capable of understanding vedanta. They have lost interest in the world. We also have to accept that role of guru cannot be neglected. Simply picking up books and reading will not help you.

Even for reading prakarana granths one needs certain qualifications, which is nothing but inner purity.

You must have read many times statements such as, 'this is the most secret knowledge. I do not tell to all, but ...' Why these types of statements are said?

Vedanta does not talk (focus) how to live in practical life. They are more concerned towards Self Realization. to cover masses, there are smriti-s, like manu smriti, parASara smriti (considered to be followed in this age), but they are neglected. Vedanta does not teach how to do business and what should be done to offenders.

The problem is that, everyone wants a shortcut and no one wants to do sAdhanA. Everyone wants easy way.

If you do not wish to read purana-s, then I have mentioned other options like reading shiva gita an listening to stotras and sri rudram, etc.

If you have read puranas and or know certain stories and then when you read some hymn say hanuman chalisa, then the entire seen is built up in front of you. You find more bhava. these stories are found in puranas and itihasa. what if you have not read or know stories form ramayana or mahabharata.

Krishna says, leave everything and surrender unto me. Okay, bhagavAn has said that we should surrender. But how to surrender? How to generate bhAva for bhagavAn?

Here bhAgavat purANa comes into picture. Here there is life of krishna. By reading life of Krishna you may get emotionally attached to Krishna. There will be a certain bonding over a period of time. After emotional bonding then you listen to madhurastakam, you will feel joy and a certain type of attraction, that makes you interested in this song and you wish to keep listening to it. Earlier, you neglected the same song sung by same artist. Are you getting my point?

(Story of Krishna is also found in mahabharata and other puranas)

If you do not know who Rama was, then how will you generate bhAva for him. A simple statement that 'Surrender unto me' is not enough for you to successfully apply this verse in your life.

Similarly, if you know the life of Shiva, his compassion you will also enjoy bhajans composed for him, describing his divine acts, his compassion, his lordship, you will be filled with devotion.

Stories are important to get bonded with the supreme.

Stories, hymns, regular puja and home, all these go hand in had and sow seeds of divine quest in our hearts which transform into shoot and transform into big tree at appropriate time.

Naturally questions will be raised like EM ji pointed out. But there must be somebody who has answers to these questions. You should reach out to s/he to find solution.

Are you getting my point. Do you agree?

I understand that very few do veda parayana. but still the catch is that there has to be inner purity. Vedic karma kanda also brings inner purity. If you can gt inner purity by other means then still it is ok. There are saints who have not read any shastras, still they get divine guidance. Ultimately spiritual progress is important.

Many people go to temple. So, I think Vaishnav acharyas blended procedures of temple worship with vedanta. On the other hand, Shiva yogis, Shiva bhaktas took yogic / tantrik path. Yoga places no restrictions that women cannot practice, etc. It is open to all. So is tantra. But progress depends upon your practice and spiritual growth. After crossing a certain level and purifying yourself and nadi-s, you are taught next step. Nilkanthacharya blended Shaiva agamas with vedas and vedanta.

They did this to make things easy for us, laymen to cross the ocean of samsara in simplest possible way. One can select appropriate path according to inclination and mental make-up.

Hari OM

Sri Vaishnava
24 May 2014, 03:51 AM
Not that I write much anyway, but just one post to put a halt to this misinformation.


Namaste Isavasya,

Veda also mean vidyA i.e. knowledge. ved-anta (vedAnta) means end of vidya meaning 'where knowledge ends'.[/YOUTUBE]

There is no end to knowledge, which is the knowledge of Brahman's infinite attributes. Vedanta means the goal of knowledge and not the end of knowledge.


[QUOTE]E.g. of OM Namah Shivaya is found in any purana, though it is a vedic mantra, this mantra can be changed by all.

The panchAkSharI occurs in the vishNu sahasranAma, which is an ithihAsa and hence is addressed to vishNu as "Om ShivAya namaha". Furthermore, the same occurs without the praNava in the narasimha purAna as a praise of Narasimha by Rishi mArkandEya as follows:

prasIdAdhya mahAdEva prasIda mama kEshavaH: jaya kAla jayEshAna jaya sarva namOstutE|jaya shankara dEvEsha jaya shrIsha namOstutE jaya sarvagurO| jayE jaya shambhO namOstutE||lOkanAtha namOstutE vIrabhadra namOstutE| namas shivAya dEvAya namOstutE bhuvanEshwara||tvaM shivasa tvaM vasurdhAta tvaM brahma tvaM surEshvara: | tvaM yamasa tvaM ravirvAyur tvaM jalaM tvaM dhanEshwara nAthOsmI manasA nityaM nArAyaNamanAmayaM varadaM kAmadaM kAnthaManantaM sRnutaM shivam||


Meaning: Narasimha! Purify me, O great Lord for whom the devas are mere playthings (mahAdEva) and delight me with your auspicious attributes, O Master of Brahma and Rudra (kEshava). Salutations to the destroyer (kAla), to the controller of all (iShAna), to the supremely omniscient One who is the creator and destroyer of all (sarva). Salutations to One who provides bliss to his devotees (Shankara) as the Lord of his devotees (dEvEsha). Salutations to the Lord of SrI mahAlakshmi (shrIsha). Salutations to the best of teachers (sarvaguru). Salutations to One who is of the form of victory (jaya) and to the One who causes happiness by his beauty (Shambhu). Salutations to the Lord of the Vedas (lOkanAtha) and to One who possesses auspicious ability to change others while himself remaining unchanged (vIrabhadra) . Salutations to the conferrer of auspiciousness (shivAya), to the affectionate (dEvAya) and to the Lord of the worlds (bhuvanEshwara).

You are Shiva, You are Kashyapa, You are Brahma, You are Indra, You are Yama, You are Surya, You are vAyu, You are the waters, You are Kubera (ie, you have them as your body, yasya Atma sarIram). You are the ruler of my mind, which is always immersed in nArAyaNa, the bestower of desirable boons, that are of a nature of unbounded bliss, the destroyer of ignorance and of an auspicious nature.

Note: namas shivAya dEvAya is addressed to vishNu here.


Puranas are not sectarian. They do not exclusively glorify one deity.

The suddha sAttvika purAnAs (vishNu and bhAgavata) are sectarian and vaidika. The mishra sattva purAnAs like padma purana, etc, the rAjasa purAnas and the tAmasa purAnAs indeed glorify several other deities, including vishNu. The portions glorifying vishNu are miniscule sAttvik portions and accepted. Others are rejected.


Bhagavad Purana also glorifies lord shiva,

No, it doesn't according to Sridhara Swami, Veeraraghavacharya and Vijayadhwaja Tirtha. Only vishNu is praised. Read the link, we have already covered it:

http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/shiva-stuti-from-srimad-bhagavatam.html


Kurma Purana also glorifies both Vishnu and Shiva. Shiva purana also glorify Vishnu.

Precisely. Even in rAjasic and tAmasic as well as mishra sattva purAnAs supposedly glorifying other dieties, it is vishNu who is praised. And every acharya right down from Adi Shankara only quotes those vaiShNava sections of these purAnAs (Shankara and Bhattar quote from Linga Purana and SHiva Purana as well, but only the vishNu para portions).

The explanation is given here in detail: http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_9.html


Padma Purana also glorify Shiva and talks about holy places like Kasi.

Those are avaidika portions in a mishra sattva purAna


According to Maharshi Suta, all the Puranas are nothing but the mediums through which Sri Hari manifests himself

एकं पुराण रुप वै तत्र पाद्मं परं महत् । ब्रह्मं मूर्धा हरेरेव ह्रदयं पद्मसंज्ञकम्॥
वैष्णवं दक्षिणो बाहुः शैव वामो महेशितुः । उरु भागवतं प्रोक्तं नाभिः स्यान्नारदीयकम्॥
मार्कण्डेयं च दक्षांग्रिर्वामो ह्याग्रेयमुच्यते । भविष्यं दक्षिणो जानुर्विष्णोरेव महात्मन: ॥
ब्रह्मवैवर्तसंज्ञं तु वामज्जानुस्नदाहृतः । लैऽगैं तु गुल्फकं दर्क्ष वाराहं वामगुल्फकम् ॥
स्कान्दं पुराण लोमानित्वगस्य वामनं स्मृतम् । कौर्म पृष्ठं समाख्यातं मात्स्यं मेदः प्रकी्र्तितम् ॥
मज्जा तु गारुडं प्रोक्तं ब्रह्माण्डमस्थि गीयते । एवमेवाभवद्विष्णुः पुराणाव्यवो हरिः ॥

पद्म पुराण, स्वर्ग खण्ड (६२।२-७)

Brahma Purana is said to be the 'forehead' of Sri Hari,
Padma Purana is said to be the 'heart' of Sri Hari,
Vishnu Purana is said to be the 'right arm' of Sri Hari.
Shiva Purana is said to be the 'left arm' of Sri Hari.
Srimad Bhagawat is said to be his 'thigh',
Narada Purana is said to be his 'navel',
Markendeya Purana is said to be his 'right-foot'.
Agni Purana is said to be his 'left foot',
Bhavishya Purana is said to be his 'right-knee',
Brahma Vaivrata Purana is said to be his 'left-knee'.
Linga Purana is said to be his 'right ankle',
Varaha Purana is said to be his 'left ankle',
Skanda Purana is said to be the hair on the body of 'Sri Hari'.
Vamana Purana is said to be his 'skin'.
Kurma Purana is said to be his 'back'.
Matsya Purana is said to be his 'stomach'.
Garuda Purana is said to be his 'bone-marrow'.
Brahmanda Purana is said to be his 'bone'.

Padma Purana, svarga khaNDa (62.2-7)

Note: These verses are found in both south Indian version with 5 khanda and bengali version with 7 khanda.

Glad you pointed out this. Yes, it is indeed srIman nArAyaNa who is parabrahman.


So, all the Puranas being manifestation of different parts of Sri Hari's body are very sacred and capable of bestowing salvation.

Correction: Only sattvika purAnAs and the sAttvika content in rAjasa/tAmasa purAnas is capable of granting salvation. Just because everything is from srI hari doesn't mean everything is pavitram. This particular slOka is a mode of meditation, for it is indeed srI hari who propagates boudha sAstra, pAsupata sAstra and tAmasa purAnAs to delude those unworthy of knowing him.


For a body to function properly, all parts are important.

True. The tAmasa purAnAs ensure that the kudRshtIs are given a road to follow, upon which they will eventually learn from their respectie deities they worship that nArAyaNa alone is Parabrahman.



According to Padma Purana, there was just one purana, which was split into 18 by Bhagavan Veda Vyasa.

Indeed that is true. When the purAna was One, it was just One with sattvika, rajasa and tAmasa as well as mishra sattva portions. These were created into separat purAnAs by vyAsa for the sake of classification.


Sampradayas give sectarian touch to these puranas and smriti-s and shruti-s. Puranas themselves do not say such a thing. Those verses in padma purnas which vaishnavas gladly adhere to to prove Vishnu supremacy are, IMO, interpolated. I have already given another classification above, which looks more apt.

SrI rAmAnuja quotes the classification openly in his vedArtha sangraha. Certainly, you wouldn't dare to say that a 11th century AchArya quoted an interpolation. Besides, in the link I gave above, the classification stands proven.

As a further proof, here is our analysis of certain kUrma purAna vAkyas which show its tAmasic content:

http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/the-absurdity-of-shakta-interpretations.html

(NOTE: Just because its named after vishNu doesn't make it a sAttvika. The reason is only because kUrma avatara is described there.


Also note that no such classification is found either in mahabharata or in vedas. There is no such part in MBh or in vedas which is considered as tamasic, rajasik or sattvik. There are no upanishads which ar classified as sAttvik, rAjasik or tAmasik.


What relevance does that play. It is precisely because of this that all vaidikas follow the veda > ithihAsa > purAna ideology.




there are saint like GYAneSvara, TukAram, Meerabai, KalidAsa, pAnini, patanjalI, madhusudan sarasvatI, appaya dikSita, upniSad brahmendra, and even rAdhA rAnI, who has never ever denigrated status of any deity.

The words of bhaktas need to be assessed with shAstra. And appaya dIkshIta as well as upanishad brahmEndra's views have been defeated.

Madhusudhana Saraswati, Amalananda, SarvajnAtma Muni, Sridhara Swami, and Adi Shankara as well as his sishyas were vaishnavas only. Proof:

Refer the links: http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/2012/04/introduction-refutation-of-hari-hara.html
http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/2014/04/refutation-of-bodhendra-saraswatis.html
http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/2012/04/sarvajnatmans-sankshepa-shariraka-lucid.html

Note what SarvajnAtma Muni, an ancient advaitin who was a follower of Adi Shankara, says regarding Shiva in his refutation of the shaiva doctrine:

The Lord of sages such as kaNAda and akShapAda, who is inferred as the Lord by virtue of creatorship of earth and the rest of the universe according to their philosophy, who bears the bull as his flag, who is called Shankara (i.e., Shiva/Rudra), is excellent in his knowledge compared to us and in our opinion. However, he does not possess unbounded prowess, rulership, or knowledge. Hence, he cannot have established the connection between the words of the Veda and the sense/object conveyed by the words. The Purvapakshin replies as follows: ‘Then, as per your siddhAnta, by what reasoon is the omniscient Lord proven, and how does the connection between names and forms come from Him?’ The answer is that we only conclude all these things from the statements of the shruti, such as ‘yaH sarvaj~naH sarvavit’ and ‘satyaM j~nAnaM anantaM’”


So much for the theory. Note that Adi Shankara interprets both Dhananjaya and Shiva namas in the sahasranAma as "Arjuna and Shiva, who are vibhUtIs of vishNu". An explanation of Shankara's views and his sahasranAma bhAshya (parts of which are already on the blog), will be coming up shortly.


Even Lord rAma and kruShNa worshipped Shiva.

rAma never worshipped Shiva. Krishna worshipped the antaryAmin of Shiva. Refer to the following links for proof:

http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/prayers-of-sri-krishna-to-shiva.html


rAma worshipped Siva linga is mentioned in AdhyAtma rAmAyaNa. kruShNa taking paSupata dixA is mentioned in kurma purANa. kruShNa also tells Siva sahasranAma in Mahabharata.

AdhyAtma rAmAyaNa is not valid as a pramAna. Only vAlmiki rAmAyaNa is valid.

And Shiva SahasranAma is an interpolated section that has never been referred to by ancient vedANtins. Furthermore, it contradicts events in the mahAbhArata itself. In contrast, there are over 40 commentaries on the vishNu sahasranAma. Proof is here:

http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_17.html

The likes of Amrut will never learn, and it is a case of the blind misleading the blind. However, it is also true that the majority will hesitate to accept the truth. Follow your own path, stop spewing venom on true vaidikas like Adi Shankara, Ramanuja and Madhva who advocated only vaiShnava siddhAntha unnecessarily.

Omkara
24 May 2014, 10:18 AM
Posting this on behalf of the authors of Narayanastra Blog on their request



Namaste Isavasya,


Veda also mean vidyA i.e. knowledge. ved-anta (vedAnta) means end of vidya meaning 'where knowledge ends'.[/YOUTUBE]


There is no end to knowledge, which is the knowledge of Brahman's infinite attributes. Vedanta means the goal of knowledge and not the end of knowledge.




[quote]E.g. of OM Namah Shivaya is found in any purana, though it is a vedic mantra, this mantra can be changed by all.
The panchAkSharI occurs in the vishNu sahasranAma, which is an ithihAsa and hence is addressed to vishNu as "Om ShivAya namaha". Furthermore, the same occurs without the praNava in the narasimha purAna as a praise of Narasimha by Rishi mArkandEya as follows:


prasIdAdhya mahAdEva prasIda mama kEshavaH: jaya kAla jayEshAna jaya sarva namOstutE|jaya shankara dEvEsha jaya shrIsha namOstutE jaya sarvagurO| jayE jaya shambhO namOstutE||lOkanAtha namOstutE vIrabhadra namOstutE| namas shivAya dEvAya namOstutE bhuvanEshwara||tvaM shivasa tvaM vasurdhAta tvaM brahma tvaM surEshvara: | tvaM yamasa tvaM ravirvAyur tvaM jalaM tvaM dhanEshwara nAthOsmI manasA nityaM nArAyaNamanAmayaM varadaM kAmadaM kAnthaManantaM sRnutaM shivam||



Meaning: Narasimha! Purify me, O great Lord for whom the devas are mere playthings (mahAdEva) and delight me with your auspicious attributes, O Master of Brahma and Rudra (kEshava). Salutations to the destroyer (kAla), to the controller of all (iShAna), to the supremely omniscient One who is the creator and destroyer of all (sarva). Salutations to One who provides bliss to his devotees (Shankara) as the Lord of his devotees (dEvEsha). Salutations to the Lord of SrI mahAlakshmi (shrIsha). Salutations to the best of teachers (sarvaguru). Salutations to One who is of the form of victory (jaya) and to the One who causes happiness by his beauty (Shambhu). Salutations to the Lord of the Vedas (lOkanAtha) and to One who possesses auspicious ability to change others while himself remaining unchanged (vIrabhadra) . Salutations to the conferrer of auspiciousness (shivAya), to the affectionate (dEvAya) and to the Lord of the worlds (bhuvanEshwara).

You are Shiva, You are Kashyapa, You are Brahma, You are Indra, You are Yama, You are Surya, You are vAyu, You are the waters, You are Kubera (ie, you have them as your body, yasya Atma sarIram). You are the ruler of my mind, which is always immersed in nArAyaNa, the bestower of desirable boons, that are of a nature of unbounded bliss, the destroyer of ignorance and of an auspicious nature.


Note: namas shivAya dEvAya is addressed to vishNu here.



Puranas are not sectarian. They do not exclusively glorify one deity.
The suddha sAttvika purAnAs (vishNu and bhAgavata) are sectarian and vaidika. The mishra sattva purAnAs like padma purana, etc, the rAjasa purAnas and the tAmasa purAnAs indeed glorify several other deities, including vishNu. The portions glorifying vishNu are miniscule sAttvik portions and accepted. Others are rejected.



Bhagavad Purana also glorifies lord shiva,
No, it doesn't according to Sridhara Swami, Veeraraghavacharya and Vijayadhwaja Tirtha. Only vishNu is praised. Read the link, we have already covered it:


http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/shiva-stuti-from-srimad-bhagavatam.html



Kurma Purana also glorifies both Vishnu and Shiva. Shiva purana also glorify Vishnu.
Precisely. Even in rAjasic and tAmasic as well as mishra sattva purAnAs supposedly glorifying other dieties, it is vishNu who is praised. And every acharya right down from Adi Shankara only quotes those vaiShNava sections of these purAnAs (Shankara and Bhattar quote from Linga Purana and SHiva Purana as well, but only the vishNu para portions).


The explanation is given here in detail: http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_9.html



Padma Purana also glorify Shiva and talks about holy places like Kasi.
Those are avaidika portions in a mishra sattva purAna



According to Maharshi Suta, all the Puranas are nothing but the mediums through which Sri Hari manifests himself


एकं पुराण रुप वै तत्र पाद्मं परं महत् । ब्रह्मं मूर्धा हरेरेव ह्रदयं पद्मसंज्ञकम्॥
वैष्णवं दक्षिणो बाहुः शैव वामो महेशितुः । उरु भागवतं प्रोक्तं नाभिः स्यान्नारदीयकम्॥
मार्कण्डेयं च दक्षांग्रिर्वामो ह्याग्रेयमुच्यते । भविष्यं दक्षिणो जानुर्विष्णोरेव महात्मन: ॥
ब्रह्मवैवर्तसंज्ञं तु वामज्जानुस्नदाहृतः । लैऽगैं तु गुल्फकं दर्क्ष वाराहं वामगुल्फकम् ॥
स्कान्दं पुराण लोमानित्वगस्य वामनं स्मृतम् । कौर्म पृष्ठं समाख्यातं मात्स्यं मेदः प्रकी्र्तितम् ॥
मज्जा तु गारुडं प्रोक्तं ब्रह्माण्डमस्थि गीयते । एवमेवाभवद्विष्णुः पुराणाव्यवो हरिः ॥


पद्म पुराण, स्वर्ग खण्ड (६२।२-७)


Brahma Purana is said to be the 'forehead' of Sri Hari,
Padma Purana is said to be the 'heart' of Sri Hari,
Vishnu Purana is said to be the 'right arm' of Sri Hari.
Shiva Purana is said to be the 'left arm' of Sri Hari.
Srimad Bhagawat is said to be his 'thigh',
Narada Purana is said to be his 'navel',
Markendeya Purana is said to be his 'right-foot'.
Agni Purana is said to be his 'left foot',
Bhavishya Purana is said to be his 'right-knee',
Brahma Vaivrata Purana is said to be his 'left-knee'.
Linga Purana is said to be his 'right ankle',
Varaha Purana is said to be his 'left ankle',
Skanda Purana is said to be the hair on the body of 'Sri Hari'.
Vamana Purana is said to be his 'skin'.
Kurma Purana is said to be his 'back'.
Matsya Purana is said to be his 'stomach'.
Garuda Purana is said to be his 'bone-marrow'.
Brahmanda Purana is said to be his 'bone'.


Padma Purana, svarga khaNDa (62.2-7)


Note: These verses are found in both south Indian version with 5 khanda and bengali version with 7 khanda.
Glad you pointed out this. Yes, it is indeed srIman nArAyaNa who is parabrahman.



So, all the Puranas being manifestation of different parts of Sri Hari's body are very sacred and capable of bestowing salvation.
Correction: Only sattvika purAnAs and the sAttvika content in rAjasa/tAmasa purAnas is capable of granting salvation. Just because everything is from srI hari doesn't mean everything is pavitram. This particular slOka is a mode of meditation, for it is indeed srI hari who propagates boudha sAstra, pAsupata sAstra and tAmasa purAnAs to delude those unworthy of knowing him.



For a body to function properly, all parts are important.
True. The tAmasa purAnAs ensure that the kudRshtIs are given a road to follow, upon which they will eventually learn from their respectie deities they worship that nArAyaNa alone is Parabrahman.





According to Padma Purana, there was just one purana, which was split into 18 by Bhagavan Veda Vyasa.
Indeed that is true. When the purAna was One, it was just One with sattvika, rajasa and tAmasa as well as mishra sattva portions. These were created into separat purAnAs by vyAsa for the sake of classification.



Sampradayas give sectarian touch to these puranas and smriti-s and shruti-s. Puranas themselves do not say such a thing. Those verses in padma purnas which vaishnavas gladly adhere to to prove Vishnu supremacy are, IMO, interpolated. I have already given another classification above, which looks more apt.
SrI rAmAnuja quotes the classification openly in his vedArtha sangraha. Certainly, you wouldn't dare to say that a 11th century AchArya quoted an interpolation. Besides, in the link I gave above, the classification stands proven.


As a further proof, here is our analysis of certain kUrma purAna vAkyas which show its tAmasic content:


http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/the-absurdity-of-shakta-interpretations.html


(NOTE: Just because its named after vishNu doesn't make it a sAttvika. The reason is only because kUrma avatara is described there.



Also note that no such classification is found either in mahabharata or in vedas. There is no such part in MBh or in vedas which is considered as tamasic, rajasik or sattvik. There are no upanishads which ar classified as sAttvik, rAjasik or tAmasik.

What relevance does that play. It is precisely because of this that all vaidikas follow the veda > ithihAsa > purAna ideology.







there are saint like GYAneSvara, TukAram, Meerabai, KalidAsa, pAnini, patanjalI, madhusudan sarasvatI, appaya dikSita, upniSad brahmendra, and even rAdhA rAnI, who has never ever denigrated status of any deity.
The words of bhaktas need to be assessed with shAstra. And appaya dIkshIta as well as upanishad brahmEndra's views have been defeated.


Madhusudhana Saraswati, Amalananda, SarvajnAtma Muni, Sridhara Swami, and Adi Shankara as well as his sishyas were vaishnavas only. Proof:


Refer the links: http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/2012/04/introduction-refutation-of-hari-hara.html
http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/2014/04/refutation-of-bodhendra-saraswatis.html
http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/2012/04/sarvajnatmans-sankshepa-shariraka-lucid.html


Note what SarvajnAtma Muni, an ancient advaitin who was a follower of Adi Shankara, says regarding Shiva in his refutation of the shaiva doctrine:


The Lord of sages such as kaNAda and akShapAda, who is inferred as the Lord by virtue of creatorship of earth and the rest of the universe according to their philosophy, who bears the bull as his flag, who is called Shankara (i.e., Shiva/Rudra), is excellent in his knowledge compared to us and in our opinion. However, he does not possess unbounded prowess, rulership, or knowledge. Hence, he cannot have established the connection between the words of the Veda and the sense/object conveyed by the words. The Purvapakshin replies as follows: Then, as per your siddhAnta, by what reasoon is the omniscient Lord proven, and how does the connection between names and forms come from Him? The answer is that we only conclude all these things from the statements of the shruti, such as yaH sarvaj~naH sarvavit and satyaM j~nAnaM anantaM



So much for the theory. Note that Adi Shankara interprets both Dhananjaya and Shiva namas in the sahasranAma as "Arjuna and Shiva, who are vibhUtIs of vishNu". An explanation of Shankara's views and his sahasranAma bhAshya (parts of which are already on the blog), will be coming up shortly.



Even Lord rAma and kruShNa worshipped Shiva.
rAma never worshipped Shiva. Krishna worshipped the antaryAmin of Shiva. Refer to the following links for proof:


http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/prayers-of-sri-krishna-to-shiva.html



rAma worshipped Siva linga is mentioned in AdhyAtma rAmAyaNa. kruShNa taking paSupata dixA is mentioned in kurma purANa. kruShNa also tells Siva sahasranAma in Mahabharata.
AdhyAtma rAmAyaNa is not valid as a pramAna. Only vAlmiki rAmAyaNa is valid.


And Shiva SahasranAma is an interpolated section that has never been referred to by ancient vedANtins. Furthermore, it contradicts events in the mahAbhArata itself. In contrast, there are over 40 commentaries on the vishNu sahasranAma. Proof is here:


http://narayanastra.blogspot.in/p/blog-page_17.html


The likes of Amrut will never learn, and it is a case of the blind misleading the blind. However, it is also true that the majority will hesitate to accept the truth. Follow your own path, stop spewing venom on true vaidikas like Adi Shankara, Ramanuja and Madhva who advocated only vaiShnava siddhAntha unnecessarily.

isavasya
24 May 2014, 12:16 PM
Namaskar Omkara

Posting this on behalf of the authors of Narayanastra Blog on their requestWhy can't people of Narayanastra blog post here directly and why do they need a messenger to put their views here? I do not have anything against people believing in Vaishnavism siddhanta or Krishna siddhanta but ludicrous claim that Jagat Guru Adi Shankara taught Vaishnavism is stupid and idiotic, much akin to Zakhir Nayak teaching Vedas. What Adi Shankaracharya taught is for followers of Adi Shankara to decide and not for the followers of Ramanuja and Ananda Tirtha to decide. There have been generations of gurus taking the position of Shankaracharya in Shankaracharya established mathas and all of them are pretty consistent on teachings of Adi Shankaracharya. There is no point in spreading ridiculous conspiracy theories that Adi Shankaracharya taught Vaishnavism. The followers of Jagat Guru know and have known what philosophy was taught by him.

Amrut
24 May 2014, 01:23 PM
Namaskar OmkaraWhy can't people of Narayanastra blog post here directly and why do they need a messenger to put their views here ?

Namaste Isavasya :)

We will have to peep into history of HDF, which I would not like to, as it will be yet another discussion that will spur up controversy, heated exchanges, temporary bans (just incase someone goes insane) or thread being dumped into jalpa section.

But for curiosity, I will answer you in brief.

These tow authors are 'humble Vaishnavas'. Their screen name is Sri Vaishnava (SV) and BhagavataFan (BF). I do not know what problem does BF have to post, but for SV, he has ego problem after his declaration



I am done with these forums.

Source: post #26 (http://hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=111115&postcount=26)

I will definitely not respond in this thread as it will derail the thread.

I would refrain to comment anyfurhter on this issue. I have put my views and SV has his. Rest is left to readers.

I am reporting my own post #12 to admin, so just incase I have already derailed, he can take appropriate action.

A mod EM ji is active on this thread. Just incase I have derailed this thread, please do let me know.

Hello Omkara :)

I was about to PM you regarding authenticity of puranas and authentic upanishads, but saw that you have not logged in since 17th. I thought you must be having exams, so didn't disturb you.

Hari OM

brahma jijnasa
24 May 2014, 02:11 PM
Namaste

Namaste!
Thanx for posting replies, as already mention I had read a bhagavat gita. Yes it is very beautiful book EM..
Now im thinking to start with shiv sutra or bhagavatam and then other Upanishads...Thanx!

I recommend translation of Bhagavatam with the Vaishnava commentary: http://vedabase.net/sb/en

It can be bought as a book.


regards

Jaskaran Singh
24 May 2014, 05:19 PM
Namaste


I recommend translation of Bhagavatam with the Vaishnava commentary: http://vedabase.net/sb/en

It can be bought as a book.


regards

If he's a Shiva bhakta, then why recommend a Vaishnava bhashyam?

brahma jijnasa
24 May 2014, 08:45 PM
Namaste Jaskaran Singh and Soul of Light

If he's a Shiva bhakta, then why recommend a Vaishnava bhashyam?

Because he said in the post #1:


Any suggestion is welcome althought I am a true devotee of lord shiva but I also like to chant names of lord vishnu or krishna, and I am pleased by their words, so please suggest any vaishnavism, shaivism scriptures or vedas which are best for me....
Thanking in advance...

Besides, the full benefit of reading Vaishnava texts one can get only if you read a good Vaishnava commentary on the text. Srimad Bhagavatam (Bhagavata Purana) is the most popular of all Vaishnava Puranas, and commentary by Srila Prabhupada is easily available even online.


One more thing. I said this in one of my previous posts in another thread:
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?p=115644#post115644

It is said in the Narada Purana 1.5.72:


śive ca parameśe ca viṣṇau ca paramātmani
samabuddhyā pravarttante te vai bhāgavatāḥ smṛtāḥ

"Those who regard god Śiva the great ruler of the world, and Vishnu the Supreme Soul, with equal attitude, are indeed spoken as Bhāgavatas."

It is said that they are Bhāgavatas or bhāgavatottamāḥ, great devotees of the Lord.


regards

Jaskaran Singh
24 May 2014, 11:30 PM
Namaste Jaskaran Singh and Soul of Light


Because he said in the post #1:



Besides, the full benefit of reading Vaishnava texts one can get only if you read a good Vaishnava commentary on the text. Srimad Bhagavatam (Bhagavata Purana) is the most popular of all Vaishnava Puranas, and commentary by Srila Prabhupada is easily available even online.
namaskAram,
Thank you for pointing that out. Having gone through the thread, it indeed seems I forgot what was mentioned in the OP. :)


One more thing. I said this in one of my previous posts in another thread:
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?p=115644#post115644

It is said in the Narada Purana 1.5.72:


śive ca parameśe ca viṣṇau ca paramātmani
samabuddhyā pravarttante te vai bhāgavatāḥ smṛtāḥ

"Those who regard god Śiva the great ruler of the world, and Vishnu the Supreme Soul, with equal attitude, are indeed spoken as Bhāgavatas."

It is said that they are Bhāgavatas or bhāgavatottamāḥ, great devotees of the Lord.


regards[/SIZE]
Well, parameshwara/paramesha means greatest lord or supreme lord (since endings of -अम are generally superlative whereas endings of -अर are comparative, compare with अधर [low] and अधम [lowest]). In this sense, although the nAradIya purANam is sAttvika, are you not going against the tAratamya of madhva?

This is what he says in the shrI mahAbhAratatAtparyanirNayaH:

सर्वज्ञ ईश्वरतमः स च सर्वशक्तिः पूर्णाव्ययात्म बलचित्सुखवीर्यसारः।
यस्याऽज्ञया रहितमिन्दिरया समेतं ब्रह्मेशपूर्वकमिदं नतु कस्य चेशम्॥१३॥

Notice that it says of bhagavAn that deprived of his command (यस्याऽज्ञया रहितम्), even if maintained by indirA (shrI/lakShmI), brahmA, and Isha (shiva) and all these others (sametaM) (इन्दिरया समेतं ब्रह्मेश) with this [universe] (पूर्वकमिदं), it still cannot do anything (नतु कस्य चेशम्); madhva's opinions are not authoritative for me, but I believe you've said multiple times that you are a gauDIya. This technically makes you linked to the mAdhvasampradAya, no? How would you reconcile the fact that madhva doesn't seem to believe in shiva as parameshvara and makes a clear distinction between shiva and mahAviShNu with your above quoted shlokam?

hinduism♥krishna
25 May 2014, 02:30 AM
Namaste


I recommend translation of Bhagavatam with the Vaishnava commentary: http://vedabase.net/sb/en

It can be bought as a book.


regards

My suggestion to those who'd like to read Bhagavata Purana :

Though Vedabase is easily available online, Everyone know Vedabase is the translations done by Gaudiya Vaishnawism. I mean , authenticity matters when we read any scripture :) And as far as my study on bhagavata Purana for almost 3 years is concerned, for sure Bhagavata posits unity of Jiva and Brahman.

I think, almost most of the people in Bharatavarsha see Gita Press' Bhagavata Purana the most authentic as it is non sectarian.

Hit www.gitapress.org and enjoy an authentic divinity of Bhagavata Purana. The PDF book is also easily available online for reading on Electronic Devices.

Hari Onkar :)

Soul of Light
25 May 2014, 03:11 AM
Namaste


I recommend translation of Bhagavatam with the Vaishnava commentary: http://vedabase.net/sb/en

It can be bought as a book.


regards
namaste brahma jijnasa ji,
thanx for link..! :)


If he's a Shiva bhakta, then why recommend a Vaishnava bhashyam?
Namaste Jaskaran Singh ji,
yes you are right, I am a true shiv bhakta.. And wanted to increase my devotion, I am seeking for true knowledge
I like your and brahma jijnasa ji post, I too belief that all forms of god come from one bramha, and hence in lord vishnu I can see lord shiva and in shiva I can see vishnu, humans have two eyes and both have same importance, there is also concept of third eye which is advance
like that for me Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu both are supreme, there is also concept of endless and formless god which is advance, as I am not advance to worship god in this form so I worship god in the form of my lord shiva and experience him everywhere
Thanking for reply...
Regards

hinduism♥krishna
25 May 2014, 03:21 AM
Quote: Bhagavad Purana also glorifies lord shiva,

No, it doesn't according to Sridhara Swami, Veeraraghavacharya and Vijayadhwaja Tirtha. Only vishNu is praised. Read the link, we have already covered it:

Who'll believe in this who has read the real Bhagavata Purana and who has known Brahman as "Ekamevadvitiya" Non Dual. :)

Check this thread and there my post too. http://hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=12038

Amrut
25 May 2014, 04:16 AM
(Note: I am not trying to act as mod)

Namaste Esteemed members,

Please understand that OP does not belong any sampradaya. Though he is attracted towards Shiva, He has equal reverence towards Vishnu.

Considering his mindset, we have to give answers.

Please do not make this into Shiva v/s Vishnu supremacy fight. So if someone says that mAdhvA and of course Sri Vaishnava-s consider Shiva as Jiva, this would definitely hurt OP. SV's answers through Omkara has links which will point to a blog in which Shiva is denigrated and Sri Rudram is interpretaed in convoluted way. Again this will hurt a Shiva bhakta. Srila Prabhupada has beautifully explained Krishna bhakti, but he has also used the word Demi-god for Shiva, which is quite unfortunate.

This is the reason why I didnt gave link to Shiva Gita which will point to Mahapasupatastra blog. I would request him to buy a copy of Shiva Gita translated in Hindi by Shri Nandlal Dashora, published by Randhir Prakashan, available at Gita Press (though it is not published by Gita Press.)

S/he is just 17 year old and is asking for direction. Judging from liberal mindset of OP, I think HLk's recommendation about reading books published by Gita Press are best alternative. IMO, Gita Press is the most genuine and honest in translation and is free from sectarian bias.

Please do not drag him in this tug-of-war.

Since OP has equal reverence both both Shiva and Vishnu, I supported his thoughts by pointing out alternate categorization by replying to Isavasya.

But then I think the course is changing.


Namaste all!

I know this question may ask many time but I have to ask it for myself in detail

I am a devotee of Lord Shiva, and I have read only a Bhagavat geeta, I want to read more scriptures which will increase my devotion, knowledge and tell me what I have to do in this spiritual path..
So please tell me about, which scripture I have to prefer to read next.. Any suggestion is welcome althought I am a true devotee of lord shiva but I also like to chant names of lord vishnu or krishna, and I am pleased by their words, so please suggest any vaishnavism, shaivism scriptures or vedas which are best for me....

Thanking in advance...

Regards :)

I think OP is more interested in spending time with God as much as possible. He is interested in Vishnu has he is most probably influenced by words of Krishna form Gita, which must have helped him in his spiritual progress.

EM ji has always been wise :)


Vannakkam: When you get so many opinions, it must be difficult to decide. Some say this, some say that. Of course most people will offer up what worked for them, occasionally not recognising or accepting that just because it worked for them doesn't mean it will work for everyone. So that leaves you with making the decision yourself. I hope, for your sake, your intuition guides you to the right scripture ... for you.

Aum Namasivaya

+1

Hari OM

Om Namah Shivaya

Ram11
25 May 2014, 05:21 AM
Namaste Ji,

In a book published by Gita press I read that it is better to spend time worshiping one's favorite deity _/\_ rather than waste such precious time by indulging in :duel:.

brahma jijnasa
28 May 2014, 07:44 PM
Namaste

namaskAram,

Well, parameshwara/paramesha means greatest lord or supreme lord (since endings of -अम are generally superlative whereas endings of -अर are comparative, compare with अधर [low] and अधम [lowest]). In this sense, although the nAradIya purANam is sAttvika, are you not going against the tAratamya of madhva?

This is what he says in the shrI mahAbhAratatAtparyanirNayaH:

सर्वज्ञ ईश्वरतमः स च सर्वशक्तिः पूर्णाव्ययात्म बलचित्सुखवीर्यसारः।
यस्याऽज्ञया रहितमिन्दिरया समेतं ब्रह्मेशपूर्वकमिदं नतु कस्य चेशम्॥१३॥

Notice that it says of bhagavAn that deprived of his command (यस्याऽज्ञया रहितम्), even if maintained by indirA (shrI/lakShmI), brahmA, and Isha (shiva) and all these others (sametaM) (इन्दिरया समेतं ब्रह्मेश) with this [universe] (पूर्वकमिदं), it still cannot do anything (नतु कस्य चेशम्); madhva's opinions are not authoritative for me, but I believe you've said multiple times that you are a gauDIya. This technically makes you linked to the mAdhvasampradAya, no? How would you reconcile the fact that madhva doesn't seem to believe in shiva as parameshvara and makes a clear distinction between shiva and mahAviShNu with your above quoted shlokam?

I do not belong to any sampradaya, but that's not the point here. The point is that Gaudiya vaishnavas distinguish between the two forms of Lord Shiva. They are different because one of them is guna avatara Lord Shiva (he is one of 3 gods: Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva), and is a jiva, while the other Lord Shiva (usually called Lord Sadāśiva) is identical to Lord Vishnu, is Vishnu tattva, and thus he is not a jiva!

We had a discussion about it here on HDF, see explanation given by Gaudiya vaishnava acarya Sanatana Gosvami:
http://hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?p=98267#post98267

Gaudiya vaishnavas and Madhvacarya vaishnavas differ in some philosophical conclusions (siddhanta). Thus, it appears that Madhva did not recognize the difference between the two different forms of Lord Shiva. Actually I'm not very familiar with his stance so that I do not know exactly what he said about Lord Sadasiva.
In fact it seems to me that Gaudiya vaishnavas are the only vaishnava tradition that recognizes the existence of two different forms of Lord Shiva, one (Lord Sadasiva) is superior to the other (guna avatara Lord Shiva). It seems that all other vaishnava sampradayas think that there is only one form of Lord Shiva, and that one is guna avatara Lord Shiva. For this reason they each text where the description of Lord Shiva appears interpreted either

1) as referring to guna avatara Lord Shiva who is inferior to the Lord Vishnu, if the text describes him as inferior to the Lord Vishnu
or
2) as referring to Lord Vishnu (Narasimha, etc) if the text describes him as the god who possesses superior characteristics that are identical to those owned by Lord Vishnu,

but Gaudiya vaishnavas would say that it should not be so because sometimes in the texts of Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, etc, word "Shiva" refers to Lord Shiva who is a jiva soul, and sometimes it refers to Lord Shiva who is identical to Lord Vishnu, ie Lord Sadasiva who is Vishnu tattva, and thus not a jiva!

I heard that the difference between the two different forms of Lord Shiva is recognized in some Shaiva traditions also. It is said that Appayya Dikshita also recognized this difference between the two forms of Lord Shiva.


regards

Soul of Light
29 May 2014, 03:16 PM
Namaste!
I don't understand the jaskaran singh ji's post where he says lord shiva as jiva, as I think my mobile only allows english font hence most of the post is seems like strange symbols...
I do not belong to any sampradaya, I have only love and belief for my lord shiva, and I can't see a slight of difference between lord vishnu and shiva.. I read shiv purana there it is written that lord vishnu is manifested from lord shiva, I don't read vishnu purana yet, but I think, there may written that lord shiva is manifested from lord vishnu... I don't want to interfere in this scriptural fight as I don't read them all yet and not have complete knowledge..
But I believe that one who does not see any differences between vishnu and shiva he is clever one, as everyone's thinking is different, some may think totally different and that is right for them
as I said in this forum there are many paths leads us to our destination, we have to do just one thing i.e. Journey, if we walk with dedication and devotion then no one can stop us from approching our destination but rather than walking if one just wastes his time by seeing which path is shorter or easier or does my path leads us to my goal then it is difficult for him to get to his destination
like that Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu both are supreme and both help us approch our ultimate goal. Seeing who is supreme is just a waste of time for me..
Repecting all the sampradayas and sorry if I talked too much
but for me both are always same and supreme..!
Regards..!!