PDA

View Full Version : Incarnation of Shiva



satay
01 October 2007, 09:50 AM
namaskar,

This post is inspired by the Siva Sutra thread. Lord Shiva's incarnations are not as widely known as Lord Vishnu's.

Would be very helpful if we could collect more information about 'Incarnations of Shiva'.

We can start with "Sri kanthanatha, an incarnation of Lord Shiva".

Baobobtree
01 October 2007, 11:58 PM
Namaste Satay.

If I remember correctly Hanuman, Shirdi Sai Baba, Sathya Sai (by his devotees), Adi Shankara (by Smarta Hindus), Dattatreya, and Sarabeswara, are all avatars of lord Shankar.

Madhavan
02 October 2007, 01:23 AM
Does that mean you consider Shiva and Vishnu different( not that I have a problem with this idea), so that their incarnations are disjoint?

Shiva's incarnations are usually in the heaven, and Vishnu on earth. Ganesha, Kartikeya,Nandikeshwara etc are all incarnations of Shiva. Sages like Durvasa , ashwattama etc are incarnations of Shiva.

We should note that Shiva is usually considered nirguNa which cannot have incarnations. Vishnu(or Shakti) is the form by which Shiva manifests. Therefore, all incarnations are typically that of Vishnu.

Every person in this world is an incarnation of Vishnu, though the degrees of manifestation are different.

Madhavan
02 October 2007, 01:36 AM
Namaste Satay.

If I remember correctly Hanuman, Shirdi Sai Baba, Sathya Sai (by his devotees), Adi Shankara (by Smarta Hindus), Dattatreya, and Sarabeswara, are all avatars of lord Shankar.

Hanuman - incarnation of vAyu ( never seen an authentic pramANa for hanuman being Shiva although the popular idea comes from hanumAn chAlIsa)

Dattatreya - incarnation of Vishnu

atreh patny anasuya trin
jajne suyasasah sutan
dattam durvasasam somam
atmesa-brahma-sambhavan (SB 4.1.15)

datta=atma; durvAsa=isa; soma=brahma;

Since Isa is usually used to denote Shiva, Atma in this context refers to Vishnu to avoid punarAkRti. So Dattatreya refers to Vishnu.

atanu
02 October 2007, 03:11 AM
Does that mean you consider Shiva and Vishnu different( not that I have a problem with this idea), so that their incarnations are disjoint?

Shiva's incarnations are usually in the heaven, and Vishnu on earth. Ganesha, Kartikeya,Nandikeshwara etc are all incarnations of Shiva. Sages like Durvasa , ashwattama etc are incarnations of Shiva.

We should note that Shiva is usually considered nirguNa which cannot have incarnations. Vishnu(or Shakti) is the form by which Shiva manifests. Therefore, all incarnations are typically that of Vishnu.

Every person in this world is an incarnation of Vishnu, though the degrees of manifestation are different.


Namaskar,

My understanding is similar from reading of Vedas. Vishnu(or Shakti) is the form by which Shiva manifests. To Madhavacharya, Vishnu appeared from Shivalinga.

However, Upanishad says that Shiva resides directly as Brahman in Varanasi -- the place above nasika and between eyebrows and in Hridaya.

Vishnu is from Soma.


Om

shian
02 October 2007, 05:52 PM
What about Nataraja?
i want to learn about Nataraja...

Eastern Mind
02 October 2007, 08:56 PM
Madhavan et al:
You said:
We should note that Shiva is usually considered nirguNa which cannot have incarnations. Vishnu(or Shakti) is the form by which Shiva manifests. Therefore, all incarnations are typically that of Vishnu.

Every person in this world is an incarnation of Vishnu, though the degrees of manifestation are different.

There would be different perspectives on this, obviously. I agree with the above point, but maybe its just regurgitation. In my opinion, God only knows. The rest of us are ego-bound. (With the exception of souls who are actually Self-realised) Declaring, as someone said before, that one is an incarnation of Siva (Sankara, Sai Baba etc.) is just another way in most cases of the followers putting their gurus on a higher pedestal, like adding more SRI's in front of their names, or to convince themselves. Personally, I have no idea, and am willing to admit it. Simpler questions such as "How can I control anger?" How can I stay away from ego? etc are more important. This is all within self (small s) seeking. Aum Namashivaya

Baobobtree
02 October 2007, 09:03 PM
Dattatreya - incarnation of VishnuNamaste Madhavan.

I remember hearing from several sources (mind you perhaps they are biased and/or incorrect on this matter), that Dattatreya was originally considered and avatar of Shiva, and only later became known as an incarnation of Vishnu, then the whole Hindu trimurti (Vishnu, Shiva and Brahma). Though I might be incorrect there.


Hanuman - incarnation of vAyu I'd always thought he was an avatar of both Vayu and Shiva, but having checked my sources, you are correct on the matter of this belief simply coming from the Hanuman Chalisa.


Does that mean you consider Shiva and Vishnu different( not that I have a problem with this idea), so that their incarnations are disjoint? Well, I do consider both to just be different forms of the one same force, I always though avatars were identified with which ever form they're teachings and functions corresponded with the most, or that the specific form of Brahman incarnates, and thus the avatar becomes almost like a sub-form of sort. Sorry, if I'm being a bit confusing here.


What about Nataraja?
i want to learn about Nataraja... Namaste Shian.

Nataraja is not a physical incarnation of Shiva, but rather a form he assumes during the creation and destruction of the universe. He dances atop a small demon, symbolizing his suppression of evil forces, and his triumph of ignorance. In one hand he holds a flame which represents the destruction of the material universe. In another hand he holds a small drum (called a damaru), which represents the sound through which Brahma recreates the universe. His third hand is held up in the Abhaya mudra, through which he protects his devotees from evil and ignorance, and his fourth hand points toward his raised leg, which represents upliftment, and enlightenment. His hair which is usually tied up in a large pile, flows freely represented his wild and unbound nature, and the snake which is usually curled around one of this arms (or his neck) is now completely uncoiled, representing the uncoiling of the human kundalini, which leads to ones enlightenment.

Madhavan
03 October 2007, 02:53 AM
Madhavan et al:
You said:
We should note that Shiva is usually considered nirguNa which cannot have incarnations. Vishnu(or Shakti) is the form by which Shiva manifests. Therefore, all incarnations are typically that of Vishnu.

Every person in this world is an incarnation of Vishnu, though the degrees of manifestation are different.

There would be different perspectives on this, obviously. I agree with the above point, but maybe its just regurgitation. In my opinion, God only knows. The rest of us are ego-bound. (With the exception of souls who are actually Self-realised) Declaring, as someone said before, that one is an incarnation of Siva (Sankara, Sai Baba etc.) is just another way in most cases of the followers putting their gurus on a higher pedestal, like adding more SRI's in front of their names, or to convince themselves. Personally, I have no idea, and am willing to admit it. Simpler questions such as "How can I control anger?" How can I stay away from ego? etc are more important. This is all within self (small s) seeking. Aum Namashivaya

Yes the claims of Shankara or Saibaba being incarnations is a pure beleif of their followers and not applicable to all Hindus. That said, according to Advaita vedanta, jIva is only Brahman, though he does not know it. This would qualify for all beings to be incarnations of Vishnu. But a full incarnation like Sri Rama or Krishna are aware of their avatarhood while ordinary mortals like us do not know - so that is the difference. Like you said, I dont generally beleive in the claims of those claiming to be avatars, as avatars are very rare and there is no need to accept one not found in the scripture without evidence.( and get hoodwinked).

Madhavan
03 October 2007, 03:09 AM
I remember hearing from several sources (mind you perhaps they are biased and/or incorrect on this matter), that Dattatreya was originally considered and avatar of Shiva, and only later became known as an incarnation of Vishnu, then the whole Hindu trimurti (Vishnu, Shiva and Brahma). Though I might be incorrect there.


Is there any scriptural evidence ( any smriti text) that supports the idea that Dattatreya is an incarnation of Shiva? I have also heard of Dattatreya being V+S+B but never seen any evidence.

satay
03 October 2007, 08:28 AM
Namaskar,
Nice to know that I am also an avatar of vishnu just like the person who blew the **** out of himself and the twenty others by strapping explosive to themselves.

Come on, if we are really avatars of the Lord would we doing the things we are doing in this world today? I don't think we are avatars at all. We are some sort of lower amsa or something.

Madhavan
03 October 2007, 08:44 AM
Namaskar,
Nice to know that I am also an avatar of vishnu just like the person who blew the **** out of himself and the twenty others by strapping explosive to themselves.

Come on, if we are really avatars of the Lord would we doing the things we are doing in this world today? I don't think we are avatars at all. We are some sort of lower amsa or something.

Namaste,

How could a "lower amsa" do such a thing for that matter? If somebody had even a microscopic amsa of God, he would not do such a thing. If this is your world view, I think Dvaita Philosophy will appeal to you. In Advaita, there is no good or evil. There is only vidyA and avidyA, which is vidyAvidya in Brahman. If one is reallly looking for a proper realistic explanation regarding the "blowing up of oneself" sort of thing, they cannot find it in Advaita. Advaita is not about explaining the miseries of life, but about mitigating it. Only Dvaita will be able to explain that. But note that there can be other problems with Dvaita, like I might ask why God allowed the so called evil etc.

saidevo
03 October 2007, 09:57 AM
Unlike the avatars of Maha Vishnu, Lord Shiva's incarnations are instantaneous, meaning that he takes a human form in connection with one or more incidents of his devotees, sports his lIlA and then simply vanishes, revealing his real nature! Nevertheless, in many cases, these were real incarnations of Shiva in human form that lasted for days if not for a whole lifetime.

Lord Shiva thus sported his lIlA with 64 of his devotees that have been compiled in to a Purana in Tamil by Paranjyoti Munivar, who has named it ThiruviLaiyAdal PuraNam (aka hAlAsya MahAtmiyam). Shiva has done wonderful lIlAs that include helping Manickavachagar (who composed Tiruvachagam) who was a minister in King Pandyan's cabinet, by changing foxes temporarily into horses and then later flooding Madurai with the Vaigai river. When the King in a bid to save the city ordered one member from every family to strengthen the shores of the river, an old woman who had her living by selling sweet pudding had none to work for her, she prayed to Shiva, who appeared as a wayward labourer, defied the orders of the King's officials, got a whipped by them but the blow fell on every being in the Universe including the King! Thus Shiva revealed himself to the King and spoke to him of the greateness of his erstwhile minister and now saint Manickavachagar.

And then Shiva stopped the marriage of Sundaramurthy Nayanar by appearing as an old man and demanding that there was a score to settle with him before Sundarar could marry. The case was reported to the court of assembly of wise men at Tiruvennai Nallur who inquired it. Shiva won the case and 'enslaved' Sundarar, preventing his marriage, and took him to the Vennai Nallur Shiva temple. There he revealed himself and told Sundarar that his action was due to a prayer by Sundarar in his earlier birth. Sundarar was aghast that he had scolded the Lord using words such as Pithan (madman). Shiva encouraged him to sing a song using the very word Pitha as the first word. The song Pitha, pirai sUdi (madman who wears the moon) is a very famous hymn in Tevaram.

The famouse Tamil classical movie 'Tiruvilaiyadal' directed by AP Nagarajan and acted by Shivaji Ganesan as Lord Shiva and his incarnations ran to packed houses for nearly a year in Tamilnadu!

These wonderful sports of Shiva can be read at:
http://www.sivanandadlshq.org/download/nayanar.pdf
http://www.shaivam.org/adiyaar.html

Shiva's instaneous incarnations that contine to this day, are the very embodiments of his boundless grace for his devotees.

yajvan
03 October 2007, 10:14 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaskar,
Come on, if we are really avatars of the Lord would we doing the things we are doing in this world today? I don't think we are avatars at all. We are some sort of lower amsa or something.

Namaste satay,
a reasonable point... yet this notion is one of conscious and unconscious awareness of who one is. This does not purport to suggest we are avatara in the sense that we are cognisant of this, and have the mission at hand e.g. Ram, Krsna, etc.

Yet, when one is fully awake , the native is no doubt an ambassador of the Divine. That is the pickle - we are Divine yet we do not remember it; our lineage is Divne and we have forgotten this.

As I see it, IMHO, it's like a garden of flowers. If not taken care of they can grow out of control and become weeds, detrimental to the garden. Like that, humans require nourishment and and direction; Nourishment of pure consciousness and direction of purpose as to who they are.

Just like the garden each flower reaches for the sun for light and heat. We need to do the same, in our case it is savitor, suriya. And if one has issue with Savitor, there are an additional 108 names one can choose from, as the Sun is the Atmakaraka of us all.

108 Names Called out in the Mahabrahata. [ my favorites are highighted ]

Dhaumya said: Surya, Bhaga, Twastri, Pusha, Arka, Savitri, Ravi, Gabhastimat, Aja, Kala, Mrityu, Dhatri, Prabhakar, Prithibi, Apa, Teja, Kha, Vayu, the sole stay, Soma, Vrihaspati, Sukra, Budha, Angaraka, Indra, Vivaswat, Diptanshu, Suchi, Sauri, Sanaichara, Brahma, Vishnu, Rudra, Skanda, Vaisravana, Yama, Vaidyutagni, Jatharagni, Aindhna, Tejasam, Pati, Dharmadwaja, Veda-karttri, Vedanga, Vedavahana, Krita, Treta, Dwapara, Kali, Full of every impurity, Kala, Kastha, Muhurtta, Kshapa, Yama, and Kshana, Samvatsara-kara, Aswattha, Kalachakra, Bibhavasu, Purusha, Saswata, Vyaktavyakta, Sanatana, Kaladhyaksha, Praja-dhyaksha, Viswakarma, Tamounda, Varuna, Sagara, Ansu, Jimuta, Jivana, Arihan, Bhutasraya, Bhutapati, Srastri, Samvartaka, Vanhi, Sarvadi, Alolupa, Ananta, Bhanu, Kamada, Sarvatomukha, Jaya, Visala, Varada, Manas, Suparna, Bhutadi, Sighraga, Prandharana, Dhanwantari, Dhumaketu, Adideva, Aditisuta, Dwadasatman, Arvindaksha, Pitri, Matri, Pitamaha, Swarga-dwara, Prajadwara, Mokshadwara, Tripistapa, Dehakarti, Prasantatman, Viswatman, Viswatomukha, Characharatman, Sukhsmatman, the merciful Maitreya.

just a thought.

pranams,

Madhavan
03 October 2007, 10:53 AM
The famouse Tamil classical movie 'Tiruvilaiyadal' directed by AP Nagarajan and acted by Shivaji Ganesan as Lord Shiva and his incarnations ran to packed houses for nearly a year in Tamilnadu!


I have a DVD of this movie. The most funny incident is the one involving hemanAtha bhAgavatar. The film is very good and really great acting by Shivaji.

satay
03 October 2007, 11:30 AM
Perhaps I am not at the stage to accept that "I" am God. I don't see how I can be God or his avatar. I don't even control an inch of anything in this universe except perhaps using my will that too haphazardly and without any surety and decisiveness.

If this means that I am dvaitin...I am okay with that. I think that we may be (part of) divine but we are not the whole divine. it is too difficult to comprehend that "I" am the controller of the universe when clearly I am controller of no-thing!

atanu
03 October 2007, 11:33 AM
Unlike the avatars of Maha Vishnu, Lord Shiva's incarnations are instantaneous, meaning that he takes a human form in connection with one or more incidents of his devotees, sports his lIlA and then simply vanishes, revealing his real nature! Nevertheless, in many cases, these were real incarnations of Shiva in human form that lasted for days if not for a whole lifetime.

-----

Namaste Saidevoji,

As far as I can follow from shruti all manifestations are of Rudra-Shiva alone, including Vishnu, who is not another at all. One who is sthanu is Shiva and who has movement is Vishnu. But the Sthanu is alone moving and the movement leads to the Sthanu.


For a true devotee of Shiva, everything is Shiva-Parvati. Yet such a devotee, when graced with sweet magic -- through any form, whether as a mad man (as in Sundara's case) or as a labourer (for Amma), will know the grace as Shiva only.

You are correct that the appearances are instantateous. But such appearances are also written down in case of Vishnu bhakas in Bhakta Mala (the name may be wrong but it is equivalent of Periapuranam).

Om

saidevo
03 October 2007, 11:39 AM
Seven Types of Avatars

From a talk given by Ghandikota V. Subba Rao to the First Overseas Convention of Chairpersons of Shri Sathya Sai Centres on 23rd November, 1998, Prashaanthi Nilayam. (http://www.eaisai.com/baba/docs/avatar.html)

1. amsha avatAra, the plenary incarnation, like Vaamana, the young boy who humbled the pride of emperor Bali.

2. kalA avatAra, which may be called the plenipotentiaries, with certain functional powers. The kalA avatAra are like Dhanvanthari, for instance, who propagated the life saving specialised Science of Aayurvedha.

3. Avesha avatAra, who are the revolutionary avatars; they appear at one time, one place with one purpose, like Parashuraama and Narasimha (half man, half lion).

4. jnAna avatAra, that carry the secret of liberation - the jnAna, the wisdom of Supreme Reality. jnAna avatAra are like the great Buddha, the great sage Kapila and the great Shankara.

5. lIlA avatAra. Sri Krishna was the lIlA avatAra. lIlA is the play and the pastime of Krishna from His young age till He left this earth nearly 5300 years ago; an extraordinary saga of great power, of majesty, of beauty, of wisdom and of knowledge; He was the uncrowned emperor of India. He was the Suuthradhaari, the great puppeteer. He was a Jagath-guru, the Universal Preceptor.

6. mAyAvatAra, like Sri Rama, who concealed His divinity. He behaved, for all practical purposes, as a human personality with all the attendant problems. He is called Maryaadha Purusha - ideal man, ideal son, ideal friend, ideal ruler etc.

7. vibhUti avatAra of Bhagavaan Sathya Sai Baba. The glory of His mahimas, miracles from birth till now, day in and day out, 365 days in a year, 73 years of extraordinary expression of divine powers. The world 'miracle' has become a hackneyed expression, in respect of Baba.

Sixteen Divine Attracting Powers
Ghandikota V. Subba Rao, Prashaanthi Nilayam, 1 January, 2000
http://www.eaisai.com/baba/docs/sixteen.html

When DIVINITY descends in human form, DHAIVAM MAANUSHA RUUPENA, it is said, IT manifests sixteen aspects of selfless, loving, universal attractive features or powers. The following is an exposition of these sixteen "attracting" aspects of the Divine Advent...

01. KAAMA AAKARSHANA or desire fulfilling power.

02. BUDDHYAAKARSHANA - the power to activate, stimulate and fulfil our intellectual capacities.

03. AHAMKAARA-AAKARSHANA transformation of our Ego sense.

04. SHABDHA AAKARSHANA, the power of sound, by way of conversation, lecture and song.

05. SPARSHA AAKARSHANA - the power of divine touch; it is healing touch.

06. RUUPAAKARSHANA - attraction of the divine form.

07. RASAAKARSHANA - sweetness personified.

08. CHITTHAAKARSHANA. Chittha is the store-house of our past and present memories and unfulfilled residual desires and impressions from our previous lives, called Vaasanas which haunt us in the present and will continue to affect our future also.

09. GANDHAAKARSHANA - the power of personal divine fragrance.

10. DHAIRYA-AKARSHANA - the power of overwhelming courage and self-confidence.

11. SMRITHYAAKARSHANA. Smrithi means powerful memory power.

12. NAAMAA KARSHANA, the power of the Sacred name.

13. BEEJAAKARSHANA SHAKTHI. Divinity exercises elemental or seed force and incorporates it in all beings. The Geetha says, "Beejam Maam Sarva Bhuuthaanaam.": Know Me to be the eternal seed power, the cause of germination of all Beings. All beings are born from the seed of Brahman, the Supreme Divinity. He is indeed the seed force of all Manthras or holy, thought-articulations in terms of seed syllables and words. These represent the basic energies of various deities presiding over the forces of Nature and Cosmos as a whole. These basic sound forces and seed Manthras or primal utterances of Divinity calling forth various manifestations of power. These are the seeds of supreme knowledge of reality (Brahma Vidhyaa), seeds of conscious speech (Vaak Beeja), seeds of illusory energy (Shakthi Beeja), seed of existence (Lakshmi Beeja), seed of desire (Kaama Beeja) and above all the seed of time and destruction (Kaalee Beeja). The Avatar activates these seed forces and validates all Manthras and scriptures.

14. AATHMASAKARSHANA; Divinity attracts our inner Being, Antharaathma. It is called soul-power attraction; drawing the sense oriented Self towards the experience of the bliss of divinity.

15. AMRITHAAKARSHANA. Amritha is the elixir of life in divinity. Unbounded Love and immortality are the signs of Divine life. The individual self prays to the Supreme Divinity to bestow on a Life of LOVE, LIGHT and IMMORTALITY.

16. SARVAAKARSHANA SHAKTHI, the totality of the above fifteen attractive powers.

Ghandikota V. Subba Rao illustrates how his guru Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba has all these powers. Thus any guru from Adi Sankara to the current Shankaracharyas and the gurus of other institutions who has these powers as felt and experienced by his staunch devotees is an avatar of Lord Shiva. It is a question of the devotees' experiences that makes an avatar of a guru rather than the extent to which he displays it to the outside world and the world accepts it.

Madhavan
03 October 2007, 12:12 PM
Perhaps I am not at the stage to accept that "I" am God. I don't see how I can be God or his avatar. I don't even control an inch of anything in this universe except perhaps using my will that too haphazardly and without any surety and decisiveness.

If this means that I am dvaitin...I am okay with that. I think that we may be (part of) divine but we are not the whole divine. it is too difficult to comprehend that "I" am the controller of the universe when clearly I am controller of no-thing!

Virtually speaking no one can claim so either. The concept of "I am God" is hypothetical. Even when a person attains jnAna how will he say that he is God - to whom will he say that? The very presence of such an "I" is not the sign of a jnAni.

No man will ever be able to control the universe. That will create a conflict of interest between God and man. The only incarnation who proved that he is God was Krishna - he did so by showing that he was existance itself! There are no other known instances except hearsays.

Being part of God is also a problem because God has no parts. Perhaps you meant to say you had a nature similar to God without his full potency?

yajvan
03 October 2007, 12:22 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~


Perhaps I am not at the stage to accept that "I" am God. I don't see how I can be God or his avatar. I don't even control an inch of anything in this universe except perhaps using my will that too haphazardly and without any surety and decisiveness.

If this means that I am dvaitin...I am okay with that. I think that we may be (part of) divine but we are not the whole divine. it is too difficult to comprehend that "I" am the controller of the universe when clearly I am controller of no-thing!

Namaste satay,
what you write and experience is fine... It is just a matter of time.
Control is one thing. IMHO basing ones core nature on this will give you a headache. The intersecting point of the Divine and you is consciousness. This as I have been taught is the fundamental principle.

The Chandogya Upanishad [3.17.6] says: Indestructible (akshitamasi) you are, Unchangable (achyutamasi) you are, You are the subtle essence of Prana (pranasamshitamasi).

So here is the pickle - great words without the personal experience! How then to get this experience? By ones sadhana, meditation.
My dear friend satay, it is not a matter of if, it is a matter of when this occurs.

It would be a completely different story if the rishi's were saying for this Brahma Sakshtkara ( Self Realization) or turiyatit chetana (sustained turya) to unfold, one must rope the moon, one must do 3 million push-ups, one must swim the ocean. They are not. They are saying be your SELF, that is all. And how does one be oneself? Be without thre 3 gunas.

And how to do that? Meditate and transcend naturally, that is it. It is a matter of 'sticking to the knitting' as they say, day in and day out.

Your SELF=Brahma Sakshtkara=Divine=Kahm=Brahman=Bhuma or Fullness= One needn't accomplish anything more, all has been done, when this Infinite experience becomes ones dailiy Being.
Om Namo bhagavate vasudevaya


pranams,

Arjuna
03 October 2007, 06:43 PM
This post is inspired by the Siva Sutra thread. Lord Shiva's incarnations are not as widely known as Lord Vishnu's.
Would be very helpful if we could collect more information about 'Incarnations of Shiva'.

Namaste,

If U mean pauranika & folk mythology, then there are some Shivavataras mentioned such as Lakulisha.
But basically Shiva (or Rudra) as samhArashakti-svarUpa does not incarnate since he deals with destruction only (and his avatAra as Kalagnirudra brings pralaya), while Shiva as Paramashiva never "incarnates" since He is Parabrahma-Parameshvara manifested in everything.
However, we can say that Sadashiva (personification of anugrahashakti) does incarnate in every Guru and Acharya.

Eastern Mind
03 October 2007, 07:46 PM
Arjuna: I agree with all you said. Good posts. However, I always react to the word 'destruction' as I don't think it correctly shows what we actually mean. It's been handed down by westerners who in translations had not the depth to see it as 'dissolution', which makes much more sense to me. What do you think? Aum Namasivaya

saidevo
03 October 2007, 09:19 PM
Namaste Atanuji.



As far as I can follow from shruti all manifestations are of Rudra-Shiva alone, including Vishnu, who is not another at all. One who is sthanu is Shiva and who has movement is Vishnu. But the Sthanu is alone moving and the movement leads to the Sthanu.


'A rose is a rose is a rose is a rose' said the poet Robert Burns. I appreciate the ontological details of hierarchy of Shiva, but Shiva is Shiva in any form he takes avatar. And that Shiva, as you have rightly observed, is Grace, the grace of granting Mukti, which is the exclusive right of Shiva alone.



For a true devotee of Shiva, everything is Shiva-Parvati. Yet such a devotee, when graced with sweet magic -- through any form, whether as a mad man (as in Sundara's case) or as a labourer (for Amma), will know the grace as Shiva only.


Mother is the favourite of some children; for some, Father is the favourite; for yet others, Maamaa (maternal uncle) is the favourite relation. Thus Parvati, Shiva and Vishnu are the Ishta Devata of the sects established in the names of Shakta, Shaiva and Vaishnava. Yet we all are Shiva's children.

Even Parvati, Shiva's Shakti and consort, has reincarnated on many occasions. Shiva as the One remains for ever and the many lead to him ultimately.

Aum namah shivAya!

Agnideva
05 October 2007, 06:43 AM
Namaste All,

Going back to the original post about Siva and incarnation … obviously, there are different answers to the question of Siva and incarnation depending on whether one is speaking from the Saiva or Smarta point of view.

From the standpoint of Siva-Shasana (Agamic Saivism), there are no Siva Avatars (incarnations). What do we mean by Avatar (incarnation) here? As used here, Avatar or incarnation means the idea that God takes a birth in a certain family, fulfills the intended purpose, and then gives up that form – this sort of teaching is not there in Saivism. However, there are manifestations or forms in which Siva may appear in mystic visions, in various legends, stories, Itihasas, Puranas, etc. Agamic Saivism recognizes 64 of these forms which are called Maheshvara Murtis, and considers 25 of these as primary.

In Saivism, the word avatara (meaning “descent”) itself has a different connotation. The descent in Saivism is not of God’s form, but of God’s knowledge. Some of the Saiva Agamas begin with a chapter called Tantra-Avatara Patala (Chapter on the Descent of Tantras), which explains that Siva alone is the source of all knowledge – Vedic, Agamic, philosophical, secular and even heretical. Since all knowledge is considered descended from Siva Himself, Siva-Dakshinamurti is the primal Teacher, the Guru of all gurus.

Any human Guru who is fully realized and embodies the divine knowledge of Siva is therefore identified with Siva Himself. This is why we find the most famous Sages, Siddhas and Saiva Satgurus like Dattatreya, Durvasa, Agastya, Lakulisha and Gorakshanatha identified with Siva Himself. Similarly, the most famous of Sivacharyas like Abhinavagupta, Manikkavacagar, etc. have also both been called Siva in human form because they were perfectly absorbed in the knowledge of Siva. It is possible that Adi Shankara was also identified with Siva by his followers (Smartas) for the very same reason.

The teaching that Siva is Guru, and Guru is Siva in human form was most fully explored by the Lakulisha-Pashupata school, a reformed sect of the ancient Pashupata religion that appeared around the first century CE. One of the beliefs of Lakulisha-Pashupatas was that in each dvapara and kali yuga, there arises a great Guru of mankind, who fully embodies the divine knowledge of Siva. The Guru who appears at the end of the dvapara yuga was called a Veda Vyasa, and the Guru who appears in the kaliyuga was called a Yogeshvara. According to this school, some of whose teachings are found in the Siva and Linga Puranas, the most recent Veda Vyasa was Krsna-Dvaipayana, and the most recent Yogeshvara was Jagadguru Lakulisha, the great reformer of the Pashupata school. In fact, the Linga Purana lists 28 Veda Vyasas and 28 Yogeshvaras that have thus far been. In Agamic Saivism, however, this teaching is not accepted.

Aum Namah Shivaya,
A.

Agnideva
05 October 2007, 06:51 AM
Here is a list of the 64 Maheshvara Murtis of Siva. The first 25 are sometimes considered the most important of the 64. Sometimes, the list is extended to 108 Maheshvara Murtis, which is inclusive of the 64.

64 Maheshvara Murtis (Forms) of Siva

1.Bhikshatana Murti
2.Nataraja Murti
3.Aja-Ekapada Murti
4.Yoga-Dakshinamurti
5.Lingodhava Murti
6.Kamadahana Murti (Kamari)
7.Tripurantaka Murti(Tripurari)
8.Mahakaleshvara Murti (Kalari/Kalantaka/Kalasamhara)
9.Jalandharavata Murti (Jalandhari)
10.Gajasurasamhara Murti (Gajantika)
11.Virabhadra Murti (Karala)
12.Kankala-Bhairava Murti
13.Kalyanasundara Murti
14.Vrishabharudha Murti
15.Chandrashekhara Murti
16.Uma-Maheshvara Murti
17.Shankaranarayana Murti (Keshavardha/Harihara)
18.Ardanarishvara Murti
19.Kirata Murti
20.Chandeshvaranugraha Murti
21.Chakradaneshvararupa Murti (Chakrapradasvarupa)
22.Somaskanda Murti
23.Gajamukhanugraha Murti
24.Nilakantha-Maheshvara Murti
25.Sukhasana Murti
26.Mukhalinga Murti (Panchamukhalingam)
27.Sadashiva Murti
28.Mahasadashiva Murti
29.Umesha Murti
30.Vrishabhantika Murti
31.Bhujangarlalita Murti
32.Bhujangatrasa Murti
33.Sandhyanritta Murti
34.Sadanritta Murti
35.Chanda-Tandava Murti
36.Gangadhara Murti
37.Gangavisarjana Murti
38.Jvarabhagna Murti
39.Shardhulahara Murti
40.Pashupata Murti
41.Vyakhyana-Dakshinamurti
42.Vina-Dakshinamurti
43.Vaguleshvara Murti
44.Apat-Uddharana Murti
45.Vatuka Bhairava Murti
46.Kshetrapala Murti
47.Aghorastra Murti
48.Dakshayajnahara Murti
49.Ashvarudha Murti
50.Ekapada-Trimurti
51.Tripada-Trimurti
52.Gaurivaraprada Murti
53.Gaurililasamanvita Murti
54.Vrishabhaharana Murti
55.Garudantika Murti
56.Brahmasirachedataka Murti
57.Kurmasamhara Murti (Kurmari)
58.Mastyasamhara Murti (Mastyari)
59.Varahasamhara Murti (Varahari)
60.Simhagna Murti (Sharabha/Sharabheshvara)
61.Raktabhikshapradana Murti
62.Guru-Murti (Gurushiva)
63.Prarthana-Murti
64.Shishyabhava Murti

List derived from Shaivam.org (http://www.shaivam.org/gallery/image/gformaah.htm) (edited for clarity)

Aum Namah Shivaya.
A.

Eastern Mind
05 October 2007, 09:29 PM
If Siva is truly All and in all, how could he possibly incarnate into a single human body. Wouldn't the rest of us (let alone all of the inanimate universe) be drawn into that, as we are all Siva too. (poor body would just explode from the shock) I think the concept puts Siva in a diminutive light. Siva is everywhere, in the trees, in the swamis, in us, at the core, in the lotus of the heart, "Anbe sivamayam, Satyame Parasivam". So if all of a sudden, Siva went into a single human body, that would put a limit on him. This doesn't jive with his 'infinite' ness. But then again I'm an Agamic Saivite, and as others have so verily stated in previous posts, this concept is not there. But if you want to believe he incarnates, too, that's your right. He's also in that thought. Aum Namasivaya

Madhavan
05 October 2007, 11:07 PM
If Siva is truly All and in all, how could he possibly incarnate into a single human body. Wouldn't the rest of us (let alone all of the inanimate universe) be drawn into that, as we are all Siva too. (poor body would just explode from the shock) I think the concept puts Siva in a diminutive light. Siva is everywhere, in the trees, in the swamis, in us, at the core, in the lotus of the heart, "Anbe sivamayam, Satyame Parasivam". So if all of a sudden, Siva went into a single human body, that would put a limit on him. This doesn't jive with his 'infinite' ness. But then again I'm an Agamic Saivite, and as others have so verily stated in previous posts, this concept is not there. But if you want to believe he incarnates, too, that's your right. He's also in that thought. Aum Namasivaya

Infact, I should return the question back to you. "If Siva is truly All and in all, how could he possibly be the ignorant men that we are?".

The reason is Siva is normally concealed by his own will. In an avatara, there is no such concealment. It is also totally wrong to think that the body of an avatara is made up of the same flesh and bones that we have, and that it is limited to any extent. An avatara's body is made of shuddha chaitanya. This point is specifically pointed out in the Gita :- 9.11. (only fools think that the Lord in the human body is of the same nature as other men)

atanu
06 October 2007, 12:28 AM
If Siva is truly All and in all, how could he possibly incarnate into a single human body. Wouldn't the rest of us (let alone all of the inanimate universe) be drawn into that, as we are all Siva too. (poor body would just explode from the shock) I think the concept puts Siva in a diminutive light. Siva is everywhere, in the trees, in the swamis, in us, at the core, in the lotus of the heart, "Anbe sivamayam, Satyame Parasivam". So if all of a sudden, Siva went into a single human body, that would put a limit on him. This doesn't jive with his 'infinite' ness. But then again I'm an Agamic Saivite, and as others have so verily stated in previous posts, this concept is not there. But if you want to believe he incarnates, too, that's your right. He's also in that thought. Aum Namasivaya


Namaste Eastern Mind,

Leave alone Shiva, one who has gained Shiva knowledge is not located in a body, though apparently for me and you, such a jnani may appear to be limited by a body.

These bodies are like costumes used in drama etc., you know. Wise knowers use the costumes in dharmic way and cause less war and strife. Jnanis who are non-different from Atman Shiva have no dharma to adhere to.

Om

Eastern Mind
06 October 2007, 12:56 PM
Yadhavan : Thank you for clarifying. Although I personally don't believe in avatar at all as its beyond my parampara's teachings, I have begun to understand how Hindus who do believe in avatar see it. From your point of view, it all makes sense. This is good knowledge for me, as I am more able to understand the other side, rather than just be narrow. Regarding that, as probably stated before by myself and others, I believe it most fruitful to stick to one's one's own path so there is less confusion. However, just as inter-faith dialogue is useful for the benefit of the planet's survival, so is Hindu inter-sect dialogue. Aum Namashivaya

Agnideva
06 October 2007, 06:45 PM
Namaste EM,

This is good knowledge for me, as I am more able to understand the other side, rather than just be narrow. Regarding that, as probably stated before by myself and others, I believe it most fruitful to stick to one's one's own path so there is less confusion. However, just as inter-faith dialogue is useful for the benefit of the planet's survival, so is Hindu inter-sect dialogue. Aum Namashivaya

Well said EM. I fully agree. I also believe that it is important for Hindus from different sects to come together and be able to understand, appreciate and respect each others' teachings. In doing that, we need not and should not dilute down the teachings of our own sampradayas and Gurus.

Aum Namah Shivaya,
A.

Arjuna
07 October 2007, 12:21 PM
Arjuna: I agree with all you said. Good posts. However, I always react to the word 'destruction' as I don't think it correctly shows what we actually mean. It's been handed down by westerners who in translations had not the depth to see it as 'dissolution', which makes much more sense to me. What do you think?

laya = dissolution, vanishing
saMhAra = destruction
vinAsha = vanishing, stopping, destruction

I see nothing wrong or bad in the word "destruction".

(Of course in monistic philosophy all "destruction" occurs in Consciousness only as a part of its spanda.)

Arjuna
07 October 2007, 12:41 PM
The reason is Siva is normally concealed by his own will.

Exactly.


In an avatara, there is no such concealment. It is also totally wrong to think that the body of an avatara is made up of the same flesh and bones that we have, and that it is limited to any extent. An avatara's body is made of shuddha chaitanya. This point is specifically pointed out in the Gita :- 9.11. (only fools think that the Lord in the human body is of the same nature as other men)

In fact everything is "made up" of Chaitanya only, since nothing else exists.
However i wouldn't agree that there is no "such concealment" since any form IS concealment by its very nature. There is nothing bad in concealment, it's a part of Consciousness' play.
Krishna and others were avataras, but never it the sense that Shiva "Himself came down to earth". Siddhas may incarnate at their own will (and thus be "avataras" of Shiva), but not Parameshvara.

The basic problem is that popular understanding of avatara concept as something historical is wrong or at least dubious. Clearly such figures like Nrisimha, Varaha etc. have little or nothing to do with history but are certain traditional symbols which can be interpreted on several levels. It is indeed better to get rid of paurANika concepts which were product of profanation, whether intentional or not.

How Parabrahman (Paramashiva) can "incarnate"? The only possible "incarnation" for Him is His Vimarsha, Shakti.

Agnideva
07 October 2007, 12:55 PM
Namaste Arjuna,


Krishna and others were avataras, but never it the sense that Shiva "Himself came down to earth". Siddhas may incarnate at their own will (and thus be "avataras" of Shiva), but not Parameshvara.
What you say here reminds me of something I read a long time ago in Paramahansa Yogananda's book Autobiography of a Yogi. Yogananda says that Avatars are actually Paramuktas (liberated beings) who choose to take on a human body by their own will for the purpose of teaching and guiding others to liberation. I don't think this teaching is there in Shaiva theology, but I don't find it contradictory to Shaivite teachings. Obviously, this would be unacceptable from a Vaishnava point of view.

Aum Namah Shivaya,
A.

upsydownyupsy mv ss
30 March 2010, 09:36 AM
the Hindu scriptures in Sanskrit and Tamil that clearly state that there is no avatar (incarnation) for Lord Shiva as he is the supreme. But his another form, Vishnu has avatars and is described as messenger of shiva in shivism, which MEANS VISHNU'S AVATARS ARE indirect avatars of shiva. But, others usually say the following are his avatars, I however disagree, dont believe? read <http://www.shaivam.org/siddhanta/tht10r.html>
1.) hanuman (because, of the name maruthi)
2.) krishna (because of the name keshava and because of the same inner meanings of pashupathi and gopala)
3.) baala shankara (=son & of shiva to calm kaali down by invoking her inner mother)
4.) aadi shankaracharya
5.) ayyappa (harihara putra)
I DONT AGREE BECAUSE, "HE IS EVERYTHING AND HE IS ME (BUT I AM NOT HIM)"-> ADVAITHAM.

Satyananda
10 October 2011, 08:26 AM
namaskar,

This post is inspired by the Siva Sutra thread. Lord Shiva's incarnations are not as widely known as Lord Vishnu's.

Would be very helpful if we could collect more information about 'Incarnations of Shiva'.

We can start with "Sri kanthanatha, an incarnation of Lord Shiva".

Haidakhan Babaji is said to be an incarnation of Shiva.
He appeared in a cave at the foot of Mount Kailash in 1970.
http://www.haidakhan.net/

Om Namah Shivaya

Eastern Mind
10 October 2011, 05:04 PM
Haidakhan Babaji is said to be an incarnation of Shiva.


Vannakkam Satyananda: Said by whom?

Aum Namasivaya

internationalhindu
10 October 2011, 06:04 PM
I presume you would prefer a list of avatars of Lord Shiva and not an explanation that Lord Vishnu, Lord Shiva, etc are all various forms of the same supreme Brahman...hence i shall say the names of a few avatars of Lord Shiva which come to my mind now - lord Dakshinamoorthy (lord Shiva as the universal teacher), Kalabhairava, Rudra, Vettaikurumagan (this is an avatar which is seen in south India in which lord Shiva is in the form of a hunter), Lord Hanuman, Rishabheswara (a fierce form taken by lord Shiva at the time of the narasimha avatar by lord Vishnu)...there are also sages like Durvasa and Adi shankara who are recognized as avatars of Lord Shiva...these are the only forms that came to my mind now...shall try and update soon...Om

Satyananda
11 October 2011, 06:28 AM
Vannakkam Satyananda: Said by whom?

Aum Namasivaya

His diciples felt that he was Shiva embodied,he certainly had the energy of Lord Shiva.
Another link : http://www.babaji.net/teachings-babaji.htm

sm78
11 October 2011, 10:00 AM
Said by whom?



Mostly by people who depend on the mythical babaji brand for their spiritual business. Generally those whose lineage don't go back beyond one-two persons need babaji's divine help to legitimize their lineage and the business of spirituality. This has been my observation.

As far as Babaji is concerned, his "messages" are too mundane and very ordinary, and all too familiar 19th century watered down hindu universal-ism, not worth the magnum effort of living for thousands of years, if you ask me.

Eastern Mind
11 October 2011, 10:50 AM
Vannakkam: Just to reiterate a bit here, many branches of Saivism, including mine, do not believe at all that Siva has avatars. Mostly it is horizontal transfer (taking a concept from one area of thought and applying it to another) from Vaishnivism. We do believe there are great sages that are in essence aligned with Siva more consciously than ordinary folk. This the category I put Adi Sankara in. As many of you know of course, technically he wasn't a Shaivite at all.

Aum Namasivaya

yajvan
11 October 2011, 06:28 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


Within kaśmir śaivism we are informed that the ṛiṣi durvāsā received knowledge of bhairava tantra from śrikaṇṭhanathā, an incarnation of śiva Himself.
Accordingly durvāsā ṛiṣi was instructed by śrikaṇṭhanathā to expand the thought of bhairava tantra in all the universe with no restriction to varna or jāti, male or female.

There are many more incarnations and will leave them for another time.

praṇām

Satyananda
13 October 2011, 05:53 AM
Mostly by people who depend on the mythical babaji brand for their spiritual business. Generally those whose lineage don't go back beyond one-two persons need babaji's divine help to legitimize their lineage and the business of spirituality. This has been my observation.

As far as Babaji is concerned, his "messages" are too mundane and very ordinary, and all too familiar 19th century watered down hindu universal-ism, not worth the magnum effort of living for thousands of years, if you ask me.

Some may not like his messages,or find them `too trivial`,but if you ask me,Babaji is one in ten-thousand so called `saints` in India.
He had the energy,he had the presence,and he transformed many.

Satyananda
13 October 2011, 06:01 AM
SadaShiva himself,is also said to have incarnated about 5,000 years ago.
He left behind many teachings and is held in highest respect by Aghoric Tantrics and others.

Omkara
07 October 2012, 10:27 PM
See this


Though the idea of avatars of Lord Shiva and the very concept of avatarhood is rejected by all Shaiva Acharyas,thete are many legends about avatars of lord Shiva,though most of them are not mentioned in the puranas or itihasas and even the mentions that are aldredy there are generally considered spurious.

I am presenting some pictures of various supposed avatars of the Lord here as the quesstion of whether Shiva incarnates or not has been asked many times but no one has mentioned these avatars.

Khandaka-Killed the demons Mani and Malla
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Khandoba.jpg

Mahadeshwara-Defeated Shravanasura
http://a5.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/185034_163833057002023_100001259894306_363944_7672655_n.jpg

Sharabha-Fought with and defeated Lord Vishnu's Narasimha and Varaha forms
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ed/Munneswaram_Sharabha.jpg/250px-Munneswaram_Sharabha.jpg

R Gitananda
09 October 2012, 03:15 AM
namaste

If there were a real distinction between an avatar of Sri Shiva as compared to an avatar of Sri Vishnu
and we were convinced that we could accurately identify them both, would we regard any differently one
which we believed to be an avatar of Sri Shiva from one which we believed to be an avatar of Sri Vishnu?

Based upon my reading of the Bhagavat Purana the way to peace is to not see them differently and
therefore I conclude that it would seem more appropriate to speak of the concept of avatar in and of itself
without separating into categories such as 'of Shiva' or 'of Vishnu', etc. Approached thus the pertinent
question would be how to distinguish a genuine avatar from one that is not.

Hari Aum


(50) (http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/canto4/chapter7.html#Text%2050)The Supreme Lord [Vishnu] said: 'I, Brahmâ and also Lord S'iva, do not differ [essentially] in being the supreme cause and Supersoul, the witness and the self-sufficient one of the material manifestation.(51) (http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/canto4/chapter7.html#Text%2051)I, having entered my own external energy that is composed of the modes of nature oh twice-born one, [thus] create, maintain and annihilate the cosmic manifestation and assume a name appropriate to My activities.(52) (http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/canto4/chapter7.html#Text%2052) Someone not conversant with this thinks that Brahmâ, S'iva and the living beings exist in separation and departs [impersonally in disregard of Me] from the notion of the one Supreme Self, the Supreme Brahman that is without a second. (53) (http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/canto4/chapter7.html#Text%2053)The way a person never supposes that his head, hands and other parts of his body would have a separate existence, My devotee neither supposes that the living beings would exist separately.(54) (http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/canto4/chapter7.html#Text%2054)He who does not consider the three [of Us] who constitute the one nature of the Supersoul of all living beings as separate [entities] oh brahmin, achieves peace.'

shian
09 October 2012, 06:09 AM
I think here in human world , become different just like the different of Sampradaya or lineage. So in the system and method , peoples will talk same thing in different way, because people already deluded. And will be confused without these difference :)

kundanghanekar
11 October 2012, 01:09 AM
hi,
i don't know that whether i am god or not,but i believe that human soul contains god and devil both. It is on your choice wat u want to be. Vidya is not the part of god or devil. So,wat are the percentage we are increasing?

Bhairava
19 October 2012, 06:25 PM
Anyone who becomes enlightened becomes an incarnation of Siva.

Suhita
19 March 2016, 05:28 AM
Namaste all,

I have read about 19 incarnation of lord shiva.