PDA

View Full Version : lord shiva



shangopriest
16 August 2008, 02:28 AM
hi im a devotee of lord shiva , but also worship other deities like ganesha , amba ji , durga and lord krishna , but when i talk about lord shiva with iskon members they seem not to like him very much just saying that he is a mere semi god .... any comments on this ?

yajvan
17 August 2008, 12:14 PM
hi im a devotee of lord shiva , but also worship other deities like ganesha , amba ji , durga and lord krishna , but when i talk about lord shiva with iskon members they seem not to like him very much just saying that he is a mere semi god .... any comments on this ?


Namaste,
this question was reviewed last week on this post...
take a look : http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=3269

pranams

Atman
07 November 2008, 10:01 AM
Lord Shiva is given a higher position than Lord Brahma, but his realm is said to be marginal, between the spiritual and material creation. It is not disrespecting to call him a demigod, he is the most powerful one, but he gets that due to his meditation on Krsna.

Ganeshprasad
07 November 2008, 10:51 AM
It is not disrespecting to call him a demigod, he is the most powerful one, but he gets that due to his meditation on Krsna.

Pranam

To call any Devas Demigod is highly disrespectful since there is no half measure about any one of them.

Jai Shree Krishna

reflections
07 November 2008, 01:17 PM
Namaste Atman,
Shiva or Shakti are not demigods. vaishnavism, Shakitsm, Shaivism are all valid accepted and very old traditions of Hinduism. Same reality is percieved in various aspects. We choose our path according to our orientation and Karma. In no other literature, except Iskcon's interpretation Shiva is represented as a demigod. From thousands of years Shiva is thought to be one with Brahman.

I am myself a Vaishnava, for me Krishna is Parabrahma. I an not even monist. I would very much like to serve his lotus feet rather than merging to a formless entity. However, those who chose a different path are not necessarily worshipping any demigod. And that is the beauty of Hinduism to recognize various paths as equally valid paths.

Don't get me wrong please. I don't want to criticize Iskcon, just pointing that their interpretation about Shiva is not the correct one.

Regards,
reflections

Jai Shri Krishna

hindustallion
07 November 2008, 09:29 PM
I am also a big devotee of Lord Shiva and do frequently get insulting comments from Krishna devotees.............it seems that ISKCON have different mind of their own....why don't they try to follow what written in scriptures.

atanu
09 November 2008, 09:55 AM
I am also a big devotee of Lord Shiva and do frequently get insulting comments from Krishna devotees.............it seems that ISKCON have different mind of their own....why don't they try to follow what written in scriptures.

The whole thing is an opportunity created by Shiva to destroy the dwarf -- the ego. He indeed dances on the dwarf.

Om

hindustallion
09 November 2008, 06:51 PM
The whole thing is an opportunity created by Shiva to destroy the dwarf -- the ego. He indeed dances on the dwarf.

Om

Can you please explain more, Atanu.
I also noticed that in paintings of ISKCON,they painted Shiva as somewhat ugly in dull black color and thin.

reflections
10 November 2008, 04:50 AM
Namaste,
By ego, first comes 'I', then comes 'my'; 'my faith'. That is still OK, issues arises when few people think 'My belief is the only right belief' which is due to superiority and ego.

May be Atanu will tell us, what does he mean by 'dwarf the ego'?

atanu
10 November 2008, 10:56 AM
Can you please explain more, Atanu.
I also noticed that in paintings of ISKCON,they painted Shiva as somewhat ugly in dull black color and thin.



Namaste,
By ego, first comes 'I', then comes 'my'; 'my faith'. That is still OK, issues arises when few people think 'My belief is the only right belief' which is due to superiority and ego.

May be Atanu will tell us, what does he mean by 'dwarf the ego'?

Namaste Reflection and hindustallion,

An immature scientist who has only known of Newton's law, which deals with solid objects, will declare Quantum Mechanics, which takes into account the ultimate non-locational wave nature of matter, as complete myth -- and that is a natural behaviour of an immature beginner.

Some quantum physicists may get annoyed or feel insulted -- and again that is the natural behaviour. A mature physicist, OTOH, will judge the student and then will act suitably, either smiling away the criticisms or explaining the matter very patiently and very delicately.
---------------------

There is a story that may be suitable here.

A devotee, "x" returned a vitriolic insult to his guru with vigour, using his fist. The Master endorsed the action. Another devotee "y" of the same guru exhausted the same vitriolic attack of the critic of his guru with a smile and silence. The master on hearing this, endorsed the action of the devotee heartily.
-----------------

There is another example from the Samurai lore. The Samurai fighters are graded as per their expertise with the sword but the Samurai who never has to use the Sword is graded the highest.

Om

atanu
10 November 2008, 12:30 PM
Namaste Reflection and hindustallion,

There is a story that may be suitable here.

A devotee, "x" returned a vitriolic insult to his guru with vigour, using his fist. The Master endorsed the action. Another devotee "y" of the same guru exhausted the same vitriolic attack of the critic of his guru with a smile and silence. The master on hearing this, endorsed the action of the devotee heartily.
Om

Namaste,

Actually the opposite of what is described above happened.

A devotee of Ramakrishna, while crossing the River Hooghly (Ganga) on a boat, fought with someone who was abusing Shri Ramakrishna. The guru, on hearing of this, rebuked the devotee gently and advised him to be more patient and forgiving.

A few days later, similar situation was repeated with another devotee, who tried to ignore the insults and the pinpricks, remembering guru's earlier advice. This time, however, the guru rebuked the devotee strongly and said that the devotee should have slapped the offender twice.

Both the devotees were confused.
------------

We all (the dwarfs) act as per the pull of our guna mixtures. The first devotee was rajasic and was advised restraint. The second devotee was Tamasic and was advised accordingly. Shiva as all the pervading Lord and as the embodied Guru, teaches everyone to overcome the dwarf who binds our minds to smallness.

The dwarf insults the so-called others who believe in Shiva. And the dwarf again feels insulted (on behalf of Shiva as if).


Mahanarayana Upanishad
XXI-1: May the Supreme who is the ruler of all knowledge, controller of all created beings, the preserver of the Vedas and the one overlord of Hiranyagarbha, be benign to me. I am the Sadasiva described thus and denoted by Pranava.


Om Namah Shivaya

devotee
10 November 2008, 08:12 PM
Namaste,

Actually the opposite of what is described above happened.

A devotee of Ramakrishna, while crossing the River Hooghly (Ganga) on a boat, fought with someone who was abusing Shri Ramakrishna. The guru, on hearing of this, rebuked the devotee gently and advised him to be more patient and forgiving.

A few days later, similar situation was repeated with another devotee, who tried to ignore the insults and the pinpricks, remembering guru's earlier advice. This time, however, the guru rebuked the devotee strongly and said that the devotee should have slapped the offender twice.

Both the devotees were confused.
------------

We all (the dwarfs) act as per the pull of our guna mixtures. The first devotee was rajasic and was advised restraint. The second devotee was Tamasic and was advised accordingly. Shiva as all the pervading Lord and as the embodied Guru, teaches everyone to overcome the dwarf who binds our minds to smallness.

The dwarf insults the so-called others who believe in Shiva. And the dwarf again feels insulted (on behalf of Shiva as if).


Namaste Atanu,

That was really a good example. :) However, was there any reason for posting this story the other way round in your earlier post or was it done inadvertently ?

Regards

OM

atanu
10 November 2008, 11:28 PM
Namaste Atanu,

That was really a good example. :) However, was there any reason for posting this story the other way round in your earlier post or was it done inadvertently ?

Regards

OM

Namaste Devotee,

Thank you. Actually, first time when i began to write the story, i simply forgot it. I wrote what was called for in the situation, as per my understanding.:o Then it came to me and i wrote the actual one. :)

God is mischievous. i feel that both stories together cover the ground.

Om

reflections
11 November 2008, 10:37 AM
Thanks Atanu, Your posts explained it pretty well. However the system is not allowing me to rep you, I don't know why.

atanu
11 November 2008, 11:43 AM
Thanks Atanu, Your posts explained it pretty well. However the system is not allowing me to rep you, I don't know why.

Thanks Reflections.

It is sufficient that we mutually enrich each other towards spiritual goal; then the purpose of our lives is fulfilled. I am sure that there is no other more worthy purpose of this life.

Participating in this forum does provide some benefit of satsangh, to the extent that one is reminded of the Self-God repeatedly and to ignore the external diversions, to stay away from distractions as far as practicable. Unfortunately, however, at present, i suffer from the many distractions.

Regards

Om

reflections
11 November 2008, 01:53 PM
One doubt:
Namaste Atanu,
Can you tell me which sect of Hinduism I belong to? I am not a monist, meaning I feel Monism might be true, but not for me. I always like to think God is something higher and separate than us. We might be smallest part of him but not the identical self. I pray to vishnu. Lord Krishna is my care taker, friend, master, chastiser, enchanting baby, it really depends on mood. However I think Krishna is just one of the perception of reality. The same reality has infinite aspects and some may approach it as Shiva or shakti or even as Jesus or Allah, they are all on right path depending upon their orientation. Being a Hindu, I do believe in Karma, but I feel grace of Krishna transcendates all negative karma, desires, sufferings.

Am I a vaishnava?

Regards,
reflections.



Thanks Reflections.

It is sufficient that we mutually enrich each other towards spiritual goal; then the purpose of our lives is fulfilled. I am sure that there is no other more worthy purpose of this life.

Participating in this forum does provide some benefit of satsangh, to the extent that one is reminded of the Self-God repeatedly and to ignore the external diversions, to stay away from distractions as far as practicable. Unfortunately, however, at present, i suffer from the many distractions.

Regards

Om

yajvan
11 November 2008, 04:39 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~

i suffer from the many distractions.

Regards Om

Namaste atanu,
How can one not have distractions when one has a nose, eyes, ears, touch and ears? They do their allotted duty, no? They bring you sight, and smells, they bring you sound and taste.

There must be some 'skill' we need to attend to so these jńānendriya-s (organs of cognition) do not drag us here and there.

pranams

atanu
12 November 2008, 02:37 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~


Namaste atanu,
How can one not have distractions when one has a nose, eyes, ears, touch and ears? They do their allotted duty, no? They bring you sight, and smells, they bring you sound and taste.

There must be some 'skill' we need to attend to so these jñānendriya-s (organs of cognition) do not drag us here and there.

pranams


Namaste Yajvan,

I agree but is there any reason why you left out the mind and the preferences of ego and its perceived needs for self sustenance as the main causes of distractions? Preferences for certain outcomes, fear of the future and guilt of the past, egg on the ego to strive forever. What can eyes and ears do when mind stays put? Possibly you are talking of this skill attained through training the mind?


Om

atanu
12 November 2008, 02:51 AM
One doubt:
Namaste Atanu,
Can you tell me which sect of Hinduism I belong to? I am not a monist, meaning I feel Monism might be true, but not for me. I always like to think God is something higher and separate than us. We might be smallest part of him but not the identical self. I pray to vishnu. Lord Krishna is my care taker, friend, master, chastiser, enchanting baby, it really depends on mood. However I think Krishna is just one of the perception of reality. The same reality has infinite aspects and some may approach it as Shiva or shakti or even as Jesus or Allah, they are all on right path depending upon their orientation. Being a Hindu, I do believe in Karma, but I feel grace of Krishna transcendates all negative karma, desires, sufferings.

Am I a vaishnava?

Regards,
reflections.

Namaste Reflections,

Your understanding is faultless. God is incomparably higher than any of the individual self. I have exactly the same faith as yours.

I know you understand the following but I am recording it for the sake of completeness that 'vaishnava' is a name to identify a group of people who have similar faiths. One definitely cannot be a name of a group, except in a manner of conveying the meaning that one belongs to such and such group. I am is I am. Not as a ego assertion but as feeling of the truth. However, Monism as a belief, opposed to experience, is ridden with pitfalls. As an assertion of Monism by the ego is always faulty.

Regards

Om

atanu
12 November 2008, 10:17 AM
One doubt:
Namaste Atanu,
--God is something higher and separate than us. We might be smallest part of him but not the identical self. I pray to vishnu. Lord Krishna is my care taker, friend, master, chastiser, enchanting baby, it really depends on mood. However I think Krishna is just one of the perception of reality. The same reality has infinite aspects and some may approach it as Shiva or shakti or even as Jesus or Allah, they are all on right path depending upon their orientation. Being a Hindu, I do believe in Karma, but I feel grace of Krishna transcendates all negative karma, desires, sufferings.

reflections.

Namaste Reflections and others,

Coming back to the original question of Lord Shiva, there is a wish to record certain observations, which are not intended for denigrating any faith and especially, dear true Vishnu bhaktas in this forum.

Keeping one's eyes and ears open (as Yajvan ji stated above), one can easily compile very immature opinions of many Vaishnavas in HK, Dvaita, or VA forums. In these forums most common threads pertain to Shiva bashing -- it is like venting one's anger indirectly. Below is shown a very common statement from this very thread:


Lord Shiva is given a higher position than Lord Brahma, but his realm is said to be marginal, between the spiritual and material creation. It is not disrespecting to call him a demigod, he is the most powerful one, but he gets that due to his meditation on Krsna.

The above is very gentle. There are writers who claim that Shiva has been killed by Vishnu or that Shiva is a poor servant of Vishnu; or Shiva actually had no capacity to digest the poison that He drank and that Vayu digested the poison for Shiva. Etc. Etc.

It would not have been of any consequence, had these statements originated from christians or muslims but from hindus who profess to follow vedas, these statements are pure rubbish -- reflecting grudge and hidden anger.

Because Veda says:

Yajur Veda i. 8. 6. d Rudra alone yieldeth to no second.

------------------------------
Let us examine just one aspect from one Upanishad and try to contemplate.

Maha Upanishad

I-1-4 athaato mahopanishhada.n vyaakhyaasyamastadaahureko ha vai naaraayaNa
aasiinna brahmaa neshaano naapo naagniishhomau neme dyaavaapR^ithivii na
nakshatraaNi na suuryo na chandramaaH . sa ekaakii na ramate .

I-1-4. Then we shall expound the Mahopanishad. They say Narayana was alone. There were not Brahma, Isha, Waters, Fire and Soma, Heaven and Earth, Stars, Sun and Moon. He could not be happy ( or He had no sport being alone).
----------
V.46 sarva.n shaanta.n niraalamba.n vyomastha.n shaashvata.n shivam.h .
anaamayamanaabhaasamanaamakamakaaraNam.h .. 45..
V. 46 na sannasanna madhyaanta.n na sarva.n sarvameva cha .
manovachobhiragraahyaM puurNaatpuurNa.n sukhaatsukham.h .. 46..

V-45. All is calm (needing) no support, existing in the ether (of the heart), eternal, Shivam, devoid of ailment and illusion, name and cause.
V-46. Neither existent nor-existent, nor in between, nor the negation of all; beyond the grasp of mind and words, fuller than the fullest, more joyful than joy.


Brahaman is Sad-Chid-Ananda. Whereas the Maha Upanishad says in the beginning that Narayyana was not happy alone: sa ekaakii na ramate (He could not be happy alone).http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/images/smilies/smile.gif . On the other hand the verses V-45 and V-46 say: Shivam, devoid of ailment and illusion, name and cause.----fuller than the fullest, more joyful than joy.

We all, irrespective of the name of our group, are pursuing Shivam -- JOY. Is there any one who is not pursuing happiness? Now, commonly Vaisnavas point out that Narayana is the creator of Isha and thus Isha must be a Demi God.


There are some valid reasons for the conflict though. Many Shiva lovers confound between Lord Shiva (Rudra, Isha, Guru) who has a personality and a function and Shivam, which is neither a being nor a non being and is indescribable.

Vaisnavas usually attack on this point. Yet they forget:

JABALOPANISHAD BELONGING TO THE SUKLA-YAJUR-VEDA

II-1. Thereafter the sage Atri (son of the creator Brahma) asked of Yajnavalkya: ‘How am I to realize the Self which is infinite and unmanifest ?’ (To this) Yajnavalkya replied: That Avimukta Lord Siva as the redeemer is to be worshipped; the Self which is infinite and unmanifest, is established in the Avimukta Ishvara, possessed of attributes.

III-1. Then the discipline students (Brahmacharins of Yajnavalkya) asked him: ‘Pray, tell us, what is that mantra by reciting which one attains immortality ?’ He replied: ‘By (reciting) Satarudriya’. These mantras are indeed the names of (Rudra to achieve) immortality. By (reciting) these (mantras) one becomes immortal.

Om Namah Shivaya

May this post be agreeable to Shiva and Vishnu.

yajvan
12 November 2008, 02:08 PM
Namaste Yajvan,

I agree but is there any reason why you left out the mind and the preferences of ego and its perceived needs for self sustenance as the main causes of distractions?
Om

Namaste atanu,
Yes I left them out to be brief... just one nodd to those who know is sufficient ( that would be you).
We have exhausted this subject on other posts. Perhaps if we wish to pick it up again for those viewing the post, may be of value? I will let you decide.
What would be the discussion? The senses act within the field of the senses and do their job. The is the recipient, the ego plays its role as does the intellect... Yet in the final analysis who is the Enjoyer of all this?
Why do we get bound to these things of the senses? What is the 'skill' that is required to navigate though life and limit the attachments and its binding influence?

pranams

tgp
13 November 2008, 04:05 AM
water has various names in various places. some call it aqua, bani, vaari, jala, neer, etc. but all mean the same water. i think iskon members doesn't understand this truth. krishna will be worried when they hate his another form.

tgp
13 November 2008, 04:13 AM
but he gets that due to his meditation on Krsna.

some of the great spritualities achieved samaadhi when they were not thinking of any god. so this is not acceptable to say that god shiva meditates on krsna

devotee
13 November 2008, 10:26 AM
This obstinate thinking of ISKON people forces me to heave a sigh in relief realising how nice it is that Hinduism is not an organised religion !

Perhaps, organisation breeds dogma & hippocracy . :(


OM

reflections
13 November 2008, 12:42 PM
This obstinate thinking of ISKON people forces me to heave a sigh in relief realising how nice it is that Hinduism is not an organised religion !

Perhaps, organisation breeds dogma & hippocracy . :(


OM
Namaste,

Yes, that is so true. What I do is, I don't treat them as authority in Hinduism, but accept good things in them. And the cleanliness in their temples as compared to other ancient ones, nice Sringar on deities, sweet Kirtan makes feel so close to God. And I like the conviction that our desires, negative karma, howsoever powerful they may be finally will be washed away by the grace of his name.

Jai shri Krisha.

Atman
17 November 2008, 04:58 PM
some of the great spritualities achieved samaadhi when they were not thinking of any god. so this is not acceptable to say that god shiva meditates on krsna

You are talking about mayavadis here, who just focus on brahman/spirit/void. Samadhi is relative, I just looked at a youtube video, and a Vaishnava lecture was explaining how even liberation can also be hell. The real goal is love of Krsna, so Shiva meditates on him, and is a great devotee.
Oh, and Buddha also attained nirvana, but if we are to take the Bhagvatam and Gita seriously, merging in Brahman, body of Mahavishnu, would also equal naraka compared to Goloka/Paramdham/SV.

reflections
18 November 2008, 12:38 PM
Namaste Atman,
We can go on and on about these debate, it will never end.
There is nothing wrong is thinking Krishna as parabrahma, and wishing to be in goloka rather than merging in absolute. I second you in that.

Your interpretation of Gita is the right one. But, please don't think other's interpretations are wrong. Scriptures are like torch, whichever path you focus, scriptures will enlighten it. If you read the scriptural interpretations by Shaiva saints or advaitain perspective etc., you will feel that they are not wrong.

Plus, the amount of time invested in making other's line smaller is actually wasted, it could have been used for making our conviction firm.

Jai Shri Krishna.






You are talking about mayavadis here, who just focus on brahman/spirit/void. Samadhi is relative, I just looked at a youtube video, and a Vaishnava lecture was explaining how even liberation can also be hell. The real goal is love of Krsna, so Shiva meditates on him, and is a great devotee.
Oh, and Buddha also attained nirvana, but if we are to take the Bhagvatam and Gita seriously, merging in Brahman, body of Mahavishnu, would also equal naraka compared to Goloka/Paramdham/SV.

atanu
20 November 2008, 09:38 AM
The real goal is love of Krsna, so Shiva meditates on him, and is a great devotee.



There you go with your opinions. Do you ever read other posts?


Oh, and Buddha also attained nirvana, but if we are to take the Bhagvatam and Gita seriously, merging in Brahman, body of Mahavishnu, would also equal naraka compared to Goloka/Paramdham/SV.

Nowhere in Gita and Bhagavatam is written what you put forth as fact but which is your opinion.

Shruti says: There is fear till there is another. So, till one experiences the Advaita Atman, which being Advaita and also being Atman cannot give rise to presence of another who is not the self.

On the other hand, who has been one with the Advaita Atman, can easily enjoy the multiplicity of states without ever fearing or without losing immortality.

Shri Krishna, in fact, teaches that the truth is known in Samadhi. Those who can not meditate and sit still for a moment find fault with the meditators who have known the truth in Samadhi and with compassion have taught the world that the ego which says that "I worship Lord and my way is superior" is actually Bhandasura.

I know that apparently it is useless to write, replying to your post, but deeper down you will begin a process of questioning some day or other. Sanatana Dharma uniquely encourages query on Brahman.

Best Wishes

Om Namah Shivaya

Ganesh
22 November 2008, 02:40 PM
I am also a big devotee of Lord Shiva and do frequently get insulting comments from Krishna devotees.............it seems that ISKCON have different mind of their own....why don't they try to follow what written in scriptures.

I am a Vaishnava but I also worship Shiva. I am influenced by Prabhupaada but I can't really call myself an ISKCON member. I think it's very bad what some members of ISKCON do - things just like the one's that you've described. This is against Gaudiya-parampara. Nityananda-cartamrta states that worshiping Govinda without the veneration of Shiva is a form of religious deviation (and the same is in the case of worshiping Shiva without venerating Vishnu). Vaishnavism is peaceful and tolerant but unfortunately some Vaishnavas misinterpret it. Bhagavad-gita states that Krishna is Shiva.

Atman
15 December 2008, 09:29 AM
There you go with your opinions. Do you ever read other posts?


Nowhere in Gita and Bhagavatam is written what you put forth as fact but which is your opinion.


I have read other posts- Gita and Bhagavatam both state Krsna as the supreme goal, whoever worships the demigods goes to their planets, but whoever worships me comes to my planet.

atanu
15 December 2008, 09:41 AM
I have read other posts- Gita and Bhagavatam both state Krsna as the supreme goal, whoever worships the demigods goes to their planets, but whoever worships me comes to my planet.

Very well. But has Krsna said that mahesvara is a demi god?

Yogkriya
21 December 2008, 07:26 AM
Very well. But has Krsna said that mahesvara is a demi god?

Namaskar Atanu ji and other spiritual brothers!

That's the whole point. 'Demi' God thing is lavishly quoted by gaudiya vaishnavs/Iskconites, and then fingers are pointed towards Lord Shiva as a demi god and interpreted that Krishna asked not to worship Shiva.
But they ignore Lord Krishna's very own words. Krishna speaks volumes on Lord Shiva, but all that is conveniently ignored. Krishna doesn't say Shiva is a mere demi/semi God...!
Kindly notice from the Bhagwad Gita (As it was) -

upadrastanumanta ca
bharta bhokta mahesvarah
paramatmeti capy ukto
dehe 'smin purusah parah (Bhagavad Gita 13:23)

"Yet in this body there is another, a transcendental enjoyer who is MAHESHWARA, the supreme proprietor, who exists as the overseer and permitter, and who is known as Paramatma,the Supreme soul of universe".


Another thing that I would like to bring to notice of Iskcon/Gaudiyas is that since Lord Krishna said that people of lower intelligence worship "demi" Gods, then it should be true. Now Lord Shiva is somehow misinterpreted as a "demi" God by Gaudiyas as per their God positioning hierarchal system. .. and Krishna himself worshiped Shiva and worshiped Shiva as Ram too before that. And so does he receives the instruction of Shiva Gita from Lord Shiva as Ram. So did worship Kunti, Gandharai great sages as Shri Vashishtha (kul Guru of Lord Ram), and almost all the Vedic sages - Lord Shiva. Were they all people of "lower intelligence"?? Was Krishna himself of lower intelligence as he was worshipping Lord Shiva in the ashram of Rishi Upamanyu? Was he of lower intelligence as he requested Rishi upmanyu of Pashupat Diksha? Was Lord Ram of lower intelligence as he asks the great sage Agastya of Virja and Pashupat dikshas?? The answer is clear isn't it?! Shiva is not a "demi" God.
Not a deva, but Mahadeva. Not just Ishwara, but Maheswara. Not just kaal, but Mahakaal.

HariHaraya Namaha!

YogKriya.

Atman
30 December 2008, 05:52 AM
Lord Shiva is also known as an Urdhaverata- one who has complete sublimation of semen, but as the spiritual world is even beyond, it would be safe to assume they have also conquered kamadeva.

Yogkriya
20 January 2009, 04:52 AM
Lord Shiva is also known as an Urdhaverata- one who has complete sublimation of semen, but as the spiritual world is even beyond, it would be safe to assume they have also conquered kamadeva.

Urdhvareta is one who's directed his energies, consciousness upwards. It may not necessarily refer to semen. Urdhvareti kriya also is a yogic technique that helps achieve the same. But yes it also moves the semen and directs it upwards. Shiva burnt Kamdev to ashes. Rati prays to Shiva to grant back her husband now burnt to ashes. Lord Shiva promises that Kamdev will be born again after many yugas.
Later as Krishna worships Shiva to have a son as valorous as He, Shiva blesses him with a son who is none other than Kamdev himself.

Even for a yogi who has attained sehestrar bhedan siddhi and attained Nirvikalpa samadhi is in bliss all the time and it is not possible for him to fall to petty carnal pleasures as he is already enjoying a much much higher pleasure that is beyond description to ordinary man.
It amazes me when some people talk loosely about Lord Shiva being able to overcome kama somehow, clearly hold no understanding of what a yogi's consciousness is who has parsed the veil of Maya and gone beyond and is situated in divine consciousness in constant samadhi. This is Krishna Consciousness, this is Shiva consciousness, this is divine consciousness. Love, peace and bliss in divine communion.
Hari Om.
Namah Shivaya!
Sarva Shiva mayam!
Regards,

Yogkriya.

atanu
20 January 2009, 06:56 AM
From Shanti Parva of Mahabharata.

Shri Krishna Sarvesvara says:


ahamAtmA hi lokAnAM vishvAnAM pANDunandana
tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham
yadyahaM nArchayeyaM vai IshAnaM varadaM shivam
AtmAnaM nArchayetkashchiditi me bhAvitaM manaH

O Son of Pandu, I am, indeed, the Atma, the indweller of this universe and the worlds. Therefore, I worship Rudra first as my own Self. If I did not worship Rudra, the indwelling Lord, the bestower of boons shivam, first in such a way, some would not worship me, at all - this is my opinion.

-------


yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo.anu taM sa hi mAm anu
rudro nArAyaNashchaiva sattvamekaM dvidhAkR^itam
loke charati kaunteya vyakti sthaM sarvakarmasu

Whoever knows him, knows me. Whoever follows him, follows me. (Though) the world, in all its actions, worships two Gods Rudra and Narayana, it is actually One only who is worshipped.

Om

atanu
20 January 2009, 12:53 PM
From Shanti Parva of Mahabharata.


Shri Krishna Sarvesvara says:


ahamAtmA hi lokAnAM vishvAnAM pANDunandana
tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham
yadyahaM nArchayeyaM vai IshAnaM varadaM shivam
AtmAnaM nArchayetkashchiditi me bhAvitaM manaH

O Son of Pandu, I am, indeed, the Atma, the indweller of this universe and the worlds. Therefore, I worship Rudra first as my own Self. If I did not worship Rudra, the indwelling Lord, the bestower of boons shivam, first in such a way, some would not worship me, at all - this is my opinion.
-------
yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo.anu taM sa hi mAm anu
rudro nArAyaNashchaiva sattvamekaM dvidhAkR^itam
loke charati kaunteya vyakti sthaM sarvakarmasu

Whoever knows him, knows me. Whoever follows him, follows me. (Though) the world, in all its actions, worships two Gods Rudra and Narayana, it is actually One only who is worshipped.

Om


Namaste All,

I thought that the above citation will not be complete without also citing the following concoction of an ISKCON/Gaudiya guru:





Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur (in his book Lord Shiva: The greatest vaisnava).
In the Siddhanta-ratnam, third pada, texts 22, 23, 26 and 27, it is stated: “By displaying the pastime of worshiping His own form as Rudra, Lord Vishnu taught the worship of Rudra not to His own sincere devotees but to the insincere living entities who desire religiosity, economic development, sense gratification, and liberation. The Lord Himself has confirmed this fact when He spoke in the Narayaniya to Arjuna as follows: ‘O Arjuna, I am the soul of the universe. My worship of Rudra is worship of My own self. Whatever I do, common people follow. Examples set by Me should be followed. That is why I worship Rudra. Vishnu does not offer obeisances to any demigod. I worship Rudra, considering him to be My own self. I am the indwelling supersoul of the entire universe. Rudra is My own part, just as a hot iron rod is non-different from fire. I have set the standard that the demigods headed by Rudra should be worshiped. If I did not set the example of worshiping Rudra then people would not follow that standard. Therefore I teach the worship of My servants through My personal behavior. There is no one greater than or equal to Me. Therefore, since I am the greatest, I do not worship anyone. But since Rudra is My part I display the example of worshiping Rudra and other demigods to teach ordinary people.
-------------------------------What kind of mind can derive such a convoluted interpretation from the very precise verses of Mahabharata, attributed to Shri Krishna? The sadhu (?) writer ignores tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham ( I worship Rudra first as my own Self). He also ignores yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo.anu taM sa hi mAm anu (Whoever knows him, knows me. Whoever follows him, follows me). How do we compare this saying of Shri Krishna with the following concoction of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur ?
-----Lord Vishnu taught the worship of Rudra not to His own sincere devotees but to the insincere living entities who desire religiosity, economic development, sense gratification, and liberation. ------------- :headscratch:

Om

santosh
20 January 2009, 09:15 PM
Hare Krishna,

I certainly did not want to take part in this discussion but since atanuji mentioned the name of Srila BhaktiSiddhanta Saraswati Maharaj in a disrespectful way, I am submiting this post.

First and foremost, if you don't understand or agree with the teachings of a Gaudiya Vaishnava Acharya, that's your choice, but there is no need to blasphem the Saint. I am sure everyone will agree with this. By Blaspheming a great saint, no one can go anywhere but in the negative direction. If you don't agree, you could simply say "no, I don't agree with this" and my point of view is this "and state whatever you have to say" and any reader will make his/her own judgement. That's civil.

Srila BhaktiSiddhanta Saraswati Thakur Maharaj is a great saint in the parampara of Brahma-Madva-Gaudiya Sampradaya. Teachings by His Divine Grace are based on the authorative scriptures and teachings of the previous saints in the Sampradaya.

All bonafide Brahma-Madva-Gaudiya devotees hold Lord Shiva in greatest of greatest respect. Lord Shiva is the Highest Vaishnava and Lord Shiva is given that respect, admiration and love as such.

Lord Shiva is not "a" devata, Lord Shiva is "the" "Maha"devata. There are 33 crore (330 million) devatas including Lord Brahma, but they are of Jiva Tattva. Lord Shiva is of Shiva Tattva. Shiva Tattava's position is always higher. Lord Krishna and all the Purush Avatars (Lord Narasimha, Lord Rama etc.) are Vishnu Tattva which is the Supreme Lord of entire cosmic manifestation.

As everybody knows, Lord Shiva drank all the poison that came out of Samudra Manthan (Churning of Ocean). Lord Shiva is Guna Avatar, special expansion, of Lord Mahavishnu Himself. To take the charge of Tamo Guna, the Supreme Lord Sri Hari, expands into Lord Shiva, however Lord Shiva is not in Tamo Guna, but He is in-charge of Tamoguna. Lord Brahma is in-charge of Rajo Guna and Lord Vishnu is in-charge of Sattva Guna.

Lord Shiva's position in Spiritual World is known an Lord SadaShiva of which Lord Shiva is manifestation in the material world.

About Lord Shiva According to Brahma Samhita (spoken by Lord Brahma):

--------- Brahma Samhita verses, translation and purports included --------
5.45

ksīram yathā dadhi vikāra-viśesa-yogāt
sañjāyate na hi tataḥ pṛthag asti hetoh
yah śambhutām api tathā samupaiti kāryād
govindam ādi-purusam tam aham bhajāmi

Translation:

Just as milk is transformed into curd by the action of acids, but yet the effect curd is neither same as, nor different from, its cause, viz., milk, so I adore the primeval Lord Govinda of whom the state of Śambhu is a transformation for the performance of the work of destruction.

Further explanation of the verse:

(The real nature of Śambhu, the presiding deity of Maheśa-dhāma, is described.) Śambhu is not a second Godhead other than Kṛṣṇa. Those, who entertain such discriminating sentiment, commit a great offense against the Supreme Lord. The supremacy of Śambhu is subservient to that of Govinda; hence they are not really different from each other. The nondistinction is established by the fact that just as milk treated with acid turns into curd so Godhead becomes a subservient when He Himself attains a distinct personality by the addition of a particular element of adulteration. This personality has no independent initiative. The said adulterating principle is constituted of a combination of the stupefying quality of the deluding energy, the quality of nonplenitude of the marginal potency and a slight degree of the ecstatic-cum-cognitive principle of the plenary spiritual potency. This specifically adulterated reflection of the principle of the subjective portion of the Divinity is Sadāśiva, in the form of the effulgent masculine-symbol-god Śambhu from whom Rudradeva is manifested. In the work of mundane creation as the material cause, in the work of preservation by the destruction of sundry asuras and in the work of destruction to conduct the whole operation, Govinda manifests Himself as guṇa-avatāra in the form of Śambhu who is the separated portion of Govinda imbued with the principle of His subjective plenary portion. The personality of the destructive principle in the form of time has been identified with that of Śambhu by scriptural evidences that have been adduced in the commentary. The purport of the Bhāgavata ślokas, viz., vaiṣṇavānāḿ yathā śambhuḥ, etc., is that Śambhu, in pursuance of the will of Govinda, works in union with his consort Durgādevī by his own time energy. He teaches pious duties (dharma) as stepping-stones to the attainment of spiritual service in the various tantra-śāstras, etc., suitable for jīvas in different grades of the conditional existence. In obedience to the will of Govinda, Śambhu maintains and fosters the religion of pure devotion by preaching the cult of illusionism (Māyāvāda) and the speculative āgama-śāstras. The fifty attributes of individual souls are manifest in a far vaster measure in Śambhu and five additional attributes not attainable by jīvas are also partly found in him. So Śambhu cannot be called a jīva. He is the lord of jīva but yet partakes of the nature of a separated portion of Govinda.

Who is Lord Krishna?

Brahma Samhita 5.39

rāmādi-mūrtisu kalā-niyamena tisthan
nānāvatāram akarod bhuvanesu kintu
krsnah svayam samabhavat paramah pumān yo
govindam ādi-purusam tam aham bhajāmi

Translation:

I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord, who manifested Himself personally as Kṛṣṇa and the different avatāras in the world in the forms of Rāma, Nṛsiḿha, Vāmana, etc., as His subjective portions.

Brahma Samhita 5.1

īśvarah paramah krsnah
sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahah
anādir ādir govindah
sarva-kārana-kāranam

Krsna who is known as Govinda is the Supreme Godhead. He has an eternal blissful spiritual body. He is the origin of all. He has no other origin and He is the prime cause of all causes.

Further explanation of the verse:

Krsna is the exalted Supreme entity having His eternal name, eternal form, eternal attribution and eternal pastimes. The very name "Kṛṣṇa" implies His love-attracting designation, expressing by His eternal nomenclature the acme of entity. His eternal beautiful heavenly blue-tinged body glowing with the intensity of ever-existing knowledge has a flute in both His hands. As His inconceivable spiritual energy is all-extending, still He maintains His all-charming medium size by His qualifying spiritual instrumentals. His all-accommodating supreme subjectivity is nicely manifested in His eternal form. The concentrated all-time presence, uncovered knowledge and inebriating felicity have their beauty in Him. The mundane manifestive portion of His own Self is known as all-pervading Paramātmā, Īśvara (Superior Lord) or Viṣṇu (All-fostering). Hence it is evident that Kṛṣṇa is sole Supreme Godhead. His unrivaled or unique spiritual body of superexcellent charm is eternally unveiled with innumerable spiritual instrumentals (senses) and unreckonable attributes keeping their signifying location properly, adjusting at the same time by His inconceivable conciliative powers. This beautiful spiritual figure is identical with Kṛṣṇa and the spiritual entity of Kṛṣṇa is identical with His own figure.

The very intensely blended entity of eternal presence of felicitous cognition is the charming targeted holding or transcendental icon. It follows that the conception of the indistinguishable formless magnitude (Brahman) which is an indolent, lax, presentment of cognitive bliss, is merely a penumbra of intensely blended glow of the three concomitants, viz., the blissful, the substantive and the cognitive. This transcendental manifestive icon Kṛṣṇa in His original face is primordial background of magnitudinal infinite Brahman and of the all-pervasive oversoul. Kṛṣṇa as truly visioned in His variegated pastimes, such as owner of transcendental cows, chief of cowherds, consort of milk-maids, ruler of the terrestrial abode Gokula and object of worship by transcendental residents of Goloka beauties, is Govinda. He is the root cause of all causes who are the predominating and predominated agents of the universe. The glance of His projected fractional portion in the sacred originating water viz., the personal oversoul or Paramātmā, gives rise to a secondary potency — nature who creates this mundane universe. This oversoul's intermediate energy brings forth the individual souls analogously to the emanated rays of the sun.

That is why Sri Sankaracharya at the end of his preaching activity said Bhaja Govindam, Bhaja Govindam. Sri Sankaracharya is none other than Lord Shiva Himself. On the order of Lord Vishnu, Lord Shiva in the form of Sri Sankaracharya preached the philosopy of monism but at the end of his preaching, Sri Sankaracharya asked to worship Govinda.

-------- end of included text --------

Again, you may disagree but please do not call names to the teachings of Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Thakur, a great Vaishnava. No need for commiting unnecessary offense.

atanu
21 January 2009, 01:02 AM
Hare Krishna,

First and foremost, if you don't understand or agree with the teachings of a Gaudiya Vaishnava Acharya, that's your choice, but there is no need to blasphem the Saint.

Namaste Santosh,

If free enquiry is profanity then and then only you are correct. On the other hand, profanity against Shiva is real profanity because Vedas prescribe Rudra worship. Brahma samhita that you quote again and again is not samhita and is not Shruti. Moreover, you also do not understand Brahma Samhita, wherein Lingarupi Sambhu is described as controller of Niyati, who is Shakti of Mahat Hare.

Know that Shri Krishna Sarvesvara is Prajna Ghana, universal Soul, whose Atma is Shivam -- Advaita Atma. Shri Krishna says: Those who know me as mahesvara know me. In verse from Mahabharata, cited above, He indeed says that one who worships Shiva worships Me. One who follows Shiva follows Me. There is no doubt in me and many of us here that the Visva Atma is not different from Advaita Atman. And Self Realised sages teach that the Visva is from the Advaita Atman.

There is no profanity against anyone. We are however free to check up all statements of those gurus who try to demean Rudra -- The Ishwara of Veda.

Regards

Om

atanu
21 January 2009, 01:20 AM
Brahma Samhita 5.1

īśvarah paramah krsnah
sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahah
anādir ādir govindah
sarva-kārana-kāranam

Yes. Veda names Rudra as Isha. Iswara Shiva alone is krsnah -- Sad-Chid-Ananda Vigraha (i.e. individual form or shape , form , figure , the body ). The above verse means this. That however, does not mean that Sad-Chid-Ananda has been replaced by the Vigraha. Where is doubt and where is any problem? In fact Shri Krishna teaches that one who worships Shiva -- the indwelling atma worships Krishna (visva atman) also.


krsnah sarvesvara is prajna ghana -- the all attractive shushupti, the revealed consciousness of advaita atma shivo, who is always the revealer. But be careful. The revealer and the revealed are not two separate beings, but it is most important to attain the revealer through the revealed.


Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
21 January 2009, 06:44 AM
Hare Krishna,
5.45
ksīram yathā dadhi vikāra-viśesa-yogāt
sañjāyate na hi tataḥ pṛthag asti hetoh
yah śambhutām api tathā samupaiti kāryād
govindam ādi-purusam tam aham bhajāmi

Translation:
Just as milk is transformed into curd by the action of acids, but yet the effect curd is neither same as, nor different from, its cause, viz., milk, so I adore the primeval Lord Govinda of whom the state of Śambhu is a transformation for the performance of the work of destruction.

Namaste Santosh,

SambhUtAm means that which is created; produced; one in whom anything has arisen. sambhutAM is to undergo union with the five elements. The above word has been used in Upanishads to indicate birth of pancha bhutas from Vishnu or Vishnu associated with panchbhutas.

Whereas the primary meaning of sambhu is parent/progenitor and it is Noun for a facet of Lord Shiva.

What the verse above says is that the created things are different from the creator; like a wave is different from the ocean. To read sambhutAm as Sambhu is not without a motivation and is open to examination. I urge you also to ponder and examine and not be attached blindly to a school. You must understand that for a Shiva lover, Vishnu is none other than Shiva. So, shed away your defensive thought process and critically examine the purports -- you will find mala in those purports.

Best Wishes

Om

yajvan
21 January 2009, 02:19 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~


The revealer and the revealed are not two separate beings, but it is most important to attain the revealer through the revealed. Om Namah Shivaya

Namasté
Atanu speaks wisely here i.e. to attain the revealer through the revealed. Here is one way it is mentioned, from Vijñāna Bhairava¹ :

… śaivī-mukhaṃ ichocyate || 20
śakti ( which is śaivī) is the mouth (mukhaṃ) or entrance ichocyate (it is explained , ucyate or explained)

This sūtra informs us śakti is the entrance…. but to what?

The 21st sūtra informs us completely¹.
Just as parts of space are known by the light of a lamp
or the rays of the sun, in the say way O Dear One
Śiva is known through Śakti.

praṇām
words and references

Vijñāna Bhairava - the conversation between śakti and śiva. This is from the Rudrayāmala Tantra.
Vijñāna is vi+jñāna: vi is to discern, distinction + jñāna is wisdom, knowledge.
Bhairava - more in-depth explanation of Bhairava can be found at this HDF post:http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=17892&postcount=52 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=17892&postcount=52)
The 21st sūtra reads the following:
yathālokena dīpasya kiraṇair-bhāskarasya ca |
jñāyate dig-vibhāgādi tadvac chatyā śivaḥ priye || 21

santosh
21 January 2009, 09:03 PM
Hare Krishna atanuji,

When you say such as
> What kind of mind can derive such a convoluted interpretation from the
> very precise verses of Mahabharata, attributed to Shri Krishna?
> The sadhu (?) writer ignores...

it is blashemy. To say Sadhu writer ignores...it is blasphemy.

The Sadhu is not ignoring anything, the scriptures are clear and commentaries on scriptures by great Vaishnava Acharyas are clear as well. You don't understand it or disagree with it, that's your choice.

> There is no doubt in me and many of us here that the Visva Atma is not different from Advaita Atman. And Self Realised sages teach that the Visva is from the Advaita Atman.

> ...many of us here...
Which Sampradaya or Ashram you are referring to?

> ...the Visva Atma is not different from Advaita Atman.

Can you explain your understanding of what is the nature of Advaita Atman? Does it have a Form?

After reading your this post and your posts in other threads, it is clear that you have made lot of efforts in understanding the Supreme Absolute Truth. But you do not have proper understanding of the Supreme Absolute Truth. Your confusion about Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu etc. is just a minor issue. It seems you are following some Advaita school of thought.

Advaita siddhanta says Aham Brahmasmi. But not Aham Para Brahmasmi. Incorrect understanding of Advaita is Aham Para Brahmasmi. Advaita Siddhanta in its highest stage can not, can not, explain about the complete nature of the Supreme Lord. It can take you only upto Brahm realization wherein the sadhaka realizes that he/she is Brahm.

Srimad Bhagavatam Maha Puran explains, three levels of realizing the Supreme Absolute Truth - Brahm realization, Paramatma Realization, Bhagawan realization. The Highest is the Bhagawan realization wherein the "humble" sadhaka sees the Supreme Absolute Truth in it's personal Form, that is, Lord Vishnu e.g. Dhruva after his tapascharya saw Lord Vishnu face to face. That is the Highest realization and Advaita Siddhanta does not have any concept of it, it is beyond Advaita Siddhanta.

Atma (Soul) in the body is Brahm-Swaroop, meaning it is Sat-Chit-Ananda, but it is not Para-Brahma (Super Soul). No, never. Para-Brahm is the Supreme Absolute Truth of which Atma is tiny infinitesmal part. Para-Brahma is infinite, but individual Atma is not infinite. Para-Brahma is the Supreme Absolute Creator and unlimited Atmas (souls or living entities) are His creation. There should not be any difficulty in understanding this. God is God and we are we. So yes, the Soul is non-different than the Lord and yet simultaneously different than the Lord - one in quality but not in quantity. He is Vibhu and we are anu. This "simultaneous oneness and difference" is explained in Achintya Bhedabhed philosophy by Lord Gauranga Himself.

Brahm never becomes Para-Brahm. In Brahm realization, Soul merges with the Para-Brahm but even then it maintains it's own identity separate. Why? because that's how it was created? We are separated part-and-parcel of the Supreme Absolute Truth. This is the proper understanding and it is not mine, it is given by the Vaishnava Acharyas - Srila Madhvacharya, Srila Vallabhacharya, Srila Ramanujacharya, Srila Nimbarkacharya, Srila Yamunacharya, Saint Gyaneshwar, Saint Tukaram, Saint Namadev, Srila Vishvanath Chakravati, Srila Baladev Vidyabhushan and many others and it is available to anyone.

Even Sri Sankaracharya who is a staunch monist, at the end said "Bhaja Govindam".

One can not understand the Supreme Absolute Truth on one's own mental effort or by reading some books. Only by surrendering to the Pure Devotee, one can ever think of understanding the Supreme Truth.

The most important fact for attaining spiritual knowledge is that you must learn the scriptures from bonafide Spiritual Master. Even reading bonafide Scriptures on own's own can give wrong conclusions. I will give one example to illustrate that. Please read Srimad Bhagavatam 8.7.19. Translatation is:

O King, when that uncontrollable poison was forcefully spreading up and down in all directions, all the demigods, along with the Lord Himself, approached Lord Śiva (http://vedabase.net/s/siva) [Sadāśiva (http://vedabase.net/s/sadasiva)]. Feeling unsheltered and very much afraid, they sought shelter of him.

Now read the commentary by Srila Madhvacharya:

One may question that since the Supreme Personality of Godhead was personally present, why did He accompany all the demigods and people in general to take shelter of Lord Sadāśiva (http://vedabase.net/s/sadasiva), instead of intervening Himself. In this connection Śrīla (http://vedabase.net/s/srila) Madhvācārya warns:

rudrasya (http://vedabase.net/r/rudrasya) yaśaso 'rthāya
svayaḿ (http://vedabase.net/s/svayam) viṣṇur viṣaḿ (http://vedabase.net/v/visam) vibhuḥ (http://vedabase.net/v/vibhuh)
na (http://vedabase.net/n/na) sañjahre (http://vedabase.net/s/sanjahre) samartho 'pi
vāyuḿ (http://vedabase.net/v/vayum) coce praśāntaye (http://vedabase.net/p/prasantaye)

Lord Viṣṇu (http://vedabase.net/v/visnu) was competent to rectify the situation, but in order to give credit to Lord Śiva (http://vedabase.net/s/siva), who later drank all the poison and kept it in his neck, Lord Viṣṇu (http://vedabase.net/v/visnu) did not take action.

All bonafide Vaishnavas in all traditions hold Lord Shiva in highest respect, owe and reverence. ISKCON celebrates Maha Shivaratri and there are special lectures glorifying the glories of Lord Shiva.

atanu
22 January 2009, 11:34 AM
Hare Krishna atanuji,

Now read the commentary by Srila Madhvacharya:

One may question that since the Supreme Personality of Godhead was personally present, why did He accompany all the demigods and people in general to take shelter of Lord Sadāśiva (http://vedabase.net/s/sadasiva), instead of intervening Himself. In this connection Śrīla (http://vedabase.net/s/srila) Madhvācārya warns:

rudrasya (http://vedabase.net/r/rudrasya) yaśaso 'rthāya
svayaḿ (http://vedabase.net/s/svayam) viṣṇur viṣaḿ (http://vedabase.net/v/visam) vibhuḥ (http://vedabase.net/v/vibhuh)
na (http://vedabase.net/n/na) sañjahre (http://vedabase.net/s/sanjahre) samartho 'pi
vāyuḿ (http://vedabase.net/v/vayum) coce praśāntaye (http://vedabase.net/p/prasantaye)

Lord Viṣṇu (http://vedabase.net/v/visnu) was competent to rectify the situation, but in order to give credit to Lord Śiva (http://vedabase.net/s/siva), who later drank all the poison and kept it in his neck, Lord Viṣṇu (http://vedabase.net/v/visnu) did not take action.

All bonafide Vaishnavas in all traditions hold Lord Shiva in highest respect, owe and reverence. ISKCON celebrates Maha Shivaratri and there are special lectures glorifying the glories of Lord Shiva.

Namaste Santosh,

If ISKCON members hold Lord Shiva in high esteem then it is good to hear and too good to believe.

By citing Madhavacharya and other purports as proof you are just piling opinion upon opinion -- all these are not sruti. And there is no point going ahead by piling up evidences when all I am asking is resolution of these two following two contradictory statements and one statement is from Lord Krishna.

Lord Krishna to Arjuna

tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham ( I worship Rudra first as my own Self). And yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo.anu taM sa hi mAm anu (Whoever knows him, knows me. Whoever follows him, follows me).

vs.




Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur (in his book Lord Shiva: The greatest vaisnava).

Lord Vishnu taught the worship of Rudra not to His own sincere devotees but to the insincere living entities who desire religiosity, economic development, sense gratification, and liberation. ---

Therefore I teach the worship of My servants through My personal behavior. -----.

-----------------------
That is extraordinary divergence. I pray that may we first resolve this.:)

Regarding the greatest worshipper part, you may be surprised to know that Soma (Shiva with Uma) worship is known as Vaisnav worship in Satapatha Brahmana.

Om

santosh
23 January 2009, 07:17 PM
Hare Krishna everybody,



Namaste Santosh,

By citing Madhavacharya and other purports as proof you are just piling opinion upon opinion -- all these are not sruti. And there is no point going ahead by piling up evidences...


What Srila Madhvacharya is saying is not just "a" opinion of "a" person. We have to be realistic and understand relative Spiritual Position. Your opinion and my opinion are just opinions, worth pretty much nothing. That's not the case with Srila Madhvacharya.

Who is Srila Madhvacharya?

-------------------------
Sri Padma Puran:

Sampradaya Vihina ye Mantraste Viphala Matah
Atah kalau bhavishyanti chaatvarah Sampradayeenah

(Please understand here the siginificance of the use of "Sampradaya Vihina" and "Viphala")

Sri Brahma Rudra Sanak Vaishnavah Kshitipavanaah
chatrvarste kalaubhavya hee Utkale Purushottama

Ramanujam Shrihee Svichakre Madvacharya chaturmuhahs
Shri Vishnu Swamimino Rudro Nibadityam chatuh kshanah

Translation:

For kaliyuga there are four authorized Sampradayas -
1. Shri Sampradaya (Sri Ramanujacharya)
2. Brahma Sampradaya (Sri Madvacharya)
3. Kumar Sampradaya (Sri Nimbarkacharya)
4. Rudra Sampradaya (Sri Vishnu Swami)

--------------------------

Srila Madhvacharya's name appears in Sri Padma Puran, yours and mine does not, please understand that.

Srila Madhvacharya and others (Sri Ramanujacharya, Sri Nimbarkacharya and Sri Vishnu Swami) are bonafide, authorized Spiritual Masters. What they say is not concoction or just a opinion. If your conclusion is opposite to that of Srila Madhvacharya, then your opinion or conclusion is wrong.




...That is extraordinary divergence. I pray that may we first resolve this.:)

Om

Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswait Thakur Maharaj's explanation is correct. Your understanding of the original verse is incorrect becuase you are doing blind translation whithout understanding what's being said. Blind translation leads to wrong conclusions. Let me explain how.

One of the popular verses in Srimad Bhagavad Gita is BG 2.47

karmaṇy evādhikāras te (http://vedabase.net/t/te)
mā (http://vedabase.net/m/ma) phaleṣu (http://vedabase.net/p/phalesu) kadācana (http://vedabase.net/k/kadacana)
mā (http://vedabase.net/m/ma) karma (http://vedabase.net/k/karma)-phala (http://vedabase.net/p/phala)-hetur bhūr
mā (http://vedabase.net/m/ma) te (http://vedabase.net/t/te) sańgo 'stv akarmaṇi (http://vedabase.net/a/akarmani)

Focus on the first part - Karmany eva adhikaras te, ma phalesu kadacan The blind translation say - you have right to do your work, but not to fruits ( ma phaleshu). In Sanskrit, phala means fruit (like mango, apple, orange etc.) and ma means not. So does "ma phaleshu" here means Lord Krishna is saying no right to fruits, meaning we shouldn't eat fruits?

Someone says phaleshu does't mean eatable fruit, but "results of your work." Ok, does is it mean that someone who is working in factory should not take salary at the end of month, becauase salary one gets "is result of one's work" for a month. Is this what the verse means?

You see how blind translation is misleading and gives wrong conclusions. The correct translation/meaning of this verse, which most of us know, is that "one has right to work/duty but one should not be attached to the results of that work/duty etc." Now someone can say how is this? Why are you saying "...should not be attached..."? Where is it referred to in the original verse? Sanskrit word for non-attachment is "anasakta", I don't see word "anasakta" in the original verse therefore the translation of this verse to "...one should not be attached to the results..." is concoction, convoluted. But as we know it is not.

When Pure Devotees such as Srila Madhvacharya, Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Thakur Maharaj etc. are providing translation, they are providing us with the proper meaning of that verse in the proper context. They are not giving us blind translation which any Tom/Dick/Harry with little knowledge of Sanskrit can do. Just as your english teacher can not teach Physics eventhough Physics book is written in english and english teacher can read/write/speak english very well and may be better than the Physics teacher, but still he can not teach Physics, becuase he has "no idea" of what the subject matter is. Just the same way, reading/ translating Sanskrit text of the Scripture has nothing to do with uderstanding what's being said.

Therefore while translating scriptural verses, one has to translate each word in the context of the verse and verse in the context of the overall passage and each passage in the context of "that" scripture whichever it is and that particular scripture in the overall context of all Sanatan Dharma scriptures, else it would be misleading. Only Pure Devotees can provide proper translation, we can not.

A friend of mine knows someone who argues - where in Srimad Bhagavad Gita, does it say one should not drink liquor, therefore it is ok to drink liquor. He drinks alcoholic beverages. This guy actually works as a part- time priest in some Temple in US. Obviously his understanding is incorrect.

Similarly one can put a mundane arguement that because milk is nothing but transformed blood therefore it is a non-vegetarian product and should not be offered to Lord Krishna or Lord Vishnu. So there appears to be contradiction. But the Scriptures and Pure Devotees tell us we can offer milk products to Lord Krishna. Actually milk and milk products (dahi, butter etc.) are Lord Krishna's favorites.

Since you mentioned Mahabharat, I would like to quote verse from Mahabharat 18.6.93,

Vede Ramayane Ch eva purane bharate tatha
adau madhye tatha ch ante Harih sarvatra geeyate.

Translation: In the texts of vedas, Ramayana, Puranas and Mahabharat, in the beginning of these texts, in the middle of these texts and in the end of these texts, glories of Hari are described.

Brihad Naradiya Purana says:

Harer Nama, Harer Nama, Harer Nama eva kevalam
kalau na asti eva, na asti eva, na asti eva, gatir anyatha

The Sanskrit of this text itself is very clear. Please understand the significance of the words "eva" and "kevalam".

In Sri Padma Puran (Uttar Khand 72-335), Lord Shiva Himself says to Srimati Parvati:

Ram Rameti, Rameti Rame Raame Manorame
Sahasra Nama Tatulyam Ram Naam Varanane

Sri Brahmanda Puran:

Sahasra Naamnam Punyanam Giravritya tu yat phalam
ekavrutya tu Krishnasya Naam ekam tat Prayacchati.

Without studying Scriptures from bonafide Guru in a bonafide (authorized) Sampradaya, it leads to wrong conclusions. It is important to undertake learning of Scriptures under the guidance of a bonafide Guru in a bonafide (authorized) Sampradaya. Else such a study, no matter how meticulous, leads to wrong conclusions.

Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Thakur Maharaj is simply giving knowledge in the line of srila Madhvacharya's Sampradaya (Parampara). He is simply putting it into english what was said in Sanskrit by the previous Vaishnava Acharyas, he is not inventing anything new. I request, please be respectful.

atanu
24 January 2009, 12:39 PM
Hare Krishna everybody,

Srila Madhvacharya's name appears in Sri Padma Puran, yours and mine does not, please understand that.



Namaste Santosh,

I am sorry for wasting your time. Just wanted to inform that the names atanu (and pratanu) appear in Veda.:D

Om

atanu
24 January 2009, 01:09 PM
Mahabharat 18.6.93,

Vede Ramayane Ch eva purane bharate tatha
adau madhye tatha ch ante Harih sarvatra geeyate.

You should know that rAma is agni. And Soma is called Hari in Rg Veda. We surely do not think that worship of rAma and hari is not prescribed.


Without studying Scriptures from bonafide Guru in a bonafide (authorized) Sampradaya, it leads to wrong conclusions.
Who is being disrepectful? Do you think that only you have bonafide master?



Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Thakur Maharaj is simply giving knowledge in the line of srila Madhvacharya's Sampradaya (Parampara). He is simply putting it into english what was said in Sanskrit by the previous Vaishnava Acharyas, he is not inventing anything new. I request, please be respectful.

Your lengthy pasted material does not explain why Shri Krishna says: I worship Rudra first as my own Self and Whoever knows him, knows me. Whoever follows him, follows me.

Whereas Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur says: Lord Vishnu taught the worship of Rudra not to His own sincere devotees but to the insincere living entities ----. Moreover, he also interprets 'Rudra is my own Self' as 'Rudra is my own part'. WE ALWAYS KNOW THAT ATMAN IS NOT A PART.

It is always as clear as water as to who are disrespectful. A statement like 'Lord Vishnu taught the worship of Rudra not to His own sincere devotees but to the insincere living entities' betrays that Srila Saraswati thinks that Shiva devotees are insincere and he alone is sincere.

Om

atanu
24 January 2009, 01:31 PM
Brihad Naradiya Purana says

Harer Nama, Harer Nama, Harer Nama eva kevalam
kalau na asti eva, na asti eva, na asti eva, gatir anyatha

The Sanskrit of this text itself is very clear. Please understand the significance of the words "eva" and "kevalam".



When the fundamental is not understood then bigoted bias emerges. First take time to digest the following teaching of Hari Himself:



yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo.anu taM sa hi mAm anu
rudro nArAyaNashchaiva sattvamekaM dvidhAkR^itam
loke charati kaunteya vyakti sthaM sarvakarmasu
Whoever knows him, knows me. Whoever follows him, follows me. (Though) the world, in all its actions, worships two Gods Rudra and Narayana, it is actually One only who is worshipped.OM

Atman
27 January 2009, 12:32 PM
Urdhvareta is one who's directed his energies, consciousness upwards. It may not necessarily refer to semen. Urdhvareti kriya also is a yogic technique that helps achieve the same. But yes it also moves the semen and directs it upwards. Shiva burnt Kamdev to ashes. Rati prays to Shiva to grant back her husband now burnt to ashes. Lord Shiva promises that Kamdev will be born again after many yugas.
Later as Krishna worships Shiva to have a son as valorous as He, Shiva blesses him with a son who is none other than Kamdev himself.

Even for a yogi who has attained sehestrar bhedan siddhi and attained Nirvikalpa samadhi is in bliss all the time and it is not possible for him to fall to petty carnal pleasures as he is already enjoying a much much higher pleasure that is beyond description to ordinary man.
It amazes me when some people talk loosely about Lord Shiva being able to overcome kama somehow, clearly hold no understanding of what a yogi's consciousness is who has parsed the veil of Maya and gone beyond and is situated in divine consciousness in constant samadhi. This is Krishna Consciousness, this is Shiva consciousness, this is divine consciousness. Love, peace and bliss in divine communion.
Hari Om.
Namah Shivaya!
Sarva Shiva mayam!
Regards,

Yogkriya.

If one has attained to Shiva consciousness- he gets to taste the bliss of Shivaloka, so attaining Nirvakalpa samadhi is blissful, but to get past brahmic bliss to Narayana/Krsna bliss is yet superior, otherwise one would just be content attaining Nirvakalpa.

atanu
27 January 2009, 01:27 PM
If one has attained to Shiva consciousness- he gets to taste the bliss of Shivaloka, so attaining Nirvakalpa samadhi is blissful, but to get past brahmic bliss to Narayana/Krsna bliss is yet superior, otherwise one would just be content attaining Nirvakalpa.

Let us first taste the bliss of Shivaloka then. Have you already tasted it?

Yogkriya
31 January 2009, 12:08 PM
If one has attained to Shiva consciousness- he gets to taste the bliss of Shivaloka, so attaining Nirvakalpa samadhi is blissful, but to get past brahmic bliss to Narayana/Krsna bliss is yet superior, otherwise one would just be content attaining Nirvakalpa.

"if one has attained to Shiva consciousness.."
To understand the consciousness of Mahavatar Babaji (sage who is living in his physical body for the past 2,000 years), is beyond an ordinary human consciousness, then to understand the conscious of Lord Shiva .. Shiva consciousness.... I think we have made terms like Krishna consciousness and Shiva consciousness and love to use them. There is no need to understand Shiva consciousness. Its a state of being. When one will be there, he'll know it. And there won't be any questions left to ask. Just pure bliss. Beyond the three gunas. That's why we say Shiva sarva mayam.
Namah Shivaya!
Yogkriya

Atman
03 February 2009, 06:00 AM
"if one has attained to Shiva consciousness.."
To understand the consciousness of Mahavatar Babaji (sage who is living in his physical body for the past 2,000 years), is beyond an ordinary human consciousness, then to understand the conscious of Lord Shiva .. Shiva consciousness.... I think we have made terms like Krishna consciousness and Shiva consciousness and love to use them. There is no need to understand Shiva consciousness. Its a state of being. When one will be there, he'll know it. And there won't be any questions left to ask. Just pure bliss. Beyond the three gunas. That's why we say Shiva sarva mayam.
Namah Shivaya!
Yogkriya

Does this mean Shiva consciousness is more elavated than Mahavatar Babaji? But when we say 'pure bliss,' is this the bliss of brahma sukra, because Lord Shiva also chants the name of Lord Rama, so he also derives more enjoyment from Ram/Krishna.

santosh
03 February 2009, 07:51 PM
Hare Krishna everybody,


Namaste Santosh,

I am sorry for wasting your time. Just wanted to inform that the names atanu (and pratanu) appear in Veda.:D

Om

This is what I was referring to - blind translation without understanding the subject matter. The word "pratanu" in Veda does not refer to you, the person whose name is Atanu, but out of incorrect translation, you think it refers to you.

I quoted that Sri Padma Puran refers to Srila Madvacharya as a bonafide acharya. That's why I put that verse. It legitimises commentaries of Srila Madhavacharya. Otherwise anyone can say anything, what's the validity?

The translation and understanding of of "tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham"
provided by Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Maharaj is the correct one. If you don't want to accept it, it is your choice. Please don't call names such as "convoluted". Just becuase you disagree doesn't mean you have to blasphem.



you may be surprised to know that Soma (Shiva with Uma) worship is known as Vaisnav worship in Satapatha Brahmana.


We are not concerned of the opinions if they are not coming from authorized Sampradaya. What is the background of Satapatha Brahmana and which Sampradaya they come from? what is their philosophy? Dvaita/Advaita/Vishista Dvaita?


You should know that rAma is agni. And Soma is called Hari in Rg Veda


The words used in Vedic literature must be understood in proper context. Lord Rama is not Agni. Sri Agni Dev is a devata from Svarga Loka, which is in the 10th planetory system in our universe of 14 levels. The 14 th one is the Highest - Brahma Loka also known as Satya Loka. Also Soma is not Lord Hari. Sri Somadeva is the presiding Deity of the Moon planet, just as mother Srimati Bhumi Devi or Prithvi Devi is the presiding Deity of earth planet. The Moon planet is part of the heavenly planetory system. Sri Somadeva and Sri Agnideva is of Jiva-Tattva not Vishnu-Tattva.

Just as the word Bhagavan is used in referring to Lord Krishna/Rama/Vishnu and also when referring to Lord Shiva and also when referring to Lord Indra, Lord Brahma and Sri Narada Muni. That does not mean Sri Narada Muni or Lord Brahma or Lord Indra are God. Therefore the scriptural text must be translated and understood in the proper overall context.

santosh
03 February 2009, 08:18 PM
Namaste Santosh,

SambhUtAm means that which is created; produced; one in whom anything has arisen. sambhutAM is to undergo union with the five elements. The above word has been used in Upanishads to indicate birth of pancha bhutas from Vishnu or Vishnu associated with panchbhutas.

Whereas the primary meaning of sambhu is parent/progenitor and it is Noun for a facet of Lord Shiva.



You yourself agree that primary meaning of Sambhu refers to Lord Shiva.

Lord Shiva is an expansion of Lord Vishnu for the performance of the work of destruction. The translation in itself is clear. Where is the scope for misunderstanding?





SambhUtAm means that which is created; produced; one in whom anything has arisen. sambhutAM is to undergo union with the five elements. The above word has been used in Upanishads to indicate birth of pancha bhutas from Vishnu or Vishnu associated with panchbhutas.



"Sambhutam" when referred in the Upanishad, it may mean certain thing. However this verse is from Brahma Samhita. To use meaning of this word in the context of the Upanishad and to substitute in the context of Brahma Samhita is incorrect and it is leading to wrong conclusion for you.





What the verse above says is that the created things are different from the creator; like a wave is different from the ocean.



This is just a total speculation which has no basis whatsoever in the original verse. Where are the words for wave, ocean etc in the original verse? Original verse uses the words kshiram (milk), dadhi (yogurt)etc.

Like I said earlier, I certainly did not wish to take part in the discussion in this particular thread because it is not based on acurate translation of any scripture nor reference to valid commentary from a bonafide Sampradaya. I posted replies becuase the post by atanu was offensive to Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Maharaj calling his translation convoluted. There was no reason to include the text from Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Maharaj's book for the purpose of blaspheming it. Maharaj wrote the book about Lord Shiva to glorify the personality of Lord Shiva which is the normal tendancy for all bonafide Vaishnavas. All Vaishnavas coming from all bonafide Sampradayas hold Lord Shiva very dear. I just wanted to put that perspective in the service of the readers of this discussion thread.

Hare Krishna!

atanu
04 February 2009, 01:35 AM
Does this mean Shiva consciousness is more elavated than Mahavatar Babaji? But when we say 'pure bliss,' is this the bliss of brahma sukra, because Lord Shiva also chants the name of Lord Rama, so he also derives more enjoyment from Ram/Krishna.

Dear Atmaram,


Narayana is Guru of those (like me) who worship Rudra in their Heart as per Narayana's teaching:
tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham ( I worship Rudra first as my own Self).Similarly rAma (Agni-Rudra) is guru of those who worship Shiva Linga, since rAma taught so by worshipping Mahesvara at Rameswaram.



Now, if Shiva chants Ram Ram, take Shiva as Guru and chant Ram Ram. But alas, you seem to have your constant attention on your virya (i am sure because of its constant loss) and the status of divinities. You have forgotten, Guru Brahma, Guru Vishnu, Guru Mahesvara. It is upto you whether you will adhere to your ego or to the following teaching of Shri Krishna
Whoever knows him, knows me. Whoever follows him, follows me. (Though) the world, in all its actions, worships two Gods Rudra and Narayana, it is actually One only who is worshipped.Mahesvara is summit of all summits and beyond summits. He is leader of all leaders and beyond the definition of pati (being advaita and parastaad).


Svet Upanishad
6.7 tamiishvaraaNaaM paramaM maheshvara.n
ta.n devataanaaM parama.n cha daivatam.h .
patiM patiinaaM paramaM parastaad.h\-
vidaama devaM bhuvaneshamiiDyam.h .. 7
6.7 WE WILL KNOW THIS MIGHTIEST ONE WHO IS FAR ABOVE ALL THE MIGHTY – THIS SUMMIT OF THE GODS AND THEIR GODHEAD, KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS, WHO TOWERETH HIGH ABOVE ALL SUMMIT AND GREATNESSES. LET US LEARN OF GOD FOR HE IS THIS UNIVERSES' MASTER AND ALL SHALL ADORE HIM.Om Namah Shivaya

Shivaya is paramaM parastAd -- beyond the param and also paramaM maheshvara.

atanu
04 February 2009, 08:32 AM
That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the shivoadvaitam. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

Atman
13 February 2009, 04:38 AM
[quote=atanu;26420]

Dear Atmaram,



. But alas, you seem to have your constant attention on your virya (i am sure because of its constant loss) Mahesvara is summit of all summits and beyond summits. He is leader of all leaders and beyond the definition of pati (being advaita and parastaad).

Not true, I haven't had any waking slips yet. I am more concerned about controlling desire in sleep though.

atanu
25 February 2009, 09:09 AM
Not true, I haven't had any waking slips yet. I am more concerned about controlling desire in sleep though.

Namaste Atman,

Your openness is refreshing. I think, kAma/love/desire/warmth, being the primeval cause of the grand show, is hardest to get over, till Self realisation. This is last to go. We lesser souls suffer from bouts of lust and lasciviousness but do not openly express it. From what is stated, you must be quite advanced. Controlling desire in sleep is possible for those who never sleep, however, since in sleep, the volitional control is absent.

Best Wishes.

Atanu

Atman
04 March 2009, 04:35 AM
That is correct in a sense, but even if one could resist and control the dream in sleep, this is an advanced stage- which shows that one has good control over lust and desire.

atanu
05 March 2009, 07:35 AM
That is correct in a sense, but even if one could resist and control the dream in sleep, this is an advanced stage- which shows that one has good control over lust and desire.

Dear Atman,

Many of us believe that the states of dream and the deep sleep must be understood, by first realising the waking state as of ONE agnivaisvanaro and not made up of discrete bodies (which are mere superpositions of sense impressions). Thereby the lust and the ignorance will be shed as mere misconceptions.

However, best wishes for your success in your chosen way.

Om

Yogkriya
25 March 2009, 12:49 PM
Om

Iskcon and Gaudiyas often fabricate scriptural interpretations, versus and explanations twisting everything as pro Krishna and showing Shiva as a servant lower being and that its not intelligent to worship him but just show casual respect.

Here's an example of Shiva bashing by Madhavananda dasa and consequent replies by Shaiva devotees. I wrote as "Chhenu"
You are welcome to comment too. :)

http://gopalkeerty.wordpress.com/2008/03/07/the-actual-secret-of-lord-siva-mayavada-advaita-sankhya/#comment-190

atanu
27 March 2009, 02:33 AM
Iskcon and Gaudiyas often fabricate scriptural interpretations, versus and explanations twisting everything as pro Krishna and showing Shiva as a servant lower being and that its not intelligent to worship him but just show casual respect.

Here's an example of Shiva bashing by Madhavananda dasa and consequent replies by Shaiva devotees. I wrote as "Chhenu"
You are welcome to comment too. :)

http://gopalkeerty.wordpress.com/2008/03/07/the-actual-secret-of-lord-siva-mayavada-advaita-sankhya/#comment-190

Namaste yogikriya,




http://www.yogaofsrichinmoy.com/god__the_author_of_all_good/mangod
Man and God are one. All men belong to the same family. We are all one. A genuine seeker must not listen to the absurd arguments of sceptics. They do not have even a pennyworth of spiritual knowledge. They are unaware of the fact that they are unconsciously making a parade of their naked stupidity. They say, "If we are all one, then how is it that when you have a headache, I do not? When my hunger is appeased, how is it that yours is not?" In reply, let us ask them how it is that when they have a leg wound, their head does not hurt as well, since both are part of the same body. The universal consciousness is within us all. If we are not conscious of it, that does not mean that it does not exist. My body is my own. But do I feel pain in my leg when my head suffers from a headache? No. But if I am aware of the Divine Consciousness which pervades my whole body, undoubtedly I shall feel the same pain all over my body. Here the individual soul is my head and the collective soul is my whole body. To feel the entire world as our very own we have first to feel God as our very own.
Man is Infinity's Heart.
Man is Eternity's Breath.
Man is Immortality's Life.

(Yoga and the Spiritual Life by Sri Chinmoy (http://www.yogaofsrichinmoy.com/))

Om Namah Shivaya

Yogkriya
27 March 2009, 01:32 PM
Namaste yogikriya,

Om Namah Shivaya


Namaskar Atanu!

Thanks for the quotes from Shri Chinmoy.
And thanks for your valuable writings on Lord Shiva and Advaita.

Namah Shivaya.

Yogkriya

atanu
28 March 2009, 12:05 PM
Hare Krishna everybody,

I quoted that Sri Padma Puran refers to Srila Madvacharya as a bonafide acharya. That's why I put that verse. It legitimises commentaries of Srila Madhavacharya. Otherwise anyone can say anything, what's the validity?

We are not concerned of the opinions if they are not coming from authorized Sampradaya. What is the background of Satapatha Brahmana and which Sampradaya they come from? what is their philosophy? Dvaita/Advaita/Vishista Dvaita?

Just as the word Bhagavan is used in referring to Lord Krishna/Rama/Vishnu and also when referring to Lord Shiva and also when referring to Lord Indra, Lord Brahma and Sri Narada Muni. That does not mean Sri Narada Muni or Lord Brahma or Lord Indra are God. Therefore the scriptural text must be translated and understood in the proper overall context.

Namaste Yogikriya,

These are awesome conclusions, indicating that some decisions have been made and those will not be re-considered even if Veda teaches otherwise. Frankly speaking, I think these are more dangerous enemies of Hinduism than the external enemies we harp on. These egotists have hollowed out the faith of Hindus. All those who have branched off from Sanatana Dharma can be shown to have done so because of these high priests, to whom no other sampradaya, except their own can ever be correct. These dangerous friends have only two pramanas; Padma Purana and Brahma Samhita, neither of which is shruti. And certain sections of Padma Purana, are foolish to the extent of being insult to common sense. And mind you these are not true dvaitins.


The words used in Vedic literature must be understood in proper context. Lord Rama is not Agni. ----


Also Soma is not Lord Hari. Sri Somadeva is the presiding Deity of the Moon planet, just as mother Srimati Bhumi Devi or Prithvi Devi is the presiding Deity of earth planet. The Moon planet is part of the heavenly planetory system. Sri Somadeva and Sri Agnideva is of Jiva-Tattva not Vishnu-Tattva.



Surprising really.
RV Book 9 HYMN XCVI. Soma Pavamana


5 Father of holy hymns, Soma flows onward the Father of the earth, Father of heaven: Father of Agni, Surya's generator, the Father who begat Indra and Visnu.
When I cite the above to show that actually Vishnu is of Soma Tattva, being born of Soma -- the auspicious energy, these stone brained say "This is not Vishnu but this is a Gandharva. And the Soma referred in this verse is not Soma Deva that you are referring to. This Soma is actually Vishnu, who is father of Soma Deva, who is wrongly called Vishnu in this verse. And moreover, this just proves the taratamya that Vishnu is the highest".

God save Yogi kriya and me from our foolish urge to reason with set cement of ----- sampradaya (brand). The foolish urge is ours, propelled by our own ego. Can anyone show reason to set cement?


Om Namah Shivaya

Yogkriya
29 March 2009, 10:52 AM
Namaste Yogikriya,

These are awesome conclusions, indicating that some decisions have been made and those will not be re-considered even if Veda teaches otherwise. Frankly speaking, I think these are more dangerous enemies of Hinduism than the external enemies we harp on. These egotists have hollowed out the faith of Hindus. All those who have branched off from Sanatana Dharma can be shown to have done so because of these high priests, to whom no other sampradaya, except their own can ever be correct. These dangerous friends have only two pramanas; Padma Purana and Brahma Samhita, neither of which is shruti. And certain sections of Padma Purana, are foolish to the extent of being insult to common sense. And mind you these are not true dvaitins.





Surprising really.
RV Book 9 HYMN XCVI. Soma Pavamana


5 Father of holy hymns, Soma flows onward the Father of the earth, Father of heaven: Father of Agni, Surya's generator, the Father who begat Indra and Visnu.
When I cite the above to show that actually Vishnu is of Soma Tattva, being born of Soma -- the auspicious energy, these stone brained say "This is not Vishnu but this is a Gandharva. And the Soma referred in this verse is not Soma Deva that you are referring to. This Soma is actually Vishnu, who is father of Soma Deva, who is wrongly called Vishnu in this verse. And moreover, this just proves the taratamya that Vishnu is the highest".

God save Yogi kriya and me from our foolish urge to reason with set cement of ----- sampradaya (brand). The foolish urge is ours, propelled by our own ego. Can anyone show reason to set cement?


Om Namah Shivaya


Ha ha :D

Namaste Atanu ji!
Namaste to all!


What we are dealing with is a Brand marketing system.

Even though the oranges are better and good for health, no company promotes them as such. They make a carbonated drink with artificial orange flavor with preservatives, artificial color, and promote it as the top most good thing!! It even has an attractive package with picture of a "superstar" showing it as good for health and spirits!!
So we follow that wave of advertisement enthusiasm. The Brand is launched. And there are egos to support it and believe in it. Eating oranges is the old thing. Maybe it doesn't work in kaliyuga..! ;-)
Just as "all the Vedic mantras don't work in kaliyuga"..!
And yes these priests of the new Brand know the virtues of oranges and vitamin C. They will argue you down with it and throw the bottle of their new Orange brand in your face and prove it to be the real source of oranges s and health!!




"I bow down to that Lord Sadasiva, who is that Supreme Truth, who is the very form of holy hymns and sacred rites, who is beyond all knowledge and truth, who is the incarnation of Brahma and Rudra, whose very eyes are the sun, moon and fire, who has a body smeared with white holy ashes, who wears a crown and artless jewellery, studded with various gems and diamonds, who is the creator, sustainer and destroyer of the whole universe, who destroyed Daksha’s sacrifice, who kills the tide of time, who resides alone in Muladhara, who transcends the categories of knowledge, upon whose head the holy Ganga makes her permanent abode, who is immanent in all beings, who possesses the six qualities, who is the truth and essence of philosophy, who is the means to attain the three Vargas (Dharma, Artha and Kama), who is the Lord of the worlds, who wears the eight serpent-kings round His neck and who is the very form of Pranava.

I adore Him who is the embodiment of consciousness, whose form is of ether and the directions, who wears the necklace of stars and planets, who is pure and spotless, who is the preceptor of all the worlds, who is the Supreme Witness of the whole universe, who is the Supreme Secret of all Vedas, who transcends all philosophy, who bestows boons upon all His devotees and who showers mercy upon the poor and ignorant.

I pray to the all-merciful Lord who is ever pure and all-blissful, who is free from all lust, greed and sorrow, who is bereft of all flaws and qualities, who is devoid of desire, disease, ego and attachment, who is all-pervading, endless and eternal, who is beyond the chains of causes and effects, in whom all pains and pleasures, pride, power and pomp, fears and dangers, sins and sufferings sink and die.

I worship Him, who is the embodiment of Pure Consciousness, in whom doubts are dried and actions cease, who is beyond all change, time and destruction, who is full, pure, mute and eternal, who is Satchidananda (Existence-Absolute, Knowledge-Absolute and Bliss-Absolute), who is the incommunicable place personified, who is all-effulgence and effulgence embodied, who is the beneficent One, the radiant vision of Infinite Beauty and Beatitude. O my Lord! Victory on Thee. Thou art the incarnation of Rudra, Raudra and Bhadra. Thou art that Mahabhairava, Kalabhairava. Thy garlands are the necklaces of skulls and Thou holdest the divine weapons Khatvanga, sword, skin (Charma), noose, hook, drum, trident, bow, arrow, club, Sakti (a weapon) and the like in Thy hands. O thousand-faced God! Thou art fearful to look at with Thy terrible teeth and Thy pealing laughter pierces through all the worlds. Serpents are Thy ear-rings, Thy garlands and bracelets. Thou wearest elephant-skin on Thy body. Thou art the conqueror of death, the destroyer of the three cities, O three-eyed God!

Thou art all-existent, Immanence of things, Essence of Peace, and the Supreme Bliss and Silence, O Sambhu! Thou art verily the Brahman of Veda and Vedanta. Thou art all-pervading, ancient and eternal. Save me, my Lord! Dispel my fears from unnatural death and dangers, destroy my enemies, with Thy trident and chop them off with the edge of Thy sword. Frighten the bands of Betala, Kushmanda and the like with the bow and arrows. Save me from falling into the pit of fearful hell and render me free and fearless. Cover me with Thy armour and protect me always. I am poor, meek, humble and helpless. I dedicate all at Thy feet and leave myself at Thy disposal. Thou art my only prop and saviour. O Lord Sadasiva! Mrityunjaya! Tryambaka! Salutations to Thee again and again."
- Shiv Kavach.


Please keep your words flowing free here, to enable that wonderful wisdom reach us. Thanks.
Warm regards,
Yogkriya