PDA

View Full Version : Why would the Lord delude?



Ganeshprasad
13 January 2010, 12:42 PM
Pranam all



Lord Visnu instructed Lord Siva to preach this philosophy because at that point of time, in India, people used to perform devotional service to Lord Visnu only for material motives and not for attaining Sudha-ekantiaka-prema-mayi-bhakti, devoid of desire for material gains and desire for Moksa (Liberation).


In order to delude such people, and also to protect the swaroop of such Suddha-bhakti (avyabhicarini-bhakti),

Two contradicting statement, one Vishu wants to delude people because he is not happy that they worship him for material gain only, but then he wants to delude and keep the sudh bhakti away from them by deluding them.



Lord Visnu instructed Lord Siva to preach this philosophy because at that point of time, in India, people used to perform devotional service to Lord Visnu only for material motives and not for attaining Sudha-ekantiaka-prema-mayi-bhakti, devoid of desire for material gains and desire for Moksa (Liberation).
 
 
At what point of time please quantify.

Why would the Lord punish this class of people whose only crime is that they do not desire pure love for god.?

This is in direct contrast to what Lord Krishna says in bg

The wise should not unsettle the mind of the ignorant who is attached to the fruits of work, but the enlightened one should inspire others by performing all works efficiently without attachment. (3.26)

Those who are deluded by the Gunas of nature get attached to the works of the Gunas. The wise should not disturb the mind of the ignorant whose knowledge is imperfect. (3.29)

nadatte kasyacit papam
na caiva sukrtam vibhuh
ajnanenavrtam jnanam
tena muhyanti cantata
The Lord does not take the (responsibility for) good or evil deeds of anybody. The knowledge is covered by (the veil of) ignorance, thereby people are deluded. (5.15)

And there you are telling us that the lord interferes and actually deludes those who worship him all being for selfish desires!
If they are deluded why delude them even more?
 
 
 
 


Lord Visnu ordered Lord Siva to spread this philosophy, because it is possible only for the pure-unalloyed devotees of Supreme Personality of GodHead to preserve the mood (bhava) of Sudha-Bhakti, not the persons having material motives or desire for liberation (meaning desire for 4 purusarthas).


Now if you accepted Shiva Gita of the same Puran this literal ordering would not make sense to you because there in Lord Shiva is supreme.
In fact the whole verse make no sense for several reasons,

an unalloyed bhakta of God would not lie and if he did it would be for in best interest of one who is lied to. But from what I gather according to you this people are made to be deluded even more, so what is in gods name the purpose of this delusion?
 
We can all agree on material desire and its draw back, but 4 pursartha?

I am afraid you be on your own because no Hindu dare reject it, take dharma away and we are no better then animals. Dharma ,atrth kaam and moksa what’s in the gods name wrong with it ?

Lord Krishna says
catur-vidha bhajante mam
janah sukrtino 'rjuna
arto jijnasur artharthi
jnani ca bharatarsabha
Four types of virtuous ones worship or seek Me, O Arjuna. They are: the distressed, the seeker of Self-knowledge, the seeker of wealth, and the wise one who knows the Supreme. (7.16)



So there is nothing wrong in (siva gita) that. Actually it is correct as per Madhurya-gata-sidhhanta of Sri Gaudiya Vaisnava Sampradaya. Lord Siva is the greatest of vaisnavas,


Your explanation is not honest I asked you if you accept Siva Gita and here you are explaining how he is a greatest servant where else, Siva Gita extol him to be supreme.
It is not correct or otherwise because Madhurya -gata-Sidhantaa say so but because that is what Padma puran say so. Do you accept that?



As of now, I won't say that Sriman Madhvacarya did not quote these verses, because I haven't read all of his commentaries/literature.


And you claim to come in his line of sampradaya?


We don't accept that vidharmis have tempered with our scriptures, though we do beleive that they distroyed many of them like burning of great library in taxila etc

You betray your biased love for Vishnu otherwise it is well researched by many Hindus that there is actually interpolation of our Puranas. As a hindu I have many reason to believe so. You are welcome to your belief but that does not change the fact. All you have to do is research puranas, how they were preserved and how many version of the same were found differing with each other.

Jai Shree Krishna

Onkara
13 January 2010, 04:15 PM
This post has been deleted.

devotee
13 January 2010, 08:58 PM
Namaste GaneshPrasad ji,

Thanks for a well reasoned post ! :)

I wonder how many lies are they (ISKCON members) ready to speak to convert people to their fold :

i) They say that Bhagwad Gita is supreme as Bhagwan himself said so. Absolutely "No problem" ! But then why do they interpret all advaitic verses in Bhagwad Gita in a distorted way to suit their philosophy ? Why are they so selective ? What is the need for interpreting those verses in a distorted manner ? Do they think that Lord Krishna needs their manipulated explanations to be understood properly ?

Some of the verses in Bhagwad Gita appear to be directly retold (almost same words are used) from Katha Upanishad ... that shows that Lord Krishna only retold what was already there in the Upanishads & that is why the Bhagwad Gita is called the essence of Upanishads & it is considered Smriti and not Shruti.

ii) They say that Shruti, Smriti & Puranas are all equal in authority as Shabda Pramana. But then won't accept Rudra-rahasya Upanishad, Shiv Purana, Devi Bhaagwat & other scriptures ! I doubt if they understand why Shruti is called Shruti & why Smriti is called Smriti & why puranas are not Shruti or Smriti.

iii) If all scriptures are equal in status then "everything" whatever they say must be correct simultaneously i.e. Shiva is Supreme (Shiva Purana), Vishnu is Supreme (Vishnu Purana), Self is Supreme & all whatever is (Maandukya Upanishad), Mother Goddess is Supreme (Devi Bhaagwat). As Supreme can only be one by definition, all the forms stated above must be same as it echoes in Rig Veda :

"Ekam Sat Vipra bahudha vadanti"

iv) They happily quote (distorted and manipulated version ) Padma Purana but leave out Shiva Gita which is part of Padma Purana ! And when pressed to clarify their stand they again resort to mischief ... showing Shiva as the best of servants of Vishnu instead of accepting Him the supreme as Shiva Gita says.

v) Every Hindu knows that Lord Rama sought the blessings of Lord Shiva before proceeding for Lanka. Why did the supreme personality of Godhead desire blessings from his own servant ?

vi) It is the height of ridiculousness to say that God can ever want to delude people ... doesn't it take the godliness (shivam) out of God ? Does God remain God if he ever desire to delude people even more when they are already deluded ? Can He be so desperate so worshipped in any way to delude his own devotees ? How can He then be called the Ocean of Compassion ?

The reason given is "because they (mayavaadis/Advaitins) worship Him for material gains" ! This is the greatest lies in the history of mankind !! The first principle of Advaita is to go from unreal to real .... and they are told to be after material gains ?? Can anyone name even one Advaitin worth his name who is/was after material gains ? Is this philosophy about how to have material gains ?

The answer to all above questions is NO (in capital) ! Then Lord Vishnu must be day-dreaming when he thought so !!

OM

saidevo
13 January 2010, 09:30 PM
namaste.

Here is a wonderful article about the Shiva-ViShNu unity and identity illustrated from various episodes in our PurANas. It begins with a beautiful observation:

“There are two mahaa-phala daayaka Vrukshas. One by the name Vaasudeva and the other by the name Vaamadeva. They differ only in their sumas (flowers) (’su’ is replaced by ‘ma’ in their names), but both give the same phalas (fruits, which is moksham)”. It is also often said, “How much one does not see the difference between Shiva and Vishnu, that much his aayu will increase”.

I am only reminded of a Tamil proverb about the two Gods among our TrimUrti:

Ariyum Sivanum oNNU
AriyAdavan vAyil maNNU!

Hari and Shiva are the same;
Those who don't know it are lame!

Krsna Das
14 January 2010, 05:33 AM
Dandavat Pranamas, Ganeshprasad Prabhu Ji,

Believe me, I did not posted the two questions for debate, but for my own information that how do advaitins reconcile these verses with there faith.

However, I understand that you have started this thread addressing me (Am I correct?), so I will try to answer all your questions in detail (previously I just said everything very briefly), with whatever I have learned from vaisnava acaryas and whatever I have grasped per my own understanding.

I request you to please read each and every word of my post and also understand the meaning.

All glories to SriSri Radha Krsna alone !


Pranam all
Two contradicting statement, one Vishu wants to delude people because he is not happy that they worship him for material gain only, but then he wants to delude and keep the sudh bhakti away from them by deluding them.


Lord does not want to keep Sudhha-Bhakti away from anybody. Infact Sudhha-Bhakti alone bounds Sri Hari himself to his devotees [ http://vedabase.net/cc/adi/4/21-22/en ]. Inspite of this Sri Bhagwan says Lord Siva to propagate Mayavad. Why? Two reasons - at that point of time, budhhism became a mojor religion to be followed in india and vedic dharma almost collapsed. (Yada Yada hi dharmasya) Whenever the practices of Sanatan Dharma are challanged by athiests/asuras, Lord himself incarnates or sometimes sends his devotees. In this case, Lord requested Siva to propage such a philosophy which is similar to budhism, but sounds like a philosophy propunded by vedic dharma and not budhism. The motive was to bring the general populace back to vedic fold. So question arises that Lord could have propagated the path of sudhha-bhakti itself. Answer is NO, that was not feasible, because people would not simply accept a philosophy which propagates the devotion to personal form of Supreme Lord, because they had been following this philosophy (budhhism) for a very long time, which speaks about voidism and not bhakti. They would simply not accept any sidhhanta which differs to a very large degree in comparision to budhhism. So a philosophy similar to budhism (prachhanna-baudhham ucyate), but seemigly belonging to vedic fold was required to be propagated, so that people should somehow come back to vedic fold. Another reason was that small number of people who were following the vedic dharma, were actually only performing the karma-kanda, but preaching this to be the supreme truth propunded by vedas. But the supreme truth is Bhakti, and not karma-kanda. In order to preserve the mood (bhava) of such sudhha-bhakti, Lord Siva propagated a philosophy, which they accepted, and in this way, the swaroop of Sudhha-Bhakti was preserved in the same mood, as is followed by the pure-unalloyed devotees of the Lord.

Lord Siva incarnated in the form of Sripad Sankracarya and propagated this philosophy so aggressively, that in no time budhhism was eradicated from india, though India is the birth place of budhhism !

Once people accepted the vedic fold of life, it was also necessary to give them the actual sidhhanta propunded by all the vedic-literatures (Sudhha-Bhakti to Sri Hari) and for this reason Lord Krsna himself incarnated in the form of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. [ http://vedabase.net/cc/adi/4/33/en ]

Caitanya Mahaprabhu has himself warned - not even to read the sariraka bhasya of SriPad Sankaracarya, otherwise the spiritual life of that person is in jeopardy:

[ http://vedabase.net/cc/madhya/6/169/en (http://vedabase.net/cc/madhya/6/169/en) ]


At what point of time please quantify.

This was the time-period after the birth of Lord Budhha and till sometime later the advent of SriPad Sankracarya.



Why would the Lord punish this class of people whose only crime is that they do not desire pure love for god.?


Who is punishing and whome? I never said anything like that.

Prabhu ji, I just want to know what is your motive - debate or acquire knowledge. If it is debate, I cannot help you out, because that is not my motive for joining HDF.



This is in direct contrast to what Lord Krishna says in bg

The wise should not unsettle the mind of the ignorant who is attached to the fruits of work, but the enlightened one should inspire others by performing all works efficiently without attachment. (3.26)

Those who are deluded by the Gunas of nature get attached to the works of the Gunas. The wise should not disturb the mind of the ignorant whose knowledge is imperfect. (3.29)

nadatte kasyacit papam
na caiva sukrtam vibhuh
ajnanenavrtam jnanam
tena muhyanti cantata
The Lord does not take the (responsibility for) good or evil deeds of anybody. The knowledge is covered by (the veil of) ignorance, thereby people are deluded. (5.15)

And there you are telling us that the lord interferes and actually deludes those who worship him all being for selfish desires!
If they are deluded why delude them even more?


That is why I keep on insisting again and again, that simply reading Geeta is not enough, one has to surrender himself at the lotus feet of unalloyed devotees, so as to get the real message of this great text. Otherwise one may turn into a scholar, but not a bhakta.

Lets take the verse 3.26. Lord says "Yuktah Samacaran" here Yuktah means not only doing work without fritive desires (Karma-sanginam), but also to do this work in the spirit of devotional service (bhakti), this is called Niskama-karma-yoga (meaning the work done without any fruitive activities in mind, but also in the spirit of devotion for the pleasure of Krsna. This is called Niskama-Karma-yoga (which is again in the mode of goodness and not Nirguna, like Bhakti, so it is not the supreme truth propunded by Geeta).

Lower than Niskama-karma-yoga is Niskam-karma. There is difference between the two. In the latter, although a person does not have any personal desires, still the motive of such work is not the pleasure of Krsna.

Whereas what I explained above is that people at that point of time were preaching karma-kanda (ritualistic activities mentioned in vedas for fulfilling a personal material motive) to be the Supreme truth, because of which the swaroop of Sudhha-bhakti was maligned. They were also not in position to accept the Sudhha-bhakti, neither Niskama-Karma-yoga (because they were attached to the results of karma).



Now if you accepted Shiva Gita of the same Puran this literal ordering would not make sense to you because there in Lord Shiva is supreme.
In fact the whole verse make no sense for several reasons,


Lord Siva proclaims himself to be supirior to Lord Ram in Siva Gita. That is correct and there is no point denying to this fact.

This should be reconciled as follows:

The relationship of Lord Visnu with Siva can be understood clearly by
(1) Tattva-gata sidhhanta [ http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=5055 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=5055) ]
(2) Aiswarya-gata-sidhhanta and
(3) Madhurya-gata-sidhhanta

What is Madhurya-gata-sidhhanta? For this, we must know what is Madhurya in first place with an example. Like mother yasoda takes a stick in her hand to chastise Krsna. Now although Krsna is abhaya-caranarvinda himself, but he experiences bhaya from his mother. This is because of atulniya-vatsalya bhava of mother yasoda towards Krsna. Krsna actually tastes such rasas of pure devotion with his devotees.

Similary, although Krsna is Supreme personality of Godhead and Siva is greatest of vaisnavas [ http://vedabase.net/sb/12/13/16/en ], he reciprocates (ye yatha mam prapadhyante tansta thaive bhjamyaham) with such a pasttime, showing himself to be his devotee, so as to taste the rasa of devotion of Sri Siva. Similary, Lord Ramacandra pays his obiesiences to Siva before making a bridge to Lanka.

ALL gaudiya vaisnavas accept this fact whole heartedly.

But in Siva Gita, Siva is considered to be Supreme. - This is true and not only with Siva Gita, but also other sastras like Siva maha purana and linga purana etc. So why is that so? - It is because puranas propund different aradhanas for people depending on the mode in which a person is. For the person absorbed in mode of ignorance, worship of Lord Siva / Goddess kali as an independent supreme diety is prescribed.

Shoving down the pure unalloyed bhava-bhakti of SriSri Radha Krsna down the throat of such person will simply not do. That's because he is not ready for this for now, keeping in mind his current situation.

But for vaisnavas, considering Lord Siva as supreme independent diety is considered as an apradha (offense towarsd Lord visnu). It is second apradha amongst the 10 nama-apradhas.



an unalloyed bhakta of God would not lie and if he did it would be for in best interest of one who is lied to. But from what I gather according to you this people are made to be deluded even more, so what is in gods name the purpose of this delusion?


An unalloyed bhakta of God never lies - that is true. But he should be ready to lie when Lord himself requests him to do so.

Telling lies for the pleasure of Krsna is the highest truth.

My Guru-Maharaj always says - "Krsna ki prasannata ke liye jhooth bolna pade to bol dena, kyon ki yahi param-satya hai" :)
 


We can all agree on material desire and its draw back, but 4 pursartha?

I am afraid you be on your own because no Hindu dare reject it, take dharma away and we are no better then animals. Dharma ,atrth kaam and moksa what’s in the gods name wrong with it ?


Four purusarthas are prescribed by vedic literature, so that human-race does not turn into animals - that's true. But at the same time, Lord cannot be attained just by the execution of these purusathas.

One must ultimatley give up the attachment for these four purusarthas or dharmas, in order to execute the Pancam-Purusartha, prema-mayi bhagwad-bhakti to the lotus feet of Supreme Personality of Godhead:

sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaḿ śaraṇaḿ vraja - Abandon all the varities of dharma and surrender ONLY TO ME (mām ekam).




Lord Krishna says
catur-vidha bhajante mam
janah sukrtino 'rjuna
arto jijnasur artharthi
jnani ca bharatarsabha
Four types of virtuous ones worship or seek Me, O Arjuna. They are: the distressed, the seeker of Self-knowledge, the seeker of wealth, and the wise one who knows the Supreme. (7.16)


The one who perfoms devotion to Lord for fulfilling his desires, Lord considers hims also to be his Bhakta. That is the mercy of supreme lord, of this there is no doubt.

However, this bhakti is called Vyabhicarini-Bhakti and not A-vyabhcarini. One must not preach Vyabhicarni-Bhakti to be the supreme truth, for if one does so, one maligns the swaroop of Sudhha-bhakti amongst the general people, who are already deluded.



Your explanation is not honest I asked you if you accept Siva Gita and here you are explaining how he is a greatest servant where else, Siva Gita extol him to be supreme. It is not correct or otherwise because Madhurya -gata-Sidhantaa say so but because that is what Padma puran say so. Do you accept that?


I have already explained this above.



And you claim to come in his line of sampradaya?


One does not have to be necessarily first go through ALL the books of Sri Brahma-Madha-Gaudiya Sampradaya in order to be initiated in it, or even any other sampradaya. Your argument is totally unacceptible. In fact it is not worth calling an argument in first place.

Anyways, if you read the scripture composed by Sriman Madhvacarya (called Visnu-tattva-vinirnaya), he has clearly propunded that there is difference between Jiva and Iswara, whereas mayavad suggests pure oneness between Jiva and Brahma. There for he has also refuted mayavad.



You betray your biased love for Vishnu otherwise it is well researched by many Hindus that there is actually interpolation of our Puranas. As a hindu I have many reason to believe so. You are welcome to your belief but that does not change the fact. All you have to do is research puranas, how they were preserved and how many version of the same were found differing with each other.


If many hindues believe that puranas are interpolated, let them beleive in it. For me, my sidhhanta is the last and final word and the Supreme Truth. I am not bothered by any other sidhhanta other than this. Please read point number ten of this thread:

[ http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?p=37982#post37982 ]

ALSO, I have explained everything whatever I could in the best possible way. I could not have explained anything better than this.. Also, as I have already said, debate is not my motive to be in HDF.

[P.E.R.I.O.D.]



Jai Shree Krishna


All glories to SriSri Radha Krsna again !

Ganeshprasad
14 January 2010, 10:36 AM
Pranam krsna Das ji

Thank you for your time an effort to explain in details, I shell try once again to prove this verses you quote can only be interpolation, I doubt that you will accept even if proof is beyond reasonable doubt simply because you can not think out side of your box.

Let me make it clear so that there is no confusion Puran means
पुराण puraaNa (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/index.php?tinput=puraaNa&direction=SE&script=HK&link=yes) adj. old (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/index.php?tinput=old&direction=ES&script=HK&link=yes) पुराण puraaNa (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/index.php?tinput=puraaNa&direction=SE&script=HK&link=yes) adj. ancient (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/index.php?tinput=ancient&direction=ES&script=HK&link=yes)
it is glories history of Bharat

That is why I asked what time point of time Lord Vishnu instructed Lord Shiva? to that you answer sometime between Budha birth and Adi Shankracharya

Fact, Sri Ved Vyas narrated this Puran well before Budha’s birth, this is enough as an evidence that the the verses are a later addition and not the original.


Two, Madhacharya does not quote these verse
Three, Lord does not delude that is explicit in Bhagvat Gita
Four, you say 4 pursharth which all hindu follows, are not desirable pursuit for some obscure reason, and yet you contradict again by quoting BG
sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaḿ śaraṇaḿ vraja - Abandon all the varities of dharma and surrender ONLY TO ME (mam- ekam). You forget to mention the result let me remind you aham tvam sarva-papebhyo moksayisyami ma sucah

I shall liberate you from all sins (or bonds of Karma). Do not grieve.

So moksa is what Krishna gives yet that is not acceptable to you.



But in Siva Gita, Siva is considered to be Supremme. - This is true and not only with Siva Gita but also other sastras like Siva maha purana and linga purana etc. So why is that so? - It is because puranas propund different aradhanas for people depending on the mode in which a person is. For the person absorbed in mode of ignorance, worship of Lord Siva / Goddess kali as an independent supreme diety is prescribed.

Not considered, but fact he is God, Maheshvara.
He is Pasupatinath, God for all beings not just people in mode of ignorance, that is your misconception otherwise this is what Bhagvat puran says but unfortunately you guys just ignore the facts and are very selective.

The devas observed Lord Siva sitting on the summit of Kailas Hill with his wife, Bhavani for the auspicious development of the three worlds. He was being worshiped by great saintly persons desiring liberation. The devas offered him their obeisance’s and prayers with great respect. SB 8.7.20

Anyway lets not make this thread Shiva V Vishnu they are both auspicious and they do not delude their devotees

Jai Shree Krishna
 

Ganeshprasad
14 January 2010, 10:45 AM
Pranam Devotee ji Saidevo ji and all



I wonder how many lies are they (ISKCON members) ready to speak to convert people to their fold :

OM

Sad but it is true, i have seen numerous lies i have been going to their temple for over 30 years, i still like the Arti and Kirtan.

if you read their books instead of concentrating on Bhagvan they have with every opportunity tried to make other Hindu practice as Inferior

Jai Shree Krishna

grames
14 January 2010, 11:39 PM
Wow...

An excellant response but with ignorance... :)

A big answer is not a big NO but "I DO NOT KNOW" yet. :)



How many Vaishnavas (historical not the figures in Puranas) have really seen Lord Vishnu, met him in person & Lord Vishnu told them that Shiva and all other gods are inferior to Him ? None ?? So, what is the Pratyaksha Pramana ?

How many Advaitins have been able to attain Advaita ? Many ... in thousands ... if not more.

OM


Where is the Pramana for people attaining "Advaita"? Even the previous Kanchi seer cannot claim he attained JivanMukthi and he very humbly denies that as a fact. Telling a wish list is not a pramana.

devotee
15 January 2010, 12:42 AM
Wow...

An excellant response but with ignorance... :)

A big answer is not a big NO but "I DO NOT KNOW" yet. :)

Where is the Pramana for people attaining "Advaita"? Even the previous Kanchi seer cannot claim he attained JivanMukthi and he very humbly denies that as a fact. Telling a wish list is not a pramana.

No need to comment ! :)

OM

saidevo
15 January 2010, 12:45 AM
namaste.

Let us not abuse the names of our sacred gurus as points of contention of the darkness of our own ignorance!

If Devotee's question about pratyakSha pramANa is rather immature, grames's counter is plainly mischievous. We have not an iota of competence to question the jIvanmukta status of our gurus like the KAnchi seer or RamaNaMaharshi. If we do question them for our petty arguments, there would be no difference between us Hindus and the mlechchas.

Krsna Das
15 January 2010, 02:37 AM
Pranam krsna Das ji
Thank you for your time an effort to explain in details.


Thanks to you also, because I get an opportunity to go through the glorious verses of Bhagwatam, Geeta and Caitanya Caritamrta again and again. Krsna is sprinkling his karuna on me and he is making you nimitta.



I shell try once again to prove this verses you quote can only be interpolation, I doubt that you will accept even if proof is beyond reasonable doubt simply because you can not think out side of your box.
Let me make it clear so that there is no confusion Puran means
पुराण puraaNa (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/index.php?tinput=puraaNa&direction=SE&script=HK&link=yes) adj. old (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/index.php?tinput=old&direction=ES&script=HK&link=yes) पुराण puraaNa (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/index.php?tinput=puraaNa&direction=SE&script=HK&link=yes) adj. ancient (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/index.php?tinput=ancient&direction=ES&script=HK&link=yes)
it is glories history of Bharat


Even if you give a prataksa-pramana for this, I will simply reject it right from the scratch. Why? Because I know that anything which is spoken independently of the 4 disciplic successions simply does not have any value

(Please read 4 disciplic successions mentioned in Garg Samhita, you can search on google too).



That is why I asked what time point of time Lord Vishnu instructed Lord Shiva? to that you answer sometime between Budha birth and Adi Shankracharya

Fact, Sri Ved Vyas narrated this Puran well before Budha’s birth, this is enough as an evidence that the the verses are a later addition and not the original.


Sri Ved Vyas narrated this Puran well before Budha’s birth - Absolutely correct.

But let me add something he is also saktya-vesa-avtara of Narayana himself and so he is tri-kaalagya. You are forgetting this fact.


Two, Madhacharya does not quote these verse

He has not quoted these verses directly - that's correct. But he has refuted mayavad in his book, I mentioned in my previous post.



Three, Lord does not delude that is explicit in Bhagvat Gita


Lord does not delude - that's correct.
Siva deludes per his request. :)



Four, you say 4 pursharth which all hindu follows, are not desirable pursuit for some obscure reason, and yet you contradict again by quoting BG
sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaḿ śaraṇaḿ vraja - Abandon all the varities of dharma and surrender ONLY TO ME (mam- ekam). You forget to mention the result let me remind you aham tvam sarva-papebhyo moksayisyami ma sucah


Correct. Just like butter milk is always obtained as a by-product when milk is churned for getting butter. You are churning (doing bhakti) for attaining butter (Prema), but you additionally get butter-milk as a by product (Moksa).

Still, Vaisnavas disregard this Moksa to be insignificant than that of a mere pebble lying on the road-side. They want to perform devotional-service, even if they have to take birth, trillions of lifetimes.

Caitanya Mahaprabhu himself composed Siksastakam and he says :

na dhanam na janam na sundarim kavitam va jagad-isa kamaye
mama janmani janmanisvare bhavatad bhaktir ahaituki tvayi

"O almighty Lord, I have no desire to accumulate wealth, nor do I desire beautiful women, nor do I want any number of followers. I only want Your causeless devotional service, birth after birth."



I shall liberate you from all sins (or bonds of Karma). Do not grieve.

So moksa is what Krishna gives yet that is not acceptable to you.


Yes Krsna reciprocates by giving Moksa, and we offer our unlimited dandavat-pranams to his Moksa, but that is not our goal.
We want atulniya-divya-prema.

Nothing else is acceptable to us.



Not considered, but fact he is God, Maheshvara.
He is Pasupatinath, God for all beings not just people in mode of ignorance, that is your misconception otherwise this is what Bhagvat puran says but unfortunately you guys just ignore the facts and are very selective.


You can consider him to be deva independent of Supreme Personality of GodHead - But this sidhhanta can be for you, but we reject this sidhhanta outwardly, right from the scratch.



The devas observed Lord Siva sitting on the summit of Kailas Hill with his wife, Bhavani for the auspicious development of the three worlds. He was being worshiped by great saintly persons desiring liberation. The devas offered him their obeisance’s and prayers with great respect. SB 8.7.20


We also pay our unlimited dandavat pranamas to Sri Siva ji Maharaj in the form of Gopiswara, but NOT for liberation (Moksa). We pray so that he can shower his causeless mercy on us, so that we can attain just an atom of vraja-prema , just like that of gopis.- Only then will we consider our human lives will be successful.


Anyway lets not make this thread Shiva V Vishnu they are both auspicious and they do not delude their devotees

NOT only that, both of them are actually parama-karana for all the auspiciousness; and there is no question of deluding the devotees.

Delusion is for those who are atiests/asuras, disguised as devotees - who are responsible for creating disturbance (updrava) in society.



Jai Shree Krishna


All glories to SriSri Radha Ksrna alone.

grames
15 January 2010, 03:39 AM
Dear Ji,

I am not questioning the great Guru's status but all i said was, even such great Guru's didn't claim they are God or JivanMutkas. Just the sign of being humble is in fact noble and forgive me if i unconsciously thrown any offense here.



namaste.

Let us not abuse the names of our sacred gurus as points of contention of the darkness of our own ignorance!

If Devotee's question about pratyakSha pramANa is rather immature, grames's counter is plainly mischievous. We have not an iota of competence to question the jIvanmukta status of our gurus like the KAnchi seer or RamaNaMaharshi. If we do question them for our petty arguments, there would be no difference between us Hindus and the mlechchas.

devotee
15 January 2010, 03:46 AM
Namaste,

So, all who don't subscribe to ISKCON's concept of God are actually deluded & going to meet their doom !

I find some similarity here with the doctrine of Abrahimic religions :

The Abrahimic religions create unreasonable fear in the minds of people, so that people dare not think rationally & question the mischievous propaganda being spread. They say that Only their concept of God is true ... only their scriptures speak the Truth .... all other gods e.g. Rama ... Krishna etc. are actually false Gods, incapable of giving salvation. The worshippers of those Gods are actually demons ... their act of worshipping is demonic. All these people are destined to go to hell !

In case of ISKCONites, it is almost the same story :

a) All except the ISKCOnites are going to get salvation. Krishna can be described only by them. Only they interpret the BG correctly.
b) All other gods e.g. Shiva, Ganesha, Ma Durga etc. are actually demi-gods !
c) People who worship those demi-gods are actually deluded. Poor people they are so dim-witted that they have chosen to worship those demi-gods !
d) The Advaitins are basically demonic. The are the worst of the lot. They are most deluded by Shiva at the "instruction" from their concept of God i.e. Lord Vishnu or Krishna. They are the most dim-witted people & are certainly going to meet their doom !
e) Advaita is so demonic that even if you hear about it, you are finished ! This great statement is attributed to a great saint of Hindus ... (& it has lowered the status of that saint in my eyes) !

May be I am going to hell. I am not afraid. I am not afraid of any false doctrine of any Abrahimic religions & that applies to false propaganda being spread by ISKCON !

Such arrogance, such racist attitude ... is foreign to Hinduism. It must have come from outside India & got mixed with our holy religion. I think if we consider ISKCON as part of Hindu Dharma then we must redefine Hinduism.

OM

Ganeshprasad
15 January 2010, 05:13 AM
Pranam Krsna Das ji






Even if you give a prataksa-pramana for this, I will simply reject it right from the scratch. Why? Because I know that anything which is spoken independently of the 4 disciplic successions simply does not have any value.


What’s the point of you coming here on Hindu forum?

You sound like one of them who comes to doorstep telling me I am doomed.

I know even if Lord Krishna came in person you still want believe him if he told you he and Lord Shiva are not different.
These disciplic succession you speak of has holes in it that you will find impossible to fill.
You claim to follow in the line of Madhvacharya yet you do not follow his Dvaita.

Prabhupad could not agree with his god brothers therefore he split, if you can not agree amongst yourselves what chance any truth coming out from here?
I don’t feel I need to say anymore because it falls on deaf ears, but I will respond to other points later to see its fallacy.

Jai Shree Krishna

keshava
15 January 2010, 05:25 AM
Namaste,

So, all who don't subscribe to ISKCON's concept of God are actually deluded & going to meet their doom !

I find some similarity here with the doctrine of Abrahimic religions :

The Abrahimic religions create unreasonable fear in the minds of people, so that people dare not think rationally & question the mischievous propaganda being spread. They say that Only their concept of God is true ... only their scriptures speak the Truth .... all other gods e.g. Rama ... Krishna etc. are actually false Gods, incapable of giving salvation. The worshippers of those Gods are actually demons ... their act of worshipping is demonic. All these people are destined to go to hell !

In case of ISKCONites, it is almost the same story :

a) All except the ISKCOnites are going to get salvation. Krishna can be described only by them. Only they interpret the BG correctly.
b) All other gods e.g. Shiva, Ganesha, Ma Durga etc. are actually demi-gods !
c) People who worship those demi-gods are actually deluded. Poor people they are so dim-witted that they have chosen to worship those demi-gods !
d) The Advaitins are basically demonic. The are the worst of the lot. They are most deluded by Shiva at the "instruction" from their concept of God i.e. Lord Vishnu or Krishna. They are the most dim-witted people & are certainly going to meet their doom !
e) Advaita is so demonic that even if you hear about it, you are finished ! This great statement is attributed to a great saint of Hindus ... (& it has lowered the status of that saint in my eyes) !

May be I am going to hell. I am not afraid. I am not afraid of any false doctrine of any Abrahimic religions & that applies to false propaganda being spread by ISKCON !

Such arrogance, such racist attitude ... is foreign to Hinduism. It must have come from outside India & got mixed with our holy religion. I think if we consider ISKCON as part of Hindu Dharma then we must redefine Hinduism.

OM

Your definition of Hindu is adviatic. There are many parts of (however you define hinduism) Hinduism that wont agree with each other or your theory and you may find it offensive if your immature and start calling it names.

The glory of of Hinduism has never been that all paths are accepted as true as you can see by debates between great acaryas. The glory of Hinduism is the fact that these things can be debated with out killing and violence. This is what sets Hinduism apart from abrahmic religions. Not the so called everyone is right modern neo hindu hodgepodge philosophy that some want to create under the banner of their vision of hinduism.

You automatically, brand people that believe in their sidhanta as being true and others being lesser as abrahmic.

Your points.
Point a. Not just iskconites - all that worship vishnu krsna rama or narayan will go back to his unlimited abode.

"Such material gains of these less intelligent human beings are temporary. The worshipers of celestial controllers go to celestial controllers, but My devotees certainly come to Me. (7.23)"

BG 7.19 (http://vedabase.net/bg/7/19/en): After many births and deaths, he who is actually in knowledge surrenders unto Me, knowing Me to be the cause of all causes and all that is. Such a great soul is very rare.

And according to Krishna himself only a devotee can understand him therefore interpret the gita correctly. Not by mundane interpretations.

The impersonalists followers also eventually attain krishna but with difficulty

The yogi, who is devoted to meditation, is superior to the ascetics. The yogi is superior to the Vedic scholars. The yogi is superior to the ritualists. Therefore, O Arjuna, be a yogi. (6.46)
And I consider the yogi-devotee ¾ who lovingly contemplates on Me with supreme faith, and whose mind is ever absorbed in Me ¾ to be the best of all the yogis. (See also 12.02 and 18.66) (6.47)

B) Yes they are demigods according to the gita meaning lesser dieties. You may have a problem with the translation as demigod but you need to get over it. It denotes lesser gods. For a discussion on this sunject you can see both sides go to. http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=4649&page=5

Persons, whose discernment has been carried away by various desires impelled by their Karmic impression, resort to celestial controllers and practice various religious rites. (7.20)
Whosoever desires to worship whatever deity — using any name, form, and method — with faith, I make their faith steady in that very deity. Endowed with steady faith they worship that deity, and obtain their wishes through that deity. Those wishes are, indeed, granted only by Me. (7.21-22)

Such material gains of these less intelligent human beings are temporary. The worshipers of celestial controllers go to celestial controllers, but My devotees certainly come to Me. (7.23)
Krishna describes the followers of these devtas as less intelligent. This is the direct interpretation from the verses.

C) See point b. This is what Krishna is saying.

D) They are unfortunate as they are absorbed in a more difficult path which takes indirect and specualtive meanings of scriptures. They are not demoniac as faras I know just on a slower path. There are gradations

The yogi, who is devoted to meditation, is superior to the ascetics. The yogi is superior to the Vedic scholars. The yogi is superior to the ritualists. Therefore, O Arjuna, be a yogi. (6.46)


E) Mahaprabhu did not say that advaita is demoniac - its your loss if your eyes see mahaprabhu in a lower status. He had great regard for sankarcarya but not the philosophy which he dabated.
mayavadi-bhasya sunile hoy sarva-nasa, “If one entertains the doctrine of illusion, all is lost.”

From tripurari swami
"Sri Chaitanya gave more credit to the Buddhists, applying the logic of “half truth is worse than no truth at all,” vedasraya nastikya-vada. While the Buddhists openly dismiss God and the soul, the doctrine of Mayavada does so covertly. Although speaking of God (isvara) and soul (jivatma), Mayavada in the final analysis denies the existence of both of these truths at the paramarthic (ultimate) level of reality. According to Mayavada philosophy, the material world is also unreal. It exists only as a dream of the imaginary jiva, who can realize that he himself does not exist as an individual or as anything definable (neti neti) by meditating on the illusion of isvara."

Mayavada is antithesis to bhakti in the end goal. You pray to the Lord then actaully realise you are him.

Therefore it is advised that it will spoil any real devotion to a superficial form of devotion in which you feel you become the Lord.

The neiti neit followers at most can get to become one with the brahman effulgence of the lord.

Vaishnavism stresses the literal meaning (mukhya vṛrtti) as primary and indirect meaning (gauna vritti) as secondary: sākshād upadesas tu shrutih - "The instructions of the shruti-shāstra should be accepted literally, without fanciful or allegorical interpretations."

advaita gets you to the point of what we are not but vaishnavaism give the positive spirtual aspect of the nature of the souls and its relationship with god on a spiritual level (Interpreted as maya by advaita)

I (Ishvara) am the basis of the impersonal Brahman, which is immortal, imperishable and eternal and is the constitutional position of ultimate happiness. (Bhagavad Gita 14.27)

I (Ishvara) am transcendental, beyond both kshara (the fallible, perishable world) and akshara (the infallible). (Bhagavad Gita 15.18)

devotee
15 January 2010, 05:33 AM
Namsate Keshava,

Just one question : Are you a born Hindu ? You don't appear to be.

OM

keshava
15 January 2010, 05:52 AM
Namsate Keshava,

Just one question : Are you a born Hindu ? You don't appear to be.

OM
Pranams devotee,
Apologies if my tone came across agressive in the previous post - wasnt my intention.

Yes I am born in a Hindu family. Born as a swaminaryan, went to local Hindu classes watched ramanand sagars ramayana and mahabharat several times (-: (probably like many here) , followed advaita philosophy while attending shaka and swadhya then became and atheist but belived in karma and re-incarnation (looking back at it sounds like bhudism) then came to Krishna conciousness. Was raised in an islamic area so very well aware of abrahamic religions.

Hope that helps.

Krsna Das
15 January 2010, 06:07 AM
Pranam Krsna Das ji
What’s the point of you coming here on Hindu forum?


To associate with vaisnava devotees, and to share my own experiences with who so ever want to know about them, or asks questions.



You sound like one of them who comes to doorstep telling me I am doomed.


Your perception. Can't help you.



I know even if Lord Krishna came in person you still want believe him if he told you he and Lord Shiva are not different. These disciplic succession you speak of has holes in it that you will find impossible to fill.You claim to follow in the line of Madhvacharya yet you do not follow his Dvaita.


And that same Krsna came himself as Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and gave the above mentioned sidhantas to us, and we are just repeating those. What problem are you having? ;)



Prabhupad could not agree with his god brothers therefore he split, if you can not agree amongst yourselves what chance any truth coming out from here?


Split? what split? His gurudeva asked him to go to foreign countries to preach and he did so by establishing ISKCON.


I don’t feel I need to say anymore because it falls on deaf ears, but I will respond to other points later to see its fallacy.

You can respond in any way you want, but that IS going to fall on deaf ears - That's correct.

I don't think you have read point number 10 of my first post in this thread : [ http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=5095 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=5095) ]

All glories to SriSri Radha Ksrna again.

devotee
15 January 2010, 06:25 AM
Namaste Keshva,


Yes I am born in a Hindu family.
Was raised in an islamic area so very well aware of abrahamic religions.


Normally born Indian Hindus don't have such strong views as you have. Raised in an Islamic area ?? ... in India or abroad ?

I am a born Hindu ... born & brought up in India. My understanding of Advaita doesn't come from reading something written by western modern Gurus but study of Bhagwad Gita & the Upanishads. And I can understand Sanskrit fairly well ... so I need very little help in understanding what the original verses mean.

Why am I telling you this ? Unity in diversity is the beauty of Hinduism. Your understanding of Advaita is flawed. It is not anti-Bhakti. No, not at all. It is not voidism, as some ISKCON members say. Bhakti is the first requirement to tread the path of Advaita.

Perhaps, you didn't read the Upanishads yourself. Please read it so that you can have a feel of Advaita Vedanta before you have such strong views.

It is not important what path you follow. That depends upon your Guna & Karma carried over from your past life. However, saying that Shiva, Ma Durga or any God is a lesser-God than Krishna ... Advaita is demonic & is followed by dim-witted people .... is certainly alien to Hinduism as we know in India. My parents were Vaishnava. I am a Krishna Devotee. My brother is a Shiva devotee. .... still I am convinced after reading Vedanta that Advaita alone is the Truth.

I am sure that if you find time to read Upanishads or read original BG in Sanskrit, you would never say what you said in your post.

OM

grames
15 January 2010, 06:34 AM
Dear Devotee,

Did u distill out Advaita after reading Gita and Upanishad or read some Guru's commentaries? Very curious as you said you know Sanskrit also. Is it dictionary based? or do you have formal training? I would like to get lot of help with respect to a new sanskrit book i got from one of my Kerala friend. If you really know sanskrit, i would like to take your help.

devotee
15 January 2010, 06:51 AM
Namaste Grames,


Did u distill out Advaita after reading Gita and Upanishad or read some Guru's commentaries?

You can say both. However, I had firm faith in it only after carefully reading Bhagwad Gita and Upanishads ... mostly Upanishads.


Very curious as you said you know Sanskrit also. Is it dictionary based? or do you have formal training?

Sanskrit was one of subjects I read in my school days. However, please don't think that I am an expert on Sanskrit. Sometimes, I do have to look for words in dictionary ... mostly in Upanishads which use very old form of Sanskrit.


I would like to get lot of help with respect to a new sanskrit book i got from one of my Kerala friend. If you really know sanskrit, i would like to take your help.

If I can help you, it would be my pleasure. However, as I told you, please don't think that I am an expert. I was basically a student of science.

OM

keshava
15 January 2010, 07:05 AM
Namaste Keshva,


Normally born Indian Hindus don't have such strong views as you have. Raised in an Islamic area ?? ... in India or abroad ?

I am a born Hindu ... born & brought up in India. My understanding of Advaita doesn't come from reading something written by western modern Gurus but study of Bhagwad Gita & the Upanishads. And I can understand Sanskrit fairly well ... so I need very little help in understanding what the original verses mean.

Why am I telling you this ? Unity in diversity is the beauty of Hinduism. Your understanding of Advaita is flawed. It is not anti-Bhakti. No, not at all. It is not voidism, as some ISKCON members say. Bhakti is the first requirement to tread the path of Advaita.

Perhaps, you didn't read the Upanishads yourself. Please read it so that you can have a feel of Advaita Vedanta before you have such strong views.

It is not important what path you follow. That depends upon your Guna & Karma carried over from your past life. However, saying that Shiva, Ma Durga or any God is a lesser-God than Krishna ... Advaita is demonic & is followed by dim-witted people .... is certainly alien to Hinduism as we know in India. My parents were Vaishnava. I am a Krishna Devotee. My brother is a Shiva devotee. .... still I am convinced after reading Vedanta that Advaita alone is the Truth.

I am sure that if you find time to read Upanishads or read original BG in Sanskrit, you would never say what you said in your post.

OM

Pranams devotee. Bhakti maybe the first requirement for advaita - but its certainly not the goal of advaita its treated as a stepping stone.

"It is not important what path you follow. "

Thats your advaitic view/interpretation. Krishna in the gita says the path you follow does matter.

Such material gains of these less intelligent human beings are temporary. The worshipers of celestial controllers go to celestial controllers, but My devotees certainly come to Me. (7.23)


"However, saying that Shiva, Ma Durga or any God is a lesser-God than Krishna ...Advaita is demonic & is followed by dim-witted people .... is certainly alien to Hinduism "

Krishna himself makes these distinctions in verses 7.20 to 7.23. Advaita philosophy doesnt as they ultimately see it as all one. Niether is this alien to hinduism - vaishnavas have been saying these things for hundreds if not thousands of years in modern history. You claim to understand much with your reading of upanishads maybe you should check history? check out Indias philosophical history. Its not alien to india.

I have not called adviatas demoniac but from a vaishnava perspective they have half hen and inaccurate philosophy. This assertion is not new therefore there have been debates between advaita and other schools for hundreds of years.


"still I am convinced after reading Vedanta that Advaita alone is the Truth.

I am sure that if you find time to read Upanishads or read original BG in Sanskrit, you would never say what you said in your post. "

Its good for you that you are convinced of advaita. I am not. There have been many devotees that have read gita and upanishads in sanskrit I suspect more qualified than you are eg Maadhavaa, ramunuja and nimarkacraya to name a few and it didnt lead them to a advaitic conclusion. Maybe they wernt as learned as you were as they said similar things im saying in my post.


Hare Krishna

devotee
15 January 2010, 07:39 AM
Namaste Keshva,

I don't think we can agree with each other's views. So, let's part are ways here. However, I should draw your attention to this :

a) Please read BG 7.20 to 23 again. Try to read these verses keeping in mind of Devatas who are worshipped for fulfilling certain worldly desires e.g. Ma Saraswati who is worshipped for knowledge ... various vedic Devatas like Agni, Indra who are worshipped for material gains as the Samhita part of Vedas say.

I think you may be able to distinguish these Devatas from Lord Shiva. Devatas have not been considered as having powers to give liberation .... but Lord Shiva, Ma Durga etc. do have powers to grant liberation.

Actually, it is not form & name of God but the difference in the bhaav (motive) of the devotee for worshipping God which matters. If you worship Lord Krishna also for some material desires ... its fruit also will be equally perishable.

b) You can't show even one verse in BG or in Upanishads which show that Advaita is "half hen and inaccurate philosophy". Remember, Jnani is the best Bhakta of Lord Krishna as Lord says in BG.

c) The differences did exist. Maadhava was a dvaitin, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu gave Achintya Bheda-abheda & Ramanuja gave Vishishta Advaita Vaad". However, I don't remember any of them called Sankara as dim-witted and demonic as has been repeatedly being posted by Krsna Das. If anyone of those great saints said this, please show it to me. This is, as I said, is not Hindu way.

We may always agree to disagree & have respect for other paths. Even if we criticise other's understanding, we may do it gracefully.

OM

keshava
15 January 2010, 08:27 AM
a) Please read BG 7.20 to 23 again. Try to read these verses keeping in mind of Devatas who are worshipped for fulfilling certain worldly desires e.g. Ma Saraswati who is worshipped for knowledge ... various vedic Devatas like Agni, Indra who are worshipped for material gains as the Samhita part of Vedas say.

I think you may be able to distinguish these Devatas from Lord Shiva. Devatas have not been considered as having powers to give liberation .... but Lord Shiva, Ma Durga etc. do have powers to grant liberation.

Actually, it is not form & name of God but the difference in the bhaav (motive) of the devotee for worshipping God which matters. If you worship Lord Krishna also for some material desires ... its fruit also will be equally perishable.



Its not just the motive or the Bhav that matters accoprding to the Gita.
In verses ppreceding 7.20-7.23 he describes 4 kinds of materially motivated people but describes them as su-kṛtinaḥ — those who are pious; and udārāḥ — magnanimous;

BG 7.17 (http://vedabase.net/bg/7/17/en): Of these, the one who is in full knowledge and who is always engaged in pure devotional service is the best. For I am very dear to him, and he is dear to Me.
BG 7.18 (http://vedabase.net/bg/7/18/en): All these devotees are undoubtedly magnanimous souls, but he who is situated in knowledge of Me I consider to be just like My own self. Being engaged in My transcendental service, he is sure to attain Me, the highest and most perfect goal.

The materially motivated devotees of krishna are described positively.
Where as those who follow anya devtas are described hṛta — deprived of; jñānāḥ — knowledge 7.20

The fruits they recieve are anta-vat — perishable and they are described as alpa-medhasām — of those of small intelligence ;

This might lower the status of the gita in your eyes or you may need to try and provide a advaitic twist to it somehow to get another meaning from it.



Namaste Keshva,


b) You can't show even one verse in BG or in Upanishads which show that Advaita is "half hen and inaccurate philosophy". Remember, Jnani is the best Bhakta of Lord Krishna as Lord says in BG.



Not a verse you wont interpret as being advatic.

See above point (A) where you said it doesnt matter what diety you worship its the bhava that counts.




c) The differences did exist. Maadhava was a dvaitin, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu gave Achintya Bheda-abheda & Ramanuja gave Vishishta Advaita Vaad". However, I don't remember any of them called Sankara as dim-witted and demonic as has been repeatedly being posted by Krsna Das. If anyone of those great saints said this, please show it to me. This is, as I said, is not Hindu way.

We may always agree to disagree & have respect for other paths. Even if we criticise other's understanding, we may do it gracefully.

OM

As far as I can see no one has called sankara in this thread a demon. It just looks like you're getting emotional and trying to make Krsna das look bad then attack that. Make the dog look bad then hang him logic

This is what I see krsna das says on post 5 and 12
post 5
Caitanya Mahaprabhu has himself warned - not even to read the sariraka bhasya of SriPad Sankaracarya, otherwise the spiritual life of that person is in jeopardy:

post 12
"NOT only that, both of them are actually parama-karana for all the auspiciousness; and there is no question of deluding the devotees.

Delusion is for those who are atiests/asuras, disguised as devotees - who are responsible for creating disturbance (updrava) in society."

Then your exagerated bombastic reply is on post 13 which i replyed back to on 14

"So, all who don't subscribe to ISKCON's concept of God are actually deluded & going to meet their doom !"

"e) Advaita is so demonic that even if you hear about it, you are finished ! This great statement is attributed to a great saint of Hindus ... (& it has lowered the status of that saint in my eyes) !"

No one said advaita is so demoniac
Now you claim someone said

"I don't remember any of them called Sankara as dim-witted and demonic as has been repeatedly being posted by Krsna Das. "
"This is, as I said, is not Hindu way. "

Exagerating and falsely putting words in to peoples mouths is not the Hindu way. No one said Mahaprabhu said adavita is so demoniac dont listen to it the reason given was "otherwise the spiritual life of that person is in jeopardy"-

Please learn to read properly and not turn things emotive and then accuse others of saying such things.
Hare Krishna









Hare Krishna

Ganeshprasad
15 January 2010, 10:48 AM
Pranam all


Thanks to you also, because I get an opportunity to go through the glorious verses of Bhagwatam, Geeta and Caitanya Caritamrta again and again. Krsna is sprinkling his karuna on me and he is making you nimitta.



Stop being emotional and hypocrite no one is buying your humility since nothing I say will make any difference to you, your words.



Sri Ved Vyas narrated this Puran well before Budha’s birth - Absolutely correct.
But let me add something he is also saktya-vesa-avtara of Narayana himself and so he is tri-kaalagya. You are forgetting this fact.
No but I am giving him more credit then you can ever imagine.
One if he had to prophesise he would have made it in Bhavisya Puran two he is more intelligent then you are giving him credit for, if the plan was to delude people, as your verses allege then you do not broadcast in advance otherwise you will fail to have desire affect. Are you getting this?



He has not quoted these verses directly - that's correct. But he has refuted mayavad in his book, I mentioned in my previous post.

I don’t think you understand the point, no one is arguing his refuting Advaita, don’t you think its strange such a glaring evidence escaped his attention. It would have saved him years of research against advaita.
But I forget you are not allowed to think out side of your box.
 
 


Lord does not delude - that's correct.
Siva deludes per his request.

don’t be a hypocrite, weather directly or using another means one still is culpable. I know, Siva do not delude because he is all auspicious.



Correct. Just like butter milk is always obtained as a by-product when milk is churned for getting butter. You are churning (doing bhakti) for attaining butter (Prema), but you additionally get butter-milk as a by product (Moksa).
Still, Vaisnavas disregard this Moksa to be insignificant than that of a mere pebble lying on the road-side. They want to perform devotional-service, even if they have to take birth, trillions of lifetimes.
What correct? We are not discussing weather Vaisnavas spurn Moksa, your contention was that Lord Vishnu was not happy about 4 Pursharth yet when I point out Krishna is asking Arjun to surrender so that he will give him Moksa you say that is correct,so make your mind up who is right? Is Vishnu or Krishna or the verse that you quote is interpolation.



Caitanya Mahaprabhu himself composed Siksastakam and he says :
na dhanam na janam na sundarim kavitam va jagad-isa kamaye
mama janmani janmanisvare bhavatad bhaktir ahaituki tvayi
"O almighty Lord, I have no desire to accumulate wealth, nor do I desire beautiful women, nor do I want any number of followers. I only want Your causeless devotional service, birth after birth."
All glories to Goranga.
So why don’t you follow his advise.
Iskcon spare no effort to make money, any which way how in the name of Krishna, they sell Shastra and called that Laxmi points, Hindus are duped in to parting their hard earned money, then they squander it on paying for litigation defending paedophiles, child abuse, on the market yes that is what happened to lots of money collected for Gosala project.
Young girls are encouraged to serve to entice young boys to join the fold.

All the effort is made to swell the numbers so who is following his desires?


Yes Krsna reciprocates by giving Moksa, and we offer our unlimited dandavat-pranams to his Moksa, but that is not our goal.
We want atulniya-divya-prema.
Nothing else is acceptable to us.
Who cares if you like moksa or not, the point was about deluding Jiva who desired Moksa so don’t change the context.
 



You can consider him to be deva independent of Supreme Personality of GodHead - But this sidhhanta can be for you, but we reject this sidhhanta outwardly, right from the scratch.
I don’t care what your Sidhanta is, don’t change the context just try to be honest, you declared boldly that people in Tamas worship Lord Shiva and I prove to you from none other than Srimad Bhagvat, that is not the case and if that is not enough Gopi worshiped Lord Shiva also yet instead of accepting the truth and acknowledge your misconception you are trying to deflect the point. Shame


Quote:
The devas observed Lord Siva sitting on the summit of Kailas Hill with his wife, Bhavani for the auspicious development of the three worlds. He was being worshiped by great saintly persons desiring liberation. The devas offered him their obeisance’s and prayers with great respect. SB 8.7.20

We also pay our unlimited dandavat pranamas to Sri Siva ji Maharaj in the form of Gopiswara, but NOT for liberation (Moksa). We pray so that he can shower his causeless mercy on us, so that we can attain just an atom of vraja-prema , just like that of gopis.- Only then will we consider our human lives will be successful.

And you still maintain that people in mode of ignorance worship Lord Shiva!



Delusion is for those who are atiests/asuras, disguised as devotees - who are responsible for creating disturbance (updrava) in society.

Again we have changed the story, first it was for those who worshiped Vishnu for material gains!
We have a saying those who live in glass house do not throw stones.




To associate with vaisnava devotees, and to share my own experiences with who so ever want to know about them, or asks questions.

For a Hindu it is to search the truth speak the truth and honour the truth.
Asato Ma Sat Gamaya Tamaso Ma Jyotir Gamaya Mrityor Maamritam Gamaya Om-Let us be led from the unreal to the Real From darkness to the Light From mortality to eternity
I feel sorry for those who close their book, thinking they have reached the truth but not experienced it.
 
 


And that same Krsna came himself as Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and gave the above mentioned sidhantas to us, and we are just repeating those. What problem are you having?

Only thing he asked to repeat was Hari Naam but not anyone ninda.



Split? what split? His gurudeva asked him to go to foreign countries to preach and he did so by establishing ISKCON.

This all happen when his Guru passed away, everyone of his god brother wanted run differently, he could have kept within his Guru’s organisation yet no one can agree with each other, so much so he told his disciples to ignore his god brother and their books. You can remain blinkered I do not bye this sampraday close doors, it is parampara that matter not an institute, they come and go, take the essence like Guru Datatraya.

 


You can respond in any way you want, but that IS going to fall on deaf ears - That's correct.
I don't think you have read point number 10 of my first post in this thread

Yes I did, so not Hindu
Jai Shree Krishna

keshava
15 January 2010, 11:34 AM
Pranams Ganeshprashadji,

If I may I would just like to say a couple of points.
Firstly moksaymi refers to free from sins not liberation as normally seen as free from samsara (there are different types of liberation one bieng megring in to the body of the Lord the others being residing with the lord etc.

Fix your mind on Me, be devoted to Me, offer service to Me, bow down to Me, and you shall certainly reach Me. I promise you because you are My very dear friend. (18.65)
Set aside all meritorious deeds and religious rituals, and just surrender completely to My will with firm faith and loving devotion. I shall liberate you from all sins, the bonds of Karma. Do not grieve. (18.66)

Secondly you seem to have some issue with Iskcon - do you even know if Krsna das is a part of ISKCON? Your entitled to your views, however I feel somethings are inaccurate.

Iskcon spare no effort to make money, any which way how in the name of Krishna, they sell Shastra and called that Laxmi points, Hindus are duped in to parting their hard earned money,


Iskcon is a preaching movement. Laxmi points doesn't mean money. a small book is .25 a big book is .5 and a large one is 1 point.

They preach and sell books as that was their spritual masters order to give trancendental knowledge. Most of the books are given to non-hindus on street distribution. And spending money on Spirtual literture may be duping to you as you may not agree with it but many are appreciative.


then they squander it on paying for litigation defending paedophiles, child abuse on the market yes that is what happened to lots of money collected for Gosala project.


There has been a squandering in the past as well as a lot of positive things. The movement is made up of people from all sorts of backgrounds and its suffered because of the action of a few which is regrettable. The cause is noble (at least in my opinion) but with any organistation the participants are human.


Are you refering to the Gosala at Bhaktivedanta manor. What is the source of this allegation as its serious and not something I'm aware of?

Whats your point in critising ISKCON? Everytime a gaudiya vaishnava whether they are a part of iskcon or not says something that you and your other friends on this forum dont like you attack the instituation.

It's like me talking about something and I dont like what a follower of advaita is saying and then while im at it I talk about some of the murders that happened in one of thier maths or talk about some scandals in the Vivekanada group or something.

Firstly I should find out if they are really from that organisation, and secondly is it relevent for the topic in discussion or is it some underlying gripe you have and you like to express it any opportunity you have.

Rather than using snide side comments about people or organisations theres more integrity and its more constructive in statrting a thread and dealing with the issues in a relevent and respectful way.

Hare Krishna

Ganeshprasad
15 January 2010, 04:29 PM
Pranam Keshava ji


Pranams Ganeshprashadji,

If I may I would just like to say a couple of points.
Firstly moksaymi refers to free from sins not liberation as normally seen as free from samsara (there are different types of liberation one bieng megring in to the body of the Lord the others being residing with the lord etc.


True I agree but there is no condemn of moksa with Krishna and that was the point, it’s a different matter various type of liberation is sought depending on choice.




Secondly you seem to have some issue with Iskcon - do you even know if Krsna das is a part of ISKCON? Your entitled to your views, however I feel somethings are inaccurate.

Oh really, now how would you think so? is it because I don’t agree with certain principles that it goes against Hindus way of thinking?



Iskcon is a preaching movement. Laxmi points doesn't mean money. a small book is .25 a big book is .5 and a large one is 1 point.

I am well aware of this , so how ever you want to package the laxmi point it all boils down to money, na dhanam that was the point,so you are in no position to accuse me of dragging Iskcon here.




They preach and sell books as that was their spritual masters order to give trancendental knowledge. Most of the books are given to non-hindus on street distribution. And spending money on Spirtual literture may be duping to you as you may not agree with it but many are appreciative.

I did not make the point that selling Books is akin to duping Hindus, it is beside the point that making a living out of selling Shastra is against Dharma. There are many ways Hindus are duped and one of the biggest lie is that they are Hindus when suited otherwise their stated position is that they are not Hindus.



There has been a squandering in the past as well as a lot of positive things. The movement is made up of people from all sorts of backgrounds and its suffered because of the action of a few which is regrettable. The cause is noble (at least in my opinion) but with any organistation the participants are human.

What makes you think past mistakes are not repeated? When the big gurus a lot of them fell from grace what to speak of rubber stamped Brahmins in Iskcon, there is a statistically high probability, will fall away from the standard and take up mleccha conduct once again. The last 40 years of iskcon amply bear this out. And what to speak of others who are busy propagating such institutions as "gay monogamy," writing about UFOs and what not. And enjoy free meal ticket and shelter, curtsey hard working Hindus both inside and out unsuspecting the shenanigan that goes on.

This is what happen when one forgets 'Na janam' no desire for followers isn’t that what Krsan Das quoted? I am not dragging Iskcon on my own.




Whats your point in critising ISKCON? Everytime a gaudiya vaishnava whether they are a part of iskcon or not says something that you and your other friends on this forum dont like you attack the instituation.
It's like me talking about something and I dont like what a follower of advaita is saying and then while im at it I talk about some of the murders that happened in one of thier maths or talk about some scandals in the Vivekanada group or something.
Firstly I should find out if they are really from that organisation, and secondly is it relevent for the topic in discussion or is it some underlying gripe you have and you like to express it any opportunity you have.
Rather than using snide side comments about people or organisations theres more integrity and its more constructive in statrting a thread and dealing with the issues in a relevent and respectful way.

Hare Krishna

Good question, if people stick to the points with Shastra and logic, and not reject it when faced with difficult question hiding behind sidhantaa, then don’t be surprised the institute get dragged in, I pulled out of Hare Krishna section because there you were discussing your sidhantaa it is different here.

Jai Shree Krishna

grames
16 January 2010, 01:27 AM
Dear Ji,

Looks like your post of this require a litter better response. I am taking privilege of giving one.

First of all, if you are not a Vaishnava, there is no concept of Deities to you in absolute reality and you cannot have one such unless you have to accept the "differences" as it becomes a necessity to justify the concept of Supreme Lord or various Devata. If your belief is all but One Brahman in absolute reality, you should not have even the concept of Ista Devata and such Ista Devata are only relative reality and when you accept the term "relative", naturally ranking or differences between such realities are rationally true. Trying to equate such "Devata" as same with no difference is like comparing all the "paddle" of the boats and claiming they all are one and same with respect to their purpose though they are independent, unique and may be priced differently and used differently. So when your position is to even deny the temporary "devata" as relative reality with respect to the Absolute realization, what is the pride in ranking them as same with out any merit or praamanas? Shouldn't it be different as long as you are in relative reality and you pronounce such differences by various names and perceive various forms? So such differences which obviously will rank them in order isn't? Give a response with good substance rather than sarcastic texts.

If you think Shruti Vaks are talking only about Absolute reality, it is not the opinion of Shri Shankara and his followers.


Two contradicting statement, one Vishu wants to delude people because he is not happy that they worship him for material gain only, but then he wants to delude and keep the sudh bhakti away from them by deluding them.


Lord do not 'punish' people but He is more hidden for those who do not desire Him and it is natural principle. What is wrong in that? Your quote from BG is not even a proof of denial of such principle and it is truth by AnuBhava of every normal man. If your wife comes to know that you are married to her for her money, her love for you will surely be "hidden" or hindered until the time you realize her worth and start loving her. SO, love is always two way link and Prema for God is not different. When one stops prema from their end, the other will not be able to close it, though Lord is always ready to reciprocate His love mercifully and that is message and conclusion of BG also. It is not to keep the "Sudda Bhakthi" away from them but to connect with Him by Sudda Bhakthi only. When you do not know what love is, how love is, what is the point talking about Love with out you being interested? That is the idea.



The wise should not unsettle the mind of the ignorant who is attached to the fruits of work, but the enlightened one should inspire others by performing all works efficiently without attachment. (3.26)

Very true and Advaita does not stop you from performing Karma or Janana Yoga but the ultimate objective of such Yoga or results of performing so much Sadana is not clear. There is no pursha Artha's in Advaita and what is Karma? What is Artha? What is Dharma? What is Moksha? Truely they all are dreams or dream objects and they have no reality in them. If you have to deny the controller aspect of spiritual realm, it is how your philosophy will be but Vaishnavas happily believe that it is Hari who is Supreme, He is the one who made all the arrangement in this world for this Soul to experience His Supremacy and also experience the bliss of the SvaRupa Ananada etc. So for Advaitin, work is encouraged but the goal is hidden or fruit of your work is hidden. Becoming Brahman is the delusion :) and extra ordinary promise or declaration where the desired people are promised that "They are God" and guide them to work more in that direction of attaining/experiencing such oneness with Brahman. Such people even when they read Shruti, worship Lord do not know the real purpose behind such acts and how many have answers for why are you in this situation in first place. Lord Krshna for them is just a "JivanMukta" and what else you can call as delusion? What is Lord Krshna for you? Brahman? Realized Jivan Mutka? One of us? Or what? Can you talk about it clearly before we come back to discussing the ranks of Deities or Devatas?

The only way you can equate all of them is by only one rule of Advaitam and that too in absolute reality sense and if you have any different philosophical point to justify that all devatas are indeed same and with same ranks, i would be very much delighted to continue the conversation after such response.


The Lord does not take the (responsibility for) good or evil deeds of anybody. The knowledge is covered by (the veil of) ignorance, thereby people are deluded. (5.15)

And there you are telling us that the lord interferes and actually deludes those who worship him all being for selfish desires! If they are deluded why delude them even more?
That is the way how the Personal God performs or plays His leela. What the above sloka means is, He is not responsible for the deeds of any individual that includes you but, it is from He the individual derive all the desire to perform such deeds. He is part of your pious deeds and He provides all necessary environment and tools to perform such pious activities and bring you more close Him. Same time, it is the same He who also gives you the environment and tools to do your sinful activities and also makes you reap the results of such sinful activities. Desiring is individual's guna and what do you desire is based on your purity of the Gosha's and He is helper and provider of all in performing such deeds as per your desire is the meaning. It is not a praamana or proof to say that Lord does not take part in fulfilling your desire to get deluded. :) That is only shortcoming in the understanding of such beautiful sloka. So when you desire Him, He promises that you will surely come to Him because He is the one who makes arrangements for the best results of such Sadhana. Who else can give promises?



Now if you accepted Shiva Gita of the same Puran this literal ordering would not make sense to you because there in Lord Shiva is supreme. In fact the whole verse make no sense for several reasons,Very true so why it has to be rejected as not the ultimate truth. Every Gita portrays the deity of that Gita as Supreme because it is all abt that particular deity. Shiva gita with out doubt will portray Lord Shiva as supreme and there is no wonder in it. But, that is not the final conclusion! and it is not a problem for Vaishnava's to accept the norm that, Puranas or portions of Purna are either Sattvik, Rajo or Tamasmic. It may be a trouble to accept such classification as valid only for non-vaishnava groups.


so what is in gods name the purpose of this delusion?The encouragement to do more Work to align in to the path of realizing the ultimate reality! This delusion is not devised with out someone asking. Its created naturally as there are 'fans' to follow and enjoy the same as how all good and bad situations are existing in this world. Of course, Advaitins out number the Vaishnavas.

Hare Krishna!

devotee
16 January 2010, 04:51 AM
Namaste Grames,

You have asked questions from GP ji but I must tell you that he is not an Advaitin. He is a true Krishna Devotee as I know him. :)

You write :


Very true and Advaita does not stop you from performing Karma or Janana Yoga but the ultimate objective of such Yoga or results of performing so much Sadana is not clear. There is no pursha Artha's in Advaita and what is Karma? What is Artha? What is Dharma? What is Moksha? Truely they all are dreams or dream objects and they have no reality in them. If you have to deny the controller aspect of spiritual realm, it is how your philosophy will be but Vaishnavas happily believe that it is Hari who is Supreme, He is the one who made all the arrangement in this world for this Soul to experience His Supremacy and also experience the bliss of the SvaRupa Ananada etc. So for Advaitin, work is encouraged but the goal is hidden or fruit of your work is hidden. Becoming Brahman is the delusion and extra ordinary promise or declaration where the desired people are promised that "They are God" and guide them to work more in that direction of attaining/experiencing such oneness with Brahman. Such people even when they read Shruti, worship Lord do not know the real purpose behind such acts and how many have answers for why are you in this situation in first place. Lord Krshna for them is just a "JivanMukta" and what else you can call as delusion? What is Lord Krshna for you? Brahman? Realized Jivan Mutka? One of us? Or what? Can you talk about it clearly before we come back to discussing the ranks of Deities or Devatas?

The only way you can equate all of them is by only one rule of Advaitam and that too in absolute reality sense and if you have any different philosophical point to justify that all devatas are indeed same and with same ranks, i would be very much delighted to continue the conversation after such response.

You have so much doubts on Advaita Vedanta & still you post as if you know everything of Advaita Vedanta !

I can tell you just one thing. Your understanding of Advaita Vedanta is not correct. You, perhaps have formed your opinion about this doctrine on the basis of discussions going on on the web by young people who don't understand any difference between Advaita Vedanta & Buddhism. What is presented there, is neither.

I have no desire to start any debate again. I just want to point out that Advaita Vedanta is really difficult to understand & therefore, one must have patience to understand what this philosophy has to offer.

Contrary to your belief, Advaita Vedanta philosophy doesn't have any contradiction with any of the paths of devotion ... Vaishnavism included ... but they see the things a little differently than it is understood in the paths of devotion. There too is God but it is not bound by name & form ... it is infinite & in all equally. The Advaitins do worship God but they prefer a slightly different way ... feeling the one-ness with God during meditation. Only an egoist can say, "I am God" .... Adavitin don't say it .... when he is really one with God, the individuality which can claim this is lost. So, "you" never become God.

You remember, I once asked you about Achintya Bheda-Abheda. However, I could not get anything directly from Chaitanya Mahaprabhu who gave this doctrine. Because as I see it, the Vishishta Advaita-vaad & Achintya Bheda-Abheda both talk about the Non-dual reality & also of undeniable duality ... & let me tell you that it matches with Advaita Vedanta Philosophy if you consider various states of reality. The problem arises when we start talking of Truth in Turiya from waking & dreaming states.

I am not saying that we must agree to each others views or any one view is superior to the other. What I feel is that there is lot of misconception which gives rise to unnecessary & avoidable debate over non-issues between Advaitins & Vaishnavas.

Please forgive me, if in the heat of moment, I have said anything unpleasant to anyone here.

I quit this thread & all discussions of this type here.

With love ...

devotee

Ganeshprasad
16 January 2010, 07:03 AM
Pranam devotee ji, Namaste Grames and all




You have asked questions from GP ji but I must tell you that he is not an Advaitin. He is a true Krishna Devotee as I know him. :)




Thanks for the kind words, I wish I was a true bhakta of Krishna but I pretend, well I try. One thing is clear for me is, that I can not see, that bhakti devoid of Lord Shiva in there, not as a servant , not as his master although he is sarva but as a different aspect of the same ultimate reality. Before anyone accuse me of not knowing who Lord Krishna is I admit I have no idea who he is but do know he is Karunasindhu ocean of mercy.

This is Tulsidas bhakti in manas, as a child I was inspired by it so is majority Hindus i think
337    Dohaa:   Sankara priya mama-drohee, Siva-drohee mama daasa:  (http://javascript<b></b>:Hindi('337'))
Tay nara karahin kalapa bhari, ghora naraka main baasa:: (http://javascript<b></b>:Hindi('337')) L/2
337. Shree Raama continued, "Those who love Shiva and are opposed to me or are against Shiva and devoted to me, will live in hell for a full kalpa." The Shree Raamacharita Maanasa repeats the oneness of Shiva, a god of the Indian trinity, and Shree Raama, an Incarnation of Vishnu. (See 241 (http://javascript<b></b>:Link('241'))[35]) By treating Shiva as a guru and as the personification of enlightened faith, Tulaseedaasa made him the foundation of devotion to Shree Raama.
Shiva is Shree Raama’s servant, master and friend. It is a peculiar relationship of oneness between an Incarnation of God and gods.
Shree Raama installed and worshipped Shiva’s symbol. Shiva always repeats Shree Raama’s name.

This verse is from an excerpt on 'Bhakti' written in 'Uttara Khanda' of Sri Rama Carita Manas by Saint Sri Tulasidasa and spoken by Lord Ramacandra Himself.

Lord Ramacandra said:


" aurau eka guputa mata sabahi kahaum kara jori,
shankara bhajana binaa nara bhagati na paavai mori "

With folded hands I now lay before you one MORE SECRET doctrine:
WITHOUT ADORING Lord Shankara NO MAN can ATTAIN loving DEVOTION to ME.
Shree Raama treats the aversion or opposition to devotion to Shiva in his devotees as the same as to himself. (See 184 (http://javascript<b></b>:Link('184'))) If one does not revere Shiva who is Shree Raama’s devotee, one cannot reach Shree Raama. Yaajnavalkya said that devotion to Shiva is the sign of devotion to Shree Raama. (See 58 (http://javascript<b></b>:Link('58'))) The precept is that ‘Vishnu is Shiva and Shiva is Vishnu and whoever thinks they are different goes to hell.’

This is my outlook Grames, if you must know but this in not the purpose of discussion on this thread nor the devas and their respective position, so let us stick to the point and that is does the lord delude especially as alleged in Padma puran?

Jai Shree Krishna

Krsna Das
16 January 2010, 07:48 AM
337    Dohaa:   Sankara priya mama-drohee, Siva-drohee mama daasa:  (http://javascript&#37;3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:Hindi%28%27337%27%29)
Tay nara karahin kalapa bhari, ghora naraka main baasa:: (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:Hindi%28%27337%27%29) L/2


Please compare the above one with what I have said in this post:




originally quoted by Krsna Das:

We also pay our unlimited dandavat pranamas to Sri Siva ji Maharaj in the form of Gopiswara, but NOT for liberation (Moksa). We pray so that he can shower his causeless mercy on us, so that we can attain just an atom of vraja-prema , just like that of gopis.- Only then will we consider our human lives will be successful.

NOT only that, both of them are actually parama-karana for all the auspiciousness



Lord Ramacandra said:

" aurau eka guputa mata sabahi kahaum kara jori,
shankara bhajana binaa nara bhagati na paavai mori "

With folded hands I now lay before you one MORE SECRET doctrine:
WITHOUT ADORING Lord Shankara NO MAN can ATTAIN loving DEVOTION to ME.
Shree Raama treats the aversion or opposition to devotion to Shiva in his devotees as the same as to himself. (See 184 (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:Link%28%27184%27%29)) If one does not revere Shiva who is Shree Raama’s devotee, one cannot reach Shree Raama. Yaajnavalkya said that devotion to Shiva is the sign of devotion to Shree Raama. (See 58 (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:Link%28%2758%27%29)) The precept is that ‘Vishnu is Shiva and Shiva is Vishnu and whoever thinks they are different goes to hell.’
Now compare the above one with what I have said as point number 6 of the following thread:

[ http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=5055 ]


Ganesh Prasad Ji, I am not giving any response to your other posts because you are now not left with any other sensible argument, and for this reason, you have resorted to say foul words for an organization and me. I have never said any foul words for any deva / organizatiobn / you / any body else , not only in this thread, but in any of the threads in this forum. I don't think anything constructive is going to come out and it is waste of time.

FULLSTOP.



Hari Bol !

Ganeshprasad
16 January 2010, 09:38 AM
Pranam krsna ji



Ganesh Prasad Ji, I am not giving any response to your other posts because

Simply put you have no answer to that



you are now not left with any other sensible argument, and for this reason, you have resorted to say foul words for an organization and me.
I have never said any foul words for any deva / organizatiobn / you / any body else , not only in this thread, but in any of the threads in this forum.

I am sorry I hurt your feelings but not for saying two words ie sentiment and hypocrite which you perceived to be foul words. They were both used in context, you are welcome to prove me wrong.

Again if I have said anything that is not true in line about an organisation feel free to correct me. Besides if you debate on the strength of any particular sidhantaa be prepared to defend the organisation it belongs to.
You may not consider the use of the words servant or demigod for Lord Shiva but it is highly offensive for his Bhakta


I don't think anything constructive is going to come out and it is waste of time.
FULLSTOP. Hari Bol !


That is so true specially so when your stated position is that you will not consider anything out side of your box. Even if the truth stares in your face you will reject it.
Jai Shree Krishna

grames
16 January 2010, 01:41 PM
Ji,

The long response is in fact answers to this question along with a possiblity of accepting all as one by only one possible meaning or concept of Advaitam.


so let us stick to the point and that is does the lord delude especially as alleged in Padma puran?

Jai Shree Krishna

I already told you, it has to be rejected! Delusion is not the direct motivation but who wants to be deluded as their ista do have such choices and scriptures available to be deluded. :)

Nature is of course made of all three guna and Tamo is in fact verily accepted by all Schools as one of the Guna. If everything is same, there is no need for various names, forms etc isnt? If it is Advaita, then you are right.... but for a Vaishnava no it is not at all right. Vishu sarvottama is the ultimate reality and everything else is subordinate to that.

keshava
16 January 2010, 01:43 PM
so let us stick to the point and that is does the lord delude especially as alleged in Padma puran?


Pranams Ganeshprashadji

Great stick to the thread, rather than take your fustration out on other organisations which isnt the only one which propogates the sidhanta you dont like and not an organsisation you assume Krsna das belongs to.

I would answer you're points - point by point but you seem to be forking out to many things.

Can i get futher details on you goshalla allegation as im quite close to that project and would love to hear your insight.

As I said in a previous thread I'm prepared to have a discussion with you on another thread on your questions on wheteher ISKCON is hindu or not rather than off the cuff remarks.

Na dhanam na janam na sundrim.

Your again taking out of context mahaprabha's words. That verse does not mean that nobody should collect money. To print books, to maintain the temple, to live etc money is requeried. The point is that it shouldnt be the aim. The aim is to serve krishna. There are other statements that mahaprabhu makes, about social divisions and bhakti which you arent considering. Yes some people have had the aim of money and its been a disservice to the organisation we live in a world of humans with many faults.

The moksa verse from the gita. No one condems moksa, vaishnavas do not aspire for it they aspire for krishna bhakti wether in this world or vaikuntha. Moksa is a side effect. Krishna in that word isnt using the word to mean liberation from samsara he is using it as free from sinful karma.

I can tell you many things wrong with ISKCON and its members you dont need to be too smart to point out faults and internal differences of opinion in any organisation.

"Good question, if people stick to the points with Shastra and logic, and not reject it when faced with difficult question hiding behind sidhantaa, then don’t be surprised the institute get dragged in, I pulled out of Hare Krishna section because there you were discussing your sidhantaa it is different here."

Bad answer. So if you feel an indvidual cant or wont listen to your reason - your way of druming it through is to drag an organisation and point out its faults. you dont even know if that person is a part of it or not. I feel that approach is childish and not constructive

If you can't see that then I respectfully pull out of this thread. The reason being is that if thats how you have your discussions then i dont feel it will have any positive out come. It's like in school you dont feel your getting through to someone so you attack their family or race or something.

I have no problems discussing all the faults you percieve and am willing to share what i've learnt about rubber stamped brahmanas, is iskcon hindu or not, should gays have recognition of manogamy or not, should devotees write about ufos and relate them to stories of vimanas and other planets in the scripture, but only in a respectful atmosphere not somewhere were you have been fustrated by a poster so have diceded to vent at the organisation you feel he belongs too.

Best of wishes and I hope you find the truth you'e looking for.

Very nice talking to you again.

Hare Krishna

grames
16 January 2010, 02:00 PM
Dear Devotee,


My head will weigh million tons if i say or claim i know advaita completely and i also very clearly know no one can know advaita and only can experience it but cannot describe it.

But, are you sure or very sure my Advaita is not in line with Shri Shankara or his diciple's? I may not know what your Advaita is but i read and tried to understand only Shri Shankara and his followers advaita. Also, please do not assume that i am living on web and formed my opinion based on reading some forum's discussion etc.


who don't understand any difference between Advaita Vedanta & Buddhism. What is presented there, is neither.


Can you please clarify the doubt i have raised abt comparison of Buddhism with Advaita in another thread? I will learn from you if you can clarify that question.



I have no desire to start any debate again. I just want to point out that Advaita Vedanta is really difficult to understand & therefore, one must have patience to understand what this philosophy has to offer. Very true and it is same for all other school of vedanta too. :) No disrespect to advaita at all. The complete message is about explaining the position of other school with regards to Gradation of Devata and then Supremacy of Vishnu. Why do you have to raise objections for such faith of other school when you do not even know ABCD of such school is the genuine concern. Can't we honor different faiths? Since, Vaishnava's faith is not politically sweet, doesn't mean that they are wrong and ill or not hindus etc right? With out knowing ISKCON, what right you have to conclude that ISKCON should be banned, ISKCON is evil etc.? Justice is not only for Love of Advaita my dear but it should be same for everyone and every other. Sama Darshana :)



Contrary to your belief, Advaita Vedanta philosophy doesn't have any contradiction with any of the paths of devotion ...
You didn't understand my entire message is what this statement of yours prove. It is not contrary to my belief but my wordings also states that, only Advaita justifies such Oneness in absolute reality and even the same philosophy agrees the duality or differences in relative reality. So, such differences will then introduce ranks and gradations and they cannot be ignored is the point i conveyed.


Only an egoist can say, "I am God" .... Adavitin don't say it .... when he is really one with God, the individuality which can claim this is lost. So, "you" never become God. Thats exactly the misnomer and life long trick for dull headed like me to understand. If i loose all of mine including the individuality of the Atma, why am i suffering or when did i start this suffering life? and how it is possible for a Ananda Brahman to get deluded? Forget it...i will never get it :)




You remember, I once asked you about Achintya Bheda-Abheda. However, I could not get anything directly from Chaitanya Mahaprabhu who gave this doctrine.
Really. I thought i gave response and also there was two big responses to your question and also one brand new thread about this topic. It is just that, they are not in a format to please you. Please read them again.

But dear friend, in VA or ABAB there are no states of reality and it is only Advaita with has two states of 'understanding' of reality. In VA and ABAB, there is only one reality!

No need for any forgiveness or even apology for this mesage but i am responding to this message just to point out your hatred for ISKCON or some vaishnavas which is not really necessary for a nice devotee like you.

Hare Krishna!

Ganeshprasad
16 January 2010, 03:15 PM
Pranam ji ji

Thanks but I cant make any sense as to what you are on about, you obviously have an issue with advaita as you keep bringing it.
I take exception to being told, beside your incomprehensive reference to delude adds further to delusion.

Thanks for the lesson on three gunas but you seem to forget one has to rise above this gunas.

These thread was neither for advaita nor Vishnu sarvottama clever very clever.

You may want to open a new thread on it your choice but forgive me if I don’t indulge.

PS a request keep your advaita discussion on the advaita thread thanks

Jai Shree Krishna

Ganeshprasad
16 January 2010, 03:17 PM
Pranam Keshava ji

Thanks
Forgive me if I don’t respond to your post in full, as for doing so will only compound forking of various point which you have accused me off, if I have diverged it is not of my choice. So yes let the discussion remain true to the relevance.

I too wish you all the best

Jai Shree Krishna

grames
17 January 2010, 12:27 AM
PS a request keep your advaita discussion on the advaita thread thanks

Jai Shree Krishna


Good tactic!

devotee
17 January 2010, 01:40 AM
Namaste Grames,

You have accused me of so many things that I am forced to clarify the things here :

a) I don't hate any organisation or anyone. The Advaita followers cannot hate anyone. However, I do have objection to the way ISKCON members take it upon themselves to attack Advaita & say objectionable things about their respected Gurus. This is not Hindu way & that is what I have said. People here very well know that I don't hate even Christianity or any other religion & their institutions ... how can I hate something which is related with my own religion ?

Can you tell me what was the motive of Krsna Das in asking Advaita followers about their opinion on objectionable passages written in (doctored) Padma Purana & out-of-context quote from Chaitanya Mahaprabhu ? How would have he felt if someone asked him to offer his opinion on someone's bad opinion about people/organisation dearest to him ? This is simply an act of provocation & whatever has happened in this thread & others has its roots in it. I didn't know that a great Saint Chaitanya Mahaprabhu will be quoted some day like this. We will have to look in what context he spoke this. It is forbidden to give knowledge of Advaita to people who are not spiritually advanced (please refer to Advaita Saadhanaa). It can be highly devastating to people who can't think beyond dual relationship with God. .... I really don't know but quoting a part of sentence without giving the full context is certainly an act of mischief which can only spread bitterness.

You are correct. I don't know even ABCD of ISKCON & I would never like to know. Though I do like going to ISKCON temples for worshipping Lord Krishna & even donating there. However, please see all my 800 odd posts & tell me if I have said anything against ISKCON without provocation from ISKCON members ?

You say,


Since, Vaishnava's faith is not politically sweet, doesn't mean that they are wrong and ill or not hindus etc right? With out knowing ISKCON, what right you have to conclude that ISKCON should be banned, ISKCON is evil etc.?

Is it civilised way to attack from behind this way without any basis when I bowed out from this thread & also asked for forgiveness if I hurt anyone ? Please show me where I said that, "Vaishnava faith is not politically sweet" or any thing similar to that. My all strong comments were Only against ISKCON (which also is based on comments posted by its members here on this forum). And can you tell me where I said, "ISKCON should be banned" or "ISKCON is evil" ? Please mark my word : I said it is not Hindu way & it is difficult to accept that a Hindu Organisation talks in this manner.

b) With so much bias against me & Advaita philosophy in general as is evident from your posts, I don't think you really want to know anything about Advaita or Buddhism. .... And it is not really necessary. It would be a sheer waste of time for a devotee like you.

c) If you still have any questions, please pm me & please don't malign me for things I didn't do. I don't want to post anything in this thread.

OM

Krsna Das
18 January 2010, 07:24 AM
Pranams Ganeshprashadji

Great stick to the thread, rather than take your fustration out on other organisations.......



"Great stick to the thread....." :) :) :)

smaranam
19 January 2010, 03:17 PM
Namaste


Wow...

An excellant response but ............


Quote:
Originally Posted by devotee
How many Vaishnavas (historical not the figures in Puranas) have really seen Lord Vishnu, met him in person & Lord Vishnu told them that Shiva and all other gods are inferior to Him ? None ?? So, what is the Pratyaksha Pramana ?

................
OM




Lord Vishnu once kindly showed a jiva how Shiva is non-different from Him, yet a different form (obviously).

Krshna Himself, who came and conquered the heart, left one jiva in sort of an ongoing lucid dream day-night, sometimes giving intuitions, walked each step with her, till she realized He was her AtmA.

In the beginning of the jiva's charmed ecstatic albeit ignorant state, a few days after the adventure began, she found 'herself' asking spontaneously (eyes closed in meditation) "Who are You ?"

In no time, a beautiful serene form, tapascharya pose , hair tied in a bun, dangling long earrings ... Gautam Buddha ?
Then the form gradually turned purplish. It was Shiva !
She opened her eyes. How can Krshna, Dwarakadheesh, Vishnu be Shiva ??
This was totally news to her. She knew nothing much from the puranas, just the Gita . Had no concepts of either Dvaita or Advaita,

That auspicious day happened to be Raam Navami.

For a week it was Shiva. Jiva was convinced her Lord Krshna/Vishnu and Shiva are the same, till one day both were in front of her. This time, her Lord was not 2 handed Shyamsundar, but 4 handed Vishnu , Om Namo Narayanaya , smiling peacefully, Lord Shiva gently laughing at the confused expression on her face .....

Krshna took the jiva up the Himalayas the night before Mahashivratri, yet the silly one did not realize (didn't know!) it was Shivratri till about 9 pm. Rooted to the spot, watched on TV , Shivabhishek in temples tall and small.
(msg ? Better remember next time!)

Krshna was always there being Paramatma. Shiva visited occasionally. Or the jiva went to Kailash to pay respects occasionally.
One afternoon jiva saw : Shiva sent His Naag , serpent thru' her front door, after a major storm in the neighbourhood. The same front door thru' which Krshna had walked in one day....


----------


I think the Vaishnav stance is , about Vishnu Tattva, form, and qualities He presides on, rather than attributed to Him or Shiva. They focus their devotion on Vishnu Tattva and form alone.
Shiva tattva, Shiva form take you a different route, and that is not a Vaishnav route , that is all there is to it.
This subtlety is well understood by advanced Vaishnavas and Shaivas.

Om Namah ShivAya
Om Namo Bhagavate VAsudevAya