PDA

View Full Version : Is Shiva the Right Deity to Worship?



Ravilochana
05 August 2010, 07:23 PM
Hi Devotees,

I ask this question only to be enlightened.

I will be honest with you all. I like Shiva because Shiva/Rudra is who I consider a great Vaishnav. I like him so much that I have actually learnt Rudram Namakam.

But in BhagavadGita, Sri Vasudeva Krishna cautions against worshipping a "Kshudra Devata".

My question is, did Sri Krishna consider Shiva a "Kshudra Devata"? Is there any harm in worshipping Shiva?

--
Respectfully,
Ravilochana

Ramakrishna
08 August 2010, 11:49 PM
Namaste Ravilochana,

Only you can know if Lord Shiva is the right deity to worship for you. Certain Vaishnavas, particularly ISKCON, believe that Lord Shiva is a worshipper of Lord Vishnu and is considered the greatest Vaishnava. However, there are also hundreds of millions of Hindus who worship Lord Shiva as the supreme form of God.

Lord Krishna is my ishta-deva and most of my prayers are to Him, but I also pray to Lord Shiva and other deities. I don't consider Lord Shiva a Vaishnava or anything, but just another great form of God. I just personally feel more attracted to Lord Krishna.

Jai Sri Krishna

Eastern Mind
09 August 2010, 06:35 AM
Namaste Ravilochana,

However, there are also hundreds of millions of Hindus who worship Lord Shiva as the supreme form of God.



Vannakkam Ravilochana: And I am one of these millions that Ramakrishna refers to. For me, I'm happy at a place like Tanjore where there is only Siva. He ia all and in all, so what else do I need. But I also worship Murugan and Ganesha. Rarely do I worship Shaktis or forms of Vishnu, but on occasion, in the spirit of Hindu solidarity, I would just to demonstrate my brotherhood with all Hindus.

But I totally agree with Ramakrishna again that it is totally your choice. Where do you feel most comfortable, most at peace, more rejuvenated after ... all this and more. It is much more about feeling it than intellectualising it. Best wishes in discovering this.

Aum Namasivaya

saidevo
09 August 2010, 11:05 AM
namate Ravilochana.

It is heartening to note that your VaishNava inclinations include your liking Shiva. But then it is somewhat surprising that you have a doubt that Shiva could be a fit deity to worship, although you say you have learned shrI Rudram and so would be familiar with this verse therein:

namaste astu bhagavan vishveshvarAya mahAdevAya tryaMbakAya
tripurAntakAya trikAgni-kAlAya kAlAgnirudrAya
nIlakaNThAya mrutyuMjayAya sarveshvarAya
sadAshivAya shrImanmahAdevAya namaH || 2.0 ||

As against what some VaiShNavities and ISKCONites believe and debate about Shiva, there are millions of Hindus who worship Shiva-Shakti, MahAViShNu and shrI KRShNa as the form of the Brahmam, the ParamAtman. This means that they don't differentiate between these godforms, and understand the import of the messages in the PurANas that speak one as a devotee of another. The fact that it is common among Hindus to have personal names such as SivaRAmaKRSHNan, RAmaSubrahmaNyan, SankaraNArAyaNan, RAmalingam, and so on is testimony to this perception of inclusion.

• Can you point out any reference in the Bhagavad GItA where shrI KRShNa refers to Shiva as a 'kShudra devata'?

As far as I can check, the only place where this term 'kShudra' appears is in verse 2.3:

klaibyaM mA sma gamaH pArtha naitattvayyupapadyate |
kShudraM hR^idayadaurbalyaM tyaktvottishhTha paraMtapa || 2.03 ||

Be not a coward, PArtha, it is unbefitting for you. Abandon this weekness of the heart and stand up, O enemy-scorcher.

• That shrI KRShNa considers Shiva as a kShudra devata--inferior deity, is nothing but disinformation spread by some passionate ViShNu/KRShNa devotees who do disservice to their own deities.

Here are some quotes of what shrI KRShNa says in the GItA about Rudra-Shiva:
In the 10th chapter called vibhUtiyoga, shrI KRShNa identifies himself with SaMkara-Shiva:

rudraaNAM shaN^karashchAsmi vittesho yakSharakShasAM |
vasUnAM paavakashchAsmi meruH shikhariNAmaham || 10.23 ||

Of the Rudras I am SaMkara; of the YakShas and RAkShasas, Vittesa;
And I am Agni of the Vasus; of the mountains I am Meru.

In the 11th chapter on his vishvarUpa-darshanam he says:

Behold the Adityas, Vasus, Rudras, the two Ashvins, as well as the Maruts.
Behold my marvels never seen before, O BhArata. 11.6

• As regards the legend of BANAsura, it seems that the story has esoteric meanings, as briefly explained in these links:

http://divine-energytools.com/
http://www.trsiyengar.com/id59.shtml
http://www.iskcondesiretree.net/profiles/blogs/vedic-knowledge-and-quantum

*****

The MahANArAyaNa UpaniShad has this identification and adoration:

namo rudrAya viShNave mRtyurme pAhi || 75.1 ||
Salutations to Rudra, and to ViShNu (or Rudra who is ViShNu). Guard me from death.

Also check the time-honoured truths in these temples:
http://sankarankovil.blogspot.com/2007/11/sankaranarayana-temple.html
http://www.ola.in/galleries/Navaikulam/index2.html
http://ssntemple.org/

By the way, you are SankaraNArAyaNa yourself, because your username is:
• epithet of Shiva, according to 'Shiva gItA' ascribed to 'Padma purANa'
• epithet of ViShNu according to Lexicographers such as AmarasiMha

Ramakrishna
09 August 2010, 02:53 PM
Namaste Ravilochana,



Where do you feel most comfortable, most at peace, more rejuvenated after ... all this and more. It is much more about feeling it than intellectualising it.

This is very very true. Hinduism is a religion that is much more about feeling and experiencing it than it is about intellectualizing or rationalizing. Those things can still help, but I think ultimately it is the feeling and experiencing that matters more.

Why not just spend some time, or a lot of time, devoutly meditating upon and praying to Lord Shiva. Then see how you feel. Then you will know if He is the "right" deity to worship for you.

But I see the last question you ask in the OP is if there is any harm in worshipping Lord Shiva. There is definitely no harm in doing so, but it may not be beneficial or you may not feel any benefits. But there is definitely no harm. That's why through experience and feeling you will be able to tell if Lord Shiva is right for you.

Jai Sri Krishna

Ganeshprasad
09 August 2010, 03:14 PM
Pranam Saidevo ji

Thank you, there is not much left to say, perhaps Ravilochana may wish to read Bhagvat puran, Prajapati praying to Lord Shiva, the churning of the ocean and also Lord Brahma's Prayer to Lord Shiva
O siva , I know that You are the Supreme controller(Parameswara), You are both the father and the mother of the entire cosmic manifestation and as the one ever auspicious and supreme brahman who is beyond cosmic manifestation" (SB 4:6:42 )


If you like i can quote Tulsidas Goswami pure Ram Bhakta, his perspective on Lord Shiva or just listen to his rudrashtakam.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPw3A1k6N58&NR=1

like Saidevo i also would like to know where in Gita Lord Krishna mentions "Kshudra Devata".

Jai Shree Krishna

Yogkriya
09 August 2010, 03:37 PM
Hi Devotees,

I ask this question only to be enlightened.

I will be honest with you all. I like Shiva because Shiva/Rudra is who I consider a great Vaishnav. I like him so much that I have actually learnt Rudram Namakam.

But in BhagavadGita, Sri Vasudeva Krishna cautions against worshipping a "Kshudra Devata".
Is there any harm in worshipping Shiva?

--
Respectfully,
Ravilochana

Dear Ravilochana,
Namaskar

The answer is - INDEED.
There is no question of Shiva being a "Kshudra devata". In fact I'm coming across this for the first time. Lord Shiva is known as Devadidev!
He's one without a beginning or an end. He is often known as the Maheswara!
One above the Ishvara! The supreme being.
Iskcon and Gaudiyas preach Shiva to be a "servant" of Krsna and a vaishnava. But Vishnu has worshipped Lord Shiva in every yuga and incarnation hundreds and thousands of times. This is revealed by Lord Krishna himself as he repeats these words revealed unto him by Lord Sarva (Shiva) Himself.
Vishnu worshiped Shiva and offered his own eye on the Shivalinga pleasing Lord Shiva who presents him with his favorite most formidable weapon - the Sudarshan chakra. Lord Rama earnestly seeks Virja deeksha and Pashupat diksha from sage Agastya and worships Lord Shiva to please him as he wandered in search of goddess Sita. Again he worships Lord Shiva at Rameshwaram. He also sends Lord Hanuman to Mount Kailash to attain a special Shivalinga for the purpose from Lord Shiva.

Shri Krishn worshipped Lord Shiva to appease him and receive the greatest boons from him. For this he approach the great sage Upamanyu and receives from him Maha Pashupaat Diksha wears all the staunch Shaiva symbols and spends first month on fruits, second on water and rest 4 month on nothing but air standing on one leg with his hands lifted above his head meditating on Lord Shiva. He also received the Shiva sahasranaam and special mantras from sage Upamanyu.

Upon seeing Lord Shiva, Krishna addresses him with names as Bhava, Sarva, Shankara..
Lord Krishna's Prayer to lord Shiva

namo 'stu te śāśvatasarvayone; brahmādhipaṃ tvām ṛṣayo vadanti
tapaś ca sattvaṃ ca rajas; tamaś ca tvām eva satyaṃ ca vadanti santaḥ

The blessed Vishnu said, 'I saluted Mahadeva, saying,--Salutations to thee, O thou that art the eternal origin of all things. The Rishis say that thou art the Lord of the Vedas. The righteous say that thou art Penance, thou art Sattwa, thou art Rajas, thou art Tamas, and thou art Truth


tvaṃ vai brahmā ca rudraś ca varuṇo 'gnir manur bhavaḥ
dhātā tvaṣṭā vidhātā ca tvaṃ prabhuḥ sarvato mukhaḥ

Thou art Brahma, thou art Rudras, thou art Varuna, thou art Agni, thou art Manu, thou art Bhava, thou art Dhatri, thou art Tashtri, thou art Vidhatri, thou art the puissant Master of all things, and thou art everywhere.

tvatto jātāni bhūtāni sthāvarāṇi carāṇi ca
tvam ādiḥ sarvabhūtānāṃ saṃhāraś ca tvam eva hi

All beings, mobile and immobile, have sprung from thee. This triple world with all its mobile and immobile entities, has been created by thee.

ye cendriyārthāś ca manaś ca kṛtsnaṃ; ye vāyavaḥ sapta tathaiva cāgniḥ
ye vā divisthā devatāś cāpi puṃsāṃ; tasmāt paraṃ tvām ṛṣayo vadanti

The Rishis say that thou art superior to the senses, the mind, the vital breaths, the seven sacrificial fires, all others that have their refuge in the all-pervading Soul, and all the deities that are adored and worthy of adoration.

vedā yajñāś ca somaś ca dakṣiṇā pāvako haviḥ
yajñopagaṃ ca yat kiṃ cid bhagavāṃs tad asaṃśayam

Thou, O illustrious one, art the Vedas, the Sacrifices, Soma, Dakshina, Pavaka, Havi, and all other requisites of sacrifice.

iṣṭaṃ dattam adhītaṃ ca vratāni niyamāś ca ye
hrīḥ kīrtiḥ śrīr dyutis tuṣṭiḥ siddhiś caiva tvad arpaṇā

The merit obtained by sacrifices, gifts made to others, the study of the Vedas, vows, regulations in respect of restraint, Modesty, Fame, Prosperity, Splendour, Contentment, and Success, all exist for leading to thee.


kāmaḥ krodho bhayaṃ lobho madaḥ stambho 'tha matsaraḥ
ādhayo vyādhayaś caiva bhagavaṃs tanayās tava


Desire, Wrath, Fear, Cupidity, Pride, Stupefaction, and Malice, Pains and Diseases, are, O illustrious one, thy children.

kṛtir vikāraḥ pralayaḥ pradhānaṃ prabhavo 'vyayaḥ
manasaḥ praramā yoniḥ svabhāvaś cāpi śāśvataḥ
avyaktaḥ pāvana vibho sahasrāṃśo hiraṇmayaḥ

Thou art all acts that creatures do, thou art the joy and sorrow that flow from those acts, thou art the absence of joy and sorrow, thou art that Ignorance which is the indestructible seed of Desire, thou art the high origin of Mind, thou art Puissance, and thou art Eternity.Thou art the Unmanifest, thou art Pavana, thou art inconceivable, thou art the thousand-rayed Sun, thou art the effulgent Chit, thou art the first of all the topics, and thou art the refuge of life.


ādir guṇānāṃ sarveṣāṃ bhavān vai jīvanāśrayaḥ
mahān ātmā matir brahmā viśvaḥ śambhuḥ svayambhuvaḥ

buddhiḥ prajñopalabdhiś ca saṃvit khyātir dhṛtiḥ smṛtiḥ
paryāya vācakaiḥ śabdair mahān ātmā vibhāvyase

Thou art Trigunas, Thou art Mahat atma, Thou art Brahman, Thou art Universe, Thou art Sambhu, and Thou art Self-born and Thou art intellect,Thou art Prajna,Thou art sound(vedas),

tvāṃ buddhvā brāhmaṇo vidvān an pramohaṃ nigacchati
hṛdayaṃ sarvabhūtānāṃ kṣetrajñas tvam ṛṣiṣṭutaḥ

Verily, regarding thee as all this, the learned Brahmanas win over that ignorance which lies at the root of the world.Thou residest in the heart of all creatures, and thou art adored by the Rishis as Kshetrajna.


sarvataḥ pāṇipādas tvaṃ sarvato 'kṣiśiromukhaḥ
sarvataḥ śrutimāṁl loke sarvam āvṛtya tiṣṭhasi

Thy arms and feet extend to every place, and thy eyes, head, and face are everywhere. Thou hearest everywhere in the universe, and thou stayest, pervading all things.

phalaṃ tvam asi tigmāṃśo nimeṣādiṣu karmasu
tvaṃ vai prabhārciḥ puruṣaḥ sarvasya hṛdi saṃsthitaḥ
aṇimā laghimā prāptir īśāno jyotir avyayaḥ

Of all acts that are performed in the Nimeshas and other divisions of time that spring in consequence of the puissance of the Sun, thou art the fruit. Thou art the original effulgence (of the supreme Chit).Thou art Purusha, and thou residest in the hearts of all things. Thou art the various Yogic attributes of success, viz., Subtility and Grossness and Fruition and Supremacy and Effulgence and Immutability.

tvayi buddhir matir lokāḥ prapannāḥ saṃśritāś ca ye
dhyānino nityayogāś ca satyasaṃdhā jitendriyāḥ

Understanding and intelligence and all the worlds rest upon thee. They that are devoted to meditation, that are always engaged in Yoga, that are devoted to or firm in Truth and that have subjugated their passions, seek thee and rest on thee.

yas tvāṃ dhruvaṃ vedayate guhā śayaṃ; prabhuṃ purāṇaṃ puruṣaṃ viśvarūpam
hiraṇmayaṃ buddhimatāṃ parāṃ gatiṃ; sa buddhimān buddhim atītya tiṣṭhati

They that know thee for one that is Immutable, or one that resides in all hearts, or one that is endued with supreme puissance, or one that is the ancient Purusha, or one that is pure Knowledge, or one that is the effulgent Chit, or one that is the highest refuge of all persons endued with intelligence, are certainly persons of great intelligence. Verily, such persons stay, transcending intelligence.

viditvā sapta sūkṣmāṇi ṣaḍaṅgaṃ tvāṃ ca mūrtitaḥ
pradhānavidhiyogasthas tvām eva viśate budhaḥ

By understanding the seven subtile entities (viz., Mahat, Ego, and five subtile primal elements called Tanmatras), by comprehending thy six attributes (of Omniscience, Contentment of Fullness, Knowledge without beginning, Independence, Puissance that is not at fault at any time and that is infinite), and being conversant with Yoga that is freed from every false notion, the man of knowledge succeeds in entering into thy great self

vam ukte mayā pārtha bhave cārti vināśane
carācaraṃ jagat sarvaṃ siṃhanādam athākarot

After I had said these words, O Partha, unto Bhava, that dispeller of grief and pain, the universe, both mobile and immobile, sent up a leonine shout (expressive of their approval of the correctness of my words).

sa vipra saṃghāś ca surāsurāś ca; nāgāḥ piśācāḥ pitaro vayāṃsi
rakṣogaṇā būta gaṇāś ca sarve; maharṣayaś caiva tathā praṇemuḥ

The innumerable Brahmanas there present, the deities and the Asuras, the Nagas, the Pisachas, the Pitris, the birds, diverse Rakshasas, diverse classes of ghosts and spirits, and all the great Rishis, then bowed down unto that great Deity.


mama mūrdhni ca divyānāṃ kusumānāṃ sugandinām
rāśayo nipatanti sma vāyuś ca susukho vavau

There then fell upon my head showers of celestial flowers possessed of great fragrance, and delicious winds blew on the spot.

nirīkṣya bhagavān devīm umāṃ māṃ ca jagad dhitaḥ
śatakratuṃ cābhivīkṣya svayaṃ mām āha śaṃkaraḥ

The puissant Sankara then, devoted to the good of the universe, looked at the goddess Uma and the lord of the celestials and myself also, and thus spoke unto me,

vidmaḥ kṛṣṇa parāṃ bhaktim asmāsu tava śatruhan
kriyatām ātmanaḥ śreyaḥ prītir hi paramā tvayi

vṛṇīṣvāṣṭau varān kṛṣṇa dātāsmi tava sattama
brūhi yādava śārdūlayān icchasi sudurlabhān

-We know, O Krishna, that thou, O slayer of foes, art filled with the greatest devotion towards us. Do what is for thy good. My love and affection for thee is very great. Do thou ask for eight boons. I shall verily give them unto thee, O Krishna, O best of all persons, tell me what they are, O chief of the Yadavas. Name what thou wishest. However difficult of attainment they be, thou shalt have them still.'"


kṛsna said : ( Mahabharata, Anushasan parva Book 13, chapter 16, Verses 1 to 11 )

mūrdhnā nipatyaniyatas tejaḥ saṃnicaye tataḥ
paramaṃ harṣam āgamya bhagavantam athābruvam

dharme dṛḍhatvaṃ yudhi śatrughātaṃ; yaśas tathāgryaṃ paramaṃ balaṃ ca
yogapriyatvaṃ tava saṃnikarṣaṃ; vṛṇe sutānāṃ ca śataṃ śatāni

evam astv iti tad vākyaṃ mayoktaḥ prāha śaṃkaraḥ

TRANSLATION :

The blessed Krishna said, 'Bowing my head with great joy unto that mass of energy and effulgence, I said these words unto the great Bhagavan Shiva, with a heart filled with gladness,--

1) Firmness in virtue, (dharme dṛḍhatvaṃ)
2) The slaughter of foes in battle,(yudhi śatrughātaṃ)
3) The highest fame,(yaśas tathāgryaṃ )
4) The greatest might, (paramaṃ balaṃ)
5) Devotion to Yoga, (yogapriyatvaṃ)
6) Thy adjacence, (ava saṃnikarṣaṃ)and
7) Hundreds upon hundreds of children, (vṛṇe sutānāṃ ca śataṃ śatāni)

these are the boons I solicit of thee,--So be it,--said Sankara


tato māṃ jagato mātā dharaṇī sarvapāvanī
uvācomā praṇihitā śarvāṇī tapasāṃ nidhiḥ

After this, the mother of the universe, the upholders of all things, who cleanses, all things, viz., the spouse of Sarva, that vast receptacle of penances said with a restrained soul these words unto me,--

datod bhagavatā putraḥ sāmbo nāma tavānagha
matto 'py aṣṭau varān iṣṭān gṛhāṇa tvaṃ dadāmi te
praṇamya śirasā sā ca mayoktā pāṇḍunandana

'The puissant Mahadeva has granted thee, O sinless one, a son who shall be named Samba. Do thou take from me also eight boons which thou choosest. I shall certainly grant them to thee.-- Bowing unto her with a bend of my head, I said unto her, O son of Pandu,--


dvijeṣv akopaṃ pitṛtaḥ prasādaṃ; śataṃ sutānām upabhogaṃ paraṃ ca
kule prītiṃ mātṛtaś ca prasādaṃ; śama prāptiṃ pravṛṇe cāpi dākṣyam

I solicit from thee non-anger against the Brahmanas, grace of my father, a hundred sons, the highest enjoyments, love for my family, the grace of my mother, the attainment of tranquillity and peace, and cleverness in every act!'

evaṃ bhaviṣyaty amaraprabhāva; nāhaṃ mṛṣā jātu vade kadā cit
bhāryā sahasrāṇi ca ṣoḍaśaiva; tāsu priyatvaṃ ca tathākṣayatvam

"Uma said, 'It shall be even so, O thou that art possessed of prowess and puissance equal to that of a celestial. I never say what is untrue. Thou shalt have sixteen thousand wives. Thy love for them and theirs also for thee shall be unlimited.

prītiṃ cāgryāṃ bāndhavānāṃ sakāśād; dadāmi te vapuṣaḥ kāmyatāṃ ca
bhokṣyante vai saptatir vai śatāni; gṛhe tubhyam atithīnāṃ ca nityam

From all thy kinsmen also, thou shalt receive the highest affection. Thy body too shall be most beautiful. Seven thousand guests will daily feed at thy palace.'

evaṃ dattvā varān devo mama devī ca bhārata
antarhitaḥ kṣaṇe tasmin sagaṇo bhīma pūrvaja

etad atyadbhutaṃ sarvaṃ brāhmaṇāyātitejase
upamanyave mayā kṛtsnam ākhyātaṃ kauravottama

Vasudeva continued, 'Having thus granted me boons both the god and the goddess, O Bharata, disappeared there and then with their Ganas, O elder brother of Bhima. All those wonderful facts I related fully, O best of kuru kings, to that Brahmana of great energy, viz., Upamanyu (from whom I had obtained the Diksha before adoring Mahadeva).

namaskṛtvā tu sa prāha devadevāya suvrata
nāsti śarva samo dāne nāsti śarva samo raṇe

Bowing down unto the great God, Upamanyu said these words to me.':
"Upamanyu said, 'There is no deity like Sarva. There is no end or refuge like Sarva. There is none that can give so many or such high boons. There is none that equal him in battle.'"


------- .... I can write more and give more references about the beautiful relationship of Lord Shiva and Krishna.

So Yes Lord Shiva is definitely the Maheshvara to be worshipped by one and all. His worship has been wide spread in Vedic times too when Krishna, the whole of Nandgram, Nand baba, Gopis, Queen Kunti, Gandhari, so many great Vedic sages worshipped Lord Shiva.

But you should meditate upon the deities as you feel in your heart. Chant the mantra of Lord Shiva, Rama and Krishna and feel who you feel more attachment towards and accept his worship. The worship of Lord Rama and Krishna are wonderful.

From a sadhak's perspective, important is your establishing contact with your ishta devta. How deeply you are able to go into your sadhna and attachment with the deva is important and what matters while respecting and holding the other forms of God in highest esteem and never belittling one or the other form.
Wish you success and divine love.

Yogkriya.

atanu
10 August 2010, 09:32 AM
Namaste Friends

Often I am also perplexed by the (apparent ?) humiliation that Lord Shiva, who is described as Mahadeva, SadaShiva, Mahesvara, Parameshwara, Param Purusha, Param Atman, Direct Brahman, in Upanishads, undergoes at the hands of Vishnu in Puranas.

Now I am not able to offer any fast and glib opinion. But when I scan above and below the pasages that describe the particular humiliations, I find something. Here I will just cite two passages from Bhagavatpurana. IMO, the whole Banasura story will not make any sense if the full of Bhagavatam is not studied, and especially the history of humiliation of banasura (and Lord Shiva as if). But was this not a teaching?



Bhagavatam Canto Ten, Chapter 62
4. Banasura was intoxicated with his strength. One day, when Lord Siva was standing beside him, Banasura touched the lord’s lotus feet with his helmet, which shone like the sun, and spoke to him as follows.
5. O Lord Mahadeva, I bow down to you, the spiritual master and controller of the worlds. You are like the heavenly tree that fulfills the desires of those whose desires are unfulfilled.
6. These one thousand arms you bestowed upon me have become merely a heavy burden. Besides you, I find no one in the three worlds worthy to fight.
7. Eager to fight with the elephants who rule the directions, O primeval lord, I went forth, pulverizing mountains with my arms, which were itching for battle. But even those great elephants fled in fear.
8. Hearing this, Lord Siva became angry and replied, "Your flag will be broken, fool, when you have done battle with one who is my equal. That fight will vanquish your conceit."


The same is true of all vanquished devotees of Lord. Their egos were destroyed, and by none else but by Vishnu. How fortunate these vanquished villains would have been.


I think, Lord Shiva is inscrutable -- even to .......... Lord Vishnu, BrahmA, and Mahendra.




[B]Bhagavatam Canto 8 Chapter 7
19. O King, when that uncontrollable poison was forcefully spreading up and down in all directions, all the demigods, along with the Lord Himself, approached Lord Siva [Sadasiva]. Feeling unsheltered and very much afraid, they sought shelter of him.

20. The demigods observed Lord Siva sitting on the summit of Kailasa Hill with his wife, Bhavani, for the auspicious development of the three worlds. He was being worshiped by great saintly persons desiring liberation. The demigods offered him their obeisances and prayers with great respect.
---
23. O lord, you are self-effulgent and supreme. You create this material world by your personal energy, and you assume the names Brahma, Visnu and Mahesvara when you act in creation, maintenance and annihilation.
---
25. O lord, you are the original source of Vedic literature. You are the original cause of material creation, the life force, the senses, the five elements, the three modes and the mahat-tattva. You are eternal time, determination and the two religious systems called truth [satya] and truthfulness [rta]. You are the shelter of the syllable om, which consists of three letters a-u-m.
---
31. O Lord Girisa, since the impersonal Brahman effulgence is transcendental to the material modes of goodness, passion and ignorance, the various directors of this material world certainly cannot appreciate it or even know where it is. It is not understandable even to Lord Brahma, Lord Visnu or the King of heaven, Mahendra.
---
33. Exalted, self-satisfied persons who preach to the entire world think of your lotus feet constantly within their hearts. However, when persons who do not know your austerity see you moving with Uma, they misunderstand you to be lusty, or when they see you wandering in the crematorium they mistakenly think that you are ferocious and envious. Certainly they are shameless. They cannot understand your activities.


As per above, IMO, Lord Shiva should never be judged. The purest Purana declares that even Lord Brahma, Lord Visnu or the King of heaven, Mahendra do not comprehend Him and that the shameless are those who try to judge the play of Parameshwara. Lord Shiva, whom scriptures describe as one without a second shiva atman, is also said to be directly situated in every soul as bhutatma (Soma).

This Lord, IMO, is not to be worshipped for preservation of ego.

Om Namah Shivaya

kd gupta
10 August 2010, 11:58 AM
I am very much hurt with such people who unknowingly utter abusive sentences .
The only maheshwar has been mentioned in Vedas and I suppose that rishis have seen Rudra , trayambakam neelgreeva shitkantha green hairs yellowish body with charmamberam , is in Vishnu form in jeeva , the welfare form as shiva with golden body and no serpents no mundmals etc. Also the god is beyond all vernas .Pl feel a common sense of knowledge .
Namo hiranyabahve [ golden body for shiva ] ,namo nishadebhyah , punjishthebhyah ,shwanibhyah , girishayay cha…yaj
I worship rudra who is in Vishnu form in all living entities including shudras nishads kirats kols .
Sovratyen rudram kanthadhyam rudrasyantah parshvyam mahadevasya…yaj
Always worship rudra [ shiva form ] with noble conduct sweet singing and with clear heart .

Rasa1976
10 August 2010, 07:37 PM
As per above, IMO, Lord Shiva should never be judged. The purest Purana declares that even Lord Brahma, Lord Visnu or the King of heaven, Mahendra do not comprehend Him and that the shameless are those who try to judge the play of Parameshwara. Lord Shiva, whom scriptures describe as one without a second shiva atman, is also said to be directly situated in every soul as bhutatma (Soma).

This Lord, IMO, is not to be worshipped for preservation of ego.

Om Namah Shivaya

Namaste Atanu,

Thank you for quoting Bhagavatam 8th Canto Chap 7.

From that same source http://srimadbhagavatam.com/8/7/21/en we have the following...




The prajāpatis said: O greatest of all demigods, Mahādeva, Supersoul of all living entities and cause of their happiness and prosperity, we have come to the shelter of your lotus feet. Now please save us from this fiery poison, which is spreading all over the three worlds.


PURPORT
Since Lord Śiva is in charge of annihilation, why should he be approached for protection, which is given by Lord Viṣṇu? Lord Brahmā creates, and Lord Śiva annihilates, but both Lord Brahmā and Lord Śiva are incarnations of Lord Viṣṇu and are known as śaktyāveśa-avatāras. They are endowed with a special power like that of Lord Viṣṇu, who is actually all-pervading in their activities. Therefore whenever prayers for protection are offered to Lord Śiva, actually Lord Viṣṇu is indicated, for otherwise Lord Śiva is meant for destruction. Lord Śiva is one of the īśvaras, or the controllers known as śaktyāveśa-avatāras. Therefore he can be addressed as having the qualities of Lord Viṣṇu.



I could have a much easier time doubting the purport to this verse if someone could quote shastra saying that Lord Shiva's form is eternal sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ. Otherwise since the term śaktyāveśa-avatāra means "specifically empowered jiva-tattva incarnation of God", we aren't given the sense that Shiva's form and characteristics are eternal. Saktyāveśa-avatāras perform universal functions for the time being then go back to God.


Once more, there is an Advaitic preponderance that suggests that all forms of God are equal and temporary manifestations that lead to something higher (like a scaffold as Ramakrishna would say). So you can see one reason why a Vaisnava will never agree that Shiva is equal in power and opulence to Krishna or Vishnu.


Much of the argument then, of Vishnu vs. Shiva in these forums is completely like apples vs. oranges. The two groups are directed towards two distinctly different ideas of the ultimate reality - one towards entrance in an abode of and service to a personal God, and the other towards liberation and absorption in nirguna brahman.


Yet some Shaivites may seek a more personal destination.
So I copied this from the old India Divine, for anyone who is interested..




The quote below, from Srila Prabhupada's purport to SB 1.3.28 confirms
that one can become an eternal associate of God in Mahesa-dhama. That
this position is not in maha-maya is also confirmed. One of the quotes
below says that one can be elevated from Sada-siva-loka to
Vaikuntha-loka, but this does not contradict the possibility to remain
as an associate of Lord Siva in his abode eternally.


Quotes:
-------
A living being can become godly by developing the
seventy-eight-percent transcendental attributes in fullness, but he
can never become a God like Siva, Visnu or Krsna. He can become a
Brahma in due course. The godly living beings who are all residents of
the planets in the spiritual sky are eternal associates of God in
different spiritual planets called Hari-dhama and Mahesa-dhama. (SB
1.3.28 purp)


Next above Devi-dhama is located Siva-dhama one portion of which,
called Mahakala-dhama, is enveloped in darkness; interpenetrating this
portion of Siva-dhama there shines the Sadasivaloka, full of great
light. (Bs 5.43 purp)


There is also a planet called Sivaloka, or Sadasivaloka, which is
situated in a marginal position between the spiritual and material
worlds. If, after being situated in Brahmaloka, one becomes more
qualified, he is promoted to Sadasivaloka. Similarly, when one becomes
even more qualified, he can attain the Vaikunthalokas. (SB 4.24.29
purp)


In the Vayu Purana there is a description of Sadasiva in one of the
Vaikuntha planets. That Sadasiva is a direct expansion of Lord Krsna’s
form for pastimes. It is said that Sadasiva (Lord Sambhu) is an
expansion from the Sadasiva in the Vaikuntha planets (Lord Visnu) and
that his consort, Mahamaya, is an expansion of Ramadevi, or Laksmi.
(Adi 6.79 purp)

atanu
10 August 2010, 09:10 PM
Namaste Atanu,

Thank you for quoting Bhagavatam 8th Canto Chap 7.

From that same source http://srimadbhagavatam.com/8/7/21/en we have the following...

I could have a much easier time doubting the purport to this verse if someone could quote shastra saying that Lord Shiva's form is eternal sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ.


:)

Namaste rasa

My intention was to point to inconsistencies and you are helping towards that.

These purports are in direct conflict with what is said in the Puranas themselves and more violently with what is said in Vedas and Upanishads. Probably you have not read the citation at all, but ask me to read the purport. Kindly read the citation again.

It is not my purpose to hoist an idea as superior to another. It is my intention to just point you to questions. How can a galaxy of Demi Gods (which includes Lord Vishnu here) say: "Girisa you assume the names of BrahmA, Vishnu, Mahesa" and also "BrhamA, Vishnu, Mahendra fail to grasp your transcendence"? And compare that with oft-repeated purport: Shiva is servant of Lord Krishna.

Kindly take your time and read more of sruti and contemplate. You may exclaim "Oh, yes. good parents are always the servants -----, good leaders are servants-----". May be. Else, some of us will show you shruti to which the purports are antagonistic.

Bhagavatam Canto 8 Chapter 7

19. O King, when that uncontrollable poison was forcefully spreading up and down in all directions, all the demigods, along with the Lord Himself, approached Lord Siva [Sadasiva]. Feeling unsheltered and very much afraid, they sought shelter of him.

20. The demigods observed Lord Siva sitting on the summit of Kailasa Hill with his wife, Bhavani, for the auspicious development of the three worlds. He was being worshiped by great saintly persons desiring liberation. The demigods offered him their obeisances and prayers with great respect.
---
23. O lord, you are self-effulgent and supreme. You create this material world by your personal energy, and you assume the names Brahma, Visnu and Mahesvara when you act in creation, maintenance and annihilation.
---
25. O lord, you are the original source of Vedic literature. You are the original cause of material creation, the life force, the senses, the five elements, the three modes and the mahat-tattva. You are eternal time, determination and the two religious systems called truth [satya] and truthfulness [rta]. You are the shelter of the syllable om, which consists of three letters a-u-m.
---
31. O Lord Girisa, since the impersonal Brahman effulgence is transcendental to the material modes of goodness, passion and ignorance, the various directors of this material world certainly cannot appreciate it or even know where it is. It is not understandable even to Lord Brahma, Lord Visnu or the King of heaven, Mahendra.
---------

You can see that the purport contradicts the above passages (from the very same Purana).

I do not understand your 'sat-chit-ananda' vigraha thingy. It is a Vaisnava/puranic concept. Why do Veda/ Vedanta/ any other school have to conform to that? It does not matter, eventually, as to what name you call your lover by and similarly by what name you call your Self by. But the Self is not a vigraha and in scriptures it is called auspicious and its nature is Sat-Chit-Ananda. Vigraha, if any, is the man, since the purusha within is complete with 16 kalas. When one is in deep sleep, one is complete with 16 kalas ---- all kalas absorbed.

I also do not understand your use of the terms Vaikuntha Loka, Kailasa Loka etc. and their comparisons. Has any one been to these lokas to say that yes the purports are correct. Or alternatively, can you show any reference from sruti for these purports (and comparisons)?

These comparisons have values for instilling purpose of direction within a sampradaya but when a particular sampradaya forces that on the other vedic sampradaya-s, it must provide proof from sruti.

Om Namah Shivaya

Rasa1976
10 August 2010, 09:43 PM
:)

Namaste rasa

That is the problem. These purports are in direct conflict with what is said in Puranas ans violently with what is said in Vedas and Upanishads.

I am surprised that you have not read the citation at all but ask me to read the purport, about which I will not comment.

31. O Lord Girisa, since the impersonal Brahman effulgence is transcendental to the material modes of goodness, passion and ignorance, the various directors of this material world certainly cannot appreciate it or even know where it is. It is not understandable even to Lord Brahma, Lord Visnu or the King of heaven, Mahendra
---------

You can see that the purport contradicts the above passages (from the very same Purana)..

Oh well, I guess you've already commented on the purport.

But contradict? Not necessarily.

From the last verse you quoted..



O Lord Girīśa, since the impersonal Brahman effulgence is transcendental to the material modes of goodness, passion and ignorance, the various directors of this material world certainly cannot appreciate it or even know where it is. It is not understandable even to Lord Brahmā, Lord Viṣṇu or the King of heaven, Mahendra.

PURPORT

.................This does not mean, however, that Lord Viṣṇu is not omniscient. Lord Viṣṇu is omniscient, but He does not need to understand what is going on in His all-pervading expansion. Therefore in Bhagavad-gītā the Lord says that although everything is an expansion of Him (mayā tatam idaḿ sarvam), He does not need to take care of everything (na cāhaḿ teṣv avasthitaḥ), since there are various directors like Lord Brahmā, Lord Śiva and Indra.



I do not understand your 'sat-chit-ananda' vigraha thingy. It is a Vaisnava/puranic concept. Why do Veda/ Vedanta/ any other school have to conform to that?

It is in the Upanishads as well (check my signature). Now, since you've mentioned Puranas, how much information do we have about Shiva's lordship that is not Puranic? Shiva-gita is clearly Puranic.

Really though, little of this pertains to my whole point, that Advaitins shoot themselves in the foot by saying Shiva doesn't ultimately exist as Shiva. So it is worthless for them to argue him on a footing vis-a-vis Vishnu who Vaisnavas at least agree has an eternal, distinct identity.

atanu
10 August 2010, 09:51 PM
Oh well, I guess you've already commented on the purport.

But contradict? Not necessarily. From the last verse you quoted..

PURPORT

.................This does not mean, however, that Lord Viṣṇu is not omniscient. but He does not need to understand what is going on in His all-pervading expansion.



Namaste Rasa

The following passage does not appear to support the purport, which appears so laboured and inconsistent. Futher, BrahmA and Mahendra are named alongside. Why the purport speaks about Vishnu alone?

31. O Lord Girisa, since the impersonal Brahman effulgence is transcendental to the material modes of goodness, passion and ignorance, the various directors of this material world certainly cannot appreciate it or even know where it is. It is not understandable even to Lord Brahma, Lord Visnu or the King of heaven, Mahendra


Further, read the above with the below --- together:

23. O lord, you are self-effulgent and supreme. You create this material world by your personal energy, and you assume the names Brahma, Visnu and Mahesvara when you act in creation, maintenance and annihilation.

We will discuss Advaita separately.

Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
10 August 2010, 10:00 PM
It is in the Upanishads as well (check my signature). Now, since you've mentioned Puranas, how much information do we have about Shiva's lordship that is not Puranic? Shiva-gita is clearly Puranic.



You think so? You think that your signature line from Upanishad supports Vigraha? Which Vigraha conforms to the following?

His form is not an object of vision; no one beholds Him with the eye.

Why add vigraha to Sat-Chit-Ananda? Isn't Man a vigraha -- an idol, whose base is Sat-Chit-Ananda?

Om Namah Shivaya

Rasa1976
10 August 2010, 10:03 PM
Namaste Rasa

The following passage does not appear to support the purport, which appear so laboured to make a point. Futher, BrahmA and Mahendra are named alongside. Why the purport speaks about Vishnu alone?

31. O Lord Girisa, since the impersonal Brahman effulgence is transcendental to the material modes of goodness, passion and ignorance, the various directors of this material world certainly cannot appreciate it or even know where it is. It is not understandable even to Lord Brahma, Lord Visnu or the King of heaven, Mahendra


Further, read the above with the below --- together:

23. O lord, you are self-effulgent and supreme. You create this material world by your personal energy, and you assume the names Brahma, Visnu and Mahesvara when you act in creation, maintenance and annihilation.

We will discuss Advaita separately.

Om Namah Shivaya

I'm not saying I'm right, but most of the "labor" here is in keeping with the śaktyāveśa-avatāra idea, that Brahma and Shiva are jivas specifically empowered by Vishnu to act in creation and annihilation.

yajvan
10 August 2010, 10:10 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


It seems here on HDF every 6 months or so the conversation arises on kṛṣṇa , visṇu, rudra and śiva. Many times what is referenced is what appears in bhāgavad gītā regarding kṛṣṇa's position relative to śiva.

Yet it is curious to me that one only looks at the bhāgavad gītā and does not look back to the parent śāstra, the mahābhārata and what it says. The Supreme (kṛṣṇa) has not changed in both of these books
and neither has the author vyāsa-ji (kṛṣṇa-dvaipāyana ) , correct? Then one must take heed to what is offered in the parent book as reliable.

As I see it common sense dictates that one must look to the mahābhārata, śanti parvan (section 342 or CCCXLII) and read what kṛṣṇa ( hari) says to arjuna (phalguna):

O' son of paṇḍu rudra should be known to have nārāyaṇa as His soul. If that deva of of deva's be worshiped ( maheśvarāya )
then O' partha ( arjuna) nārāyaṇa is worshipped.
I (hari) am the soul O' son of paṇḍu of all the worlds, of the universe. Rudra is My soul. It is for this reason that I always adore
Him. He who knows rudra knows Myself. And he who knows Myself knows rudra. He who follows rudra follows Me.
Rudra is nārāyaṇa. Both are One. No one other then rudra is is competent in granting me a boon.
In adoring rudra thus I have adored My own Self. Visṇu , says kṛṣṇa, never bows his head onto any devatā except His own Self.
It is for this reason that I adore rudra. For as I have told you (arjuna) rudra is my own Self.

- - - - - - - - - -
Is not kṛṣṇa hari? Is not kṛṣṇa nārāyaṇa? Is not nārāyaṇa rudra? Is then kṛṣṇa not rudra? Kṛṣṇa clearly tells us Rudra is nārāyaṇa. Both are One.

This is only one section where this equivalency is brought out. Yet a times we all contend one is superior to the other. Where is the wisdom in this? I will listen to what kṛṣṇa tells me to be the ultimate truth.

praṇām

atanu
10 August 2010, 10:15 PM
I'm not saying I'm right, but most of the "labor" here is in keeping with the śaktyāveśa-avatāra idea, that Brahma and Shiva are jivas specifically empowered by Vishnu to act in creation and annihilation.

Yes it is laboured to a fault (surely for an auspicious purpose), since the same passage says that Girisa acts as BrahmA, Vishnu, Mahesvara.

Who is Girisha? Girisha is the lord of Giri -this sat-chit-ananda vigraha called body. Giridhari upholds the body.

Join you later.

Om Namah Shivaya

Rasa1976
10 August 2010, 10:18 PM
You think so? You think that your signature line from Upanishad supports Vigraha? Which Vigraha conforms to the following?

His form is not an object of vision; no one beholds Him with the eye.

Why add vigraha to Sat-Chit-Ananda? Isn't Man a vigraha -- an idol, whose base is Sat-Chit-Ananda?

Om Namah Shivaya

From your post it sounds like you are demanding to see inconcievable eternal form. Form is vigraha, sat-chid-ananda-vigraha is form that is invincible, full of truth, etc. You haven't grasped this as a concept. "Any limb can perform all the function of every limb." Hence, "not an object of vision".

atanu
10 August 2010, 10:28 PM
From your post it sounds like you are demanding to see inconcievable eternal form. Form is vigraha, sat-chid-ananda-vigraha is form that is invincible, full of truth, etc. You haven't grasped this as a concept. "Any limb can perform all the function of every limb." Hence, "not an object of vision".

Namaste Rasa

(Please do not start with : You do not grasp etc.)

What you say above about inconceivable vigraha is purport, Labouring on the meaning of Vigraha, which is a form. What is that form which is inconceivable?

Self is Self, which has for its nature Sat-Chid-Ananda. Self is directly pratyaksha (evident) everywhere.

But all this is not pertinent to the discussions. What is pertinent is the following two verses that prove the purports as misleading (I believe for an auspicious cause):

23. O lord, you are self-effulgent and supreme. You create this material world by your personal energy, and you assume the names Brahma, Visnu and Mahesvara when you act in creation, maintenance and annihilation.

31. O Lord Girisa, since the impersonal Brahman effulgence is transcendental to the material modes of goodness, passion and ignorance, the various directors of this material world certainly cannot appreciate it or even know where it is. It is not understandable even to Lord Brahma, Lord Visnu or the King of heaven, Mahendra
--------------------

One must first declare that the sages, devas and Vishnu were saying false things, before proceeding with any purport that paints Girisha as an expansion.


Om Namah Shivaya

atanu
11 August 2010, 03:26 AM
-----Now, since you've mentioned Puranas, how much information do we have about Shiva's lordship that is not Puranic? Shiva-gita is clearly Puranic.


Namaste Rasa

:) Again it is a mistake of not reading fully the original source. The citation that was provided from bhagavatam says this:

25. O lord, you are the original source of Vedic literature. You are the original cause of material creation, the life force, the senses, the five elements, the three modes and the mahat-tattva. You are eternal time, determination and the two religious systems called truth [satya] and truthfulness [rta]. You are the shelter of the syllable om, which consists of three letters a-u-m.


28. O lord, you are the three Vedas personified. The seven seas are your abdomen, and the mountains are your bones. All drugs, creepers and vegetables are the hairs on your body, the Vedic mantras like Gayatri are the seven layers of your body, and the Vedic religious system is the core of your heart.

29. O lord, the five important Vedic mantras are represented by your five faces, from which the thirty-eight most celebrated Vedic mantras have been generated. Your Lordship, Lord Siva, is self-illuminated. You are directly situated as the supreme truth, known as Paramatma.


I am just showing a few paras. You will find others that speak of Sadyota and other vedic mantras that pertain to Lord directly. Auspicious Lord's body is Veda. It is equivalent of saying that the third state of Pragnya Ghana is the first manifestation of Lord.

Om Namah Shivaya

Rasa1976
11 August 2010, 06:25 AM
Namaste Rasa

(Please do not start with : You do not grasp etc.)

Oh OK. I wonder where I got that idea.


namaste rasa

Six questions are one only, and in my opinion the question is faulty. Andrew has mentioned it but you have not grasped that, IMO.





What you say above about inconceivable vigraha is purport, Labouring on the meaning of Vigraha, which is a form. What is that form which is inconceivable?

Self is Self, which has for its nature Sat-Chid-Ananda. Self is directly pratyaksha (evident) everywhere.

But all this is not pertinent to the discussions. What is pertinent is the following two verses that prove the purports as misleading (I believe for an auspicious cause):

23. O lord, you are self-effulgent and supreme. You create this material world by your personal energy, and you assume the names Brahma, Visnu and Mahesvara when you act in creation, maintenance and annihilation.

31. O Lord Girisa, since the impersonal Brahman effulgence is transcendental to the material modes of goodness, passion and ignorance, the various directors of this material world certainly cannot appreciate it or even know where it is. It is not understandable even to Lord Brahma, Lord Visnu or the King of heaven, Mahendra
--------------------

One must first declare that the sages, devas and Vishnu were saying false things, before proceeding with any purport that paints Girisha as an expansion.


Om Namah Shivaya


Really I'm not concerned with another endless argument against Advaita. This should have been clear already. Also the commentary to Verse 31 I quoted is easily within the context of the same idea I'll mention for the third time - saktyavesa. You don't like this concept, fine. But don't say it is labored when it is only well within the context of a set of teachings you don't like and don't care to read or understand.

My point (again) is why should Advaitins take offense to the idea of supremacy of Vishnu over Shiva when they don't believe Shiva ultimately exists (as Shiva)? I personally think a discussion of "my god is equal or better than your god" however childish should be valued from either side, if at least both person's god could be held eternally identifiable as a god, having an eternal lila, form, etc., etc. It shows the passion and love for either god.

Otherwise such arguments don't matter. The offended Advaitin becomes one with his all-encompassing position, then what or whose position is left to argue?

Eastern Mind
11 August 2010, 06:50 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


It seems here on HDF every 6 months or so the conversation arises on kṛṣṇa , visṇu, rudra and śiva. Many times what is referenced is what appears in bhāgavad gītā regarding kṛṣṇa's position relative to śiva.

Yet it is curious to me that one only looks at the bhāgavad gītā and does not look back to the parent śāstra, the mahābhārata and what it says. The Supreme (kṛṣṇa) has not changed in both of these books
and neither has the author vyāsa-ji (kṛṣṇa-dvaipāyana ) , correct? Then one must take heed to what is offered in the parent book as reliable.

As I see it common sense dictates that one must look to the mahābhārata, śanti parvan (section 342 or CCCXLII) and read what kṛṣṇa ( hari) says to arjuna (phalguna):

O' son of paṇḍu rudra should be known to have nārāyaṇa as His soul. If that deva of of deva's be worshiped ( maheśvarāya )
then O' partha ( arjuna) nārāyaṇa is worshiped.
I (hari) am the soul O' son of paṇḍu of all the worlds, of the universe. Rudra is My soul. It is for this reason that I always adore
Him. He who knows rudra knows Myself. And he who knows Myself knows rudra. He who follows rudra follows Me.
Rudra is nārāyaṇa. Both are One. No one other then rudra is is competent in granting me a boon.
In adoring rudra thus I have adored My own Self. Visṇu , says kṛṣṇa, never bows his head onto any devatā except His own Self.
It is for this reason that I adore rudra. For as I have told you (arjuna) rudra is my own Self.

- - - - - - - - - -
Is not kṛṣṇa hari? Is not kṛṣṇa nārāyaṇa? Is not nārāyaṇa rudra? Is then kṛṣṇa not rudra? Kṛṣṇa clearly tells us Rudra is nārāyaṇa. Both are One.

This is only one section where this equivalency is brought out. Yet a times we all contend one is superior to the other. Where is the wisdom in this? I will listen to what kṛṣṇa tells me to be the ultimate truth.

praṇām

Vannakkam Yajvan: Why just go to the Mahabharata? Why not go to Vedas, Upanishads, and Agamas? By saying you will listen to what Krishna tells you to be the ultimate truth, isn't this putting Krishna above the rest? Now I am just curious about this statement, not trying to start another argument. Clearly there's enough emotion already in this thread.

I see similarities between "Let us see what Krishna says about this" and 'Let us see what the Bible says about this," in that in both cases the insinuation is that something is the ultimate authority on it.

Personally, I'll listen to my gut or intuition when I get advanced in SD enough to actually have some inner truths revealed to me. The God inside us all knows this stuff. Only then will I have an ultimate authority to look at.

Aum Namasivaya

atanu
11 August 2010, 07:05 AM
Oh OK. I wonder where I got that idea.

Namaste Rasa

OK. I am sorry. My mistake.


Really I'm not concerned with another endless argument against Advaita.
--
My point (again) is why should Advaitins take offense to the idea of supremacy of Vishnu over Shiva


Kindly note that there has been no Advaita discussed here. We are just examining the exact verses of Bhagavatam.

On this, I actually wonder about achintya. I am perplexed (it is achintya to me) as to what makes some devotees grade Param Atman? Or what makes some devotees to even consider that Param Atman can be a Khudra Devata?

The following was already cited:

Bhagavatam

29. O lord, the five important Vedic mantras are represented by your five faces, from which the thirty-eight most celebrated Vedic mantras have been generated. Your Lordship, Lord Siva, is self-illuminated. You are directly situated as the supreme truth, known as Paramatma.

This should be my last post on the subject, because it is plain to see that someone will make a purport of the above to show that Param Atman is not Param Atman after all ---- and that the Param Atman in this passage only refers to Vishnu.
:)

Om Namah Shivaya

kd gupta
11 August 2010, 10:43 AM
So supposing rudra/shiva is jeeva . Now see….
Indra Vishnu pivatam maddho asya somasya dastra jatharam pranetham..rig6/69/7
O indra and Vishnu drink this somras to fill your stomach .
So is Vishnu jeeva or parmatma ?
haha...

Rasa1976
11 August 2010, 07:11 PM
Namaste Rasa

On this, I actually wonder about achintya. I am perplexed (it is achintya to me) as to what makes some devotees grade Param Atman? Or what makes some devotees to even consider that Param Atman can be a Khudra Devata?

Paramatma is "graded" due to being a Vishnu feature. Though Vishnu can be said to be shuddha-sattva Paramatma is still thought of as a Vishnu expansion who works within the mahat-tattva (performing a temporary function), unlike Krishna or Vishnu in Vaikuntha.

I am not familiar with "Khudra Devata".



The following was already cited:

Bhagavatam

29. O lord, the five important Vedic mantras are represented by your five faces, from which the thirty-eight most celebrated Vedic mantras have been generated. Your Lordship, Lord Siva, is self-illuminated. You are directly situated as the supreme truth, known as Paramatma.

This should be my last post on the subject, because it is plain to see that someone will make a purport of the above to show that Param Atman is not Param Atman after all ---- and that the Param Atman in this passage only refers to Vishnu.
:)

Om Namah Shivaya


Well, it's almost as if you are saying the purport is twisted. I would prefer to call it tilted. There is a slant toward the ishta-dev of the author, I recognize that. This of course all goes back to Chaitanya Vaishnavism that emphasizes from the Bhagavata krishnas tu bhagavan swayam - Krishna as the source of all incarnations, Though Krishna is also said to expand from Vishnu he is regarded as the most complete expression of Purusha. This has been declared at least since that time even though the Bhagavata gives plenty of room for all kinds of other theories on Vedanta. But in the Bhagavata there is the Vishnu/Krishna preponderance and emphasis of bhakti over mukti, so you have to deal with some people's ishta-devas (perhaps) getting in the way of yours.

I reacted because I've seen people here complain that "Vaisnavas tell that Shiva and others are only demigods". But if they have already chosen the logic of general Advaita, they have agreed that atman, paramatman, shiva-tattva, vishnu-tattva and all the devas and devis are ultimately one and the same. So why complain that Shiva or any other divinity is spoken of as only a demigod, when a demigod (to them) is the same as God?

purnapragya
11 August 2010, 09:08 PM
In vedas the paramatma state as Brahman,In puranic litaratuer paramatma stated as Krishna and In tantric form Paramatma stated as Shiva.I think this may help all of u.In Puran its said their is no difference between vishnu and shiva (Har and hari is uniq there is no "veda")Its us who has selfish desire to promot our view and reject other.If u pray to krishna u unwillingly also pray to Shiva .Shiva is the form of attributeless and Vishnu is the form of infinite attribute.So not quarrel in this idiot question.Its some dravidian fanatic thought to misrepresent bhagvat gita just ignor those anty sanatan dharma component.
Shivoohom Shivam.

atanu
11 August 2010, 11:28 PM
Paramatma is "graded" due to being a Vishnu feature.

Namaste Rasa

I did not want to post anymore -- but i am also impelled by Vishnu feature, which is mAyA. You are correct. Paramatma is graded by our own perspectives -- by mind's preferences and peculiarities. And those who have headquarters at mAyApuri get maximum marks for most successful veiling of the one truth.

All this is however for an auspiciuos cause.


I am not familiar with "Khudra Devata".

Kindly read the OP.


Well, it's almost as if you are saying the purport is twisted. I would prefer to call it tilted.

Well, that is your opinion. When the tilt makes one (OP in this case) suggest that the Paramatma could be only a khudra devata, I prefer to call it a 180 degree twist. ;)

Best Wishes and Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

Sahasranama
12 August 2010, 09:28 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


It seems here on HDF every 6 months or so the conversation arises on kṛṣṇa , visṇu, rudra and śiva. Many times what is referenced is what appears in bhāgavad gītā regarding kṛṣṇa's position relative to śiva.

Yet it is curious to me that one only looks at the bhāgavad gītā and does not look back to the parent śāstra, the mahābhārata and what it says. The Supreme (kṛṣṇa) has not changed in both of these books
and neither has the author vyāsa-ji (kṛṣṇa-dvaipāyana ) , correct? Then one must take heed to what is offered in the parent book as reliable.

As I see it common sense dictates that one must look to the mahābhārata, śanti parvan (section 342 or CCCXLII) and read what kṛṣṇa ( hari) says to arjuna (phalguna):

O' son of paṇḍu rudra should be known to have nārāyaṇa as His soul. If that deva of of deva's be worshiped ( maheśvarāya )
then O' partha ( arjuna) nārāyaṇa is worshiped.
I (hari) am the soul O' son of paṇḍu of all the worlds, of the universe. Rudra is My soul. It is for this reason that I always adore
Him. He who knows rudra knows Myself. And he who knows Myself knows rudra. He who follows rudra follows Me.
Rudra is nārāyaṇa. Both are One. No one other then rudra is is competent in granting me a boon.
In adoring rudra thus I have adored My own Self. Visṇu , says kṛṣṇa, never bows his head onto any devatā except His own Self.
It is for this reason that I adore rudra. For as I have told you (arjuna) rudra is my own Self.

- - - - - - - - - -
Is not kṛṣṇa hari? Is not kṛṣṇa nārāyaṇa? Is not nārāyaṇa rudra? Is then kṛṣṇa not rudra? Kṛṣṇa clearly tells us Rudra is nārāyaṇa. Both are One.

This is only one section where this equivalency is brought out. Yet a times we all contend one is superior to the other. Where is the wisdom in this? I will listen to what kṛṣṇa tells me to be the ultimate truth.

praṇām


This is a great reply, but these type of quotes always get underappreciated. From reading the scriptures personally, I know there are countless of these examples in the shastras to confirm what you have brought up here. But people seem to look over it like it isn't there.

isavasya
12 August 2010, 04:00 PM
Hi Devotees,



But in BhagavadGita, Sri Vasudeva Krishna cautions against worshipping a "Kshudra Devata".

My question is, did Sri Krishna consider Shiva a "Kshudra Devata"?

Hello ravilochna,




Krishna himself worships shiva, so your question loses it's point in the first place.




There is no question that Krishna liked Shiva too, otherwise he would not have pardoned Banasura and spared his life if Shiva had not begged him for it. But still, Shiva is lower in stature compared to Sri Krishna. Shiva is also considered "Tamasik" and that adds one more complexity.



Shiva begged ?? ha ha ,what a joke ! It's hilarious to read your posts, apart from the fact that you don't know how to pose your question.

Narayana performed strenuous Tapa when the Highest God of the world,
the origin of the Universe and the parent of the worlds, visualized himself before Narayana. That God is Known as shiva, Sambhu, Hara or Rudra.

"Vyasa continued, 'The blue-throated God, of inconceivable soul, that wielder of Pinaka, that divine Lord ever praised by the Rishis, then gave boons unto Vasudeva who deserved them all. The great God mahadeva said,


'O Narayana, through my grace, amongst men, gods, and Gandharvas, thou shalt be of immeasurable might and soul. Neither gods, nor Asuras, nor great Uragas, nor Pisachas, nor Gandharvas, nor men, nor Rakshasas, nor birds, nor Nagas, nor any creatures in the Universe, shall ever be able to bear thy prowess.

so mahabharata also says, krishna received boons from shiva, and narayana saw his father, the origin of the universe, i.e -Shiva. I believe this part of mahabharata doesnt sounds beautiful to your ears ?



My dear Atanu,

You are partly right and partly wrong.

You are right that Shiva/Rudra undergoes a kind of humiliation in Puranas and comes across as "Bholenath". He is not wise enough to expect Bhasmasura's move before handing over the boon and had to be rescued by Lord Vishnu. He goes to see Sriman Narayana along with his consort, Mother Parvathi, and then what does he do? Right in front of everyone, he asks Lord Vishnu to show the form of Mohini and completely falls over for Vishnumaaya. More examples can be offered in this respect.

ha ha ha

Another example of maya making you deluded,

shiva and humiliated ?? you are too eager to quote things from your own angle, may I also start behaving like you and start giving quotes, and quotes not just from puran but higher authority Upanishad, should I also quote a deluded picture of vishnu getting butchered into pieces by maheshwara ??? Need i bring sarabha upanishad.

Why is it most of the times that some viashnava tries so hard to prove his point, but i pity you, even after so much effort, Lord shiva will remain the most worshipped eternal lord of bharat varsha. ananda tirtha's teachings will remain confined till karnataka and some pars of tamil nadu.





But you are wrong in stating that Shiva is the "Direct Brahman" in the Upanishads. Well, yes, in certain minor Shaivic upanishads like "Rudra Hridaya Upanishad", he is the Parabrahman. But not in the major upanishads. If you have a counter argument, I am very interested in hearing it.

oh minor upanishad:( ?

ha ha..........what a joke, supreme vedas, primary upanishad, svetashvatara upanishad, taitreya aranyaka, all say shiva to be param brahma. eko hi rudro na dvitiyaya na.......................................By the way, some vaishnavas imagine many things, you seem to be one of them.





Is there any harm in worshipping Shiva?

Lord krishna says,

That creature, who cherishes malice towards the illustrious Mahadeva who is the original cause of everything, who is the Supreme Soul, and who is the Lord, has certainly to go to hell. ~~Krishna's words.(Anusasana Parva , MahaBharat)


Vannakkam Yajvan: Why just go to the Mahabharata? Why not go to Vedas, Upanishads, and Agamas? By saying you will listen to what Krishna tells you to be the ultimate truth, isn't this putting Krishna above the rest? Now I am just curious about this statement, not trying to start another argument. Clearly there's enough emotion already in this thread.


namaste EM ji,

100% right, even though mahabharata confirms both shiva and vishnu as parmatma, we don't need to prove from their. Vedas and Upanishads (Shruti) alone proves it.

yajvan
12 August 2010, 08:21 PM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté sahasranama,


From reading the scriptures personally, I know there are countless of these examples in the shastras to confirm what you have brought up here. But people seem to look over it like it isn't there.

Yes, I agree. I am not certain why people do this. I have called out multiple examples, as have atanu, devotee, etc. My intent is not one of being a snob, but for people to look to the sameness (sama) and not the differences. Differences are fine, yet take on a new meaning as 'play' within the fabric of sameness.

Saidevo once said, we are not looking for uniformity , but the unity of all in things. These are wise words.

And even within the viṣṇu-sahasranāṁ we find this teaching offered - and the same in the śiva sahasranāṁ. How is viṣṇu not maheśvarā ?
I cannot tell you.

praṇām

saidevo
12 August 2010, 10:12 PM
namaste Yajvan.



Saidevo once said, we are not looking for uniformity , but the unity of all in things. These are wise words.


Good God, those were not my words, but KAnchi ParamAchArya's. Here is the full quote:

"That the beliefs and customs of the various religions are different cannot be a cause for complaint. Nor is there any need to make all of them similar. The important thing is for the followers of the various faiths to live in harmony with one another. The goal must be unity, not uniformity. "

Rasa1976
13 August 2010, 05:13 AM
i am also impelled by Vishnu feature, which is mAyA.

LOL. Of course here I could joke "Mayavadis think everything is Brahman except Vishnu, who is maya".

But normally, most Hindus seem to agree that all forms of God have been told to us by sages and the revealed scriptures. They are divine revelations or manifestations of an expression of God fit for worship.

So knowing that they have been revealed to say, Vyasa, who is on the shuddha-sattva level, shouldn't these forms also be said to be shuddha-sattva (pure eternal spiritual forms) even by Advaitins even if they don't seem to agree that the ultimate reality is a little blue cowherd boy?

In other words, they could be seen as forms of what may appear as imagination but as divine revelations they have a firm basis in eternity, even if you don't like the idea of Vishnu eternally existing as a four-armed human being with limbs of concentrated Brahman (though you might like that of Shiva, lol).

You see, I am trying to wind up where I began with as many questions as assertions.

atanu
13 August 2010, 07:04 AM
LOL. Of course here I could joke "Mayavadis think everything is Brahman except Vishnu, who is maya".



Ha Ha. See the effect of Vishnu feature yourself. Did I say that Vishnu=mAyA? I said mAyA is a feature of Vishnu --- or any other way you may state it.


Om Namah Shivaya

yajvan
13 August 2010, 11:34 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté saidevo,


namaste Yajvan.

Good God, those were not my words, but KAnchi ParamAchArya's. Here is the full quote:

Yes, I recall this... and I could have said it better , that you have brought these words to HDF via svāmī-ji . I was happy just to remember these words :)

praṇām

satay
14 August 2010, 01:19 PM
Admin Note

Thread under review.