Last edited by smaranam; 20 September 2013 at 01:46 PM.
|| Shri KRshNArpaNamastu ||
I hope other hindus do not take offense to this, but sri vaishnavas do not accept the existence of Ganesha or that he is a vedic devata.
As per the writings of our acharyas, we recognise only Subrahmanya, the son of Shiva. The deity named vinAyaka (also named by srI adi shankara in his bhashya) according to us is part of Shiva's bhUta gaNas, but is not his son and is not the Ganapati worshipped popularly as Shiva putra.
The rg vedic mantra containing the word "ganapatim" as well as "ganapati" appearing in the Satarudriyam are interpreted as epithets to Vishnu (lord of the nitya sUrIs, known as ganas) by us. In addition, the sahasranAmA vAkya,
yasya dvirada vaktrAdyAh pArisadyAh parassatam | vighnam nighnanti satatam visvaksEnam tamAsrayE
...is interpreted as "We salute the elephant faced gajanana, the nitya suri and the army of nitya sUrIs in thousands, headed by the commander Vishwaksena, who is the destroyer of obstacles to the realisation of Brahman (sriman nArAyaNa)."
Vishwaksena is a nitya sUri and occurs in the pancharAtra agama as well.
Of course, there are other vaishnavas who do accept Ganesha as a legitimate deity, but that is their sampradaya. To each his own.
[CENTER][COLOR="Black"][COLOR="Red"][COLOR="DarkRed"]No holiness rules over my freedom
No commands from above I obey
I seek the ruin, I shake the worlds
Behold! I am blackest ov the black
Ov khaos I am, the disobediant one
Depraved son who hath dwelt in nothingness
Upon the ninth I fell, from grace up above
To taste this life ov sin, to give birth to the "I"[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]
[B]~ "Blackest Ov the Black" - Behemoth.[/B]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3P-JdwtK1DY[/url] [/CENTER]
Then why don't you tell Gaudiya vaishnava acaryas that they are "puerile"? They have explained anadi karma thus as I have said. You know, I'm still waiting for you and that your "reputable Vaishnava scholars" to show that the anAdi karma actually means anAdi samsAra.
In my post on Ganesha I said "Scriptures approve worship of the gods, eternally liberated souls, etc., the only question is what of all that is common for Vaishnava practice."
As acknowledged by your colleague jignyAsu "we do worship all deities in yagnAs and in Vishnu temples. This does include authorized Vedic hymns praising various deities having Sriman Narayana as their Atman (as per Vaishnavas)."
You have forgotten that in this very thread Bhāgavatam 11.27.29 was mentioned where it is said that some demigods including Vināyaka are worshiped (http://vedabase.net/sb/11/27/29/en) in chapter "Lord Kṛṣṇa's Instructions on the Process of Deity Worship":
"With offerings such as prokṣaṇa one should worship Durgā, Vināyaka, Vyāsa, Viṣvaksena, the spiritual masters and the various demigods. All these personalities should be in their proper places facing the Deity of the Lord."
Now, I'm not saying that Vināyaka mentioned in this verse is Ganesha but still the verse mentions some divinities and various demigods!
Obviously worship of mentioned divinities and various demigods is not prohibited. That's my point. It does not matter whether Srila Prabhupada established worship of Ganesha or not. It's just a matter of customs of the sampradaya and practical application of the above mentioned Bhāgavatam 11.27.29 verse and similar scriptural injunctions.
It seems that your colleague jignyAsu does not agree with you, see above where I have quoted him "This does include authorized Vedic hymns praising various deities having Sriman Narayana as their Atman (as per Vaishnavas)."
If that specific meditation on the paramatma within the divinities is not recommended in the scriptures then why did Sri Radha worshiped Ganesha in this way?
I have already quoted Brahma-vaivarta purana, Krishna janma khanda, ch. CXXIII.54-59, p. 534.
where Radha eulogised Ganesha "You are the supreme Brahma ... there is none superior to you ... you cause the gods to manifest themselves".
If this is not that specific type of meditation or worship, then what is it?
As I have already explained if we carefully examine Radha's eulogy we can clearly see that the words "You are the supreme Brahma ... there is none superior to you ... you cause the gods to manifest themselves" can not be applied to Ganesha who is just a jiva soul (jivatma).
To whom does it apply those words if can not be applied to Ganesha?
Who can be described as "You are the supreme Brahma, etc."?
Guess Who?
regards
Last edited by brahma jijnasa; 21 September 2013 at 07:16 PM.
I did not say that Gaudiya Vaishnava acharyas are puerile. I said that your misinterpretations of scripture are puerile. Let us not confuse the two. Gaudiya Vaishnavas accept the Vedaantic view that karma is anAdi, and that karma means what everyone else understands it to mean - action in the material world which results in puNyam or pApam. Nowhere in the writings of Baladeva Vidyaabhuushana do we see this being reinterpreted in the sense of a "fall from Vaikuntha." Asking for proof that anAdi karma implies anAdi samsAra is moronic. Every Vedaanta commentator knows that it does, since that is a straightforward inference - Adi Shankara, Madhva, Raamaanuja, Baladeva... they all do. In none of their writings do we see them referring to a "fall from Vaikuntha." The burden of proof is on the challenger to centuries of Vedaantic interpretation to show otherwise.
First of all, as a believer in "Jesus is a pure devotee" and "Mohammed is a shaktyavesha avatar," what to speak of other non-Vedic deviations like "fall from Vaikuntha," you have no credibility to speak on behalf of Gaudiya Vaishnavas, what to speak of Vaishnavas in general.
Second, shAstra does not say that gaNesha is an "eternally liberated soul." In fact, there is no universally accepted shruti which even mentions gaNesha.
The deities mentioned by jignyAsu are Vedic deities whose names are explicitly mentioned in veda - rudra, indra, agni, vAyu, mitra, varuNa, etc. gaNesha's name is not mentioned in any extant shruti and is not included in that list.
This is completely irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion. Here is the commentary on that verse from your own sampradAya:Originally Posted by brahma jijnasa
PURPORT According to Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī, the Gaṇeśa and Durgā mentioned in this verse are not the same personalities present within the material world; rather, they are eternal associates of the Lord in Vaikuṇṭha. In this world Gaṇeśa, the son of Lord Śiva, is famous for awarding financial success, and the goddess Durgā, the wife of Lord Śiva, is famous as the external, illusory potency of the Supreme Lord. The personalities mentioned here, however, are eternally liberated associates of the Lord who reside in the spiritual sky, beyond the material manifestation. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī quotes from various Vedic literatures to prove that the name Durgā may also indicate the internal potency of the Lord, who is nondifferent from Him. The external, or covering, potency of the Lord expands from this original Durgā. The Durgā of the material world, called Mahā-māyā, assumes the function of bewildering the living entities. Thus a devotee should not fear becoming polluted by worshiping the Durgā mentioned here, who has the same name as illusion, but rather the devotee must show respect to these eternal servitors of the Supreme Lord in Vaikuṇṭha.
Now, you either agree with jIva gosvAmI or you don't. If you don't, then you are no Gaudiya Vaishnava and have no business misrepresenting yourself as such. If you do, then this verse does not bolster your case any, making it quite dishonest for you to try and imply otherwise.
Because you are obviously confused, let me remind you that the title of this thread is "Ganapathi pooja in Vaishnavism." In response to jignyAsu's very correct position that nothing need be sought from anya-devatas that cannot be had from the worship of shrIman nArAyaNa, it was you who jumped in and rambled on about tangential points regarding the merits of worshiping entities other than shrIman nArAyaNa, obviously to lay the foundation for your implied position that gaNesha-worship as a liberated soul might be acceptable. So far, you have not proven the case. You cannot show where gaNesha is mentioned as a vedic deity, cannot show that he is a liberated soul, and cannot produce any evidence even from the writers in your own sampradAya (excluding some Jesus followers from ISKCON who obviously lack intellectual credibility) authenticating the worship of gaNesha as a valid ancillary sAdhana.Obviously worship of mentioned divinities and various demigods is not prohibited. That's my point. It does not matter whether Srila Prabhupada established worship of Ganesha or not. It's just a matter of customs of the sampradaya and practical application of the above mentioned Bhāgavatam 11.27.29 verse and similar scriptural injunctions.
Once again, you have no idea what you are talking about. There are no authorized Vedic hymns discussing the worship of an elephant-faced deity who is the son of Shiva, making your point moot.It seems that your colleague jignyAsu does not agree with you, see above where I have quoted him "This does include authorized Vedic hymns praising various deities having Sriman Narayana as their Atman (as per Vaishnavas)."
Which is not a core scripture for Gaudiya Vaishnavas, and is also not shruti. Thus it has no bearing on practices based on authorized Vedic hymnsIf that specific meditation on the paramatma within the divinities is not recommended in the scriptures then why did Sri Radha worshiped Ganesha in this way?
I have already quoted Brahma-vaivarta purana, Krishna janma khanda, ch. CXXIII.54-59, p. 534.
Philosoraptor
"Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato
namastE astu bhagavan vishveshvarAya mahAdevAya tryaMbakAya|
tripurAntakAya trikAgnikAlAya kAlAgnirudrAya nIlakaNThAya mRtyuJNjayAya sarveshvarAya sadAshivAya shrIman mAhAdevAya ||
Om shrImAtrE namah
sarvam shrI umA-mahEshwara parabrahmArpaNamastu
A Shaivite library
http://www.scribd.com/HinduismLibrary
I have problems with this logic.
While we say 'Jack is a tall boy' and the attributes of Jack's physical body are applied to the Jiva Jack due to the inseparable relation between soul and the body, 'Jack' is a term that refers to the inseparable combination of the soul and the body. Thus we can say "Jack was born on 12th June 1984" wherein are referring to the body of the composite entity Jack. We can also say that "Jack has existed for all eternity" wherein we are referring to the eternal soul in the composite entity "Jack".
We cannot, however attribute to individual components of "Jack" attributes of each other. We cannot say "Jack's body has existed forever " or "Jack's soul was born on so-and-so date"
Similarly, Brahman abd Jiva are parts of a composite which is as inseparable as the body and the soul. However, we cannot say that Brahman is a being of limited knowledge who transmigrates under the influence of Karma, because we are attributing properties of the other part of the Brahman-Jiva composite to Brahman.
Similarly, we cannot go upto a particular jiva and tell him "You are the supreme lord who creates, sustains and destroys the universe" and then invoke the inseparability of the Antaryamin and Jiva.
Keep in mind that I am not saying that Ganesha is the Supreme Brahman. He is a Jiva.
namastE astu bhagavan vishveshvarAya mahAdevAya tryaMbakAya|
tripurAntakAya trikAgnikAlAya kAlAgnirudrAya nIlakaNThAya mRtyuJNjayAya sarveshvarAya sadAshivAya shrIman mAhAdevAya ||
Om shrImAtrE namah
sarvam shrI umA-mahEshwara parabrahmArpaNamastu
A Shaivite library
http://www.scribd.com/HinduismLibrary
NamastePhilosoraptor: There are no authorized Vedic hymns discussing the worship of an elephant-faced deity who is the son of Shiva
Which Vedic hymns name Rama?
Which Vedic hymns name Krishna?
Which Vedic hymns name Garuda?
Which Vedic hymns name Ananta Shesha Naga?
There are no Vedic hymns describing the worship of any of these names? Therefore we should not worship them?
Om Namah Sivaya
Rig Veda list only 33 devas, they are all propitiated, worthy off our worship, all other names of gods are derivative from this 33 originals,
Bhagvat Gita; Shree Krishna says Chapter 3.11 devan bhavayatanena te deva bhavayantu vah parasparam bhavayantah sreyah param avapsyatha Chapter 17.4 yajante sattvika devan yaksa-raksamsi rajasah pretan bhuta-ganams canye yajante tamasa janah
The world disappears in him. He is the peaceful, the good, the one without a second.
Actually, nArAyaNa is explicitly mentioned in the mahAnArAyaNa upaniShad, which is the 10th prapataka of the taittirIya AraNyaka which is pramANa for all vedAntists.
kRiShNa is mentioned in the chAndogya upaniShad.
garuDa ("garutmAn") is mentioned in the Rg veda saMhitA.
Philosoraptor
"Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato
Pranam,
As Philosoraptor mentioned, I quoted that only for Vedic hymns of various deities like Lord Brahma, Agni etc. as opposed to using (Rajasic)Puranas under heavy interpolation. The Bhagavatam verse talks about worshiping deities alongside with Lord Narayana while you are using it to worship deities installed in a separate temple. Worshiping Lord with His associates and guru is but basic Vaishnavam but you are using it to rationalize worship other deities.
We give a lot of importance to the agamas used to install a deity.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Bookmarks