Svetasvatara Upanishad and temple visit

[harih]

At face value, the participating in a war, particularly a senseless one seems very much against ahimsa and as a buddhist in particular I am pacifist. Now I understand that Hindus aren't pacifists, nor in reality are buddhist nations. I have read that some interpret the battle as representing an inner struggle or war with desire and attachment. I think the teaching of following your dharma and acting ethically without regard to failure/success is a profound teaching with many uses. But again I have trouble with this story in a literal sense. Any help?

Thanks, Liang

Dear Liang

Namaste. Even though your message was addressed to Sri Yajvan, I hope you don't mind me replying with my thoughts in brief. If the context of the story, the battle could not be termed senseless, as the Pandavas were fighting for their sustenance. Hence Lord Krishna says in the Gita "Without doing this Karma, you won't be able to undertake even your Sareera-Yatra (self maintenance)". And given the societal rules of the time, the Pandavas could not go abegging without disguising themselves as Brahmanas.

[Amalbhairom]

Eastern Mind: It is my personal opinion that Siva is misrepresented

I agree totally.
Shiva is Param Brahman (in Vedanta), Beyond Bindu Nada Kala (of Yoga), He is Jagadguru, the One from which all rays of light and knowledge descend into the samsara. In Patanjal Yoga Sutras, he is described as Ishwara, who is the original Guru of all Gurus, who is not bound by the shackles of Time and causation.
"Sa Purvesham api Guruh, KalenAnavachchedath."
Shiva is the source of Veda, Tantra, Yoga, Music, Weaponry and all things that sustain the worlds. Veda agrees with it. Upanishads like Svetashvetara (Belonging to the Krishna Yajurveda branch, that precedes Yajnavalkya) also does. There are also many other less known Upanishads that support the above.
Some Western Scholars(like R.T.H.Griffith) opine that Shiva was later included among the gods of the Vedas. But that is just wrong. What about Rigveda's sukta "Kad Rudram..."? Again, the famous Devi Suktam says "Aham Rudrebhih Vasubhih Charam... Rudraya Dhanuratanomi...." etc.
Some Puranas and Mahabharata, say Shiva was born from Brahmadeva's tears! But Svetasvetara Upanishad clearly refutes that claim, by stating that Shiva witnessed the birth of Brahma from his Lotus...

Again, certain sectarian pundits in ancient times (well, not so ancient either) added many verses denigrating Shiva to the status of a lesser god, in parts of Srimad Bhagavat Puran. These are called "Prakshipta" slokas (added later). Padma Purana (itself a Vaishnava Purana) goes so far as to classify other Puranas as Sattvic, Rajasik and Tamasik. Sadly, Padma Purana describes all major Shaiva Puranas as Tamasik!! But in doing so, Padma Purana (a) Proves that those Puranas on Shiva and Mahashakti were already celebrated works, before it's composition.
(b) Padma Purana describes many pilgrimages in Bhoomi-Khanda, curiously, Vijayanagara Temples among them. Vijayanagara came in the 14th century AD. Did Mahamuni Vyas begin writing Padma Purana in the 1400s? Or, did some other group of erudites write PadmA Purana and circulate it in Vyasa's name?
(c) PadmA Purana again contradicts itself and says Shiva is the greatest in certain parts!!
I am mentioning Padma-Purana this heavily, for those derogatory verses are frequently quoted by some puny minded people to insult Shiva, who is beyond praise or, abuse.

Vayu Purana is one of the oldest Puranas. It clearly glorifies Lord Shiva. It is mentioned in Mahabharata, so, it must be older than the epic itself. There were many Puranas, now extinct, that were already there before the birth of Vyasdeva. So, Scholars should get over the "only 18 are there" riddle.

Also, there are many shlokas in the Vedas and Upanishads spoken in eulogy to Shiva, the Supreme Lord, that have been misinterpreted with malefic intent. Many famous scholars of India have done this for centuries. They provide very poor illogical explanations and stupid grammatical laws to prove that those praises are really about Shri Vishnu!! (I am not against Vishnu, but Shiva is my Lord.) Yet those prashastis clearly mention words like, Shiva, Rudra, Ishana, Maheshwara.

Namaste to you all. And forgive me for going a little off topic.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté

Again, certain sectarian pundits in ancient times (well, not so ancient either) added many verses denigrating Shiva to the status of a lesser god, in parts of Srimad Bhagavat Puran. These are called "Prakshipta" slokas (added later). Padma Purana (itself a Vaishnava Purana) goes so far as to classify other Puranas as Sattvic, Rajasik and Tamasik. Sadly, Padma Purana describes all major Shaiva Puranas as Tamasik!!

• The highest ( anuttara) quality and expression of sattvoguṇa is that of discriminative knowledge (viveka) by which one can experience the difference between buddhi (intellect) and puruṣa (Self, Being, Presence, Pure Awareness)
• The highest ( anuttara) quality and expression of rajoguṇa is mumukṣā , that noble desire (tapas) for liberation (mukti).
• The highest ( anuttara) quality and expression of tamoguṇa is the ability to halt all thoughts and sensory imput activities ( samādhi), and maintain this condition (turyātīta) perpetually.

I welcome tamoguṇa as an expression of śiva – this is His ‘grace’ or anugraha.


इतिशिवं
iti śivaṁ

[Amalbhairom]

to Yajvan,

• The highest ( anuttara) quality and expression of sattvoguṇa is that of discriminative knowledge (viveka) by which one can experience the difference between buddhi (intellect) and puruṣa (Self, Being, Presence, Pure Awareness)
• The highest ( anuttara) quality and expression of rajoguṇa is mumukṣā , that noble desire (tapas) for liberation (mukti).
• The highest ( anuttara) quality and expression of tamoguṇa is the ability to halt all thoughts and sensory imput activities ( samādhi), and maintain this condition (turyātīta) perpetually.

Brother,

That's just absurd. Viveka is the attribute that generates dispassion... which in turn pushes one towards self realization. But Samadhi, on the other hand, makes one enlightened. Samadhi = union of Jivatman and Paramatman. To call the means of mukti as Sattva and mukti itself Tamasik doesn't make sense.

"Yogo ityuka samyoga jivatma paramatmano", that's samadhi. If that supreme 4th state is Tamasik, then according to your logic, Krishna, Vishnu, Vyas and most of the knowers of Brahman, must be very Tamasik!!! Most of the wise sages, remained in Turyaga/ Samadhi as frequently as possible. The scriptures call that state, to be "Beyond the 3 Gunas", Gunatita.

Remember Krishna's advice to Arjuna in Gita, "Veda is concerned with 3 gunas, Arjuna, try to go beyond all gunas." Traigunyo vishayo veda, nistraigunyo bhavarjunah.

Veda only leads us towards the truth, but the Truth can only be known by fusing the knower, knowledge and the object of knowledge... that is Samadhi.

What the 3 Gunas represent has been clarified in Shraddha Traya Vibhag yoga chapter of Gita. In Padma Purana, all Shaivite & Shakta Puranas have been labelled as Tamasik, only to bring down their credebility.

[Amalbhairom]

Reference:
Samyoga yoga ityukto jivatma paramatmano--- from Yogi Yajnavalkya.

Maitrayaniya Upanishad(6.20-30), of Yajurveda branch, 1000-800BC, which is much earlier than even Patanjali's Yoga Sutras, mark the level of Samadhi as Final. It describes six stages to the attainment of Samadhi. Pranayama, Pratyahara, Dharana, Dhyana, TARKA and Samadhi.
This Tarka stage is also a samadhi, albeit a lower one, wherein the intellect judges the object of meditation as in Viveka-Vichara. And the Final Samadhi state is the fusion of the tritaya, where all vichara & discrimination ends and only pure consciousness remains. In that highest state, there remains no doubt, no questions unanswered, for it is the merging in Param Brahman.

In Samadhi, there is only Brahman, the world of desire and illusion doesn't exist for the Yogi. So, there is no need for Viveka/ Discrimination of Purusha & Prakriti. The yogi is then absorbed in Parama Purusha. So, No Sattva, Rajas or, Tamas is there in Samadni.

[Amalbhairom]

Namaste, my brother, do not consider for a moment, that I hold any grievance against anyone. I am just clarifying my point, with supporting evidence.

Maitrayani Upanishad: (on the State of Self Realization)---Samadhi, where the mind is suspended, and a state beyond words ensue.
"Laya vikshepa rahitam, manah kritwa sunischalam; Yada yatiamanibhavam, tada tat Paramam Padam."
Again,
"Tavan mano Niroddhavyam Hridi yavat Kshyam gatam; Etaj Jnanam cha Mokhsham cha sesahanye grantha-vistarah."
"Samadhi Nirdhautam alasya Chetaso nivesitasya Atmani yat sukham bhavet;
Na shakyate varnayitum gira tada, swayam tad antahkaranena grahyate."

In Svetasvetara Upanishad:
In samadhi, during Self Realization, there is no illusory world left, neither is the Karana Sharira. The yogi's consciousness goes beyond the cosmic structure and merges into Param Brahman.
"Tasya-abhidhyanat Tritiyam Deha-Bhede, Viswaiswaryam Kevala Apta-Kamah."
======================

Now, Svetasvetara Upanishad clearly states that SHIVA (Paramatman) is the witness of the illusory universe as well as it's creator (Brahma-deva):
"Ya devanam prabhavasch udbhavascha, Vishwadhipo Rudro Maharshih; Hiranya-Garbham pashyata Jayamanam..."
(this Shruti successfully dispels all Puranic Hogwash, about Shiva being the son of Brahma-deva!!! Also, here it says, Shiva is the Origin of all gods.)

Knowing Shiva, as the Paramatman, one is liberated from all bondages of samsara. Here is the verse from Svetasvetara Up.--->
"Ghritat param mandam ivati sukhsmam, Jnatva Shivam Sarvabhuteshu Gurham.
Vishwas-aikam Parivestitaram, Jnatva Deva Muchyate Sarva-Pashai"
"