How far is it right to consider Shaivism and Vaishnavism as seperate entities?

[upsydownyupsy mv ss]

How far is it right to consider Shaivism and Vaishnavism as two different entities with seperate origins and existance? I ask this question only because I see a lot of confusion and arguments between Shaivaites and Vaishnavaites saying their lord is god. But it is to be noted that the characters of Shiva in Shaiva stories and theories is same as that of Vaishnava. Hence I prefer them as seperate entities to avoid confusions. In Vaishnavaite stories, such as that of the Bhagavata Mahapuranam, that Shiva is sub-ordinate of Vishnu, which is the reverse in Shaiva scriptures like Shiva Mahapuranam. This only points that the two sects are of different origin, but ended up joining somewhere in the middle of the ancient times. Lets not create anymore confusions in our heads now. While most of us (like me, smarthas and shankaracharya) do consider Vishnu and Shiva as single entity, yet we find arguments between the other two sects, trying to degrade the other or twist the thesis of the other for example:

The people from Iskon say Shiva has his eyes closed and meditates upon Vishnu. Well, if you ask a shaiva about the same, he'd answer that the supreme Shiva meditates upon all his devotees. Since, Vishnu is one of his devotees, Shiva meditates on Vishnu as well. Shaivas also do something similar and they usually say that Vishnu in yoga nidra thinks only of Shiva and prays on him. But, a vaishnava would answer its because the supreme vishnu meditates on all his devotees, since shiva is supreme vaishnava, he is meditated upon.

Such arguments puts an innocent devotee into confusions only. If such confusions continue, a day is not far when confused hindus themselves attack hinduism and get converted to other religions without even sparing a thought to the vedas and other massive hindu scriptures. I was once prey to such confusions too once. Is considering the two sects as 2 different religions is beneficial? Well... I found it benefitting while listening to stories from both shaiva and vaishnava scriptures, and I've found no confusions while doing so. Please do think about this matter without considering yourself as a shaiva or vaishnava, but as a devotee who wants to remove some confusions in others and or yourself. Hope I'm clear and hope this thread does not create any arguments and hope it does not attract evil thoughts to the minds of the readers. Satay please do remove this thread if it does so, but before that inform me satay in private and get my permission.

[satay]

Admin Note

namaste upsy (or is it downy?)

Satay please do remove this thread if it does so, but before that inform me satay in private and get my permission.

Please get familiar with the forum rules by going to the FAQ section.

Site administrators don't need any permission to perform their duties.

FYI.

[devotee]

Dear SS,

Unless you are deciding to join a certain sect, I would advise yo to see things as a common non-sectarian Hindu sees.

For a non-sectarian Hindu :

a) God is One & He manifests in different forms.
b) Shiva, Vishnu (even as Krishna, Rama or any of his Avatars) & Mother Goddess are supreme deities and each one of them is fully omnipotent as any other ... no one is subordinate to anyone. You may find Shiva praying to Vishnu ... Vishnu praying to Shiva ... both praying to Mother Goddess etc.
c) Each form has different characteristics from other. They perform different functions as various officers within a single governing body.
d) Though each one seems limited by the characteristics of that form, each one can transcend that limitations if situation so demands.

Your choice of a form depends upon your own Gunas.

OM

[upsydownyupsy mv ss]

Admin Note

namaste upsy (or is it downy?)



Please get familiar with the forum rules by going to the FAQ section.

Site administrators don't need any permission to perform their duties.

FYI.

Yes, I know that you dont need permission, but I wanted you to tell me if you wanted to delete it, thats all. Thanks for telling me to read the FAQ. O.K I will

[upsydownyupsy mv ss]

Dear SS,

Unless you are deciding to join a certain sect, I would advise yo to see things as a common non-sectarian Hindu sees.

For a non-sectarian Hindu :

a) God is One & He manifests in different forms.
b) Shiva, Vishnu (even as Krishna, Rama or any of his Avatars) & Mother Goddess are supreme deities and each one of them is fully omnipotent as any other ... no one is subordinate to anyone. You may find Shiva praying to Vishnu ... Vishnu praying to Shiva ... both praying to Mother Goddess etc.
c) Each form has different characteristics from other. They perform different functions as various officers within a single governing body.
d) Though each one seems limited by the characteristics of that form, each one can transcend that limitations if situation so demands.

Your choice of a form depends upon your own Gunas.

OM

I'm still not clarified.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakam upsy:

Firstly, there is no right or wrong. Most Hindus just see the multitude of correct paths, correct for each individual. If you are looking for right and wrong concepts, you came to the wrong place.

I'll try to answer your question, but then again, it is just my take on it.

There are 4 main and many minor sects within Hinduism. The four main sects are Vaishnava, Smarta, Saiva, and Shaktite. Then there are tons of in between variations, and some that worship the formless only, or the Ganapatyans, who worship Ganesha as the supreme.

Staunch Vaishnavites and Saivas don't usually directly worship the other sects main God much, yet they recogise that sects right to do so, and wouldn't insult it. (With sone exceptions) The reason for this isn't anything unusual, its just the belief that, "I have everything I need here, so why go elsewhere?"

Smartism was an attempt at unification, by stating that all Gods are Supreme, and that devotees can choose their particular ishta. A lot of what devotee said, in my opinion, was a result of Smarta influence. A Hindu who is non-sectarian has likely had Smarta influence from somewhere. For example, a smarta priest can work in almost any temple, for he doesn't see any difference really, whereas Vaishnava or Saiva trained priests are trained differently, and would have gotten slokas from different places.

Shaktism is most closely aligned to Saivism, and the 'effectual' principle, not truly feminine, more just ida current, or 'the soft side'. There is no masculine/feminine duality in actuality with God, although it is portrayed that way. God is genderless.

There are two approaches to deciding on what you believe. One is intellectual. Read a lot of scriptures by all sects, get to know who is who, what is what, and decide what makes sense to you.

The other is by feel or intuition. Attend your local temples and find out what they are first. Perhaps you will just feel more comfortable in one or the other, as they all do have different vibrations.

Its extremely vast and this can never be stressed enough. Many 'non-sectarian' Hindus actually are sectarian, its just that they don't know it. Many Bengalis have never seen South Indian Saivism practised, and vice versa, so whatever they have grown up with is 'Hinduism', and they mistakenly think that that version of Hinduism is the whole of Hinduism. For the more well travelled or well read, they see both as correct. Here is a simple example: Is it Siva, or is it Shiva? It's both, you and I can see, but yes I have heard both sides trying to tell the other that that they were saying it wrong.

There is a ton of info on line. Here is one link to a simplified version: http://www.freebase.com/view/en/shaivism

Don't know it this helped or not, but...

Aum Namasivaya

[atanu]

I'm still not clarified.

namaste upsy

I think Devotee's post was clear enough. The following text from a scripture indicates the functional aspect of different deities we may meditate upon for realising the Atman-Purusha, which is your own nameless self and which is called by different names.

(Meditate) On the moon (Indra-Indu) as one with the internal organ (Mind), on the quarters of the horizon as one with his sense of hearing, on Vishnu as one with his (power of) motion, on Hara (Rudra) as the same with his strength, on Agni (Fire) as identical with his speech, on Mitra as identical with his excretions, and on Pragapati as one with his organ of generation.

The atman is that which is before the mind (or any of the above deities). But I suppose that arguments based on one's own path and resultant preferences will always be there. Although, Shaivism and Vaishnavaism are different paths, both are based on Veda and mostly have the same goal of attainment of Atman.


Om Namah Shivaya

[isavasya]

Dear downy ,

H2O is a susbtance which can be called water, it can also be called ice and it can also be called steam. Changing of form doesnt means it becomes differnt substance. The same applies for GOD. The great vedas say, "Ekam sat vipra bahuda vadanti"- Truth is one, but sages call it by various names. The same goes for God. Dear downy Please pardon me in saying that, I dont agree there is really any differnces in shaivas or vasihnavas, at least I havent met any among 1000 of hindus who suffer from any such difference. There are few over internet thats all. How ever as a student we have all the right to question the truth.You said, our shastras seem to be biased, I say they can be taken the way a reader wants to be. We see lord hanuman always showing great devotion for Lord rama, and similarly we see lord rama worshiping a shivlingam.It is not about superiority, it is the humble nature of our one great lord with differnt forms, who wants to garner same feelings of humbleness in others. Remember only one thing

|| Shivaya Vishnu rupaya Shiva Rupaya Vishnave.||

[upsydownyupsy mv ss]

Thank you everyone. Now I'm clear, especially by the last post.

[NayaSurya]

I think Devotee's post was clear enough. The following text from a scripture indicates the functional aspect of different deities we may meditate upon for realising the Atman-Purusha, which is your own nameless self and which is called by different names.

(Meditate) On the moon (Indra-Indu) as one with the internal organ (Mind), on the quarters of the horizon as one with his sense of hearing, on Vishnu as one with his (power of) motion, on Hara (Rudra) as the same with his strength, on Agni (Fire) as identical with his speech, on Mitra as identical with his excretions, and on Pragapati as one with his organ of generation.

The atman is that which is before the mind (or any of the above deities). But I suppose that arguments based on one's own path and resultant preferences will always be there. Although, Shaivism and Vaishnavaism are different paths, both are based on Veda and mostly have the same goal of attainment of Atman.


Om Namah Shivaya

I love this. Called by the many names. So true.