Originally Posted by
Avazjan
Namaste.
Rather than answer you directly, I just want to point out both the futility of this argument and its total irrelevance. The whole "Shiva vs Vishnu" song and dance has been repeated ad nauseum for hundreds of years without resolution, and without doing anybody any good! It cannot be solved as it is not the result of rational self inquiry, nor is it a legitimate issue. It is simply a product of sectarian bias and egotism.
Vishnu is not exalted by the inferiority of Shiva. Shiva is not exalted by the inferiority of Vishnu. God is most exalted when the concept of inferiority in general falls away, having no place in brahman. Obsessing about which god is superior is to entirely miss the point of both gods, who really are one.
One can accurately state that Vishnu is the face of Shiva, and Shiva is the face of Vishnu. Or that they are one and the same, aspects of one another and brahman as perfect archetypes of Purusha/Saguna Brahman/Ishvara. Distinct, but not mutually exclusive. Ishvara shows his divine glory in a multitude of forms to benefit jivatman deluded by ahamkara. Sadhaka is not a path of exaltation, it is not a . This argumentation about the superiority of gods is really just displaced egotism. The sadhaka invests his ego into the god, and champions the god as a subtle form of championing his own ego by association. It is just like how people associate and identify with sports teams.
There is plenty of scriptural evidence on both sides of this artificial fence, some supporting Shiva as supreme, some Vishnu as supreme, in support not of the truth, but of the biases of the authors (and pernicious editors) as well as intended audiences.
But in reality Vishnu and Shiva do not exist "as such." Both are comparatively recent conceptualizations of God. Before people get angry about this statement, please let me explain what is meant.
Shiva isn't referred to until around 300-100 BCE. Vishnu appears in the vedas, but is a relatively minor god. We associate Shiva with the vedic Rudra, who is also a relatively minor god. Indra is more or less the centerpiece of vedic deities ... except there is Varuna, who is spiritually superior to Indra (although Indra is the temporal ruler). Varuna is the conceptual "progenitor" of the modern trimurti.
Vishnu and Shiva are not in competition with eachother! They do not vie with one another for divine status! Such is POINTLESS. They are in perfect harmony, equality and oneness. Shiva is the greatest devotee of Vishnu. Shiva is one with Vishnu. Vishnu is the greatest devotee of Shiva. Vishnu is one with Shiva.
It is simply that the pattern that older conceptualizations of God fall away, and the new ones are championed - often at expense of their direct forebears, as well as their contemporaries.
I mean no disrespect AT ALL to Vishnu or Shiva, or worshipers of bhagavan in these blessed forms. The truth, the principles, the essence which Vishnu or Shiva represent are indisputable and fill me with adoration. I love the forms this Truth has taken in showing us the Trimurti. It is most excellent. However... it is still transient and ephemeral. The beauty of the trimurti is that it is simultaneously partite, representing specific sets of concepts and aspects, both gross and subtle as there are different varieties/levels even within one aspect (IE: braddha rudra, ishana rudra shiva, panchavaktra shiva, ardhanarishvara, etc. - partite/ascending forms of Shiva within a well known tantric sadhana) as well as one. Just like the word Aum, which is comprised of three letters unified in a single word.
In hundreds of thousands of years, if humanity survives (which is in doubt, to be frank,) it is entirely likely that Vishnu and Shiva will be long forgotten, in so far as Vishnu and Shiva are mere words, composed of sounds which however excellent are not Parasabda, which is the essence of saguna brahman (which both Vishnu and Shiva exemplify most admirably.) Instead, sanatana dharma will have different names - if humanity even needs such terminology at that time, different aspects appropriate to the time and culture, representative of That which is beyond all such limited notions of locality and temporality.
If we conceive of God in a certain aspect regarded as supreme, then it is this aspect which grants us direct experience of the supreme. However, this aspect must have the right attributes. It is not a good idea to come up new gods by oneself. the sages have done this throughout history for the benefit of humanity, clothing raw divinity into the right aspects for the time period and culture. It is therefore unsurprising that when a Shaivite experiences god realization from the lowest to the highest, it is through and as Shiva. And that when a Vishnaiva experiences the same realizations, it is through and as Vishnu. Both are true. Both are valid. Some sampradayas achieve these realizations through an ascending series of deities presided over by one's istha-devata. Ishvara is the source and culmination of all three aspects of the Trimurti, yet if we single out one - Vishnu or Shiva - as Bhagavan, this is ALSO correct, because they are not merely emissaries of Ishvara, but the entirety in of themselves.
In conclusion, I recommend disregarding completely all claims about the supremacy of one or the other, and to think seriously about whether or not you want to listen to people who go on about it. They may well have great truths to share with you that you should be attentive to given the opportunity, but I submit to you that there are better teachers. Worship that which sings to your heart, not as receptacle of ego-identity, but as the antidote.
Namaste.
Bookmarks