Namaste,
I decided to start this thread based off of something that Eastern Mind said in another thread called "Were the Itihasas actual historical events?". The thread can be found here: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...4832#post44832
I have also been thinking about starting this thread for a while now.
Here is what Eastern Mind said:
Vannakkam Ranakrishna:
I an still an agnostic in these matters. Its not part of traditional Saiva lore, just as the Bible (from other threads) isn`t part of SD. But I must say after this thread I am closer to believing it may have happened than before. Such is the reason for discussion. At least now I understand the Vaishnava perspective better. We all have the right to believe whatever we want. I would prefer to focus on commonalities of the many paths within Hinduism. But you have to understand that the sects of Hinduism: Vaishnava, Saiva, Shakta, Smarta, etc, are as different as the Abrahamic religions are to each other.
If you claim to be a Vaishnava, then my opinion shouldn't matter much now should it?
I just received a recently published book on the 63 Nayanmars, or Saiva Saints. I don't expect you to want to read it.
Aum Namasivaya
My question is, are the different sects of Hinduism really that different? Are they really as different as different religions are to each other? I'm a Vaishnavite, and I believe that Lord Krishna is the supreme and most complete form of God, so I guess that would make me a Gaudiya Vaishnavite (although I am not part of ISKCON). Most of my prayers are to Lord Krishna, however I still do pray to Lord Shiva, Lord Ganesha, and Lord Hanuman. I still do believe that they are valid and true forms of God and are just as worthy of worship as Lord Krishna is. It is just that based largely off of the Bhagavad Gita, I believe that Lord Krishna is the most complete and supreme form of God, and therefore I pray to Him a little more than I pray to Lord Shiva, Lord Ganesha, and Lord Hanuman. My altar does not just have pictures of Lord Krishna and Radha, it also has pictures of Lord Shiva, Lord Ganesha, and Lord Hanuman.
I do not view the different sects of Hinduism as being that different. To me, it is just a matter of which particular form of God connects with you the most and you feel like worshiping the most. For me, that it Lord Krishna. For others, it may be Lord Shiva, or Lord Ganesha, or Goddess Kali. Now, I do believe that there are some extremes, such as ISKCON (some members at least) that worship only Lord Krishna and believe that He is the only form of God that is worthy of praying to. I am sure there are extremes on the other end as well, with Saivites and members of other sects. I believe that is wrong and goes against one of the most basic yet important tenets of Hinduism, that Lord Vishnu, Lord Shiva, Lord Krishna, Lord Ganesha, etc. are all valid manifestations of Brahman, the ultimate reality, and they are all worthy of being worshiped.
Now, am I being a Smarta by worshiping Lord Krishna, in addition to Lord Shiva, Lord Hanuman, and Lord Ganesha? Are there other Vaishnavites who also pray to these other forms of God? Are there Saivites who pray to Lord Vishnu and any of His avatars? Does my ideology fit with Smartism since I worship so many different forms of God, even though I still believe Lord Krishna is the supreme form? I understand the other sects of Hinduism, but I am not sure about what Smartism exactly is. How different are the sects of Hinduism, really?
Lastly, I would be interested in reading your book, Eastern Mind. I am just as interested in learning about the Saiva saints as I am about the Vaishnava saints.
Hare Krishna
Bookmarks